Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

Master One · 2007-03-09 17:07:18

I was playing around with dwm the whole afternoon. I am not a programmer, just a user, looking for the best possible way to productively work with my laptop. The concept of a tiling WM is quite fascinating, I already tried ion3 before, but dwm seems even more slick (besides the lua and unnecessary titlebars in ion3).

The general problem is, that the screen is always to small to be able to show several apps "fullscreen" in their frames, so I was wondering if this is really the right approach to have all open apps visible all the time. For example I often have two different apps in windows floating over each other, just to copy&past from one app to the other (ctrl-c + alt-tab + ctrl-v), which does not really require both apps to be fully visible. The same applies for example, if I need one window with some info I need in another app only partly visible, while working with that other app.

Can a tiling WM really replace a normal WM (let's compare dwm with openbox3), when using all the usual apps (webbrowser, texteditor, office-apps, ...), and lead to be better workflow & enhanced productivity?

It's not only about the possibility, to control everything from the keyboard instead of using the mouse extensively, but also about advances of tiled windows over floating ones.

During my tests with dwm the major showstopper for me was the missing systray, because there are some apps, which just can't be used without it (like the networkmanager-frontend, or my hdaps-monitor to show the status of the harddisc active protection system). How would you use networkmanager in dwm (or any other tiling WM)?

As much as I like the concept, I am not really convinced that I could stick with it atm.

Any opinions welcome.

P.S. I tried Gnome, XFCE4, KDE / KDEMOD, Openbox3, Fluxbox & FVWM (in my former Gentoo times), ion3 and dwm by now, and they all have their up- & downsides. Generally I just want to work on my laptop, not so much fiddling around with configs to set everything up, and I want to be able to use GTK+ & QT apps, without one of the two looking worse than in their otherwise usual environment. I find it very hard to accomplish that task.

phrakture · 2007-03-09 17:34:15

I technically don't use a tiling WM. I use a "fullscreen WM" - ratpoison. The basic principle is that all applications are started completely fullscreened and takes up as much of the screen as possible. Sure you can split the screen and stuff similar to tiling WMs, but it's not really the intended way to use that a lot.

With regard to the systray comment - there are other apps out there that don't rely on a system tray. Actually, most people would claim that if an application can only do what it needs to with a system tray, it is a broken application. I'd agree.

Master One · 2007-03-09 17:53:17

phrakture, I already have read about ratpoison, but as far as I could see (didn't try it yet), it does not support virtual desktops / workspaces, so how can multiple apps be managed with it usefully (not having virtual desktops / workspaces seems a backstep to me, or did I misunderstand something concerning ratpoison?). Also isn't ratpoison a tiling WM as well (quote from the ratpoison website: "The screen can be split into non-overlapping frames. All windows are kept maximized inside their frames to take full advantage of your precious screen real estate.")? Do you never need two or more apps visible at the same time, like for reading some info in one windows, to use that info in another one?

You surely are right about the apps needing a systray, but that's nothing I can change, and I don't know of any real alternative to networkmanager (which runs by its own even without a frontend, but you just can not control it without the app that places itself in the systray).

skymt · 2007-03-09 18:18:48

With Ratpoison, every window essentially runs in its own workspace. Every window is numbered, so you can hit Ctrl-t 2 to switch to window 2, Ctrl-t 4 for window 4, etc. You can split the screen to have multiple windows on-screen at the same time. If you've used the command-line program screen, you'll be comfortable in Ratpoison as it's the same concept.

Example: You launch Firefox. It's assigned number 0. You then open two terminals, which are assigned to 1 and 2. You can hit C-t 1 to switch the whole screen to the first terminal, then C-t 0 to go back to Firefox. C-t s will split the screen horizontally, with Firefox on top and terminal 1 (the application you were at previously) on the bottom. C-t Tab switches focus between frames. You hit C-t 2, and whatever frame has focus switches to terminal 2.

For a systray, try Docker, a system tray in a window. DWM will float it in a layer above your tiled windows, I don't know how Ratpoison handles it.

phrakture · 2007-03-09 18:44:58

Well, ratpoison supports window "groups" that function almost the same as virtual desktops.

