**OLD/LOCKED***"What Window Mgr. / Desktop Environment?" (rant) Thread

[nillo]

umm..what exactly is it....like are GNOME and KDE and such window managers...and if they are, and you want to run one thats less of a resource hog do you not even have to have GNOME or kde on your system?

[xalice]

Gnome and KDE are not window managers themselves, but are "desktop environments" that run on top of a window manager. Yes, they can be resource hogs, and no, you don't need to run either one. You can run a window manager by itself. What KDE and Gnome offer are integrated panels, menus, desktop icons, etc. Both have associated GUI file managers, and both have several native applications. The applications tend to be quite compatible - I use a Gnome desktop but often use the Konquerer file manager from KDE.

If you prefer a faster, more light-weight desktop, you can run any of a number of window managers without either KDE or gnome. IceWM and XFCE are a couple that I've tried that seem very easy to use. I haven't tried fluxbox, but many people seem to like it for its appearance and speed.

IMO, one of the things that makes linux so attractive is the number of choices you have - you can set up your system with almost any look and feel you like. Try exploring some of the available window managers and see which ones you like best. If you need help finding/installing/running, post back with your questions.

[nillo]

alrighty thanx

[Hayl]

click on my link in my signature for a look at how i have fluxbox configured.

if you want to see more screenshots of flux - try their homepage. it is in my signature as well.

[zie]

Hi, i just finsihed installing gnome 2. I have been using kde so far. When I started gnome

$ xinit /opt/gnome2/bin/gnome-session

I got the gnome panel and desktop, but with the ugly twm as my window manager. Did I missed something?

[SeT]

yup, i was also kinda supprised to find out - metacity is the window manager for gnome.

[bskahan]

sawfish is a more powerful gnome2 compliant WM.

[zie]

Thanks guys.
I have installed metacity. If I want to switch to sawfish, after installation, what do I supposed to do? And is there any way to change the default metacity title bar?

[bskahan]

assuming you have sawfish installed;
at a command prompt type:
$ killall metacity ; sleep 0 ; sawfish &
sometimes it has to be sleep 1, depending on your computer. To get it so gnome will always have sawfish just save the session as you log out.

here's an example sawfish config file:
http://www.etria.com/configs/sawfishrc.txt

[Gertrude]

I have a old pc with a p166 Mhz, 128 meg of ram and a 2 gig hd.. What windows manager would run halfway ok on this if any at all? I wouls like just something simple with decent functionality at the same time..

[mrBen]

If you want a desktop environment, then check out XFce (http://www.xfce.org) .

If you just need a window manager, then see if you like one of the *box range (Blackbox, Fluxbox, OpenBox, Waimea). I currently run Fluxbox on a PII 300, 128Mb RAM quite happily. Nice small footprint too.

If they don't strike your fancy, then checkout WindowMaker (http://www.windowmaker.org/)

[threadhead]

i would recommend to choose fluxbox because its
very light, fast and stable. im using it myself with
no problems at all.

give it a shot.
www.fluxbox.org

[bl8drnr]

KDE, GNOME, or ICEWM? Is gnome really better if you do any programming?

[bl8drnr]

help

[AngryPuppy]

"Best" is in the eye of the beholder.

Best distro, best window manager, etc.

I don't know about coding (on Linux that is... I code for a living but on IBM mainframes), so I can't offer much there.

The common two are KDE and Gnome that offer nice tools besides just an interface. There are many others that are not so resource intensive (IceWM, Fluxbox, etc.).

I suggest figuring out waht you want to do specifically, look at what you have at your disposal and research all of your alternatives.

Linux is not about telling you what is "best". It's about having a choice so that you can find what is best for you.

I know this is not what you were looking for in an answer, but it is true.

Terry

[deimos]

Basically, there is no 'best'. There is only 'best for you', and we need criteria before we can make worthwhile recommendations.

I'm not a programmer, but from compiling so much source, I'd wager that software dev consumes every cycle a cpu can muster. In that regard, I'd suggest a *box for its low resource usage.

Try several of them. The only limit to the # of wm's you can use is disk space.

Or maybe, just do some preliminary reading (http://www.linuxnewbie.org/forum/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=295791&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending). Good luck!

[z0mbix]

http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/documents/deadhorse.html

[The Executioner]

the best - Explorer.exe, but i don't know if it works on Wine :cool:

[bl8drnr]

I just wanted to find out what everybody else liked, maybe should've posted it in a poll, eh?

[mdwatts]

Originally posted by bl8drnr
help

After only 4 minutes ???? :rolleyes:

And for question such as 'Which is the best'?

:confused:

[lazarus777]

Like everyone has said, it's a matter of personal preference. I know some people who adore KDE and won't use anything else, but we use GNOME at work. I personally switch my WM every few weeks; I'm using iceWM atm because it takes less time to config than some other ones, but you can still config everything I really need to, when you've the time, plus it's pretty fast and has some cool themes that don't depend on huge bground images. I'd say, try as many as you possibly can. That way, when you do find one you like, you'll know it :)

[mdwatts]

Originally posted by bl8drnr
I just wanted to find out what everybody else liked, maybe should've posted it in a poll, eh?

Why not just read/view the polls in all the other 'Best Window Manager' threads in the Desktop/Window Manager forum?

[bl8drnr]

aaargghhhhh

is that your reply to every post? or just to ones that fit?

[mdwatts]

Originally posted by bl8drnr
aaargghhhhh

is that your reply to every post? or just to ones that fit?

What reply are you referring to?

Have a look through these threads (http://linuxnewbie.org/forum/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=295866&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending)

[jglen490]

I just wanted to find out what everybody else liked, maybe should've posted it in a poll, eh?
The SEARCH button the top of every page in LNO is really your friend. And it would have been better, or at least more honest, to ask "what wm do you like".

As has been said so many times, with all the choices in available in Linux, there is no "best", there are ample choices that allow you to discover what is "best for you".

Look, lurk, research, find out for yourself. Go to sites like http://www.xwinman.org/index.html, or to sourceforge. Do google searches. See what there is, look at the screen shots, and check it out for yourself.

It's actually a lot more fun doing things that way :D !!

[Hayl]

Originally posted by bl8drnr
aaargghhhhh

is that your reply to every post? or just to ones that fit?

learn to search and don't slam mdwatts - he is a nice guy.

[CryingWolf]

Originally posted by cheeky_zombie
http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanb/documents/deadhorse.html

BMW is way better then a Toyota. :D

[CaptainPinko]

whats the difference between a window manager and a desktop top? i understand htat the desktops (eg. KDE and GNOME et al) give widgets and what appears on an XFree86 monitor but what is the purpose ofd the window managers?

[Hayl]

window managers show the title bars at the top of each window and the window controls, as well as the window resizing grips. they also deal with moving, resizing, etc.

kde and gnome are not desktops. they are desktop ENVIRONMENTS. they include: a desktop manager, window manager, and standardized look/feel/widgets for all their native apps.

a desktop manager controls icons, etc on the desktop.

if you didnt have a window manager, you wouldn't be able to move windows around, minimize, maximize, etc.

if you look at my screenshot, i only run Openbox, which is a Window Manager. I don't run a desktop manager. I use gnome apps, but I don't run gnome - just the apps.

[CaptainPinko]

oh, ok... i think i'm getting it, so what is the distinction between running GNOME and GNOME-Apps?

[Hayl]

if you run all of Gnome then you are running their window manager, their desktop manager, their panel app, their system tray app, their sound server, and a bunch more apps that run in the background that you wouldn't even know are running unless you looked.

in my just running the gnome apps i don't run all the unnecessary stuff.

same thing with KDE - one thing that KDE runs is the dcop server which allows the KDE apps to talk to each other. however with KDE apps the dcop server will always load even if you are in gnome and just want to run 1 KDE app. which is why i don't run any kde apps at all.

[hertfordkc]

" if you look at my screenshot, i only run Openbox, which is a Window Manager. I don't run a desktop manager. I use gnome apps, but I don't run gnome - just the apps."
Do the DE/WM slow things down? Are you saving your computer for something?
I've done an install on a small box and would like to install on my current Dell, but would like to be sure that others can look at icons and open files or start programs that they need. fvwm2 doesn't do it, but I haven't done a reinstall to look at KDE or gnome, so I'm not sure what your comment means.

[carrja99]

Just something interesting I've noticed... have you noticed that Redhat and Mandrake users tend to use KDE or GNOME, while people who use distros such as Slackware or Debian tend to use fluxbox, blackbox, or openbox?

The other distros, people just seem to lean towards WindowMaker or Enlightenment, and the other 20% just choose any distro they want.

Why is this?

[sharth]

the desktop based distros will by default give you an option to install kde and gnome. red hat and mandrake I know do this. However, with debian, X itself is not installed by default. I looked through the list of windowmanagers, and thought enlightenment had a cool name, so I installed that. Eventually, I switched over to blackbox. I tried flux for a day, didn't like it and stayed with blackbox.

Why slack and debian use the boxs? Got Me :) The rest using the others? got me :)

Hopefully, with e17, if its as good as it sounds, it hopefully we become another option along with the normal kde and gnome crowd, since it really does look promising.

