Window manager - pros and cons

lamberss · 2009-08-26 15:36:26

[Off-Topic]

Murray_B wrote:

Very interesting, how many people uses tiling WMs!

This is probably an anomaly of 1) the forum that you are in, and 2) the particular thread that you are in.

Arch Linux appeals to minimalists more so than many other main stream linux flavors, so you will find a lot more people here that like the "no mousey, tiley the windows" window managers than you will find using other linux flavors.

Also, I suspect that most users are happy with Gnome/KDE/XFCE, and don't browse forums, etc. for threads relating to window managers. (Again, there are probably a higher percentage of Archers that are interested in this sort of thing.)

What I would be interested in would be a poll that included every linux user.

[On-Topic]

I keep bouncing back and forth between Gnome and Openbox. I like Openbox because it is light and has no defaults so I can plug in my apps the best. However, my wife doesn't care to take the time to learn new things on computers, so she likes the interface to be as much Windows/Mac-ish as possible (nothing wrong with that, btw, imo you should do what you like). Also, I like keeping Gnome/Compiz around to show my anti-linux friends that Linux isn't stuck in the stone age (even though my minimalistic nature tends to prefer a more stone age look).

I've tried a number of tiling window managers, and I haven't really liked most of them. I find that in general I don't open and close windows alot, so it is easier just to mouse them to the size I want them.

SiC · 2009-08-26 19:34:00

I use compiz / gnome consistently across all my machines. Partly because I like them, especially all the transparency effects in compiz, but also because I can't get my head around tiling WMs and frankly I don't have the inclination to try. Yes I can see the benefits, but I like the shiny

I also have to use windows in work, so the consistency between the two is good

spupy · 2009-08-27 00:40:45

My choice is Fluxbox.
Pros:
* Great stability. I've never seen it crash in 1.5 years.
* Great speed.
* Minimalism.
* High configurability - keybindings, windows matching.
* Simple conf files.
* Tabbing

Cons:
* Few quality themes.
* Not much eye-candy.
* Right-click menu could be better (like openbox')
* Stupid skype bug.
* No menu when alt-tabbing or changing workspaces (openbox has this, other window managers as well)
* Resizing sucks (this may be just my configuration) - the windows is first resized when you complete the dragging resize move.

Last edited by spupy (2009-08-27 00:41:38)

dunz0r · 2009-08-27 06:11:33

I use Awesome with almost only terminal applications and keyboard controlled ones.

Pros:
* Configurability
* Fast
* Lua-based configuration
* Easy to execute code on the fly( for example for testing some small function you just came up with)
* Good documentation
* Active Community
* I've implemented dynamic tabbing
Cons:
* Syntax changes alot
* "The KDE of tiling WM's"
* Support for mouse changing thingie(hourglass etc)
* Titlebar support
* Not all apps like tiling WM's

My config :> http://github.com/dunz0r/awesome-configs

markatto · 2009-08-27 07:10:48

I use Awesome

Pros:
* VERY Customizable
* Lower "cost of entry" than xmonad if you know lua but not haskell
* Uses all available screen real estate (good for both very large and very small displays)
* Fast

Cons:
* can be a bit hard to integrate into a desktop environment (solution: don't use one!)
* the devs are pretty much insane
* your config file will be rendered useless every other update

Wintervenom · 2009-08-27 16:50:48

I use Openbox with PyTyle.

I found Openbox to be fast and very customizable. The configuration -- despite it being written in XML -- is simple and easy to understand. Non-programmers and users who do not wish to waste more than a few minutes configuring a window manager might like this. All of Openbox's window management actions can be bound to a keyboard shortcut, so users who do not like to use pointing devices may also be happy with it.

BurntSushi's PyTyle is a nice way to add continuous tiling to virtually any (standards-compliant) window manager. It was also very simple and easy to configure, and well-commented. It does its job well. The tiling is per-workspace, so you can have tiling on one workspace, and stacking on another, which can be quite useful.

archdaemon · 2009-08-28 01:35:12

I just played around installing, loading, and uninstalling over a dozen window managers recently. I'm currently in fluxbox but I think I'm really eternally an fvwm user.