As for docker, I have not tried it, but you could create a split, and resize it so as to make docker sit at the bottom of the screen... dunno, I don't use any apps that require a system tray, so I don't need something like docker.

caust1c · 2007-03-09 19:03:34

wmii might have what you want, the sticky layout.
only the selected application in the focused tab is visible, the other apps only show the title.
maybe i'll implement this layout in dwm

Dusty · 2007-03-09 20:01:36

I utterly HATE most non-tiling window managers. I only massively dislike most tiling ones, because they just don't work with some apps that I use.

My happy medium is pekwm, which is technically non-tiling, but between autoproperties and the smart fit option (you double click the title bar and the window expands to fit available space), it can act like a tiling window manager, while allowing me to overlap windows as needed. Pekwm is my 'Arch' of window managers. I stopped looking for other distros when I found Arch.

Dusty

Stalwart · 2007-03-09 21:16:00

stalonetray is stand alone tray you're able to use in almost any WM

iphitus · 2007-03-09 22:07:37

dwm seems to have some sort of basic tray that catches KDE apps.

Otherwise, I use trayer:

trayer --expand true --widthtype request --transparent true --alpha 255 --edge bottom --align right &

None of the WM's out there really do what I'd like either. *shrug* I've been meaning to write my own for a long time. I find tiled wm's far more usable than non-tiled. Whenever I have to use a non tiled wm, it's somewhat frustrating.

James

Last edited by iphitus (2007-03-09 22:09:18)

skymt · 2007-03-09 22:30:52

iphitus wrote:

dwm seems to have some sort of basic tray that catches KDE apps.

What? Are you using a patched version? I've looked though the source and didn't see anything like that.

Where does it appear? Can you post a screenshot?

Master One · 2007-03-10 06:09:55

skymt wrote:

iphitus wrote:
dwm seems to have some sort of basic tray that catches KDE apps.
What? Are you using a patched version? I've looked though the source and didn't see anything like that. Where does it appear? Can you post a screenshot?

That's a good question. Unless there is something special to configure in config.h, it's not in the latest official release 3.8.

The problem with standalone systrays in tiling WMs is, where to put it. I tried trayer in dwm, started it without any option and it overlapped the bottom of the screen, strangely when I started knetworkmanager, it just opened in a new window, instead of going into that tray. I assume there is a missing link between the WM and the tray-functionality.

Dusty, I've been reading on the pekwem website, and it seems quite interesting as well, I'm gonna try that one next.

iBertus · 2007-03-10 06:43:53

IMHO, systray functionality has always been a little broken in linux -- too many different protocols. With most "good" window managers this is an unnecessary function.

gunnix · 2007-03-10 22:48:10

I like ratpoison a lot too, but I think I can do anything with icewm that I can with ratpoison but more. It's easy to have all stuff fullscreen and work like in ratpoison but you can also run stuff (with fucked up gui) like the gimp...

magnum_opus · 2007-03-11 01:52:39

unless you're using a widescreen monitor and mostly terminal apps you're going to end up interacting with the window manager just as much on a tiling WM as an overlapping one.

pauldonnelly · 2007-03-11 04:56:48

I think tiling WMs would be more viable if every program were written to play nice with them. I used to be a tiler myself, but lately I find it faster not to use one since every program can keep the shape it wants. It would go a long way if programs could (and did) tell the window manager about the dimensions of the content they want to display.

codemac · 2007-03-11 19:15:25

Dusty introduced me to pekwm. It wasn't ideal for me, but damn, it was good.

iphitus · 2007-03-11 23:52:36

caust1c wrote:

wmii might have what you want, the sticky layout.
only the selected application in the focused tab is visible, the other apps only show the title.
maybe i'll implement this layout in dwm

that would be awesome.

and I was mistaken about the tray, dwm just put the tray icon for kopete floating in the bottom corner so i presumed it was a tray.