[IRQ5]

I really have no idea but, if I was to guess, while I recognize everybody is completely different, still, Redhat and Mandrake seem to be the most "popular" distros. So I suspect a lot of Windows-oriented people go with something "official" seeming. And KDE and Gnome seem to be defaults and Windows peple often don't configure much but take what they get. And KDE and Gnome are the most Windows-ish, I think.

Whereas people who want to get way away from Windows probably head towards the more offbeat distros and pick up the more offbeat window managers, instead of "desktop environments".

Maybe. But I'm coming from Windows - posting from Windows now because I have yet to match up the software and hardware to make a net-worthy Linux box. And I installed an old Caldera because it happened to be handy. It defaulted to KDE but it's a resource hog and too windowsish for me. So I've managed to get ratpoison in, which is way cool but almost too minimalist for me. So now I'm looking for something in between - closer to the ratpoison end of the spectrum than the KDE, though.

So like I say, everybody's different but that's my guess about generalizations. Interesting observation though. I'm too new to know if it's true but even based on what I've seen so far it does seem to be so.

[mocnicom]

I used kde for along time, but just last week I switched to fluxbox for faster loading. And I stuck with it so far because I seem more productive in it, and it only took a day for it to have a intuitive feel. Probably the other distro's have more *box users because the users of those distros are generally more experienced, and thus have had the time to try all the diff WM's.

[wolfhalen]

people who use redhat and mandrake are "usually" very new to linux. Thus the windows and macish feel of kde or gnome appeal to them, unless they just don't know better anyway and use the default. the box's and enlightenment are very linux in feel and can be a little more alien when you are already in a new os as it is....

I personally don't like enlightenment very much. I haven't tried the box ones, although I used litestep in windows and it's kinda the same animal.

I use kde3 in slackware, and have used gnome 2 there. Although I am compiling gnome myself (very long process) cuz I don't like the "distro" of gnome2 that's currently availible for slack.

the reason I don't think deb and slack users like the eye candy environments so much is the same reason they use that distro.

I love eye candy though, even if my windows take 20 seconds to redraw when I resize. lol

[Raoul_Duke]

I have Gnome/KDE/Fluxbox/Enlighenment installed and just pick depending on my mood........:)

[linux12414]

Originally posted by Raoul_Duke
I have Gnome/KDE/Fluxbox/Enlighenment installed and just pick depending on my mood........:)

I have most all wms installed and pick what amuses me at the moment, too.

However, I always tend to go back to Fluxbox or Waimea.

[Hayl]

just an opinion

it's probably because the newer people are more comforable using a "windows-like" interface and installing using an "easy to install" distro. therefore redhat/suse/mandrake with kde or gnome.

the more advanced people install debian, slackware, gentoo and generally want a more minimal desktop and do a lot more work in a terminal. therefore deb, slack, gentoo with *box.

[DredNort]

I'm not sure us slack/deb/gentoo users are very advanced. Maybe a bit more experienced, more adventurous or just plain showoffs.

(I just love Slackware! I mention it as often as I can to those interested in Linux.)

Anyway, on the rare occasion that I use a GUI/WM as root, I use Fluxbox (at least for the moment).
But during day-to-day stuff, I use gnome, rarely kde, and often change the gnome window manager.(I'm still using gnome 1.4)

I think that those using the more 'advanced' distros have a slightly more definate idea of what they want from their GUI/WM as well as a sence of how much resources they are consuming.
This may not be as noticable with the average 'RedHat/Mandrake/so on' user.
It certainly didn't play on my mind when I was using Mandrake.
;)

[audioaficionado]

Knoppix defaults to KDE3 unless you hit F2 early in the boot to access the cheat code options. I've tried some of the other WM but I'm too new to even get to my HD and grab some of my wallpaper files LOL. KDE3 even has the hda1 hdb1 etc already iconized so all your files are but a single click away. So until I learn more, I like the windows ease of KDE3 for now.

[sharth]

Originally posted by DredNort
I'm not sure us slack/deb/gentoo users are very advanced. Maybe a bit more experienced, more adventurous or just plain showoffs. I'm thinking that we are just stupider :) hehe. I actually like having a quite different desktop then windows :)

[retoon]

To be honest with everyone here, I look for aesthetics when I look for a window manager. I personally enjoy the gnome desktop environment, and would prefer it over window maker. Thats just me. I've been using Linux for about 3 or 4 months now, and I feel I have gotten proficient enough to make commentary. I had slackware installed for a little while, which alot of people tell me is difficult to setup. Don't know why, just rtfm. The window managers that came with it were nice, but I ended up using gnome underneath slackware. I also wasn't very impressed with it either. I am now back to using Red Hat 8.0. Red Hat is not an os for beginners only. Yes, complete newbies find it easy to use as I did, but even after you have crossed over it still does the job. But to get back on topic, I prefer gnome because I like the way it looks, and on my hardware anyways, it does a fine job speed wise.

[ASCI Blue]

Gentoo + KDE = fast eyecandy. I like transparent menus and as far as I can tell Flux, Black, Openbox, WindowMaker, and possibly E don't have them (may be wrong about E).

[kam]

I have Gentoo and GNOME. :D :D I love it.

P.S. Transparent menus are ugly. :)

[lonescout]

Some like the functional minivans/suvs....some the hot looking sports cars....

As far, as why RH people seem to stick with KDE/GNOME, I can completely understand why. When i first installed, the only real option I got was KDE or GNOME....some useless option for TWM came up, but you only get a basic file menu (ummm, I think just Xterm and an option to switch back to KDE (which didn't even work). To someone BRAND new, don't think they'd ever figure out how to add stuff the the menu (or get rid of that god-awful theme that it runs under - I think was Enlightenment) It's not that the other managers aren't there, they just aren't really functional out of the box. Would seem that they could include a file menu (i ended up using that little perl script first time around) so user could run something from them without going to terminl or creating their own menu. A default theme that didn't look like the business end of used crap paper would be helpful too!!!!

I had to switch out of necessity. My old box wasn't really functional while running either GNOME/KDE, so after sniffing around on the net, I put blackbox and fluxbox on different users on my machine...liked both, but use blackbox primarily.

I do, however, see where someone who has a machine that can handle the big boyz, and just left windoze would be more comfortable using KDE/GNOME.

just $.02 from a pretty new user...............

[audioaficionado]

I have a dual SMP Pentium Pro 200 with 288Mb ECC EDO @ 66MHz. It runs KDE3 fine with Knoppix 3.1 live CD Linux. If it's slower, it's only by a fraction of a second on a window redraw.

I just went to the KDE site and grabbed some great wallpaper. Now if I could get to my HD as easy as KDE3, I'd love to try out the other WMs. They sure have ugly backgrounds out of the box.

[jglen490]

When I first started using Linux and wanted a desktop environment, I went with KDE -- it just looked great :cool: !! After using it for a while, I discovered that looking great and doing great were two different things (at least on my low-end hardware). So I started looking around for something that looked good (it's a visual thing) while not being so dark and minimalistic. I went to various sites to look at screen shots and study functionality, and finally I decided on IceWM.

Don't get me wrong, I still like KDE and I go back to it every once in a while. But Ice performs better -- on my machine. It has nothing to do with being more "manly", or being more "tech-like", or being "a real Linux user only uses the CLI and indulges in self-flagellation before starting the magical incantations over the campfire". Those things are all very meaningless. All I want is an OS that makes sense and does what I need done. That's Linux, and that's the choices i've made with Linux. And it really works well when done from that viewpoint.

You have choices in Linux, sometimes they seem overwhelming, but just use those choices 'til it comes out right for you!!

[BigFatJoe]

First Linux I installed was MDK 6.0 and with a KDE it looked so window-ish it gave me the creeps. I couldn't stand it, and went back to Windows with Litestep after 3 days. After a while, I found Blackbox for windows and was amazed at the speed and general minimal nature (which I enjoyed). so the natural choice was blackbox for me when I installed Debian...

Currently I use openbox, but am still trying to figure out the differences between it and blackbox - maybe I'm just not trying hard enough. Oh yeah: I dont like the tabs in fluxbox, but waimea seems like the next thing I'll try. I like lots of configurability, coming from Litestep in Windoze.

