Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

Stalafin · 2008-07-15 19:34:57

About a week ago I started to use Xmonad - and I am highly impressed! The complete work flow is a breeze, I don't have to keep track of all my hundreds of programs anymore - at least the way I used to.

Everything is arranged, nice and neatly. It is the first time I am actually taking advantage of the possibilities offered by having different workspaces!

Starting with Windows 95 (I was just 6 years or so old), then later with Windows 98 and Windows XP I was used to work with only one workspace, alt+tabbing my way through the clutter of windows being spread all over. After my switch to GNU/Linux (Ubuntu at that time) this didn't really change, although there were different workspace. It was the same with Openbox or KDE later one. The possibility was there, but it just didn't come natural to work like that.

But with those tiling WMs I am seriously spoiled! Just after this very week I am already having a hard time adopting to a classic floating WM again.

Now I just wonder - how come tiling WMs aren't widely used these days? Is it because Microsoft didn't support them? Or Apple?

When did tiling WMs actually emerge? And do you think there is a chance for them to get widely accepted, even among non-techsavvy people?

Or for those who are using Floating WMs - did you ever try a tiling WM? Are you planning to? If you tried one, why aren't you using it?

What do guys think is the major advantage of tiling WMs over floating WMs and vice versae?

I would like to hear some opinions.

JazzplayerL9 · 2008-07-15 19:45:57

I switch back and forth between Gnome and Awesome depending on what I'm doing. If it's casual web surfing and listening to music...gnome. But when I need to get some work done at the office I switch over to Awesome because I have many matlab/octave scripts written that I edit and execute on the fly all day long. Awesome is exceptionally good with window management...and if I find that a program doesn't behave nicely with it, I just edit my .awesomerc file and tell it to go into "float" mode and open it on another desktop space. My usual awesome setup is to have octave, gedit, and eterm open on one desktop space...exaile open on the next...opera on the next...and I don't really get to much else so the rest go unused or I have a file manager open (I happen to like nautilus, ok?!?) on another desktop. That's really it...and I've been thinking about adding stalonetray so I have a system tray...but I use gnome just about as much...so I haven't spent time doing that yet.

There you have it...my opinion: floating wm's are good when you don't have much you're doing...and tiling ones are GREAT for when you need to get very involved in what you're doing.

vogt · 2008-07-15 20:30:49

I would say that with xmonad you can set up a superset (almost) of the functionality of <insert window manager here>: things which need to be floated, like the GIMP can be, while everything else is immediately visible on its own workspace. And if you want decent looking window decorations (with buttons, I think), that's there too.

Now, if somebody added compositing, but it seems that the people with enough skills to get xmonad to steal some of compiz's effects don't have enough motivation and/or spare time to do that.

Compiz(-fusion) does have a plugin to tile windows, but it didn't like it as much.

Also, needing a >100M GHC isn't that beautiful if you only need it to make some minor changes to xmonad's configuration though.

Obi-Lan · 2008-07-15 20:48:09

I think that it is mostly bacause I'm lazy. Lazy to use time to configure any WM or memorize key combinations. And then I have gotten too used to gnomes volume management, quit openbox because I got tired to mount things manually. I like it when I get gtkam if I plug in camera or nautilus when I plugin usb stick.

I tried wmii and it seemed to be very efficient but didn't get exited too much.

slackhack · 2008-07-15 21:32:17

I thought about using a tiling WM, but I use mostly browsers and other gtk2 gui apps, with terminals secondarily. tiling WMs seemed better if you primarily use terminals, am I wrong about that? It just seems like I would feel constricted or restrained not being able to move windows around, resize them, etc. what's the best tiling WM to try? Awesome?

Ashren · 2008-07-15 21:35:18

I don't find Xmonad beautiful, especially not the syntax of the config file, what a nightmare.* Dwm on the other hand, that's a beaut - a real archers choice.

I'm running gnome when procrastinating and dwm when procrastinating with scripts and lots of terminal work.

* A clear indication of lack of basic Haskell l33tness. I did enjoy running Xmonad after a week of tinkering, though.

Vintendo · 2008-07-15 21:35:51

I love Tiling Window Managers. I started(and am still using Awesome) mainly because it's configuration file is easiest to understand. I also have a browser and a bunch of terminals open.

Zepp · 2008-07-15 21:40:51

I prefer wmii's tiling, however Xmonad is pretty nice and I have started using it since it has xinerama support.

dolby · 2008-07-15 21:59:54

slackhack wrote:

I thought about using a tiling WM, but I use mostly browsers and other gtk2 gui apps, with terminals secondarily. tiling WMs seemed better if you primarily use terminals, am I wrong about that? It just seems like I would feel constricted or restrained not being able to move windows around, resize them, etc. what's the best tiling WM to try? Awesome?

