window manager vs desktop environments

Please compose all posts in Emacs.

Moderators: phlip, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
ve_
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 8:08 pm UTC
Location: right here

window manager vs desktop environments

Postby ve_ » Mon Jul 09, 2012 1:13 pm UTC

which do you use, and why?
i use compiz - because of the exposé
+ lxpanel

Iranon
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:30 am UTC

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Iranon » Mon Jul 09, 2012 6:48 pm UTC

I'm a little in love with FVWM. It doesn't judge me, doesn't deliberately misunderstand me and doesn't expect me to butter it up with fancy language.
LEGO won't be ready for the average user until it comes pre-assembled, in a single unified theme, and glued together so it doesn't come apart.

User avatar
tetsujin
Posts: 426
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby tetsujin » Tue Jul 10, 2012 9:30 pm UTC

Been using Gnome for several years now. I like various tools that come with it and the fairly basic taskbar/menu/widget bar system, it set up pretty easily to do things like automount inserted media, autorun my favorite terminal, and so on. But it seems like the new version of the Gnome UI messed everything up, so I'm not sure what I prefer now. :\

I do tend to enjoy having a "desktop environment" that's got its act together, at least a little. I don't mind mixing and matching that with all the other X11 programs in the world that eschew things like UI standards and so on... But I like to have a core set of stuff that's all on the same page design-wise. But in Debian, both KDE and Gnome seem to be dependency hell, at least in the unstable branch. Like something will get updated and suddenly APT wants to uninstall all of gnome. <sigh>
---GEC
I want to create a truly new command-line shell for Unix.
Anybody want to place bets on whether I ever get any code written?

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby ahammel » Tue Jul 10, 2012 9:36 pm UTC

I use DWM because I like to run a resource-light setup, because I hate the mouse, and because it works, bitches.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

troyp
Posts: 557
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 9:20 pm UTC
Location: Lismore, NSW

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby troyp » Wed Jul 11, 2012 6:46 am UTC

Is this meant to be "which do you prefer: a wm or full-fledged DE?" or "which WM/DE do you use?" ?

Anyhow, I use KDE because it seems to be the most powerful and flexible environment which is easy to use. Decent tiling is important, because I'm often working with tiled windows, but a fully tiling wm wouldn't work because sometimes it works better to have a window floating on top of, or overlapping, another. I like to be to do things entirely with the mouse when I don't need to enter text, and mostly/entirely with the keyboard when I do, and KDE has excellent support for both keyboard shortcuts and window actions. I like to be able to keep a window on top while I copy text or files into another, so I have an "always on top" window decoration added to the title bars. Sometimes, to refer to data from another window, I prefer to read it *through* the window I'm typing in so I have transparency controlled both by hotkeys and by mouse-wheeling the title bar. Transparency is one of the reasons I find compositing useful. Also zooming, sometimes previews and annotations, now and then something else. Of course if I'm running low on memory, it's only a hotkey or click on a plasmoid to suspend compositing.

KDE is far from perfect, but overall it works well and does what I want. Most importantly it's customizable: if I want to change something, most of the time I can. You couldn't say that about most software.

I often wonder if I could set up an environment I like using a lighter weight wm (like awesome or fvwm) combined with auxiliary programs. Most likely, I could, but I don't know how long it would take to learn it and set it all up. With not just the window management, but everything else a huge integrated DE does for you. Also, there are some KDE apps I use all the time so I'd probably end up loading a lot of the libs anyway.

edit: wow, I managed to mangle my post somehow with the end at the beginning and the "NEW POST\nSubject:" text pasted in the middle. Not sure how that happened...I only tried to swap the order of two sections. Hope everyone managed to decipher it.
Last edited by troyp on Thu Jul 12, 2012 3:28 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Iranon
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:30 am UTC

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Iranon » Wed Jul 11, 2012 1:53 pm UTC

KDE ist quite powerful... but I value easy hand editing of open-ended config files over wizards for everything.
I don't expect anyone to code a checkbox or extension for...

