Started a new Window Manager / Destop Environment Rant thread.
The old one is now locked; you can get to it by clicking here.
Started a new Window Manager / Destop Environment Rant thread.
The old one is now locked; you can get to it by clicking here.
WooHoo! First Post.
XFce
For me, I just want to tell gnome coders that currently the version of gnome I know has its own way of doing things -- Nothing is similar to apple mac nor windows! I mean it create shortcuts differently, has its taskbar work differently....
Thus, a newbie friendly window manager would be KDE, which is capable of doing things very similar to other systems.
I recommend KDE for newbies and Gnome for more experienced users as Gnome has less "nonsense", as others would say. Both are equally nice but I am too familiar with the Windoze format for the moment and have developed habits on it that I am trying hard to unlearn.
http://www.kde.org/
http://www.gnome.org
Ion or Ratpoison :-)
Simple and keyboard-oriented. If you really need eye candy, I guess you can throw in .jpg's or .png's as backgrounds for your aterm. Every app. opens to max. window size and you just flick between workspaces or split the screen horizontally or vertically when you're feeling super-whiz-bang.
If you're going to try Ion, d/l the old stable version from 2002. It doesn't require the Lua scripting language and has been thoroughly tested. All you need to learn is approximately 5 key combinations and you have the world at your keyboard.
Ratpoison is as good or better.
My 1.89 cents.
Does anyone here just use X? No window manager, just X and maybe some shell scripts to start up commonly used apps.
KDE! KDE! KDE! KDE! KDE! KDE! KDE! KDE! KDE! KDE! KDE!
I just started to do some serious programming and have been really impressed by QT Designer and Kdevelop.
I tried Gnome but it didnt really appeal to me. I consider myself a power user and gnome's way of over simplifing everything is a pain in the @$$. Plus I hate using GTK and Glade.
Isaac,
That's a good question. I'm not entirely certain, but I don't think it's possible. I believe you need some kind of window manager to work with X to act as an interpreter and define the size and position of frames/windows, and other tasks like choosing between different workspaces and terminals, foreground and background, etc.
Floog
Quote:
Originally posted by IsaacKuo
Does anyone here just use X? No window manager, just X and maybe some shell scripts to start up commonly used apps.
w00t I mean umm..
Pekwm.. although I'll give gnome 2.6 a try soon.
fluxbox-dev has also improved a lot so I guess thats on a gotta try again list too.
Openbox3 --- all u need.
PS: fsck i hate these types of threads :D
E
its all you really need...
I use KDE
Yes, it eats more memory than I would like, and has some "nonsense," like XiaoKJ mentioned. However, I like the way the panel/kicker works, and how pretty the konsole looks...and the taskbar grouping.
Yes, I know gnome supports all this as well, but it has always seemed a tad "cramped." I don't know how to explain it.
Okay, I'll admit it. It's because of Mosfet's Liquid. I'm serious. I have yet to find a gtk2 theme that looks good enough to replace it.
For older machines, I use a scaled down version of xfce... xftaskbar (with fixed autohiding), xfdesktop, xfce-session...... no panel.
For even older caliber workhorses, I'll use icewm. The reason I take xfce over icewm is that a) icewm's double-decker taskbar doesn't show tasks on both levels, and b) gtk2 looks cool.
~psi42
XFce. I'd post more, but I gotta get back to getting a lot done, what with my DE not getting in the way :-)
GNOME
/dev/tty0
or if i'm working on my sun box:
/dev/serial
TALK ABOUT EYE_CANDY!
I'd have to second ion...awesome wm. I went from kde (when I was a newbie), to flux, to gnome, to xfce, and now I use ion all the time. Xfce is also nice if you need more eye candy but don't want gnome or kde.
fvwm.
configurability? what? .. yeah.
total control.
www.fvwm.org
Fluxbox........FAST
I went from KDE to blackbox, to fluxbox. I was with Fluxbox for a long time but switched to Xfce since v4 came out, mainly because I wanted something reasonably pretty on the eyes to show to my Windows friends that was still able to run quickly on my then PII 300 system.
Xfce is, IMHO, the perfect blend of eye candy and speed.