Pros:
* insanely configurable
* rock solid
* light and fast

Cons:
* it can be pretty if you want it to be, but it's not easy, especially for those of us lacking any graphical talent and the upstream default config is hideous while the builtins are merely eh.
* can be tricky to configure with quite a learning curve
* perfection can get boring

I ended up modeling the configuration I've used longest on the visually minimalist, keyboard-driven evilwm which happened to be nearly perfect but wasn't configurable so couldn't be made completely perfect. In fvwm, I can get the focus model I want, which is to focus new windows, no click-to-focus, don't lose focus moving off the window, and return focus to the previous window when closing the window after it. In fvwm, I can get the placement model I want, which is called MinOverlapPercentPlacement in fvwm - means to cover as little of a percentage of any window as possible. In fvwm, I can get the "snaps" to move the windows to the 9 major positions - 4 corners, 4 middles of sides, and center of whole display -with a keystroke. Also good app-specific controls, user-definable functions (without needing to know some weird non-shell scripting language), and so on. I'm not sure you'd ever need to switch from fvwm because, barring tiling WMs and the like (and maybe even those), most anything cool in another WM can be incorporated into your fvwm config.

That said, the latest flux gets you a surprising amount without much effort. Granted, if you've already put in the effort with fvwm, it doesn't cost you much after that. Flux can't do the MinOverlapPercentPlacement - it fills rows left to right, by default, which isn't bad - beats manual, undermouse, cascade, the random stuff openbox does - but isn't ideal.

I haven't had anything on the screen for years so I don't know if I need or want the toolbar but, if I did, it's pretty good and a lot easier than something like FvwmButtons or the subpar FvwmTaskbar. I've also done without window decorations but flux gives you decent ones easily - less good than a BlueGlass E16/Pek-theme I was able to bludgeon into one fvwm configuration, but prettier than my usual pixel border.

Flux's lack of a universal window list bugs me - maybe it has it, but it seems like you need to check the four workspaces and the icons menus in the Workspaces menu if you forget what's up. I ended up lashing xlsclients and xmessage together to list all windows.

All the other WMs I've tried lately are unacceptable to me now, though I have used things like pek and older fluxes at various times in the past.

triplc · 2009-08-28 03:31:01

+1 for fluxbox

i am a long time user of fluxbox

pro:

+ tab

cons:

+ i want it have better set of keyboard command

after trying openbox, i go back to fluxbox because openbox does not have have tab (yeah, after using tabs, i cannot not use it; imagine using firefox without tabs)

after trying dwm, ratpoison, ion3, musca, i go back to fluxbox because applications are not written for tiling. so no matter how smart tiling is, it is not quite convenient to use

however i really love the tiling idea, so i wrote a tiling keys for flux (~/.fluxbox/keys) (idea: remove the deco and put windows in preset places)

! ....

Mod4 1 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 796 1024} {MoveTo 0 0}
Mod4 2 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 484 1024} {MoveTo 796 0}
Mod4 3 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 1280 720} {MoveTo 0 0}
Mod4 4 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 1280 304} {MoveTo 0 720}

Mod4 Shift 1 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 796 924} {MoveTo 0 0}
Mod4 Shift 2 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 796 100} {MoveTo 0 924}

Mod4 Shift 3 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 796 720} {MoveTo 0 0}
Mod4 Shift 4 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 796 304} {MoveTo 0 720}

Mod4 Shift 5 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 640 316} {MoveTo 0 720}
Mod4 Shift 6 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 640 304} {MoveTo 640 720}

Mod4 Control 1 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 484 924} {MoveTo 796 0}
Mod4 Control 2 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 484 100} {MoveTo 796 924}

Mod4 Control 3 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 484 720} {MoveTo 796 0}
Mod4 Control 4 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 484 304} {MoveTo 796 720}

Mod4 Control 5 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 484 216} {MoveTo 796 0}
Mod4 Control 6 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 484 504} {MoveTo 796 216}
Mod4 Control 7 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 484 708} {MoveTo 796 216}
Mod4 Control 8 :MacroCmd {ResizeTo 484 808} {MoveTo 796 216}

Mod4 D :ToggleDecor

! ....