"add a cleanup button to do the following: Tile all editor windows on the left half of desktop 1. Put all terminals and file managers in a tabbed window on the right half. Put all open browsers and documents in a predetermined overlapping pattern on desktop 2, enable sloppy focus with autoraise only for these. Put the antisocial media apps and media players in a corner out of the way and make them stick across desktops. Put everything else on desktop 3. Heuristically determine if anyone thinks this is nerdy in a sad, sad way. If yes, Rickroll them".

And they shouldn't because it's ridiculous and confusing for people who didn't explicitly state they want it that way. But if the user wants a ridiculous housekeeping button, let them have it.
LEGO won't be ready for the average user until it comes pre-assembled, in a single unified theme, and glued together so it doesn't come apart.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby ahammel » Wed Jul 11, 2012 3:52 pm UTC

troyp wrote:...Most importantly [KDE is] customizable: if I want to change something, most of the time I can. You couldn't say that about most software.

I could say that about every Linux DE/WM that I've tried that isn't Gnome or Unity.

Sort of related: I remember reading about a mouse-drive WM sort of similar to Blackbox, except that it brings up a honeycomb-shaped options menu when you right-click. Anybody know what that's called? Google is failing me.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

Iranon
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:30 am UTC

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Iranon » Wed Jul 11, 2012 5:39 pm UTC

Sounds like the UDE Window Manager:
http://udeproject.sourceforge.net

Interesting one, but seems a little too minimal for my tastes.
I want my shinies.
LEGO won't be ready for the average user until it comes pre-assembled, in a single unified theme, and glued together so it doesn't come apart.

troyp
Posts: 557
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 9:20 pm UTC
Location: Lismore, NSW

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby troyp » Thu Jul 12, 2012 5:20 am UTC

Iranon wrote:KDE ist quite powerful... but I value easy hand editing of open-ended config files over wizards for everything.

So do I, really. I'm just not sure how much effort it would take to get a more scriptable wm how I like it. The documentation tends to be limited. Also, when I've investigated, I've often had trouble working out exactly what their capabilities are. Can you script mouse events (like wheel actions on the titlebar) with FVWM? Can I get decent transparency? I've heard that xcompmgr is too slow to render transparency for practical use. Can you use Compiz as a compositor for FVWM?

ahammel wrote:I could say that about every Linux DE/WM that I've tried that isn't Gnome or Unity.

Well, it depends on which you've tried and what you wanted to do, of course, but personally, I've been less satisfied than you have. I think unix graphical environments are more customizable than most software, probably because there's only a few major ones and the minor ones tend to be targeted at geeks and compete with the big guys by being more scriptable (as well as less resource-hungry). Even so, whenever I try one, I seem to run into obstacles as soon as I try to set it up the way I want it. XFCE seems to have less customization options than gnome. Pure tiling window managers are probably very customizable in terms of the functionality they have, but that's no help if you want floating windows sometimes. Other wms like openbox or FVWM may be able to do what I want, but if so, it's not straightforward to work out how.

Iranon wrote:Sounds like the UDE Window Manager:
http://udeproject.sourceforge.net

Interesting one, but seems a little too minimal for my tastes.
I want my shinies.

It's only new. It'll be interesting to see how it develops.

Iranon
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:30 am UTC

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Iranon » Thu Jul 12, 2012 7:11 am UTC

troyp wrote:
Iranon wrote:KDE ist quite powerful... but I value easy hand editing of open-ended config files over wizards for everything.

So do I, really. I'm just not sure how much effort it would take to get a more scriptable wm how I like it. The documentation tends to be limited.


FVWM's documentation is fairly thorough from my experience.

Also, when I've investigated, I've often had trouble working out exactly what their capabilities are.

Quite impressive. Occasionally, there are odd limitations of "what can be done well without undue fiddling".