When I want that, I use Enlightenment myself :)Quote:
Originally posted by mrBen
I went from KDE to blackbox, to fluxbox. I was with Fluxbox for a long time but switched to Xfce since v4 came out, mainly because I wanted something reasonably pretty on the eyes to show to my Windows friends that was still able to run quickly on my then PII 300 system.
Xfce is, IMHO, the perfect blend of eye candy and speed.
I tend to be a chronic openbox user...even when I decide to use gnome, I usually use openbox instead of metacity :D
I've been using sawfish (previously known as sawmill) for the longest time and have just stuck with it... maybe it's because I created a theme for it that doesn't exist for any other WM... I like to keep it simple, so I use only sawfish + gnome panel across the top (gnome 1.4... yeah I know I know, hey I'm used to it).
I have however, found some time to install and play w/ KDE on my laptop... I must say that I'm very impressed with the integrated feel of the WM/Panels/Applets/Configuration/Apps.
I also love the ease of use, common sense, completeness, and overall very slick look.
Can it be true... a long time gnome user... falling in love with KDE??????? :eek:
Openbox... it's smooth.
:eek: Sawfish! Theres one I haven't used in a while! I love the port of the theme 'Cyrus'.Quote:
Originally posted by bburton
I've been using sawfish (previously known as sawmill) for the longest time and have just stuck with it... maybe it's because I created a theme for it that doesn't exist for any other WM... I like to keep it simple, so I use only sawfish + gnome panel across the top (gnome 1.4... yeah I know I know, hey I'm used to it).
I have however, found some time to install and play w/ KDE on my laptop... I must say that I'm very impressed with the integrated feel of the WM/Panels/Applets/Configuration/Apps.
I also love the ease of use, common sense, completeness, and overall very slick look.
Can it be true... a long time gnome user... falling in love with KDE??????? :eek:
I tried it out independantly and loved how it looked, especially with the gtk2 menu....However the lisp menu configuration detered me from using it.
I remember when I started out with linux, back on mandrake, though...Sawfish was gnome 1.4's WM(so its only fitting that's the version of gnome-panel you use ;))
My first Linux experience, 5 months ago, was with RH9 using Gnome. Upgraded to FC1 and started using KDE. Both are nice, but bloated. Wanted to get away from that; they were reminding me too much of Winders.
Have a few interfaces loaded in and I've experimented with all of them, but I keep going back to Fluxbox. It runs blue blazes around KDE, and it ain't hard to customize the menus.
Gonna Linuxize my other 'puter (old Gateway Astro, 64M, currently running Win98SE), and Fluxbox is going on that one too.
It's interesting reading about the different window managers that are out there, but I'm wondering just how big the difference between all the different wms are, and what specific differences would lead a person to choose one wm over another. How many different ways of implementing a panel/start-menu/taskbar etc. can there be?
I run KDE as the default on my debian system because I like the eye candy(am using the ActiveHeart style), I like many of the KDE applications available(esp. Konqueror), and the way those apps smoothly integrate. The one thing I dislike is that it's resource-hungry. For when I don't feel the need to load up the whole KDE environment, I use Windowmaker. I use that over others because it moves away from the MS-style "taskbar/panel" model. Menus are accessed by clicking on the desktop itself, and the dock and clipboard provide much of the functionality that is provided by a panel/taskbar function in other wms. The only thing I haven't found is a way to easily switch between multiple windows that feels comfortable to me.
zeddity:
I'd have to agree...Quote:
Originally posted by JohnT
Fluxbox........FAST
Plus it's S-I-M-P-L-E and NO ICONS!
As for menus- a right click on the desktop. There is a "panel", though you don't use it much- there's no menu on it- and if you want to switch desktops, you can roll the mouse wheel or just hold onto a window that you move off screen-
this baby flies!!
:D
Any QT-based wm not KDE?
It seems that GTK takes the lead, and I don't quite like GTK, and I need to use K3b....
just because a wm uses gtk doesn't mean you cant use qt apps...you just need to have qt installed...Quote:
Originally posted by XiaoKJ
Any QT-based wm not KDE?
It seems that GTK takes the lead, and I don't quite like GTK, and I need to use K3b....