Hell no. I recommend xmonad. You can intergrate any DE you want too,

Ashren wrote:

I don't find Xmonad beautiful, especially not the syntax of the config file, what a nightmare.* Dwm on the other hand, that's a beaut - a real archers choice.
I'm running gnome when procrastinating and dwm when procrastinating with scripts and lots of terminal work.
* A clear indication of lack of basic Haskell l33tness. I did enjoy running Xmonad after a week of tinkering, though.

I think that your statement is not true anymore. the dwm configuration file has been constantly changing for like half a year or so which is very irritating. also the attempt to intergrate xinerama support with all those xv, yv 's or what they were called was very funny, and frustrating to say the least. also see my response to slackhack.

Even though xmonad is written in haskell, and i dont know any haskell, its the only serious tiling window manager left out there.
maybe wmii too. dwm is probably still a good base to build your own kickass wm.

Stalafin wrote:

When did tiling WMs actually emerge?

With Windows 1.0?

Last edited by dolby (2008-07-15 22:05:54)

rson451 · 2008-07-15 22:19:22

dolby wrote:

slackhack wrote:
I thought about using a tiling WM, but I use mostly browsers and other gtk2 gui apps, with terminals secondarily. tiling WMs seemed better if you primarily use terminals, am I wrong about that? It just seems like I would feel constricted or restrained not being able to move windows around, resize them, etc. what's the best tiling WM to try? Awesome?
Hell no. I recommend xmonad. You can intergrate any DE you want too,
I think that your statement is not true anymore. the dwm configuration file has been constantly changing for like half a year or so which is very irritating. also the attempt to intergrate xinerama support with all those xv, yv 's or what they were called was very funny, and frustrating to say the least. also see my response to slackhack.
Even though xmonad is written in haskell, and i dont know any haskell, its the only serious tiling window manager left out there.
maybe wmii too. dwm is probably still a good base to build your own kickass wm.

I completely agree about dwm and the whole xinerama thing. I've been on dwm 4.7 since it came out and just backported the newer features (window urgency hints anyone?) to my 4.7. I am currently working on small changes because as you said, dwm is a great base to make your own wm.

heleos · 2008-07-15 23:40:48

While we're on the topic of xmonad

I'm an awesome user, and I was wondering about the mouse support in xmonad. I'm not ready to switch over to tiling completely, and in awesome I have a floating tab. Last time I tried out xmonad, I believe that was an option. I'm wondering about the mouse support. Is it as good as awesome's?

moljac024 · 2008-07-16 00:09:18

I'm just switching over to a tiling wm myself and I chose Xmonad. It seems great, the possibilities endless...

And I only see the haskell thing as a plus. I mean, what can it hurt learning a new programming paradigm ?

I chose Xmonad because I got the impression it's the best tiling window manager at the moment ( dolby seems to think that way as well )

Last edited by moljac024 (2008-07-16 00:14:39)

slackhack · 2008-07-16 00:16:25

wow, I just installed a bunch of these -- pretty cool. awesome has the best default appearance, and I like how you can choose the layout in the taskbar, but i'm liking wmii's vim and alt+ keybindings best so far. looks like there's a bit of learning curve to configuring these.

some fonts look kind of wonky, like in the menus of gtk2 apps - what's up with that? I can see how you can get hooked on these tiling wms, especially on a laptop. using keystrokes is so much preferable to the touchpad all the time.

Mimi · 2008-07-16 01:04:45

slackhack wrote:

some fonts look kind of wonky, like in the menus of gtk2 apps - what's up with that?

Could be a font-hinting-problem.
Xfce for example stores the settings in a file called xft.xrdb. I just copied them to my Xdefaults.

Xft.dpi: 100
Xft.antialias: true
Xft.hinting:true
Xft.hintstyle: hintfull
xft.rgba: rgb

I've been using wmii for a couple of days now, and i think i'll never go back...

-- Mimi

The Orange Peanut · 2008-07-16 01:20:22

I just installed Awesome for the hell of it. I've never used a tiling WM. This could be fun once I set myself down and configure it and learn to use it properly. I don't have time tonight, but I may screw around with it tomorrow.

slackhack · 2008-07-16 01:21:47

Mimi wrote:

slackhack wrote:
some fonts look kind of wonky, like in the menus of gtk2 apps - what's up with that?
Could be a font-hinting-problem.
Xfce for example stores the settings in a file called xft.xrdb. I just copied them to my Xdefaults.
Xft.dpi: 100
Xft.antialias: true
Xft.hinting:true
Xft.hintstyle: hintfull
xft.rgba: rgb
I've been using wmii for a couple of days now, and i think i'll never go back...
-- Mimi

that really helped - thanks!

I love this alt+p and there are all your programs. alt + a is cool too, but I'd like to add more options to the menu. still don't really get the concept of this wmiir filesystem, though. are the man pages the only doc for this?

Mimi · 2008-07-16 02:23:00

slackhack wrote:

alt + a is cool too, but I'd like to add more options to the menu.

I just placed some scripts in the ~/.wmii-3.5 directory, now i can execute them using alt+a.

are the man pages the only doc for this?