Can you script mouse events (like wheel actions on the titlebar) with FVWM?

Very straightforward. Wheel up/down are treated as mouse buttons 4 and 5, you can tie everything to everything.
Different actions are possible on click, release, doubleclick, drag (including gesture recognition), with or without modifier buttons. I think I have over 50 things tied to my titlebar alone (not counting the buttons).

Can I get decent transparency? I've heard that xcompmgr is too slow to render transparency for practical use.

I believe there's a patched version of FVWM that has good native support. Compton (xcompmgr fork) works just fine for transparency of decorations or inactive windows, I think setting transparency for individual windows is still clumsy and slow.

Can you use Compiz as a compositor for FVWM?

As far as I'm aware, it's an integrated solution rather than a standalone compositor... so no.

Other wms like openbox or FVWM may be able to do what I want, but if so, it's not straightforward to work out how.

Nothing is ever straightforward across the board. Openbox has rather structured configuration using a markup language for a large part. This makes things annoying and restrictive for hand twerking, but easy to have friendly (optional) GUIs for the basics.
It's a reasonable compromise for people who want things to just work but want to do a little tinkering on the side or simply prefer a cleaner environment than full DEs.

FVWM has very open-ended configuration syntax that makes it easy to do almost anything you want, but even easier to do it in an incorrect, glitchy or simply unpolished way.
Things like the housekeeping button from my earlier post would be easy to make work on the first attempt taking a minute or two, getting it to be visually smooth and 100% predictable may require some trickery.

If someone wanted to make a smooth GUI-driven experience, they could do it: Piperead for anything not available natively + modules like FvwmButtons and its ability to swallow disparate windows would let one fake better integration than full DEs have.
Nobody ever does it, because in an open-ended system there is no clear goal. And even if the designer reaches theirs, people would just tear it apart and do their own thing.
LEGO won't be ready for the average user until it comes pre-assembled, in a single unified theme, and glued together so it doesn't come apart.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby ahammel » Thu Jul 12, 2012 7:53 pm UTC

troyp wrote:
ahammel wrote:I could say that about every Linux DE/WM that I've tried that isn't Gnome or Unity.

Well, it depends on which you've tried and what you wanted to do, of course, but personally, I've been less satisfied than you have. I think unix graphical environments are more customizable than most software, probably because there's only a few major ones and the minor ones tend to be targeted at geeks and compete with the big guys by being more scriptable (as well as less resource-hungry). Even so, whenever I try one, I seem to run into obstacles as soon as I try to set it up the way I want it. XFCE seems to have less customization options than gnome. Pure tiling window managers are probably very customizable in terms of the functionality they have, but that's no help if you want floating windows sometimes. Other wms like openbox or FVWM may be able to do what I want, but if so, it's not straightforward to work out how.

Well, yeah, there's always going to be a tradeoff between "make it do whatever I want" and "configure it easily". You configure DWM by hacking the source, but you can do anything you want. You configure Finder with a dialog window that has little video clips of the options, but there's not a whole hell of a lot you can change.

Most tiling WMs will do floating windows. Well, XMonad, Awesome and DWM, for sure.

I've used Openbox as well, and the pretty easy even for noob me. All the setting live in an XML file, and as I recall there are good tools to work with it.

I'm surprised to hear that XFCE is less configurable than Gnome. Gnome 3 has no built in method to change the default font size, nevermind more complicated stuff.

Iranon wrote:Sounds like the UDE Window Manager:
http://udeproject.sourceforge.net

Interesting one, but seems a little too minimal for my tastes.
I want my shinies.

That's the one, thanks! Not sure about the relative merits of that and Blackbox, but I guess I'll worry about that if I ever decide to go back to a mouse-driven environment.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Copper Bezel » Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:16 pm UTC

ahammel wrote:I'm surprised to hear that XFCE is less configurable than Gnome. Gnome 3 has no built in method to change the default font size, nevermind more complicated stuff.

