You are not logged in.
I've never tried OpenBox, but none of you have really explained satisfactorily why I should?
I started my linux life on Gnome 1.4 and loved it. Then Gnome 2 came out and I decided the Gnome developers were fascists and I dumped their shit. Tried XFCE here and there and I think it's decent for what it is, but left me wanting. Moved onto KDE3 and was happy for several years. KDE 3.5.9 was very solid. Was kind of forced here at Arch to move to KDE 4 ( a bad decision by Arch devs) and it's been a rough ride to be honest. Still lots of crappy little bugs, but getting better. I see the potential of KDE 4 - it brings the desktop for linux to a whole new level. I mean it actually looks and feels like it's from the 21st century (when it's working properly). I'm just downloading 4.1.3 this morning so we'll see if they've cleaned it up a bit.
I've got a lovely bunch of coconuts...
Offline
... Has anyone else ever tried to leave openbox? If so, why? Did you leave for good? ...
I can confirm that I leave ... gnome to openbox; and huh ... not yet go back!
Offline
Last night I installed Openbox for about the tenth time and decided to see if I can get it work for me. It took less than 24 hours to come back to E17. You know what the last thing that broke me down? Openbox swallowed the back arrow's ability to repeat! I already spent a day searching for answers for configurations that take about five seconds in E17, and the last thing I wanted to do is figure out why the hell I had to push the back arrow over and over again to make minor corrections to lines! Of course trying and failing to find a basic panel that could handle transparency correctly proved to be a major headache. And weirdnesses with the mouse not really grabbing window borders... And the X problems.... And..... I'm back home.
After I wrote this post, I ended up back at Openbox where I've been happily working for weeks. I didn't see that coming...
Offline
I used to run openbox on my laptop (which I use for personal software development projects and such) - some time ago I switched to tiling window managers (settled on xmonad and have been using it for some time). I still use openbox on my desktop (the machine has different 'needs' than the laptop and I'm way too lazy to write the proper xmonad configuration file). Personally handwritten-from-scratch openbox rc.xml and themerc FTW btw (openbox documentation is really great).
Offline
I used openbox for about a month in 2007. I havent used it again nor plan to. The only thing i can think of and is worst than xml config files is lua config files.
There shouldn't be any reason to learn more editor types than emacs or vi -- mg (1)
[You learn that sarcasm does not often work well in international forums. That is why we avoid it. -- ewaller (arch linux forum moderator)
Offline
I tried openbox for awhile but didn't like the looks I could achieve with themes. Now I use pekwm with pypanel and have been able to cobble together a few themes into one of my own that will suite me for awhile.
Time is a great teacher, but unfortunately it kills all its pupils ... - Louis Hector Berlioz
Offline
I left openbox / fluxbox a while ago, ditched it for xfce and later for xmonad / xfce...
My coding blog (or an attempt at it)
Archer start page (or an attempt at it)
Offline
don't waste time to try anything else, go with awesome!
Last edited by seenxu (2008-12-15 23:45:46)
Offline
XMonad.
But openbox held my attention the longest among the heathen non-tiling WMs
Cthulhu For President!
Offline
I ditched Openbox for XFCE...
Offline
At work I use two different computers with Xubuntu and Ubuntu, and they just don't seem "right" to me. Something feels out of place. I really like how quick and responsive Openbox is in comparison to the full-bodied DEs.
Offline
At work I use two different computers with Xubuntu and Ubuntu, and they just don't seem "right" to me. Something feels out of place. I really like how quick and responsive Openbox is in comparison to the full-bodied DEs.
Quit.
Offline
I've never tried OpenBox, but none of you have really explained satisfactorily why I should?
I started my linux life on Gnome 1.4 and loved it. Then Gnome 2 came out and I decided the Gnome developers were fascists and I dumped their shit. Tried XFCE here and there and I think it's decent for what it is, but left me wanting. Moved onto KDE3 and was happy for several years. KDE 3.5.9 was very solid. Was kind of forced here at Arch to move to KDE 4 ( a bad decision by Arch devs) and it's been a rough ride to be honest. Still lots of crappy little bugs, but getting better. I see the potential of KDE 4 - it brings the desktop for linux to a whole new level. I mean it actually looks and feels like it's from the 21st century (when it's working properly). I'm just downloading 4.1.3 this morning so we'll see if they've cleaned it up a bit.