[hop-frog]

2 more to add to the list:

mgr - an extremely old window manager that I have yet to try

and

windowlab - can be found at: http://www.nickgravgaard.com/windowlab/

[hop-frog]

3dwm 4dwm 5dwm 9wm aewm aewm++ aewm2 afterstep ahwm alde alloywm amaterus arswm asclassic athene awm b4step berlin blackbox blwm bowman cde clementine ctwm cwm devolution dtwm dwim dxwm ede efsane efsane II enlightenment epiwm evilwm ewm eXode failsafewm 'flowe desktop' fluxbox flwm foxdesktop 'freedom desktop' fvwm fvwm2 fvwm95 gnome golem great gtkwm gwm gwml hackedbox haze heliwm hpwm icewm 'interface wm' interviews ion iwm jewel kde kwin kwm larswm lwm m_swm maewm matchbox metacity mgr mlvwm mosquito mvwm mwm nawm ncdwm novawm olvwm olwm openbox oroborus oswm ovwm owm pawm pekwm perlbox perlwm phluid piewm plwm pmwm pstwm pswm puppet pwm qlwm qvwm ratpoison rox rtl sapphire sawfish screen scwm swm swim sxwm tekwm tkwm treewm tvtwm twin twm ude uwm vtwm vuewm vwm w2kwm w9wm waimea 'window maker' 'windows-el wm' windowlab wm wm2 wmg wmx wwm xdswm xfce xnwm xpwm xwm yawm zwm

[Fryguy8]

It's been a while since we've seen a "which window manager" post. I feel it's about time for some people's input. A lot have things have changed, KDE is out with a new version, gnome is out with a new version, and it seems that a lot of new things are happening.

Besides some minor cosmetic differences etc, what are the differences between KDE and Gnome now? Gnome still runs faster, and uses the GTK libs as opposed to separate QT libs, right?

And for more vanilla window managers, what's new? Windowmaker, *box, what else? I'm kind of getting sick of waimea, it's not 100% rock solid like a window manager should be, and I'm finally starting to get bored of transparent titlebars, and am looking for suggestions. I prefer not to manually build KDE or GNOME from scratch as I'm on LFS and it would take a lot of screwing up to finally get it right.

[Hayl]

KDE and Gnome are not Window Managers, they are desktop environments.

my fave Window Manager is Openbox.

[hop-frog]

Try out the ones listed in the larger fonts first and work your way down until you find one you like. If you could mention some features you liked from the window managers you've tried so far, we could narrow the list down.

3dwm 4dwm 5dwm 9wm aewm aewm++ aewm2 afterstep ahwm alde alloywm amaterus arswm asclassic athene awm b4step berlin blackbox blwm bowman cde clementine ctwm cwm devolution dtwm dwim dxwm ede efsane efsane II enlightenment epiwm evilwm ewm eXode failsafewm 'flowe desktop' fluxbox flwm foxdesktop 'freedom desktop' fvwm fvwm2 fvwm95 gnome golem great gtkwm gwm gwml hackedbox haze heliwm hpwm icewm 'interface wm' interviews ion iwm jewel kde kwin kwm larswm lwm m_swm maewm matchbox metacity mgr mlvwm mosquito mvwm mwm nawm ncdwm novawm olvwm olwm openbox oroborus oswm ovwm owm pawm pekwm perlbox perlwm phluid piewm plwm pmwm pstwm pswm puppet pwm qlwm qvwm ratpoison rox rtl sapphire sawfish screen scwm swm swim sxwm tekwm tkwm treewm tvtwm twin twm ude uwm vtwm vuewm vwm w2kwm w9wm waimea 'window maker' 'windows-el wm' windowlab wm wm2 wmg wmx wwm xdswm xfce xnwm xpwm xwm yawm zwm

[lazarus777]

my 2 cents :)

fluxbox overall becuase it's just cool; fast, looks good, can do anything you actually really need...

icewm for those who can't get over windows :) I made a really nice icewm machine for a Win95 addicted friend to convert him to the wisdom of *nix

Enlightenment for when I'm bored and really want to play with my WM; it's really too complicated for me to use everyday, I prefer something much lighter/faster, but it's a great way to impress people; and it just has such a cool name ;)

[Fryguy8]

Hayl, I'm pretty sure that everyone knows that by now, you know what I mean.

I want a window manager that features easy access to running programs (whether it be an easily and fully customizable root window menu, or what) I want something that stays out of the way, is 100% rock stable, and has the ability to look very good and very different easily.I have all the horsepower in the world. I kind of like waimea, but it's not rock stable, and there are some quirks, and I don't need the fluxbox bar (I know you can make it go away but..) I'm thinking maybe enlightenment.

[msmdrunk]

Ok, i guess i'll give what lil input i can. Just to let you know i have only been using linux for 6 days right now. I'm loving it. I'm using redhat 8.0 but im thinking of ordering another distro. Anyways so far i have used KDE 3.0.3(i think), Gnome, window maker, and fluxbox. I dont like KDE or Gnome. WindowMaker was ok. But so far im loving fluxbox, i just need to get it down a lil better, but so far i love it. Its light, runs pretty well, navigates well, i have only been using it for about 12 hours or so i guess, but so far its good. Theres a lot of questions i wanna ask about it, but i'll spare you all, if anyone likes to help newbies and have aim hit me up with your SN, sometimes its just easier talking to someone then searching for an answer. Right now tho im gonna read some documentation.

Lata,
Ryan

[Fryguy8]

I dunno. What other heavily themeable WMs are out there? It'd be great to use some of the ones on the huge lists, but I need/want something that I can customize the looks of a lot. I'm also kind of picky about behavior (think sawfish/waimea tweaking)

[lazarus777]

if you want themable and don't care so much about size, stick with Enlightenment, or maybe AfterStep

[wol]

I like being able to resize a window by grabbing any edge, not just a bottom corner. Besides KWM (KDE's window manager), what other WM's will allow this?

[hop-frog]

Originally posted by Fryguy8
I dunno. What other heavily themeable WMs are out there?
The most themeable are golem, oroborus, epiwm, fvwm2, vtwm, matchbox, ctwm, afterstep, kwin, enlightenment, waimea, 'window maker', scwm, icewm, sawfish, xfce openbox, blackbox, fluxbox, and metacity.

is 100% rock stable
This cuts the list down to oroborus, epiwm, fvwm2, vtwm, matchbox, ctwm, afterstep, kwin, xfce, enlightenment, 'window maker', scwm, icewm, openbox, blackbox, fluxbox, and metacity.

has the ability to look very good and very different easily
This shortens the list to oroborus, epiwm, matchbox, ctwm, xfce, afterstep, kwin, enlightenment, 'window maker', icewm, openbox, blackbox, fluxbox, and metacity.

For ones that can properly handle all of the window hints the list is shortened to xfce, afterstep, kwin (for kde), enlightenment, 'window maker' icewm, metacity, blackbox, openbox, and fluxbox.

There are some other nice window managers that aren't as themeable, but they look really good by default: pawm, haze, aewm and relatives, ion, and efsane.

There are some that don't look so great, but their intuitive interface makes up for this IMO: olwm, wm2, windowlab, 5dwm, ratpoison.

[Fryguy8]

hop-frog, that was extremely helpful. Now is time to search the internet for source code of these so that I can compile them :)

[hop-frog]

This just in at xwinman.org:

Xd640
http://www.oksid.ch/xd640/index.html

Another IMD look-alike?

btw, we're up to 140.

[fishhead]

Can't beat this for a comprehensive WM listing: http://www.plig.org/xwinman/

[dkeav]

E17 that is all i have to say

sure you have to build it yourself right now but throw in ROX and your good to go

[demura]

xfce4-cvs!

just built it. When this puppy comes out its gonna blow gnome/kde away!

But until at least an alpha comes out, i'm stickin with good ol' Blackbox w/ dfm

[Hayl]

Originally posted by Fryguy8
Hayl, I'm pretty sure that everyone knows that by now, you know what I mean.

actually many people don't know that they aren't window managers. and correcting it helps to make people (mainly newbies) not be confused by people who use the wrong terminology.

[dkeav]

i agree whole heartedly with the above, i'm tired of correcting simple mistakes caused by improper terminology use

[Tulluin]

Waimea is the most customizable, prettiest, cleanest window manager I have found. My roommate runs E16, it's ok, but ugly, no transparency, and runs a lot of extra ****.
Waimea is good for transparency, customization, and minimalism.

[Fryguy8]

Yah I"m using waimea right now, and it's missing some key elements to me.

it's not stable.
It doesnt' support smart window placement
it has pretty poor hinting (ever use XMMS with it?)

That and I'm sick of the transparency, it was cool for a couple of months.

I'm prolly gonna try window maker and just spend a lot of time tweaking it.

[hop-frog]

this just in at freshmeat:

weewm

and these 3 were added today at xwinman.org:

eclipse
frame
mavosxwm

[Elric of Grans]

G'Day,

Now, I am not after one of them lists of the billion and one different Window Managers available: just a discussion of the more popular ones ;)

I personally use Window Maker, and find it quite nice: it's fast to load, you can change the look nicely (and easily!), and it does everything I want it to. Dock apps are nice, though I don't use too many. Desktop switching and shading windows by mouse wheel are nice little features, though hardly unique. Clipping common programs is also nice, and all in all it's a lot better than loading a whole Desktop - I doubt I'd ever use GNOME or KDE ever again! However, judging on screenshots here, it's far from the most popular - though it does seem to be more popular than the similar-looking -step Window Managers.

Now, for bells and whistles, Enlightenment seems to be the way to go...however, it takes six weeks to boot. OK, not quite that long, but five seconds is too long! It also does not seem to be as popular as I would have thought: perhaps because it has so much more than necessary. I've heard it does not install well on newer versions of RedHat too - is this the case for any other distros?

