Black Box experiences?

Lontronics · 2006-08-29 15:31:20

I was wondering if there are Arch users around with Black Box window-manager experiences?

As a test I have compiled fluxbox and blackbox, and am using blackbox now as my window manager.

It is very fast, but I am also missing some (minor) things.

What are your experiences and do you have some tips/ hints?!

A short list of positive and negative things I noticed till now:

Positive:
- very fast (even faster as icewm, which I thought was the fastest wm around...)
- very stable
- very easy to edit menu's, configuration and styles
- very small memory footprint
- very small package (incl. themes the package is only 480kb, the executable is 533kb where fluxbox is 1,4mB and icewm is about 570kb, but including icewm-session, icewmbg, icewmtray and others more then 1mB also)

Negative:
- no menu in toolbar
- not all programs together on toolbar, you have to 'right-click' on a free part of the screen, or right-click on the bar of the opened program
- no tray

Jan

(moved topic to desktop invironments)

Chman · 2006-08-29 15:52:15

My post is a bit offtopic, but you might want to take a look at Openbox if you like minimalist WMs. If you need a pager/tray you could try Pypanel (in community) or Visibility.

1c3d0g · 2006-08-29 16:02:02

I second Chman's post. :-)

Lontronics · 2006-08-29 16:12:11

Thanks for the advise Chman and 1c3d0g, not offtopic at all

What would be the advantage of Openbox instead of Blackbox?
I have read the about at the Openbox, and it is giving me the idea it has some more features, the same as for example Fluxbox. That is nice ofcourse when you need them, but makes it also slower.
Are there advantages which will make you choose Openbox?

Jan.

Chman · 2006-08-29 16:29:20

I didn't use Blackbox enough to give you a comparaison list, but I'm sure of one thing : Openbox is _really_ fast and lightweight. Configuration is damn easy (two xml files, one for openbox which can be generated by Obconf, the other one for the menu) and there are great themes (look for rezza's and smoon's themes in screenshots topics).

I use Openbox because I'm used to it and I love its simplicity. You should try it to judge by yourself

Lontronics · 2006-08-29 19:23:51

I will give it a try tonight

Further comments about Blackbox and/or Openbox are still welcome ofcourse

Jan

allucid · 2006-08-29 19:37:40

I've used all three in the past. I prefer openbox because of the extensive keybindings and the alt-tab behavior.

Lontronics · 2006-08-29 20:17:36

I have just tried Openbox for a moment to see and feel the difference. And although I know that the testperiod is much too short to give a good opinion, I noticed two things;
- blackbox is about the same speed or a little faster
- blackbox is using less memory (about 20 percent!)

The differences are small, but I got stuck with the .xsd menufile of openbox, so switched back to blackbox

After some more 'research' I will take my decision if I go further with blackbox, or give openbox another try.

About the numbers;
- memory, using top:
VIRT:BB:5320-5568
VIRT:OB:6496-6948
RES:BB:2916-2968
RES:OB:3564-3900
SHR:BB:2260-2328
SHR:OB:2656-2732

-javascript speed comparison with Opera and javacript speedtest (Yes, I know, not the most exact test....):
Test 1: BB: 1,101
Test 1: OB: 1,103-1,109
Test 2: BB: 0,29
Test 2: OB:0,301-0,315
Test 3: BB: 0,361
Test 3: OB: 0,36-0,366
Test 4: BB: 0,295
Test 4: OB: 0,296-0,297
Test 5: BB: 0,07
Test 5: OB: 0,072
Test 6: BB: 1,265
Test 6: OB: 1,161
Test 7: BB: 0,27-0,275
Test 7: OB: 0,274-0,276

allucid · 2006-08-29 20:31:04

I am skeptical about the usefulness of such a test. Why not just use the one you like the best?

For example, speed/memory usage is going to depend on what theme you are using and possibly other factors. Also, more memory use does not necessarily indicate bloat -- perhaps that makes the application in question quicker and more responsive.

Lontronics · 2006-08-29 20:50:38

You are right about that

And to be honoust I was not complete with my answer too....

Openbox feels more 'at home' even after a few minutes... just a feeling.

Blackbox feels faster, I do not know why, but the screen buildup feels crispier, which I can not find in the testresults...

As you said, I will start with Blackbox because that is working at the moment and working fine.
When I do not like it anymore, for what reason, I will probably switch to Openbox.