Last edited by triplc (2009-08-28 03:45:38)

BurntSushi · 2009-08-28 05:30:33

triplc wrote:

after trying dwm, ratpoison, ion3, musca, i go back to fluxbox because applications are not written for tiling. so no matter how smart tiling is, it is not quite convenient to use
however i really love the tiling idea, so i wrote a tiling keys for flux (~/.fluxbox/keys) (idea: remove the deco and put windows in preset places)

<shameless_plug>
Have a look at PyTyle- it's working on Fluxbox
</shameless_plug>

archdaemon · 2009-08-29 01:01:25

archdaemon wrote:

Flux's lack of a universal window list bugs me - maybe it has it, but it seems like you need to check the four workspaces and the icons menus in the Workspaces menu if you forget what's up.

Found it - there's a ClientMenu command. It doesn't seem to be bound to anything by default, but it's there.

otacon · 2009-09-18 06:59:39

So I got really tired of kde4 so I deleted it and have been running on pure Xorg for two days. I have to say I kind of like it better. I have not tried awesome or anything so maybe I will, but for now x is doing alright for me. I even got the background to turn black thanks to ratpoison's installation guide.

Pros:
The lightest you can get
Fast
Completely customizable to your background color

cons: nothing comes with it so basically control everything as if you did not have a gui and also be able to start gui programs.

Maybe I could just install a couple of programs and stay with plain Xorg.
Maybe something to get the keyboard commands going and change how xterm looks

Last edited by otacon (2009-09-18 07:00:03)

sand_man · 2009-09-18 09:21:31

by "pure Xorg" I guess you mean twm.

You must be a masochist

Gigamo · 2009-09-18 09:29:08

markatto wrote:

I use Awesome
Cons:
* the devs are pretty much insane

Ah come on, jd_ is awesome!

toad · 2009-09-18 10:00:16

Okay, since nobody here has extolled the virtues of KDE here goes:

I use KDE 4.3.1 vanilla.

Pros:
- looks a blinder without having to install and figure out compiz
- stable (did I really write that? Yep, KDE hasn't crashed on me since the 4.1 days)
- can be used without the mouse (I need the mouse for individual programmes, but not KDE itself)
- is pretty darn quick even on my ole IBM T41
- excellent package integration

Cons:
- takes a while to load
- takes a while to download!
- takes up a little space (but hey, we all have enough of that these days)

NOTE:
Just downloading xmonad 'cos of this thread - 70MB, lot of stuff...

Pechorin · 2009-09-18 10:03:00

Oh joy! A voice of dissidence: though it's a DE, not a WM, I use GNOME at work:

Pros:
1. Nifty compiz effects to impress my coworkers.
2. Nice remote server management, so I can easily have access to files on whichever server I need to access at time. This has become obsolete with fusefs, since no DE intervention is really needed now, but it's still nice to have the ability a few clicks away.
3. Evolution generally manages in the corporate world nicely.
4. Very stable, no surprises in new releases,

Cons:
1. Evolution is THE WORST E-MAIL CLIENT for pop ever!
2. Nearly impossible to get the upstream to fix user annoyances.

Arch Linux

#51 2009-08-26 15:36:26

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#52 2009-08-26 19:34:00

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#53 2009-08-27 00:40:45

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#54 2009-08-27 06:11:33

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#55 2009-08-27 07:10:48

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#56 2009-08-27 16:50:48

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#57 2009-08-28 01:35:12

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#58 2009-08-28 03:31:01

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#59 2009-08-28 05:30:33

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#60 2009-08-29 01:01:25

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#61 2009-09-18 06:59:39

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#62 2009-09-18 09:21:31

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#63 2009-09-18 09:29:08

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#64 2009-09-18 10:00:16

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

#65 2009-09-18 10:03:00

Re: Window manager - pros and cons

Board footer