Arch Linux

D-a-a-n

Member

Registered: 2007-07-28

Posts: 6

What WM to use?

First off, I don't know if this is the right place to post my question.

I've been using KDE, Gnome, e17, Fluxbox.

- Kde looked childish (imho) wasn't so stable and slower than any other DE. (KDE 4 still doesn't look professional)
- Gnome lacked features and it didn't like the look and feel .
- E17, though in alpha stadium, promises to be the mac under linux DE's but I miss the usability.
- I've been using Fluxbox for half a year now and I find it to be the fastest, most configurable WM. But it's a WM so you you have to put a lot off work in it,  making it more functional.

But then there are other WM's like fvwm, icewm, openbox. I noticed a lot of people where very enthusiastic about fvwm and icewm.

So here's my question (finally ) what are the main differences between fluxbox, fvwm, openbox,.. What are their derivatives? Is their really a difference in speed between these WM's? What's most configurable? Biggest community/support? Pro's Cons...

I ask you this because, based on screenshots, they're all lookalikes

Greetz Daan

pressh

Developer/TU

From: Netherlands

Registered: 2005-08-14

Posts: 1,719

Re: What WM to use?

fvwm is a twm derivative and has not so much to do with *box like window managers. You can make fvwm look like whatever you want using plain text files. Fvwm is the most configurable among all window managers.

There is a thread comparing fluxbox and openbox here.

jase

Member

From: Finland

Registered: 2008-01-20

Posts: 25

Re: What WM to use?

I used fluxbox years ago (2004) so I don't know what has changed since (probably nothing major). Last fall I installed openbox to my laptop and when I compare these two I can't see any speed difference. They both are fast!

Flux has the bar that shows running applications, in openbox you have to use 3rd party application to have same functionality*. I haven't use any of those other WMs you mention but I guess that theres no or little difference between them.

I'd say stay with the flux if you have it configured the way you like.

*) From openbox wiki "There are many taskbar/panels around. Some examples are: fbpanel, pypanel, perlpanel, xfce4-panel (from XFCE), gnome-panel (from GNOME) and kicker (from KDE)."

---

http://www.archlinux.fi

peets

Member

From: Montreal

Registered: 2007-01-11

Posts: 936

Website

Re: What WM to use?

fvwm is where it's at for config-power, but I find the config language too unwieldy for my taste. I've settled with pekWM for a few months now. All configuration is done with text files; there are sane defaults; I get a lot of power, but not as much as fvwm, but my config files are pretty short. Windows can have "autoproperties", all keys and mouse buttons are configurable... it's not exactly as I'd like, but it does the job for now. I recommend it.

filenox

Member

From: Belgium

Registered: 2007-05-16

Posts: 117

Website

Re: What WM to use?

openbox + fbpanel is a very good and fast configuration.
so fluxbox + fbpanel is a very good and fast configuration to

only fbpanel is a little hard to configure, but it works fine after that.

- i'm using gnome + openbox now, because i wanted more configurationtools + support, and i stil is quite fast -

---

[b]|Blog[NL/BE]!

cry0x

Member

Registered: 2007-04-11

Posts: 91

Re: What WM to use?

I switched from Openbox to an XFCE environment. I'm much happier now.

---

Who is this doin' this synthetic type of alpha beta psychedelic funkin'?

blu3ness

Member

From: Edmonton, Canada

Registered: 2007-12-28

Posts: 169

Re: What WM to use?

happy with openbox, pypanel + conky makes life easier. I mainly use GTK apps, however.

---

Archlinux on Compaq Presario v5000 laptop

dunc

Member

From: Glasgow, UK

Registered: 2007-06-18

Posts: 559

Re: What WM to use?

I switched from Openbox to an XFCE environment. I'm much happier now.

I did the opposite. I wouldn't say I'm much happier (to be honest, I just fancied a change), but I like it.

---

0 Ok, 0:1

DonVla

Member

From: Bonn, Germany

Registered: 2007-06-07

Posts: 997

Re: What WM to use?

i would say they are all not so different in speed and layout.
the small things are the difference. fb has tabs, ob has pipe-menus.
ob has a brilliant keyboard+mouse integration. they interact in a very canonical way. fb has the same keyboard support, but less mouse support, though that may has changed in the later versions.
you can try pekwm. it's a mixture of both. it has tabs and pipe-menus . though configuration seems trickier.
however, i _really_ like openbox. i'm using it for 2.5-3 years now and it's so highly configurably taht it fits (my needs) now like a tailor-made suit.

vlad

exiguous

Member

Registered: 2007-11-11

Posts: 44

Re: What WM to use?

On my 7 year old PC, I notice a small difference in speed between Openbox and Fluxbox (Openbox is the faster one, obviously). On newer machines, you probably won't notice any difference.

I think the syntax of the Fluxbox configuration may be a little easier to follow when compared to the XML in Openbox. I'm not a big fan of XML, but I can deal with it. I'm also not sure I like the big honkin' rc file for Openbox. I like the more "modular" approach that Fluxbox uses. These are just small points and my tastes, however.

I do like that Openbox is standards compliant. I don't think Fluxbox is quite there yet (getting closer, I think).