I guess it could be argued on the grounds that XFCE ultimately has fewer features to configure. It would still require counting Gnome twerk Tool, but I can't see how you can not - it's not provided by default, but it's a Gnome package, so Gnome's answer to the question, "how do I put icons in the menus?" is "install this package" instead of "edit this text file." There's also a hell of a lot of stuff to screw around with in dconf, so that you can change some workspace behaviors or move the window buttons from right to left, fiddly little options that, it's technically true, XFCE does not provide.

Gnome's extensions presumably count for something as well.

Iranon wrote:As far as I'm aware, it's an integrated solution rather than a standalone compositor... so no.

Huh, I had to look this up. I'd thought that Compiz was originally a compositor that merged with a wm called Beryl, but that's exactly not what happened, and it was always an integrated compositing wm.

Iranon wrote:KDE ist quite powerful... but I value easy hand editing of open-ended config files over wizards for everything.
I don't expect anyone to code a checkbox or extension for...

"add a cleanup button to do the following: Tile all editor windows on the left half of desktop 1. Put all terminals and file managers in a tabbed window on the right half. Put all open browsers and documents in a predetermined overlapping pattern on desktop 2, enable sloppy focus with autoraise only for these. Put the antisocial media apps and media players in a corner out of the way and make them stick across desktops. Put everything else on desktop 3. Heuristically determine if anyone thinks this is nerdy in a sad, sad way. If yes, Rickroll them".

And they shouldn't because it's ridiculous and confusing for people who didn't explicitly state they want it that way. But if the user wants a ridiculous housekeeping button, let them have it.

I just can't envision getting enough use out of something like that to justify learning how to script it in a wm's unique little environment, then making up said script. That's a serious investment. The idea with Gnome's extensions is that you write slightly less crazy things you think someone else might actually have some use for, then share them, which reduces said investment overall.

(So far, I'm not really convinced. It's very easy to code an extension on a whim if you have the knowledge, less likely that you'll commit to maintaining it, so you create it, you share it, and then it stops working for everyone in six months or less when the Shell is updated, while you've moved on to something else.)
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

troyp
Posts: 557
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 9:20 pm UTC
Location: Lismore, NSW

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby troyp » Fri Jul 13, 2012 12:11 am UTC

@Iranon: thanks for the info on FVWM. It does sound like it would do most of what I want. I tried it briefly again last night (I still have it installed, along with a bunch of others - which plays havoc with my menus) and played around with transparency using xcompmgr (since compton wasn't in the repos) and unagi. Unagi seemed to have integration issues (I couldn't use the transparency settings for gnome-terminal, for example - I could only turn the terminal transparent using transset), but xcompmgr worked okay. It's not as nice as a proper compositor, but it's probably enough for bare-bones functionality, at least.

Do you know if FVWM can "group" windows as panes of a larger window, so you can move and resize them together? This is something I can't do with KDE that I want. It seems like such obvious functionality, but isn't commonly supported. I know E16 does it, but AFAICT, E17 doesn't and I'm not sure what else can do it (I'm reluctant to use a wm from 1997 - there's got to be better alternatives, surely).

ahammel wrote:Most tiling WMs will do floating windows. Well, XMonad, Awesome and DWM, for sure.

I didn't realize XMonad did tiling. I know Bluetile does (which is why I tried that instead of XMonad). How good is the mouse support? Is dwm like a cut-down wmii, or is it different?

I'm surprised to hear that XFCE is less configurable than Gnome. Gnome 3 has no built in method to change the default font size, nevermind more complicated stuff.

To be honest, I was talking more about Gnome2. Gnome3 is still pretty new, from my perspective, so I don't even really expect it to be configurable yet. Still, if Gnome 3 isn't more configurable overall than XFCE now (and it may well be), I suspect it will be soon. Sure, configuring Gnome3 may require dconf and/or extensions, but that's okay.