The homepage seems to be under construction. I couldn't find a guide for the current version, but one for 3.1.
Google still has it:
http://209.85.135.104/search?q=cache:Ew … ide_en.pdf

Zeist · 2008-07-16 08:05:28

I actually do both tiling and a floating WM which I alternate between a bit.

I like wmii for when I'm working actively on development... but for most of my time I actually enjoy being in pekwm more.

Intrepid · 2008-07-16 08:15:22

I used to use tiling window managers until I found out E17 allowed me to maximize windows into unused space (very useful). Several WMs will do this.

After a long time using stacking wm's with this functionality (Openbox, Metacity, E17) and some other wms (Compiz Fusion/KWin/Fluxbox), I tried Xmonad, Dwm, etc but finally settled on Awesome.

The thing I like about Awesome is that the rules are easy to set up. Once you have the general rules set up, not only do GUI apps behave nicely, you get other advantages of more bloated WMs/DEs without the bloat: Statusbar widgets, taskbars, easy customization.

@vogt: Awesome supports opacity changes via xcompmgr. I don't know if you wanted full-blown effects?
@slackhack: AFAIK, Awesome allows resizing of the master window. You can use the mouse to switch a window with another when tiling by Win+Click and dragging over. Floating mode has usual resize/move.
@Stalafin: Tiling windows started with Xerox in the 70s or 80s

Sorry for the long post

ekerazha · 2008-07-16 09:27:49

I tried some tiling WMs like awesome but I still prefer floating WMs. Usually I use apps as maximized windows and I'm not comfortable with all that small tiled windows.

ekerazha · 2008-07-16 09:47:23

Intrepid wrote:

I used to use tiling window managers until I found out E17 allowed me to maximize windows into unused space (very useful). Several WMs will do this.
After a long time using stacking wm's with this functionality (Openbox, Metacity, E17) and some other wms (Compiz Fusion/KWin/Fluxbox), I tried Xmonad, Dwm, etc but finally settled on Awesome.

How do you maximize into unused space using Openbox/Metacity?

Mimi · 2008-07-16 11:57:59

ekerazha wrote:

I tried some tiling WMs like awesome but I still prefer floating WMs. Usually I use apps as maximized windows and I'm not comfortable with all that small tiled windows.

Wmii (and others too) has also a "maximized layout".

I really love tagging.

ekerazha · 2008-07-16 12:06:30

Mimi wrote:

ekerazha wrote:
I tried some tiling WMs like awesome but I still prefer floating WMs. Usually I use apps as maximized windows and I'm not comfortable with all that small tiled windows.
Wmii (and others too) has also a "maximized layout".
I really love tagging.

Yes... but at this point there's no need for a tiling WM.

patroclo7 · 2008-07-16 12:11:37

rson451 wrote:

I completely agree about dwm and the whole xinerama thing. I've been on dwm 4.7 since it came out and just backported the newer features (window urgency hints anyone?) to my 4.7. I am currently working on small changes because as you said, dwm is a great base to make your own wm.

Since I am in the same situation (dwm 4.7 was for me a nearly perfect and seemingly bug-free window manager, but I do not like the newer releases), would you mind to share your backports to 4.7 of the new features?

rson451 · 2008-07-16 14:12:27

At this time the only thing I've backported is the urgency hints. I've not seen anything in the newer dwm versions other than this that I felt was useful. Unfortunately I do not have a patch for this but I can try to work on getting one made (it's a very trivial amount of code added/changed). Probably will take me a while though as I'm in the process of moving.

In case you are interested, my dwm includes bstack, save floats, a one liner to make room for a conky bar, and urgency hints, that's about all that's different from stock dwm.

Last edited by rson451 (2008-07-16 14:15:53)

Arch Linux

#1 2008-07-15 19:34:57

Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#2 2008-07-15 19:45:57

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#3 2008-07-15 20:30:49

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#4 2008-07-15 20:48:09

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#5 2008-07-15 21:32:17

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#6 2008-07-15 21:35:18

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#7 2008-07-15 21:35:51

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#8 2008-07-15 21:40:51

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#9 2008-07-15 21:59:54

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#10 2008-07-15 22:19:22

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#11 2008-07-15 23:40:48

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#12 2008-07-16 00:09:18

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#13 2008-07-16 00:16:25

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#14 2008-07-16 01:04:45

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#15 2008-07-16 01:20:22

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#16 2008-07-16 01:21:47

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#17 2008-07-16 02:23:00

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#18 2008-07-16 08:05:28

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#19 2008-07-16 08:15:22

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#20 2008-07-16 09:27:49

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#21 2008-07-16 09:47:23

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#22 2008-07-16 11:57:59

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#23 2008-07-16 12:06:30

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#24 2008-07-16 12:11:37

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

#25 2008-07-16 14:12:27

Re: Why is Xmonad so beautiful? (Discussion about tiling WMs)

Board footer