Now, judging on people here, the -box Window Managers seem to be the most popular - especially FluxBox. Why? Well... I wouldn't mind finding that one out ;) Most FluxBox screenies seem to be plain to the point of boring, and surely it couldn't boot much faster than a -step Window Manager - I find that gkrellm is what takes the longest to load ;) Not sure what the attraction is, but perhaps some people here could explain.

fvwm seems somewhat popular too...makes me cringe every time I see it though. Some people also seem to like IceWM, though I don't think it looks much better than fvwm. Perhaps there's some nice features I'm not aware of? Please, if anyone here uses these, do tell!

Hope I've not missed any popular Window Managers (note: popular - none of these Window Managers hardly anyone's heard of :p ). I'm not trying to start another "Which WM do you use" threads - there's plenty of them - rather a comparison thread (I've not been able to find a good one of them through Search). I'm curious to know what makes each Window Manager better than the others in the eyes of those who use them. Please, back up your "I like X!" with *reasons* ;) Please to respect other's opinions too: we don't need any Holy Wars here...save them for when visiting non-GNU/Linux fora :D

[hop-frog]

Window Maker is one of my favorites, especially because how it handles iconified windows. The applets are a plus.

I do not like the Blackbox, Fluxbox, OpenBox, HackedBox, PerlBox, variety. Everything in it is too small and the tasklist is in the wrong place.

I don't care how configurable it is and how many gimmicks it has: Enlightenment looks ugly and its layout is a mess.

IceWM is nice. The defect is not in the looks, but in the feel.

Aside from its appearance I'd rank OLWM right along side BeOS for inovative/intuitive interface. Someday I will complete my version, which will include a 21st century appearance.

AmiWM could use an upgrade to match AmigaOS version 4. That is no going to happe nany time soon.

Metacity has a good look and feel, but I had to download 30 billion terraquads worth of dependancies just to try it out. Half of the themes look like some Atlantik/Atlantis theme that I could never find.

VTWM has some very nice features, but it is tedious to use. Move the mouse a few pixels in the wrong direction and in the next moment you are halfway to Messier 42.

CTWM would be a great WM if the developers would only upgrade the hint handling and add better pixmap support around the borders.

I don't care too much for wm2 and wmx. I can read sideways, upside-down, backwards, but I see no reason why I should take the extra effort to perform these operations when I could use a window manager that displays the text horizontally from left to right.

I've been following PAWM for the last year anxiously waiting for a more stable release. New releases were coming in about once every two to three months. Hopefully the website will come back online.

That's all for now.

/ hop-frog

[n00bie]

I use fluxbox, and its the coolest thing ever. Editing menu is easy (Just edit one file) It has desktop switching with mouse wheel. It has a great tab feature (Just adjust your tab to the bottom left/right and it doesnt get in your way) its lightning fast. And I rather not have any desktop shortcuts...
I dont use any other apps for *box like pager or anything else...
I can run any app for kde or gnome and... Did I mention it is fast?

[jglen490]

I use IceWM because it works well, is configurable/flexible, and it looks good, too. Every once in a while, I'll start my Xwindow session with KDE3, just for an eye candy fix, but on my machine, Ice is pretty enough and it does whatever I ask of it. Since I have it looking and acting the way I want it, I don't need to "waste" time looking at anything else -- been there, done that, like what I have.

In the end, it's just a choice :D !!

[mrBen]

I've been around a few WMs, but I like Fluxbox the best.

I used to use LiteStep under Windows, so gave Afterstep and WM , but I found them too 'chunky' for my (then) 800x600 14'' monitor :(

Fluxbox is great because it is small, and then you can add to it from there. Personally, I use acidlaunch (very small program laucher), Gkrellm for stats and net connection, bbpager for paging, and bbkeys to handle decent alt-tabbing, but use the generic key handling for everything else.

Grease-lightning on my 2 old systems.
But that's just my preference.

[LinuxLuke]

I also use IceWM, it came default on my Vector Linux install, and I've tried the whole *box thing, didn't work for me, I had a thing for windowmaker for a while, but then I started to use Ice more in depth, and it started working for me. KDE is just too bulky, I prefer preformance to eye candy, so that rules out KDE and Gnome

[Gaxus]

I use openbox.....

why? WHY NOT !?!?! :mad:

Seems more or less identical to fluxbox, just slightly more obscure I think :cool:

[dkeav]

used them all, like them all, all have perks, and enlightenment is not slow its just initially bloated especially if your on old hardware, but you can turn off a lot of that eye candy effects crap and have it boot and run much faster than window maker

personnally i got the hardware to run kde and gnome so im trying out kde3.1 now but i doubt is stay there long when E17 finally(if ever)comes out (rastaman does good work but someone needs to slip him some crack or something)

[zdude255]

I also have the hardware for Gnome.

I like it because it starts up at a reasonable speed, has some nice eye candy w/ nautilus. Plus the panel is awesome, I use floating panels alot too.

The workspace switcher is also cool, with graphical representation of each window. (If they're big enough.)

[trc]

Originally posted by Elric of Grans

Now, for bells and whistles, Enlightenment seems to be the way to go...however, it takes six weeks to boot. OK, not quite that long, but five seconds is too long!

loads in less than 2 seconds for me. i love E, but on occasion i fool around with waimea. never really got into any *box wm

[nate10588]

what is the fastest window manager? i have a slow laptop and have tried KDE and Gnome... but they seem so slow. (especially KDE)

[trc]

try one of the *box (fluxbox, openbox, blackbox), or enlightenment

[GaryJones32]

fvwm2 or icewm or hackedbox with everything dissabled are fastest

[LinuxLuke]

TWM!!!!!!!!!! by far the fastest! if you want true speed... use a pure Xterm... dont run a window manager

[Resident_Geek]

I use Fluxbox - I haven't tried much else, but it's configurable as crap, and I just started figuring it out. At first, I though everything could afford to be 5 times bigger, and I was probably right. Then, about 2 minutes passed and I was over it. I don't know if changing workspaces with the scroll wheel if Fluxbox-exclusive or not, but it rules! I always have a littel space to the left of the toolbar and below all windows (is there a way to maximize to just above the toolbar and not over it?), so I just move there and scroll. The slit kicks also. I have it autohidden and on top, so whenever I need to look at gkrellm, I just move the mouse right and it's there. Tabs are really helpful too, because I usually have about 5 terminals open at once and another 5 gaim conversations. Wow, in the time it took me to type this post, I just increased my liking of Fluxbox by a factor of about 10. :D Linux rules!

[Hayl]

i have the hardware for Gnome or KDE but i run openbox.

one of the reasons i really like openbox is their epist keygrabber.

i am waiting (impatiently) for version 3 because it is a complete rewrite (bo blackbox code :)) and will have powerful scripting capabilities.

[hop-frog]

If we can assume that size is in direct relation to speed in an optimally compiled manager: Blackbox is ~160kb binary. TWM just a little smaller, more if you get an older version. 15kb for xwm (that's for the source!) and a 12kb binary for sWM (with minimal compilation) I'm sure there are more that are even less :D but then you start to lose important features such as close/hide buttons. I ran into one that only puts a 1-pixel border around each window. Unless you had a really really old computer most of these window managers would probably run at the same speed to a human's perseption.

[phil_patnude]

up until about two weeks ago I was running the latest slack and I had compiled OpenBox, thinking to save my precious (and very limited) resources. Before that I had been using KDE and Gnome all the time despite the long amounts of time it took to do anything (5-10 seconds to load some software on my Celeron 400mhz, 64mb ram machine).

OpenBox was a treat. It took no time to load and all my big apps ran a lot faster inside it. However, I missed having an actual desktop with icons to launch programs and a chanageable wallpaper. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it required more programs to do that... I never went about chasing them all down). But those features were small losses, and OpenBox did the trick til I got bored one day and erased my HD to try a different distro (Ironically, one based on Slack)

So now i use IceWM, since it's fast, has those icons i need, and was already there once I installed Vector Linux. I haven't got around to downloading any more software yet.

I haven't used any of the *Step wm's since kernel 2.0.x was out, so i can't comment on any new versions, but AfterStep ran good on my P1 133mhz and my Cyrix6x86 100mhz boxes (32mb ram, 2gig hd each). I liked the docking thing, too. I think I will download a *Box and a *Step this week to add to my windowmanager arsenal.

[Hayl]

Originally posted by phil_patnude
(Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it required more programs to do that... I never went about chasing them all down).

yes. you can do it (have a desktop) with idesk or with ROX-Filer. i don't bother - i am not a fan of desktop icons.

[Resident_Geek]

idesk is the biggest pain in the butt to install of anything I've ever used. First, I had to add two different directories to the Makefile to look for libraries in, because they couldn't be found. Now, I have to install libpng, but I need zlib to do that. I haven't successfully compiled the first file yet. :(

[Hayl]

Originally posted by Resident_Geek
idesk is the biggest pain in the butt to install of anything I've ever used. First, I had to add two different directories to the Makefile to look for libraries in, because they couldn't be found. Now, I have to install libpng, but I need zlib to do that. I haven't successfully compiled the first file yet. :(

weird. i had no problems - emerge idesk :)

[Resident_Geek]

Bite me, gentoo boy :D I'll get it someday, most likely someday after i've dumped dialup.