Copper Bezel wrote:Gnome's extensions presumably count for something as well.

I think they count for a *lot*. Gnome3's extension framework will be its saving grace, IMO. The Gnome devs have a bad attitude towards end-user configurability, but in creating a powerful extension framework, they've provided the means for others to pick up their slack. I think its just a matter of time now.

Copper Bezel wrote:It's very easy to code an extension on a whim if you have the knowledge, less likely that you'll commit to maintaining it, so you create it, you share it, and then it stops working for everyone in six months or less when the Shell is updated, while you've moved on to something else.)

Lol, the bane of user-written extensions. Still, if an extension is popular enough, someone will probably fork it or create an alternative.

User avatar
Ariii
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 5:24 am UTC

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Ariii » Fri Jul 13, 2012 2:57 am UTC

I really switch between FVWM and AmiWM on my clamshell iBook. I mostly use it since it's lightweight, but I know enough commands that I can use for Debian that it makes things a lot easier, and I can now do things just as well as in a desktop environment. I like AmiWM a lot for some reason. It's pretty easy to change the colors around, and I got a setting that looks pretty nice to me. I've been trying to write an FVWM theme lately, and I really like FVWM for it's customizability, it's great to have a couple utilities you can have loaded on it that are running in the background for easy access. Also, I slightly prefer WM's because they're easier to fool around with (For me) than DE's.

User avatar
Ariii
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 5:24 am UTC

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Ariii » Fri Jul 13, 2012 2:59 am UTC

I really switch between FVWM and AmiWM on my clamshell iBook. I mostly use it since it's lightweight, but I know enough commands that I can use for Debian that it makes things a lot easier, and I can now do things just as well as in a desktop environment. I like AmiWM a lot for some reason. It's pretty easy to change the colors around, and I got a setting that looks pretty nice to me. I've been trying to write an FVWM theme lately, and I really like FVWM for it's customizability, it's great to have a couple utilities you can have loaded on it that are running in the background for easy access. Also, I slightly prefer WM's because they're easier to fool around with (For me) than DE's. I do like KaleidoScope from Mac OS 9, it made it incredibly easy to make themes.

Oh, if any mods are around, can they delete my previous post? I double-posted by accident.

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby EvanED » Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:42 am UTC

troyp wrote:I didn't realize XMonad did tiling. I know Bluetile does (which is why I tried that instead of XMonad). How good is the mouse support? Is dwm like a cut-down wmii, or is it different?

I can't speak to dwm, but I've used both Xmonad and Awesome a lot. Both have at least OK mouse support; awesome's is quite good. Both WMs are very good for use.

Actually it seems that Awesome is trying to move away from the "tiling WM" category a little bit (though they're obviously not going to drop said support) and become just more more of a flexible lightweight WM. Because of the fact that the "configuration" file is programming half the damn thing anyway, it shouldn't be so surprising that it's that flexible.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby ahammel » Fri Jul 13, 2012 5:26 am UTC

troyp wrote:
ahammel wrote:Most tiling WMs will do floating windows. Well, XMonad, Awesome and DWM, for sure.

I didn't realize XMonad did tiling. I know Bluetile does (which is why I tried that instead of XMonad). How good is the mouse support? Is dwm like a cut-down wmii, or is it different?

Mouse support seems decent in both XMonad and dwm, but I don't use it so much. Never used wmii (it looks pretty cool, actually), but yes, per wikipedia, it looks like a beefed-up, vim-flavoured dwm.

Honestly, if ease of configuration is a big deal for you, stay the hell away from dwm. There is no configuration: there's just reasonably easy to hack source code. Xmonad is way easier to twerk if you know Haskell at all (or even if you don't, actually), and you can apply your changes without logging out. Not sure how good awesome is at configs, but I've heard some complaints.

troyp wrote:
I'm surprised to hear that XFCE is less configurable than Gnome. Gnome 3 has no built in method to change the default font size, nevermind more complicated stuff.