I mean it actually looks and feels like it's from the 21st century
You mean has a lot of useless nonsense like eye candy which only gets in the way of actual work? Or gaming for that matter?
You speak of the "desktop" as if it's something to be admired, not used. You might as well have a beautiful golden statue and call it a web browser.
Cthulhu For President!
Offline
I used it. And I have left it for good. Using XFCE now.
Birger
Offline
I started off with Ubuntu. I used GNOME for 2 months, switched to Openbox for another 6, switched to Arch + Openbox, and then tried out XFCE and dwm. I am now back to Openbox, but I keep dwm around because I really enjoyed it, but I don't really think it's practical for everyday use for me specifically.
[ lamy + pilot ] [ arch64 | wmii ] [ ati + amd ]
Offline
I have left openbox for xmonad, and left xmonad for stumpwm. Xmonad is a cool window manager but I personally like stumpwm overall design better. Stumpwm has floating now btw, ...
http://blog.pindundin.de/2008/11/03/stu … -floating/
It's not THAT usable yet but i'm excited about it. Heh I can finally run openoffice and gimp. If it's any consolation you run common lisp in the background.
Openbox is easier to design though, I guess that's what I miss about it. In Xmonad you'll need dzen2 and haskell to make it look good, with stumpwm you'll need common lisp.
Offline
Has anyone else ever tried to leave openbox?
Leave it for one of the big all-encompassing desktop environments? No way.
Leave it for one of the more minimal tiling wm's like dwm, ratpoison, xmonad? They're very enticing, but not quite right.
The only thing I could leave Openbox for is something similar, but even more minimal (yet still functional). So about a week ago I tried out EvilWM. Sort of like Openbox without menu capability. It does everything I need it to, but not one iota more, which is glorious. I never even have to think about it as it stays completely out of the way. So maybe I can leave Openbox for EvilWM. It's been a week so far...:P
Bob
Offline
Once you go tiling you never go back.
+1
I went KDE -> fluxbox -> openbox -> awesome 2.3 -> dwm -> awesome 3.2
I probably used openbox for the longest time out of any of those, though. I miss it sometimes...
and I still have fluxbox installed for when I break stuff
check this out
http://www.myspace.com/banditsinthewoods
Offline
So maybe I can leave Openbox for EvilWM.
I must be a convert since I just added the EvilCat to my avatar
Bob
Offline
oops
Last edited by Hrod beraht (2009-02-28 22:27:57)
Offline
I used Openbox for some time, then I tried dwm, and I never looked back
Last edited by ludovico (2009-02-28 22:33:46)
Sin? What's all this about sin?
Offline
You mean has a lot of useless nonsense like eye candy which only gets in the way of actual work? Or gaming for that matter?
You speak of the "desktop" as if it's something to be admired, not used. You might as well have a beautiful golden statue and call it a web browser.
I bet you don't use themes either.
Working with the desktop is a visual experience. making that visual experience pleasing enhances the experience of the desktop for many users. I don't get why some people sneer at this. They probably scoff at beautiful cars as well.
Offline
I left Openbox for a lighter, faster and much simpler JWM. I built a heavily stripped and optimized Xfce 4.6 two days ago. There is no comparison in speed, back to JWM I go. I also run dwm on a couple of boxes and find it no faster and no less resource reducing (within 200 KB of resident and shared memory) than JWM.
Arch Linux + sway
Debian Testing + GNOME/sway
NetBSD 64-bit + Xfce
Offline
I haven't seen anyone around, using Openbox with xfce4-panel (it's so awesome) yet. Anyone using this incredibly awesome setup? For non-fans of this "tiling"-cult, nothing beats Openbox
Last edited by Themaister (2009-03-01 00:24:47)
Offline
buttons wrote:You mean has a lot of useless nonsense like eye candy which only gets in the way of actual work? Or gaming for that matter?
You speak of the "desktop" as if it's something to be admired, not used. You might as well have a beautiful golden statue and call it a web browser.
I bet you don't use themes either.
Working with the desktop is a visual experience. making that visual experience pleasing enhances the experience of the desktop for many users. I don't get why some people sneer at this. They probably scoff at beautiful cars as well.
A visually pleasing experience is almost always an inefficient one.
I personally think my window manager of choice (dwm) is beautiful.
I personally think the fact that I never break 300MB of RAM usage without doing something very intensive is beautiful.
Offline