[joesbox]

i use flux right now and just moved to it from blackbox. i heard so much about it i had to try. anyway, i tend to be a minimalist when it comes to wallpapers or anything on the desktop. i have gotten over the desktop icon thing by installing the LAUNCH (http://gkrellmlaunch.sourceforge.net/) plugin and putting in my most used apps.

Originally posted by phil_patnude
However, I missed having an actual desktop with icons to launch programs and a chanageable wallpaper.

i also use the launch plugin with bsetbg to change my wallpaper whenever i want. here is a screenshot (http://images.deviantart.com/large/screenshot/nix/inevitable.jpg) of my latest blackbox running Aterm and gkrellm. (i know that the wallpaper is not minimalistic but it looks awsome)
the reason that i use flux (to get back to the reason of the thread) is because i have a slow machine that can't handle KDE or Gnome and this thing flies. (128mb ram, 16mb vidcard, PIII 450) also i got tired of all of the icons overtaking my desktop everytime i installed something on windows so i gained a distaste for them.

[sharth]

Blackbox is minimilistic. Does nearly everything i want it to. A few problems with some full screen stuff, and I hate how X deals with opengl mouse stealing (i want a hardcoded path to move in and out of a mouse steal). But beyond that, wms are all preferance. I don't need much in the way of desktop. So blackbox works fine for me. (didn't go flux because i never understood tabs).

I am waiting for E17 though.

[Hayl]

Originally posted by Resident_Geek
Bite me, gentoo boy :D I'll get it someday, most likely someday after i've dumped dialup.

have you tried installing rox-filer for desktop icons?

[Resident_Geek]

I'm in the process of installing idesk; I meant I'll get gentoo.

[phil_patnude]

ok, i've been running flux for a few hours now.
Joes_box, what is the "launch plugin"

btw can anyone offer some suggestions to get this script working?

#!/bin/bash
#script to load windowmangers in the way i like
#created 4/18/03 ? Phil Patnude
xinit
dfm
/usr/local/bin/fluxbox
bsetbg -f /usr/share/pixmaps/pipes-plumb.jpg
#end

it's use should be kind of clear, to start an x-session and load a desktop, then flux, then my wallpaper. When i run it form the console, all i get is the the x-session. but if i cut out the xinit, and run it from an xterm, everything works. any help is appreciated.

[Resident_Geek]

Change it to "xinit &" and "dfm &". The bsetbg you can leave, but a & would speed up loadin slightly, and it won't hurt. This will let other programs run while the xinit is going, so the script won't hang on the x session. What it's doing right now is executing the other commands after your x session ends. I bet if you ran your script, exited the x session, and started a new one, all your changes would be there. The way I did it, and I believe the conventional way, is to modify your .xinitrc file in your home directoy. It's executed automatically when you start x, so just put all yuor commands in there and end it with fluxbox. Mine has bsetbg -f ~/wallpaper2.jpg, xscreensaver &, xset m 4, and fluxbox. yours would look like this:

bsetbg -f /usr/share/pixmaps/pipes-plumb.jpg &
dfm &
/usr/local/fluxbox

but your script will work fine when you add the &'s.

[Gertrude]

I think icewm is the fastest I have used, it loads in about 2 seconds. give or take a second.

[zdude255]

Yeah, try IceWM, its pretty light. Instant load on a 1.5 Ghz, still pretty functional too, plus there are lots of themes

[phil_patnude]

hey thanks, resident. I took your advice and put the code into my ~/.xinitrc but i had to make the file and when i tried to run startx or xinit (can't remember which, maybe both) x exited immediately and didn't load the programs. i gave up after playing with having an .xinitrc and crashin x so many times

i eventually figured it out after toying with the different parts of x's configuration. here's how i managed it:

addded this line to the end of my /etc/x11/xinit/xinitrc :
# Start the window manager:
exec ~/xgo

and then created an executable xgo for each user, so that they can have their own settings for desktop and wm, etc.
mine reads as follows
#load my desktop
#last edited 4/18/03 - phil patnude
dfm &
bsetbg -f /usr/share/pixmaps/pipes-plumb.jpg &
/usr/local/bin/fluxbox
#done

for some reason, i can't get Xfree to execute any commands in these files AFTER i tell it to load flux. No idea why that is, but it took me an hour to figure it out. Again, thanks for the suggestion; now all i have to do is type 'startx' and i boot into my desktop just the way i like it
-phil

[hop-frog]

you might check out xtoolwait
you can use it to run your programs after the window manager has started up.

[phil_patnude]

thanks, i'll look for that.

[Resident_Geek]

The reason it won't load anything after flux is that without a & after flux, it waits until flux finishes running (which is when you shut down X) to continue executing commands from the file. However, if you add the &, it will barrel on, and .xinitrc will reach its end before you have a chance to do anything, so that's not a good way to do it. If you really want to have flux near the top, you can hang on its pid, which I've never tried. There's a really good help file about this on flux's site, give me a minute to find it.

EDIT: It's in their FAQ, located here (http://fluxbox.sourceforge.net/docs/en/faq.php) .

[Gamfa]

I use Icewm. Clean, simple, and easy to configure. I run MDK and I don't bother to load Gnome or KDE, Ice gives me everything I need in the interface and load only the packages I really use. Everything clean and simple.

[knute]

I use sawfish.

I've tried others, but as I have an aversion to using the mouse when I'm doing such things like writing a letter or coding, I keep coming back to sawfish cause if I need to move a window, I find pressing <Ctrl><Left Arrow> easier than grabbing the mouse and clicking and dragging it to where I want it. And since I've set up the afore mentioned key combo to move the window left as far as it can, well, I have the info that I need and am back to typing before I would have even been able to reach the mouse. :D


I have set up windowmaker in the past for my kids as well. They were really young then (like 2 and 4) and I didn't want for them to be able to accidentally delete something or totally mess up their desktop with the games and such that I'ld set up for them.
WindowMaker had a setting that wouldn't allow any of your changes to the desktop to become permanent when you exitted.
Needless to say, it was a definate plus so that when they moved things all over the place (and a couple of times moved things off the edge of the screen) all it took was an exit and relog to fix it. :cool:

[joesbox]

Originally posted by phil_patnude
ok, i've been running flux for a few hours now.
Joes_box, what is the "launch plugin"



it is a plugin for gkrellm. i put a link in my last post to the download page. it helps eliminate the need for icons.

[osmocot404]

I happen to like fluxbox, because it is very customizable and there is lots of open space to put all your programs. I am not really organized, but with fluxbox it seems all the clutter is gone.

[morpheus12x]

Hello people

I've been doing a lot of thinkng lately about Window Managers that consume a lot more of cpu speed and memory (RAM).And I Heard that KDE does infact consume much memory, and it does do that cause its only one on my machine which takes more that 1 minute to load.

After all of that I decided to use WM like Afterstep ,HAckedBox,fluxbox ,Window maker and other ones.I wanna know from peole who use them daily,How are other WMs diffferent from KDE and Gnome.

My question is: Which WM doesn,t consume lot more memory and doesn,t take more that a minute to load?Abd which One is actualy simple to use?

I don,t wanna use KDE =(HELL no!),because its so slowish and its so big in MEgs.

Thanks in ADvance...fellow Linuxers!

[jglen490]

I use IceWM. For me, it just works.

In reality, there's no such thing as "best", except as it works best for you. That's the great thing about Linux, you have choices and you get to choose what works best for you :cool: .

To get an idea about some other X window apps, try this (http://www.xwinman.org/index.html) site.

[serz]

I love Fluxbox, it's pretty nice and fast.
www.fluxbox.org

[moojuece]

i really like xfce....but that is just me

[LrngTheHardWay]

The "best" WM (for you) is going to be the one that fits your particular situation, and that you like most.

That basically requires you to taste a good cross section of the flavors out there.

[mchangun]

I wanna make a comparison of how much RAM is bein chewed by my WM. Which process do i look at for this? Just "X"?

[morpheus12x]

to see when Much ram is chewed up type at the terminal " ps -aux " to view the processes.Most of the time when using KDE you'll see KDE minigetty process names at the top. Or even beter you can type "top" at the terminal to see processes that consume at lot of RAM.

[mchangun]

u sure its not jus the X process?

[Beckman]

just test them all... or a few popular ones at least...

and ull stay with fluxbox after u tried all of them hehe....

fluxbox rox...

if u like clearness and simplicity
otherwise go with an environment like gnome or kde, they look good with all their taskbars and iconbars etc......

but they cant mess with the speed of fluxbox.

[sharth]

one of the big things probably is the drag and drop capabilities between programs.

Inter-program cooperation.

[mchangun]

What's this "Rox" thing about? Is it another windows manager? Or a program that runs on top of one?

[stumbles]

The best window manager is the one you are most happy with.

[andysimmons]

Originally posted by mchangun
What's this "Rox" thing about? Is it another windows manager? Or a program that runs on top of one?