To be honest, I was talking more about Gnome2. Gnome3 is still pretty new, from my perspective, so I don't even really expect it to be configurable yet. Still, if Gnome 3 isn't more configurable overall than XFCE now (and it may well be), I suspect it will be soon. Sure, configuring Gnome3 may require dconf and/or extensions, but that's okay.

Fair enough. I haven't played with Gnome3 very much (on account of hating it with the fire of a thousand suns), so I don't really have an opinion about how the "config stuff is in an different package" philosophy works. Linus Torvalds doesn't like it, but he doesn't like anything.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

User avatar
Max™
Posts: 1792
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:21 am UTC
Location: mu

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Max™ » Fri Jul 13, 2012 11:35 am UTC

Moved to Cinnamon after playing with Gnome 3 a bit. Honestly my favorite part so far is the hot corner for desktop/window selection and managing, seems so much more natural than the Compiz setup I had going.
mu

Iranon
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:30 am UTC

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Iranon » Fri Jul 13, 2012 2:27 pm UTC

troyp wrote:Do you know if FVWM can "group" windows as panes of a larger window, so you can move and resize them together? This is something I can't do with KDE that I want. It seems like such obvious functionality, but isn't commonly supported. I know E16 does it, but AFAICT, E17 doesn't and I'm not sure what else can do it (I'm reluctant to use a wm from 1997 - there's got to be better alternatives, surely).


I'm afraid I can only think of an insufficient and an overkill solution.
You can assign arbitrary flags to group windows (State command), but interactive commands seem limited to one window at a time... if you want to move/resize all via a single click&drag this won't do.
FvwmButtons can swallow whatever you want and have all sorts of fun things

Regarding Gnome Shell extensions: Totally different beast in my opinion, much more complex and you're hitting a moving target. Interesting in its own right, but not as suitable for a casual "cool idea, I'm stealing and improving it" or "keep a console open, if you do a weird action often enough add it in a comfortable way".
FVWM's configuration syntax is a good compromise between open-endedness and expediency. If its non-standardness offends you and you want to do your hacking in a proper language, a Sawfish is fine too.
LEGO won't be ready for the average user until it comes pre-assembled, in a single unified theme, and glued together so it doesn't come apart.

User avatar
Ptolom
Posts: 1559
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2008 1:55 pm UTC
Location: The entropy pool
Contact:

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Ptolom » Fri Jul 13, 2012 5:01 pm UTC

I like wmii. It's incredibly fast, does both floating and tiled windows and seems to work better with software that uses loads of popups and separate windows than its sibling dwm.

User avatar
woddfellow2
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 2:41 am UTC
Contact:

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby woddfellow2 » Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:20 am UTC

I used desktop environments until late 2010, when I started using tiling WMs. I started with awesome, and ended up at ratpoison. I also use twm as a floating WM.
1-Crawl 2-Cnfg 3-ATF 4-Exit ?

troyp
Posts: 557
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 9:20 pm UTC
Location: Lismore, NSW

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby troyp » Mon Aug 06, 2012 2:35 am UTC

So after some more thought and research, I've decided to give Awesome a try. I decided that if I was going to go to the trouble of learning my way around a new wm, I wanted one which could be scripted with a real language and which had real tiling capabilities. I'd love something lisp-based like Stumpwm, but the lispy wms all seem pretty moribund. I wanted something actively maintained and fairly popular, so I figured Awesome or Xmonad would be best. I chose Awesome become it seems to have better support for floating windows.

So far, I've just been getting used to the basic controls. I'm enjoying it, mostly (when it's not being a PITA). I haven't started customizing it yet, apart from disabling the incredibly annoying "smart focus" in rc.lua. I can already tell this wm really will be awesome when I get the hang of it. It's probably gonna take me a while to learn everything, though (I'll have to learn to do the stuff my DE normally does for me, too, unless I decide to run the wm on top of a DE). I guess I'll have to learn Lua, now, but that's okay - I've always been curious about the language (although a part of me considers any language without an integer type to be an abomination).