James

Zoranthus · 2007-03-12 09:51:12

I also like tiling/fullscreen WMs alot for their minimal approach, but I just can't do without:

-Alerts (IM/IRC-Message alterts never reach other workspaces and I keep missing tells/status changes/warnings)
-Conky. Man I love Conky.
-Yes/No-GTKdialogues that don't clutter the entire screen

ootput · 2007-03-12 10:32:38

Zoranthus wrote:

I also like tiling/fullscreen WMs alot for their minimal approach, but I just can't do without:
-Alerts (IM/IRC-Message alterts never reach other workspaces and I keep missing tells/status changes/warnings)
-Conky. Man I love Conky.
-Yes/No-GTKdialogues that don't clutter the entire screen

Ion3 allows this.

Zoranthus · 2007-03-12 11:07:08

ootput wrote:

Ion3 allows this.

Yea, probably in some way.. I guess I could get bitlbee's status message output into the ion status bar, if I learned some lua and had a look into bitlbee scripting language. And i could just put conky into Workspace X and just switch there everytime i want to have a look at my conky data. And switch to floating mode for these dialogues when i see them.

I'll certainly try some tiling WM again, next time I have some spare time to setup and play around with stuff.. but atm I'm just too used to root window, tray, and launch menu. And clicking tiny widgets to control my windows.

I'm sure a poperly setup TWM is faster in terms of usability. Keyboard only = teh win. If it wasn't for the webbrowser demanding a hand on the mouse most of the time anyway, I would have put much more effort into it already. And links, lynx and similar text-based keyboard-only-browsers really do have major drawbacks imo..

Last edited by Zoranthus (2007-03-12 11:14:17)

magnum_opus · 2007-03-12 19:48:52

tiling wm != keyboard only
similarly
overlapping can be controlled by keyboards as much as tiling.

upsidaisium · 2007-03-13 00:51:14

Dusty wrote:

My happy medium is pekwm, which is technically non-tiling, but between autoproperties and the smart fit option (you double click the title bar and the window expands to fit available space), it can act like a tiling window manager, while allowing me to overlap windows as needed. Pekwm is my 'Arch' of window managers. I stopped looking for other distros when I found Arch.

i think i'm going to give pekwm a whirl. lately i've been getting pretty picky when it comes to window managers--pekwm sounds promising.

magnum_opus · 2007-03-13 02:42:07

only downside to pek really is the lack of themes, if there's one out there you like, groovy, but the choice is kinda slim (compared to openbox of fluxbox)

Master One · 2007-03-13 08:31:10

magnum_opus wrote:

unless you're using a widescreen monitor and mostly terminal apps you're going to end up interacting with the window manager just as much on a tiling WM as an overlapping one.

Seems I have to agree on that. I already moved on testing FVWM with a very interesting configuration from 6thpink (it's in the FVWM Forum), which is a completely different approach with no emphasis on using all the pixels your screen can give you for the actual workspace. I never thought I'd return to FVWM, because I don't want to spend a lifetime configuring a WM, but 6thpink's config has something that caught my eye...

upsidaisium · 2007-03-13 22:17:33

magnum_opus wrote:

only downside to pek really is the lack of themes, if there's one out there you like, groovy, but the choice is kinda slim (compared to openbox of fluxbox)

i thought i'd try making my own theme; it doesn't seem all that difficult. (am i wrong..? )

Arch Linux

#1 2007-03-09 17:07:18

Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#2 2007-03-09 17:34:15

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#3 2007-03-09 17:53:17

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#4 2007-03-09 18:18:48

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#5 2007-03-09 18:44:58

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#6 2007-03-09 19:03:34

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#7 2007-03-09 20:01:36

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#8 2007-03-09 21:16:00

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#9 2007-03-09 22:07:37

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#10 2007-03-09 22:30:52

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#11 2007-03-10 06:09:55

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#12 2007-03-10 06:43:53

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#13 2007-03-10 22:48:10

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#14 2007-03-11 01:52:39

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#15 2007-03-11 04:56:48

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#16 2007-03-11 19:15:25

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#17 2007-03-11 23:52:36

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#18 2007-03-12 09:51:12

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#19 2007-03-12 10:32:38

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#20 2007-03-12 11:07:08

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#21 2007-03-12 19:48:52

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#22 2007-03-13 00:51:14

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#23 2007-03-13 02:42:07

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#24 2007-03-13 08:31:10

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

#25 2007-03-13 22:17:33

Re: Practical usefulness of a tiling WM (not the codergeekish way)?

Board footer