I know, and I run k3b in xfce and gnome...
but I don't like the idea that I have to install both gtk and qt to use 1 wm
then use one of the *boxen or another wm that doesn't make use of gtk.
KDE - Intergrated applications, similar to Windows, bloated & eye-candyQuote:
Originally posted by zeddity
It's interesting reading about the different window managers that are out there, but I'm wondering just how big the difference between all the different wms are, and what specific differences would lead a person to choose one wm over another. How many different ways of implementing a panel/start-menu/taskbar etc. can there be?
Gnome - Similar to KDE although it's does it's own thing, it doesn't feel like a copy of OS X or Windows.
Open/Flux/Blackbox - Click-based Menu. Fast & smooth
XFCE - The largest of the light Window Managers.
Ion & Ratposion - Keyboard based WM
Enlightenment - The ultimate in configurabilty
thats what I'm asking for!
enlightenment, just because it is fast, customizable, pretty, and fast. together with efl it makes a killer desktop. kde is too bloated, even compared to windows. gnome is nice, but it's a DE, and that's too big for my taste. And i don't like boxes, except the original and best, blackbox :)
PEKWM....;)Quote:
Originally posted by Darkbolt
then use one of the *boxen or another wm that doesn't make use of gtk.
Fluxbox.
Simplicity is best, and flux offers that.
enlightenment is on gtk, and pekwm and fluxbox don't use a dm, and to tell you I want to use kdm too :D
Enlightenment does NOT use gtk.Quote:
Originally posted by XiaoKJ
enlightenment is on gtk, and pekwm and fluxbox don't use a dm, and to tell you I want to use kdm too :D
and just because kdm doesn't come with entries for fluxbox and pekwm doesn't mean that you cant use it, it means that you need to make entires...
I've been known to use PekWM, FVWM, or KDE. I'm using KDE 3.2.2 right now and it's much better than older versions. I installed KDE 3.3-beta1 last night, and the speed improvement is quite drastic, looking forward to the final release.
KDE is starting to get faster, and GNOME is starting to get slower (though not by much). I like Qt's redrawing better than GTK's. It's smoother. Also, KDE isn't going for any particular look 'n' feel- anyone who takes a glance at the Control Center will see this. I've got mine layed out so it looks something like MacOS X, but with a theme that's fairly unique to KDE. I'm not even using anything that's not in a vanilla install of KDE (I do have the Baghira theme installed, but I decided that I don't like that particular facet of how MacOS X looks, given the choice- and I've got a Mac that I like just fine, running OS X).
KDE has a default setup that's supposed to be comfortable for people who are more used to other platforms, but it also lends itself to customizers. This is good for the LiteStep / TweakUI lovers from Windows. It's also good if you want to set up a completely unique GUI look for, say, a kiosk at the mall, or a tradeshow booth.
GNOME, on the other hand, tries to just choose good defaults, so that there's no "hand holding" by going out of the way to deliver a familiar look, but at the same time, the whole thing's sensible enough to where you don't NEED to tweak the look 'n' feel out of whack.
Personally, I like both approaches, but I'd like if I didn't have to use 2 GUI toolkits. Oh well, such is the burden of a platform of choice.
If enlightenment doesn't use gtk, explain this:
And FYI, I use kdm instead of gdm cos I know sometimes gdm don't have entries other than gnome, while kdm has all the other entries. I meant that pekwm, blackbox and the likes don't even have any gtk or qt dependancies. not that I don't like them, but I still can't get used to clicking on the background to start apps. if I install qt and kdm only to find qt used by only k3b and kdm, I don't think its worthwhile.Code:[root@{removed} /]# pacman -S enlightenment
Targets: glib-1.2.10-4 gtk-1.2.10-4 libungif-4.1.0-2 imlib-1.9.14-4 fnlib-0.5-3 audiofile-0.2.6-1 esd-0.2.34-1 enlightenment-0.16.6-2
Ohh, I know the existance of command-line and gtk-based cd burner apps, but I don't have the time to learn new stuff. I will try to get used to less-resource-hog wms, as of the time of writing I'm using xfce4. Sometimes I get picky for eye-candy :D