I posted this very same question a few days ago, and after quite a bit of testing between the two, i found that they're both pretty much the same.... BUT, XFCE is a lot easier to use overall because you don't have to tweak so much or configure everything by hand.... it just works straight out of the box. It's a good compromise, and is very fast, even on older hardware. 
1 2011-03-23 16:37:21
Re: #! statler openbox vs xfce (17 replies, posted in Help & Support (Stable))
2 2011-03-17 15:46:52
Re: XFCE faster than Openbox? (24 replies, posted in CrunchBang Talk)
jeffreyC wrote:
Xfce 4 settings manager > desktop > icons change the setting to something other than none then to none (I also unchecked the boxes in default icons) you lose the icons on the desktop but get a WM style right click menu.
Got it, thanks for that. Works really well & is just what i'm after.
3 2011-03-16 22:09:38
Re: XFCE faster than Openbox? (24 replies, posted in CrunchBang Talk)
jeffreyC wrote:
You can set up Xfce for right click menu use, many of us do
That sounds interesting.... didn't know you could do that ..... Is that a native selection within XFCE or some kind of hack? Thanks for the info....
4 2011-03-16 19:40:14
Re: XFCE faster than Openbox? (24 replies, posted in CrunchBang Talk)
5dolla wrote:
to be totally honest i dont see a difference in speed between the two.... benchmarking may
be a different story. I just like xfce for the easy of use wen it comes to the menu.
Could be that "Speed" (Overall) is the wrong word to use? Maybe "Responsiveness" is a better word? This seems to be more noticeable to me on older/restricted/compromised hardware.
Personally, i prefer the Openbox right click menu over pretty much anything, but again, it's all down to choice. The more i'm using XFCE the more i'm getting used to it & liking it....
5 2011-03-16 19:36:54
Re: XFCE faster than Openbox? (24 replies, posted in CrunchBang Talk)
vrkalak wrote:
Many people believe that a Full-featured desktop environment like Xfce is bigger and clunkier than some other lightweight Desktop/Window Managers ... when in reality this is not the case.
Most users only have a distro like Xubuntu for comparison.
Indeed, and as i mentioned above, Xubuntu was indeed the last time that i used XFCE, with the exception of Zenwalk, which i love but for the life of me i cannot understand why they're still using LiLO!? Zenwalk is fast and snappy....
vrkalak wrote:
Xfce was designed to be a 'stand-alone' desktop environment ... and not installed on top of Gnome, as what Xubuntu does.
I thought that Xubuntu was JUST XFCE & apart from some Gnome deps etc, was purely XFCE?? I'll have to look into that.
vrkalak wrote:
Find an OS distro, that uses Xfce as a 'stand-alone' desktop environment and you will notice just how fast, simple and responsive a true light-weight desktop environment can be.
#!Crunchbang Statler (Xfce) and Debian 6 /Xfce are good examples of this.
And the new LinuxMint-Debian /Xfce is another example (not released yet)
No, but the latest Ubuntu based version of XFCE/Mint has just been released..... downloading right now to have a look in VB. Sorry, my bad.... in haste i read (Mistakenly) LXDE as XFCE.... 
Ooops..... still, the LXDE release is fine & dandy.
6 2011-03-16 19:31:52
Re: XFCE faster than Openbox? (24 replies, posted in CrunchBang Talk)
jeffreyC wrote:
Another option for network shares in Thunar is the Thunar shares plugin from Linux Mint Debian Edition.
The next Xfce Linux Mint will be Debian based
Thanks for the link... i've downloaded the deb & i'll give it a go just to see how it works.... be good to do it natively from Thunar if possible.
7 2011-03-15 21:09:19
Re: XFCE faster than Openbox? (24 replies, posted in CrunchBang Talk)
cchhrriiss121212 wrote:
Now you can use filezilla or gftp to browse the files from any other machine on the network, just put in the IP address + username + password of the server
More detail here:
https://help.ubuntu.com/10.04/servergui … erver.html
Hey, thanks for that.... i'm going to give it a go and see what happens. Sounds pretty straightforward though. I'll stick with gftp as i use it for work so know my way around it a little.