Thanks,
Jan

allucid · 2006-08-29 20:57:47

Yeah, admittedly openbox is a bit slowish when compared to some other wm's.

chrismortimore · 2006-08-30 09:05:10

I found fluxbox to be the better of the *box WMs. In terms of startup speed, I think that loading fluxbox (from xdm) with xscreensaver and gkrellm, I was up to a wopping 2 seconds (on my laptop, specs are in the sig if you care). Slowed down a little when I started using rox to give me desktop icons though.
And in terms of using speed, as fast as I ever needed. And I never spotted a speed difference between blackbox and fluxbox, but it was so long ago that I last tried openbox it probably isn't even worth remembering how fast it was.

sven · 2006-10-04 12:28:49

I did try both OpenBox and BlackBox and to me, OpenBox seemed to be slower than Blackbox. I have quite old hardware, though - 1GHz Athlon from 2001 and a slow 2 Ghz Celeron (on a laptop, bought year 2003).

I am using some extras with BlackBox: bbrun to be able to quickly start programs, bbkeys for alt-tab functionality and bbconf to easily edit the right-click - menu.

Sigi · 2006-10-04 13:05:21

I just switched from xfce to openbox and I really like it. I use openbox 3.3, feh, pypanel, gmrun and sometimes (to impress others ;-) ) conky with a lot of system information etc.

Openbox is really easy to configure and a lot faster than xfce. The only thing I'm still missing is a nice pager.

Chman · 2006-10-04 13:39:08

Sigi wrote:

Openbox is really easy to configure and a lot faster than xfce. The only thing I'm still missing is a nice pager.

What about Visibility ?

Sigi · 2006-10-04 13:47:48

Chman wrote:

What about Visibility ?

Looks promissing, thx

salmonix · 2010-02-04 21:01:56

I've been using blackbox and fluxbox for long and always try Openbox but fall back. I dislike the xml syntax of the config files and I started with fluxbox, so I mainly reuse the menu and keyfiles: the menu and key files are almost the same, so 'migration' is simple.
I usually stay with blackbox for one reason: you can set your desktop in multiple rows - that is really great. (I put work in one row, docs under.) If Openbox new it I'd perhaps take time to convert my flux/blackbox settings.
Well, bb is the fastest/lightest (although bbkeys is pulling it down) but we are in terms of less than 1 Mb differences in the lightweight category and I feel perhaps no difference between the two on my 333Mhz Armada1750. (If U open a number of terminals those can be more memory hungry than the wm, esp. if you do not use urxvtd/urxvtc)
One thing is missing - and will be missing - from blackbox: it is the RootMenu keybinding. And one more: to remember the window size. Like it in fluxbox.
Stability: I have never seen stability issue with any of these. Well, maybe bbkeys and bbrun. On gentoo I had to use fbrun instead ( I do not remember why), now bbkeys freezes when I start. (.xinitrc)

If you want some eye-candy dandy transparency then fluxbox is the first. (for me, course) Transparent window decoration, menu, window, hundreds of themes and the same flexibility. Unfortunately no multiple rows for desktops, perhaps with some pager?. But remembers window parameters and has RootMenu. This is important for me: on a laptop the 'mouse' is at hand, but at the desk it is annoying to touch it all the time.
Flux needs no bbkeys.

(Ps.: the lack of RootMenu is conceptual with Blackbox as explained in the FAQ. But this is a kind of coding and not functional concept - which is wrong approach. The program is to be used and ergonomic mouse is a joke.)

Last edited by salmonix (2010-02-04 21:08:37)

sand_man · 2010-02-04 22:10:54

Thats a necrobump if I've ever seen one!

Acecero · 2010-02-05 01:11:10

/me sighs

*reports

Misfit138 · 2010-02-05 01:21:38

Zombie. Closing.

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/For … Bumping.27

Arch Linux

#1 2006-08-29 15:31:20

Black Box experiences?

#2 2006-08-29 15:52:15

Re: Black Box experiences?

#3 2006-08-29 16:02:02

Re: Black Box experiences?

#4 2006-08-29 16:12:11

Re: Black Box experiences?

#5 2006-08-29 16:29:20

Re: Black Box experiences?

#6 2006-08-29 19:23:51

Re: Black Box experiences?

#7 2006-08-29 19:37:40

Re: Black Box experiences?

#8 2006-08-29 20:17:36

Re: Black Box experiences?

#9 2006-08-29 20:31:04

Re: Black Box experiences?

#10 2006-08-29 20:50:38

Re: Black Box experiences?

#11 2006-08-29 20:57:47

Re: Black Box experiences?

#12 2006-08-30 09:05:10

Re: Black Box experiences?

#13 2006-10-04 12:28:49

Re: Black Box experiences?

#14 2006-10-04 13:05:21

Re: Black Box experiences?

#15 2006-10-04 13:39:08

Re: Black Box experiences?

#16 2006-10-04 13:47:48

Re: Black Box experiences?

#17 2010-02-04 21:01:56

Re: Black Box experiences?

#18 2010-02-04 22:10:54

Re: Black Box experiences?

#19 2010-02-05 01:11:10

Re: Black Box experiences?

#20 2010-02-05 01:21:38

Re: Black Box experiences?

Board footer