He just means "fluxbox rocks" or "fluxbox is awesome" etc. This (http://www.wtfiml33t.com/viewarticle.php?artid=132) site might help clear some of the confusion; just promise me you won't use l33tsp34k after you read their guide.

[mchangun]

LOL!
i did catch that he meant fluxbox rocks ;)

i was asking a different questoin, what is Rox (a another piece of software) all about?

[andysimmons]

:D lol Ok gotcha.

Is this (http://freshmeat.net/projects/rox-filer/?topic_id=55%2C860) what you meant? I don't know anything about it, but I found it on freshmeat.net.

[NuclearKitten]

rox is just another file manager. it's ok, but i preffer emelfm.

[The Mas]

Originally posted by moojuece
i really like xfce....but that is just me

During the mid to late 1990s, I used CDE quite a bit on my UNIX systems, and in fact, I contributed some localization and internationalization work to one of the commercial CDE implementations.

When I started working with Linux, I used fvwm quite a bit, and I used the multiple desktop feature quite a bit, since I had, by that time, become comfortable with CDE.

When I started to use the desktop features more often and tried out some desktop Linux systems, they generally came with KDE, so I got more acclimated to KDE, because of those factors, than GNOME or one of the other popular window managers that approach desktop managers in functionality.

As I started to use Debian systems, I was given more opportunity to try out a variety of window managers and desktop managers. As I did so, I found that XFCE was a good compromise between speed, convenience, and functionality. The xfwm window manager used by XFCE isn't the fastest or most resource conservative window manager, but it's moderate in resource usage, and the flexibility available with the full desktop make XFCE quite appealing.

For those wanting the simplest, most feature rich and flexible desktop, KDE is good, but you pay the price with relatively high resource consumption. GNOME is less resource intensive and it has some nice applications included in the complete package, but it sacrifices some simplicity for casual users.

Blackbox or fluxbox make great window managers for someone who wants a really fast window manager and they're willing to do a bit of configuration on their own.

[hop-frog]

Window Maker is my favorite. Only downside to it is you are perminently stuck with NeXT-like window decor.

Rox is a desktop centered around file managment and "drag and drop."

XFce is a desktop (and one of my favorites), but it uses XFwm as the window manager, which I don't like very much. Maybe in version 4 it will be improved.

Blackbox is boring.

[The Mas]

Originally posted by hop-frog
Window Maker is my favorite. Only downside to it is you are perminently stuck with NeXT-like window decor.

Rox is a desktop centered around file managment and "drag and drop."

XFce is a desktop (and one of my favorites), but it uses XFwm as the window manager, which I don't like very much. Maybe in version 4 it will be improved.

Blackbox is boring.

I've not used Rox, so I can't comment about it.

I've not grown attached to Window Maker, AfterStep, or any of the NeXT variants, though they generally perform well. I'd say that Window Maker and XFCE are pretty comparable in system performance. You're used to Window Maker, so that's fine. I'm used to the CDE, KDE, fvwm, XFCE multiple desktop model, and I find it easy to add entries to either the menus or system tray with XFCE, so I tend to prefer it.

Blackbox is a no frills window manager, so I can see why not everyone would like it. I use it on Debian systems with a fully populated Debian submenu, so I can get at all my applications. Still, I find XFCE easier, and Blackbox is not that much faster, so I go with XFCE.

I've never grown attached to Enlightenment. I'm using KDE at the moment. My system has enough power to run it just fine. I prefer XFCE when I really want snappy access, but KDE is fine, it's easy to customize, so it makes a decent every day desktop on nicely configured systems.

[2ndsign]

i use enlightenment with emelfm !

i cant speak for anyone else, that is what i like!

but as far which wm is the best i dont know!

it depend on the computer and the individual!!:D

[The Mas]

Here's a direct quote:

"Morphix LightGUI

I had only a limited amount of RAM to deal with, so I decided to start with LightGUI, which includes a number of basic tools and aims at being fast even on older hardware. With a total ISO footprint of 187.13MB, the distribution is small enough to fit on a Mini-CD. It uses IceWM as its graphical user environment, Rox as its file manager, Phoenix as its Web browser, Sylpheed as its e-mail client, and includes a number of other necessities: MPlayer, AbiWord, Gnumeric, XMMS, Gaim, gFTP, and more.

The one thing that stuck with me about LightGUI was its sheer working speed, even on Tower I, which had only 192MB of RAM. At one point I was viewing a movie straight from CD with MPlayer, browsing the Web with Phoenix, testing AbiWord, and trying to acquire a screenshot with the GIMP, having already downloaded four files from Vorbis.com , all the while experiencing very little lag in the way of application functionality. Sure, there was some latency when I tried to open another application, but that's to be expected, given all that I was doing.

I was so impressed by LightGUI that I decided to use the GIMP to take a screenshot of all the stuff that was going on. Sadly, I was unable to get it due to a system error, which only occurred in this module. Previously, there had also been a printing system error which at first I thought was in AbiWord ("Font data file... cannot be opened for reading!"). I couldn't print through any other method, including command-line tools. It became apparent later that printing was a problem with all of the modules.

The major downside of the LightGUI is the general user un-friendliness of IceWM. The Morphix team has done a marvelous job of taking IceWM and Rox, neither of which is particularly famous for its ease of use, and making a distribution almost anyone with a computer can use without much help. Still, there is room for improvement. You can check out the wiki road map to see where they're going.

LightGUI is fine for anyone interested in trying out Linux, but who doesn't have access to a very powerful system. Those who do have access to something with a bit more muscle should try one of the modules with a more developed user interface a try."

from the article about Morphix Debian GNU/Linux software and the various CD-based versions you can get. The full article can be found at http://newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=03/04/22/1444243

[Sepero]

This thread was getting stale, so I thought I might jumpstart it again. I found it when I was looking for something similar to this myself.

A lot of people might be bashing this guy, but a WM like this really helps when I'm trying to convert power-users from winsh*t to GNU/Linux.

So far this thread is about 6 months old, so let's add some new stuff to this thread! WM's forever!! :p

[chiatello]

whats the difference?

right now im using kde, but what the dirrence, between it and fluxbox/blackbox adn what not


--thanks

[serz]

I don't know very well how to explain this...I will try.

Window Managers are much faster than Desktop Environments, why? Because Desktop Environments uses a Window Manager (without this, you couldn't manage windows) plus they depend on other things as well.

[psi42]

(Most:confused: ) desktop environments have a lot of extra stuff (desktop icons, etc) while (most:confused: ) window managers do not. (Most:confused: ) desktop environments also have a lot of apps designed for use with it. Like for kde you have things like kscreenshot, koffice, etc.

I don't think it is really an easy to define difference....:)

~psi42

[serz]

Originally posted by psi42
(Most:confused: ) desktop environments have a lot of extra stuff (desktop icons, etc) while (most:confused: ) window managers do not.
Yep, that's what I meant when it depends on much things than WM's do not.
Originally posted by psi42
(Most:confused: ) desktop environments also have a lot of apps designed for use with it. Like for kde you have things like kscreenshot, koffice, etc.
That's true it dosn't matter because they are not loaded when the Desktop Environment starts. But yea...

[paj12]

Desktop environments usually have alot of extra software, usually GUI-based, designed to make your comp more user-friendly. For instance, you can take a WM like Blackbox (or one of its derivatives) and install things like an icon manager and menus and other stuff. That's about like the difference between a WM and a DE.

[hop-frog]

There is no simple division between what is a Desktop Environment (DE) and what is a Window Manager (WM). There are several projects that are a little of both. That is why I like to lump them all together and just call them Windowing Environments.

A WM will create borders around your windows and it decides how and where a window is displayed on the screen.

A DE is a collection of programs that are usually packaged together and they work best if they are used together. The DE comes with a WM (though you can usually swap the default WM for another one of your choice). A DE also comes with a Deskset. A Deskset consists of at least most of these core programs: a file manager, a clock and calendar tool, a calculator, a text editor, a custom X terminal, and some means of configuring the system. A DE will also provide some means of managing desktop icons, launching programs, and a tasklist.

Some projects fit somewhere in between WM and DE. IceWM is considered a WM because it provides window borders. It also provides a tasklist, program menus, clock, desktop icons, and a configuration tool. It is not really a DE, because it does not have a true Deskset.

[chiatello]

wow, i just used one of the window managers and all i can say is awesome!


its like 10x faster than kde/gnome (and im on a pretty powerful machine)

but on the other hand it doesnt look half as good :(


is there a good lloooking fast window manager?

[hop-frog]

Originally posted by chiatello
is there a good lloooking fast window manager? There are lots of different WMs to choose from (over 130) with a wide variety of appearances. I prefer the looks of Window Maker, but lots of other people favor that of Blackbox (and its relatives), IceWM, and XFce. If you don't like the appearance, you can easily change it to suit your own preferences or you can just try another WM until you find one that you like.

http://www.xwinman.org is a good place to see what WMs are out there, but keep in mind that the screenshots on that site are really old and all of the WMs can look much nicer than what is shown.
http://themes.freshmeat.net is a good place to see what various WMs look like.
Once you find a WM you like, the best source for that WMs themes would be that WM's own Web site or another site that specifically hosts themes for that particular WM. Better yet, make your own theme.

[mandrakeroot]

I thought metacity was the windowmanager that gnome 2.2 used but you cant run metacity by itself(can you?). You can run fluxbox by itself though. I know you can run the gnome stuff in fluxbox(like the taskbar and such)

[serz]

I belive sawfish is the WM that GNOME uses. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[hop-frog]

Originally posted by mandrakeroot
I thought metacity was the windowmanager that gnome 2.2 used but you cant run metacity by itself(can you?).Metacity is the default WM for the GNOME DE. You can change this to another one of your choice if you want. Metacity is probably one of the best WMs to run with GNOME though because it was designed specifically to run with GNOME.

You don't have to have GNOME running to run Metacity, but you have to have lots of GNOME libraries installed in order for it to work properly. If you use Metacity independently from GNOME, you will have to use other programs to provide the taskbar, icons, wallpaper, and application launchers.

You can run fluxbox by itself though. I know you can run the gnome stuff in fluxbox(like the taskbar and such)True. Just like most DEs, GNOME is made up of several different programs that work together. You can take just about any of those programs out of GNOME and they will probably work in another environment. Likewise, you can also bring independant programs or programs from other DEs into the GNOME environment. You could probably run KDE's taskbar in GNOME and GNOME's taskbar in KDE.

[hop-frog]

Originally posted by serz
I belive sawfish is the WM that GNOME uses. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong. Sawfish was the WM that GNOME 1.x used by default. GNOME 2.x uses Metacity. You can use Sawfish in GNOME 2 if you want. Sawfish has a much more powerful theming capability.

[mandrakeroot]

THis might be slightly off topic but I noticed that gnome 1.3 had more features in its taskbaar (you could right click close all windows when they were grouped etc.)

[pvc]

i want to turn a 200mhz pc in to a mp3 player,

so i wondered if anyone knew if there are windowmanager lite enough not to be choppy on this system.

sytem =
200mzh amd
48mb memory
2mb-matrox mistique vid card

thanx in advance

[Hayl]

any of the *box window managers
pekwm
oroborus
fvwm

btw: there are already a ton of threads asking this same question. you should try using the search funciton before posting new threads.

here is a post i found using "light window manager" in search.

http://www.justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=79203&highlight=light+window+manager

[GaryJones32]

the very smallest window manager is http://www.all-day-breakfast.com/wm2/

lots more you can do to get your box running better besides wm.

[jlmb]

Originally posted by pvc
i want to turn a 200mhz pc in to a mp3 player,

so i wondered if anyone knew if there are windowmanager lite enough not to be choppy on this system.

sytem =
200mzh amd
48mb memory
2mb-matrox mistique vid card

thanx in advance

You don't need X to make it a mp3player box.
I have a p133 without X that plays mp3s perfectly in console mode. I use mp3blaster

[ph34r]

You don't need X to make it a mp3player box.

I agree. mpg123, and there are a few other console based players.

[Gaxus]

If command line is what you are going for, I would recommend CPLAY (http://www.tf.hut.fi/~flu/cplay/).

[pvc]

well the thing is i personaly wouldnt use X either but the box is intended to be used by absolute pc illiterate people, so i figured i needed X,

if any one knows a good (understandable to idiots) (so not mpg123 etc..)console mp3 player i would be greatfull too

grreetz,
PvC

[hop-frog]

I searched Freshmeat.net under 'curses mp3' (http://freshmeat.net/search/?q=curses+mp3&section=projects) and found some programs you might try out. Curses programs are ones that run in the console or an X terminal emu and they use a simple graphic user interface. If you are going to be working exclusively in the console, you might want to install gpm. This will let people use the mouse.

If you don't like any of those programse, you could write a simple script with 'dialog' that would act as an easy to use frontend to mpg123. This shouldn't be very difficult.

[serz]

Originally posted by pvc
if any one knows a good (understandable to idiots) (so not mpg123 etc..)console mp3 player i would be greatfull too.
mp3blaster is very user-frienly, is what jlmb suggested :)

You may also want to do some search at Freshmeat (www.freshmeat.net) for console mp3 players.

[biscaynesix]

Gnome is cooEL

[bigmac99]

as a newbie, I see screenshots here and there, some with KDE, some with GNOME, and some with other Window Managers. Which one do you use? why? What makes you choose one over the other? I like some of KDE's features, but sometimes I'll login with GNOME also. Those are the only 2 I have played around with. Do some apps run in one but not the other?

Thanks in advance.

Charles

[serz]

Originally posted by bigmac99
Do some apps run in one but not the other?
No. For example, if you have GNOME and KDE installed, you will be able to run KDE programs in GNOME and viceversa.

Moving this to the Window/Desktop Managers forum.

[mdwatts]

Also have a look through the very, very long 'best window/desktop manager' thread in the /dev/random forum.

[stumbles]

Originally posted by bigmac99
as a newbie, I see screenshots here and there, some with KDE, some with GNOME, and some with other Window Managers. Which one do you use? why? What makes you choose one over the other? I like some of KDE's features, but sometimes I'll login with GNOME also. Those are the only 2 I have played around with. Do some apps run in one but not the other?

Thanks in advance.

Charles

I choose KDE because I like its looks and the way it feels. The only way you'll know is not by what I or anyone else here says, you'll only know until like most everyone else run several or all until you find one that suits.

[X_console]

I don't use either. I run a regular window manager. Best thing to do would be to try them out yourself. They're almost similar in terms of capabilities so if you've got the hard drive space, go for it. For me I found that I had no use for them so I got rid of them.

Also, check out http://www.freedesktop.org for alternatives to GNOME and KDE.

[The Mas]

Originally posted by chiatello
wow, i just used one of the window managers and all i can say is awesome!


its like 10x faster than kde/gnome (and im on a pretty powerful machine)

but on the other hand it doesnt look half as good :(


is there a good lloooking fast window manager?

You might want to consider looking into XFCE. The latest official release is XFCE 3.8.18. It is a bonafide desktop environment, but it runs faster than any other desktop environment and faster than many window managers, too. It has less than a 5 MB image size on most systems and on some systems, it has an image size slightly smaller than that.

If you want something a bit more flexible in appearance than XFCE 3, try XFCE 4. It is in the final stages of testing, so it is at release candidate 3 (RC 3) stage right now, but unlike some other software, it is NOT full of bugs, it works pretty well already. You can do quite a bit with the appearance; it uses the GTK2 + toolkit.

I recommend both versions; which one you choose will depend on your specific needs. Either one works really well. Check out http://www.xfce.org for details.

[questionasker]

probably already something like this posted. but i would also like a link to where to download your favorites, if thats not too much to ask.

[tmcG]

One place to download a lot of window managers is Window Managers (http://www.plig.org/xwinman/)

As for the best one, that is something I think is best that you decide as everyone has their fabvourites.

If you like a fast, light window manager, then Blackbox, Fluxbox, Window Maker are good choices.

If you like a "Windows like feel", then KDE or Gnome are worth looking at.

There are many others so I recommend install them and see!

Good luck!:D

[serz]

There's no *best* Window Manager.

Take a look to this (http://www.justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=107415) thread.

[questionasker]

every time i go to gnome site, all i find is separate .tars on their ftp site. is there not just on file to d/l that has all u need to install gnome?

[Hayl]

Originally posted by questionasker
every time i go to gnome site, all i find is separate .tars on their ftp site. is there not just on file to d/l that has all u need to install gnome?

your distribution generally will have premade packages for that. generally there will be more than one - as is the case for XFCE and KDE.

[Hayl]

Originally posted by questionasker
probably already something like this posted. but i would also like a link to where to download your favorites, if thats not too much to ask.

there is a sticky post at the top of the Window Manager forum - with links to most window managers.

[Dennizlerim]

Originally posted by bigmac99
Window Managers. Which one do you use? why? What makes you choose one over the other?

I run KDE, together with a few Superkaramba Extensions....
I wanted to change to IceWM, but got pissed of, because of the work I would have to put into it to make it work like I want to..... I'll probably look at it, if I got some time to do it

Looked at window maker, but it just is not what I think of a desktop. A friend of mine uses it and loves it, though....

I like KDE because I can make it look like I want to, but still have the luxury of all the nice KDE tools (configuration, konqueror[smb, tar support]).
I also like to use most of the KDE-apps like KMail
(btw. is there any cool gtk email proggy? i don't like bals, or sylpheed)

The question of gnome and kde is a question of gtk and qt, too, I guess......

It's really a question of what you like.....

So test them and stick with what you like

[saturn-vk]

Originally posted by Dennizlerim

(btw. is there any cool gtk email proggy? i don't like bals, or sylpheed)


Ximian Evolution ?

[Dennizlerim]

Originally posted by saturn-vk
Ximian Evolution ?

nice program, but it doesn't support striping down html emails to plain text.

I get a lot of emails from outlook users and I don't want to see special font types, images or other stuff.......