Thanks to everyone for info on various wms.

stolid
Posts: 167
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:18 am UTC
Location: 25th state

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby stolid » Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:58 am UTC

Another awesome user here. I love it. I only use tiling maybe 1/4 of the time though (probably will more when I get a bunch of Programming assignments this semester). I use a distro called CrunchBang which came with Openbox (also one of my favorites) instead of a full DE. I think I prefer it that way: have a selection of best apps, not necessarily those tied to a particular desktop environment. If I had to use a full DE though, I'd probably pick XFCE or maybe MATE/Cinnamon.

When I get the itch to experiment, I'd like to try out i3 maybe. I'm pretty happy with Awesome so far though (been using it for a month now). I like the tagging and selection of layouts. The multimonitor support is good too. All the cool features are in WMs, as they don't have to stick with the common formulas that most users expect. KDE has some nice features though (just not my cup of tea).
Registered Linux User #555399

sampei
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 5:41 pm UTC

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby sampei » Fri May 31, 2013 5:49 pm UTC

I have been using gnome for years.

Easy and well organized.

Not going to switch easily.

Volcano99
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 10:10 pm UTC
Location: 350 km SW of The Castle

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Volcano99 » Sat Jun 15, 2013 6:14 pm UTC

I use Cinnamon, but I'd love to learn to use a tiled WM if it didn't require an enormous effort to learn. Is there any manual named "Tiled WMs for Gnome Users"?

Iranon
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:30 am UTC

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Iranon » Sun Jun 16, 2013 7:50 am UTC

The effort isn't so enormous... the main problem is the same as in choosing a Linux distro: Tons of options, most differences are neglegible to most people. Some want low-level control, others think the whole point of a tiling WM is that you don't have to configure anything.

Awesome and Openbox with pytyle require no explanation and little effort to start with: The first has friendly defaults to play around with, the second adds tiling functionality to a very sensible and unintimidating stacking WM.
LEGO won't be ready for the average user until it comes pre-assembled, in a single unified theme, and glued together so it doesn't come apart.

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby zenten » Sun Jul 28, 2013 10:06 pm UTC

One of the really, really minimalist window managers. Like, Ion has too much going on for it for my tastes. I haven't really found one that I'm happy with though, and sometimes just go with raw X.Org (not even the default X WM that typically comes packaged with it) and launching programs from the virtual console.

greb
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 4:17 pm UTC

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby greb » Mon Aug 12, 2013 5:42 am UTC

I prefer a minimalistic setup. The benefits aren't just less complexity of the system, less memory consumption and more control, it also keeps the compiling time down :D. I'm currently using fluxbox, but as long as I can open terminals and have a clock I'm happy.

m4d4sb34ns
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:16 pm UTC
Location: North West UK

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby m4d4sb34ns » Sun Aug 25, 2013 12:14 am UTC

stolid wrote:I use a distro called CrunchBang which came with Openbox (also one of my favorites) instead of a full DE.


This. #! Is just...beautiful. I was so desperate to keep it I stuck with the stable 9.10 version until about a month ago when I upgraded my laptop with an SSD.

Cinnamon is OK for bloaty desktop work, but I've never been able to stick with anything involving Gnome or KDE for long. LXDE and other lightweight alternatives just feel like a poor mans Openbox.

Iranon
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:30 am UTC

Re: window manager vs desktop environments

Postby Iranon » Sun Aug 25, 2013 7:06 am UTC

LXDE actually uses Openbox by default, but I think I get your point - the light DEs have neither the elegant simplicity of a standalone WM nor the convenience and comfort of a full-fat DE.
LEGO won't be ready for the average user until it comes pre-assembled, in a single unified theme, and glued together so it doesn't come apart.


Return to “Religious Wars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests