Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.windows.x > #162

X window managers

Show all headers | View raw

>>>>> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> writes:
>>>>> On 2014-03-10, Randy Westlund <Vorzakir@invalid.invalid> wrote:

 >> I haven't uninstalled XFCE just in case I come across something that
 >> doesn't play well with a tiling WM.  At some point, I'll get around
 >> to replacing XFCE with one of these really tiny ones, but I don't
 >> even start a second X display anymore.

 > I prefer Windowmaker on a desktop and E17 on my netbook, both pretty
 > heavyweight systems by the standards of things like xmonad.  But
 > someone mentioned an old twm derivative by the name of vtwm on a
 > Slashdot post earlier this year or late last year.  So I compiled it
 > and have had playing around with it.

 > My conclusion is that most of what I use a window manager for is
 > already present in this early, lightweight stuff.  So where do the
 > extra GBs go?

	And it still left me wonder why no one has mentioned Openbox
	yet?  The pro's of Openbox is that it's really lightweight
	(comparable to TWM, if not better than the latter) and also a
	"traditional" (as in: non-tiling, workspace-able) window
	manager, with customizable controls allowing for
	keyboard-focused interaction.  Frankly, I could hardly see a
	reason to prefer either XFCE WM, or good old TWM, over Openbox.

	As for the drawback that bothers me personally, Openbox allows a
	window to either belong to a single workspace, or be "stuck" to
	all of the workspaces at once.  Alas, there's no option for the
	window to only appear on certain workspaces but not the rest,
	which I think I'd find convenient.

	When it comes to the tiling thing, I have to admit that I see
	little use for it.  The majority of X applications I use are set
	to use the whole screen for their "main" windows.  I see no need
	for applications to share screen with one another.  (But then, I
	rarely use the GNU Screen's "split-screen" option, either.)

[...]

-- 
FSF associate member #7257

Back to comp.windows.x | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Memory comparison of Linux light desktops, pt 3 RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-09 19:34 +0000
  Re: Memory comparison of Linux light desktops, pt 3 Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2014-03-10 20:53 +0000
  Re: Memory comparison of Linux light desktops, pt 3 Randy Westlund <Vorzakir@invalid.invalid> - 2014-03-10 21:24 +0000
    Re: Memory comparison of Linux light desktops, pt 3 RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-14 19:42 +0000
      Re: Memory comparison of Linux light desktops, pt 3 Randy Westlund <Vorzakir@invalid.invalid> - 2014-03-15 06:45 +0000
      X window managers Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.net> - 2014-03-20 10:09 +0000
  Re: Memory comparison of Linux light desktops, pt 3 unixb4coffee <unixb4coffee@gmail.com> - 2014-03-20 11:11 -0700
    Re: Memory comparison of Linux light desktops, pt 3 "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2014-03-20 14:08 -0500
      Re: Memory comparison of Linux light desktops, pt 3 Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-03-20 20:25 +0100
        Re: Memory comparison of Linux light desktops, pt 3 "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2014-03-20 21:21 -0500
        Re: Memory comparison of Linux light desktops, pt 3 unixb4coffee <unixb4coffee@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 10:54 -0700
          Re: Memory comparison of Linux light desktops, pt 3 "Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@sacrideo.us> - 2014-03-22 14:13 -0500
      Re: Memory comparison of Linux light desktops, pt 3 Dario Niedermann <dnied@tiscali.it> - 2014-06-25 10:26 +0200

csiph-web