[Okie]

http://xwinman.org/vote.html

looks like WindowMaker and ICEwm are the two leading Xwindow managers...

[hrhrhrFOOT]

How did you get afterstep to work with animated backgrounds?

[amgeex]

I've got a question about XFce. Is it a desktop manager or a window manager? If it's a desktop, then I can use it instead of KDE 3.x on my future MDK 9.2 install, right? Also, how fast would it be on my system?
(check out my specs on my sig).

[Hayl]

It's a Desktop Environment like Gnome and KDE.

It is basically a stripped down smaller Gnome.

[amgeex]

Ok, but would it run fast on my system? Check out my sig for specs.

[Hayl]

I have no idea. I've never used it before.

Probably would run better than KDE or Gnome.

[o0zi]

It would run fine on your system, but if it doesn't there's always IceWM, or even Fluxbox.

[amgeex]

I guess I'll give it a try, I'm just waiting for MDK 9.2 'cause I'm kinda new to linux. I'd like to try slack or gentoo, but I don't feel like I'm prepared for them, so...

[o0zi]

You can get the Mandrake 9.2 ISOs off BitTorrent now if you have a fast internet connection, but you might as well wait if you want the proper pack with a manual.

[amgeex]

Could you post a link to the downloads pleez?

;0) hehe. I want my linux now!

[Floog]

Thunderbird 0.3

Originally posted by Dennizlerim
nice program, but it doesn't support striping down html emails to plain text.

I get a lot of emails from outlook users and I don't want to see special font types, images or other stuff.......

[maver]

i know that i can't keep switch them back and forth so i have to decide on one sooner or later, the question is witch? in kde i like the applets on the bars and Kopete seems to be a bit more stable (but i still get some 11 error and msn just stoped working) but i also noticed that totem can't run now it just crashes everytime. as for gnome it runs just fine most of the time, along with other apps and its got lots of software going for it. so i was just wandering what you guys use and why?

[gehidore]

why people ask this question over and over and over i believe if you do a search for which window manager you will find a current thread.


but as for me i use fluxbox with kde apps( sometimes)

ie xmms mozilla k3b dillo

[serz]

There are so many threads like this one...

http://www.justlinux.com/forum/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=839298&sortby=replies&sortorder=descending

[DerekKraan]

I use GNOME because it's simple, and GTK owns joo. ;)

Honestly though, you'll just have to figure out what works best for you.

[X_console]

Actually I prefer XFCE 4. :)

[KyPeN]

Originally posted by X_console
Actually I prefer XFCE 4. :)
Isn't it nice? Its like a simplified OSX....but fast....

[Zubir]

not touching this one with a ten foot pole. people get crazier than hell over kde vs. gnome...

[mart_man00]

people get crazier than hell over kde vs. gnome...
I know! Some people still dont know QT is the shiznick of toolkits. Go figure...

[GlennaclawZ]

I agree I use Qt so much its not even funny... heh
it may make all the widgets for u but it still takes skill in the programming aspect of it :)

[carbon-12]

" Kopete seems to be a bit more stable (but i still get some 11 error and msn just stoped working)"

You should try Gaim or aMSN. Their very stable.


"but i also noticed that totem can't run now it just crashes everytime."

I had the same problems. I just use gxine /w mplayer codecs.


" i was just wandering what you guys use and why?"

I use Gnome because its seems much faster than KDE. Also I prefer the way gnome/gtk apps look/feel.

[mborrill]

here we go again:) another 50 page debate on which is better

[terribleRobbo]

* Waves at mods *

LOCK IT! LOCK IT!

We don't need _another_ thread about this... :(

(Sorry, maver, but this has been asked _way_ too many times... It just turns into a big timesink + flamewar. Apologies. :( )

[wranga]

A lot of the time distros are built around certain desktop environments, eg. Redhat with Gnome and Mandrake with KDE.

[ooagentbender]

Its fast, its simple and it works. It may take a little getting used to but I think fluxbox is one of the slickest windows managers out there. If you havn't tried it please do I think you will be hooked because of its speed and ease of use.

[Icarus]

Are you spamming the board to drive your post count up...or just very excited? :D

I do agree fluxbox is good, but it is not for everyone...neither is Gnome, KDE, IceWM, Enlightenment or <fill in the blank> ;)

[nouse66]

have you tried the development version or just the main one? i just installed 0.9.7 and its even better! i can finally have gaim working like gnome and kde where you can close the buddy list and it hides in the tray icon. also, little things like icons on the toolbar and every program has a spot on the toolbar (like the window-ish desktop managers) are nice.

[hyp_spec]

gnome :)

[carbon-12]

^^
Thanx in advance

[Darkbolt]

none are "better" than the other...It comes down to taste.

Blackbox is what spawned them all, its the simplest for those that are really minimalistic

Fluxbox is basically(or was basically) blackbox with tabs, with the new development version they have some new features, like pixmap themes(I think) and menu transparency

Openbox3 just had a complete code rewrite, so it only resembles the previous two in look. Its menus and themes are incompatible now. Everything, save for the themes are handled with XML, which is more tedius, but its more organized too. It comes with a python script to port flux/blackbox themes, but its not 100% perfect.

Like I said though, comes down to personal preference

[KyPeN]

I have not tried Openbox, but I can tell ya that FB beats BB w/ a stick. There really is no difference in performance if you use regular (non-pix map) themes and no transparency. I use them both and the difference is minimal at most. The tabs are very useful, and I couldn't live w/out desktop mouse-wheel scrolling.

[carbon-12]

Great! Well I guess ill go /w fluxbox.

thanx for the quick responses BTW. :)

[hyp_spec]

dont like openbox3 or fb-dev but I absolutely love Openbox2 and Blackbox

[cereal83]

I like KDE most. I have tried other ones like Gnome, winice or whatever it is called and another one but I like KDE because it is simple. Plus I don't notice a differance in speed when I use a differant window manager. I looked at screen shots of black box and it's looks plain and boring.

Thats what I think

[AndrewLubinus89]

I never used openbox much but I love fluxbox. The tabs are great and the desktop scrolling is good too.

[The Mas]

Originally posted by X_console
Actually I prefer XFCE 4. :)

For quite a while, when I was using several distros as my every day desktop, and one of them only had KDE, I had pretty much standardized upon KDE for my desktop environment. I've been using KDE, in one form or another since early 1999. The KDE project started, I believe, in 1996, and the GNOME desktop project started about a year later.

Back in 1995, I used fvwm, fvwm2, or fvwm95 on my first Linux system. At the same time, I was using Digital UNIX with a CDE (Common Desktop Environment) as my primary work desktop. Prior to that, I had used OSF/Motif for many years, so I was familiar with that general style of computing.

When I first ran across XFCE, I noticed how similar it was to CDE in its basic appearance. I didn't immediately take to it. But later, I started working with XFCE 3.8.12, and I started using XFCE more and more often. By the time XFCE 3.8.18 came out, I was using XFCE pretty regularly.

When I heard about XFCE 4 being under development, I gave it a try, too. When it got close to the final release, I started using it more regularly, and soon used it nearly as often as XFCE 3.8.18. Once the final release came out, I made it my primary desktop environment.

I occasionally use other desktops and window managers, but mostly to evaluate them. The most common window manager I use besides the XFWM window manager that's part of XFCE is probably IceWM, unless you count the times that I still use KDE.

I find that for lightweight, fast use, XFCE 4 easily makes an excellent, full featured desktop. I like IceWM for use as a lightweight window manager, but I actually find XFCE just as fast, overall, as Ice, and only slightly heavier in resource consumption.

I still like KDE, but since I don't often use some of its features, I use it more these days just to try it out whenever new updates come out. It's a bit heavy on resource consumption. I've heard the upcoming KDE 3.2 release is a bit better in that regard, according to someone who's been reviewing it on a 266 MHz system. I'll have to check out KDE 3.2 soon myself.

As far as GNOME goes, I've never really grown accustomed to it. I have nothing against it, but desktop choices often have a lot to do with what you've come to know and use. Coming from an OSF/Motif, CDE, KDE, and XFCE background, that might explain why I haven't developed a passion for GNOME. For me, if I want something heavy and full featured, I find that KDE does the job. For something lighter, XFCE is much lighter than either GNOME or KDE, so I don't find myself using GNOME a lot. I have seen the GNOME 2.4 release mature quite a bit, and it now has some pretty decent features. I've just not grown used to it.

Desktop use all boils down to preferences. It turns out that many desktop tools and window managers have good features and plenty of positive attributes. I simply select the ones that appeal to me most.

My most frequent use list includes, in this order:

XFCE
KDE
IceWM

[Trogdor]

Fluxbox.

[Hypz]

I use pekwm. I changed because I saw a couple of serz's screenshots. Very nice. Plus very easy to use.

[serz]

Openbox is very used too.

[Hypz]

Where do you get your themes from? Do you make most of them? Any guides that could help me do the same?

[Hayl]

This thread has been "refreshed" with a new one: here (http://www.justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=718589#post718589).

This thread is now closed... please use the new one.