8 2011-03-15 21:06:28
Re: XFCE faster than Openbox? (24 replies, posted in CrunchBang Talk)
FiniteStateMachine wrote:
Many assume XFCE is much heavier then OB, but it really isn't. I think Xubuntu gave it a bad rap, as in that instance it was barely any better than GNOME. But when setup properly, it really is quite light. Ram usage is about the same, and besides the right click menu, responsiveness is equal.
That certainly seems to be the case. You're right about the Xubuntu thing because that's about the time i stopped using XFCE in general, when Xubuntu started getting "Heavier" quite a few years back.... haven't had much to do with it since and have always either used Fluxbox or Openbox on most machines, and any reasonably powered desktops i've stuck with Gnome.... but XFCE flies..... It's really great to see it working how i remember it working.
I'm not sure if it'll work as well on my eeePC 901 (Using XFCE) but i'm going to give it a go & see what happens.
9 2011-03-15 14:51:43
Re: XFCE faster than Openbox? (24 replies, posted in CrunchBang Talk)
rstrcogburn wrote:
The window manager function of XFCE that allows moving a window without rendering it until it's placed makes it seem faster on slow machines. A very nice feature.
I don't know if it's doing that here or not.... do you mean in the style of say, XP, where it just draws an empty rectangle until you let go of the mouse key, then it renders? If so, that's not what i've got here & it's still snappy as hell..... having said that, this laptop has a great graphics card so graphics has never been an issue..... I'm glad that you mentioned that though, as i may try installing CB on my netbook (eeePC 901) using XFCE just to see how it performs. I had CB (using Openbox) on it before, but as i mentioned earlier, i just kept getting permission problems etc with any USB storage device i plugged in, and rather than sort out what the problem is, i'll just stick another Distro on and try that instead.
But i'll give that a go...... Cheers.
10 2011-03-15 14:47:16
Re: XFCE faster than Openbox? (24 replies, posted in CrunchBang Talk)
cchhrriiss121212 wrote:
DJiNN wrote:snipola...
Now all i need is some way of achieving Network shares fairly easily?
I use vsftpd plus filezilla, takes about 5 min to setup. But I take it you want something integrated into your file manager?
Preferably but not too fussed really. If it works and allows me to easily connect to, and browse etc, other machines on the network, then that's perfect. Is there a "How To" guide anywhere? I'd like to read about it & see how it works first. Thanks for the heads up.... much appreciated.
11 2011-03-15 14:44:53
Re: XFCE faster than Openbox? (24 replies, posted in CrunchBang Talk)
Awebb wrote:
I don't see how Openbox is faster than XFCE or vice versa. I don't have a machine old enough to experience a real performance difference or a real impact on the desktop responsiveness. So the only relevant issue is how the desktop influences my work flow. Most users seem to choose a certain DM and adapt the DM typical habits.
Try to find the applications that suite you most and design your own DM.
This laptop is only about four years old (Core 2 Duo, 2gb Ram) and it's purely subjective i know, but i just expected the whole XFCE environment to be noticeably slower & glunkier and it turns out to be even snappier & more responsive than when i load an Openbox session. Stuff opens quicker, less hanging about when firing up apps and stuff like that.
With regards to DM's and designing my own setup. A while back i would have done just that, but time is limited at the moment so if something doesn't work too well, or to my liking, i won't spend too much time trying to get it to work.... i'll usually just swap it for something that works, hence my reference to Mint? But, i've always liked CB & keep coming back to it, mainly because of the minimalistic approach and also, now that it has a Debian base, because of the rolling release format. Plus it has a great user forum too... 
All in all i'm having a good time so far with XFCE.... early days i know, but i'll give it a few more, maybe a week or so & see how it fares. If it's not doing what i need then i guess i'll re-evaluate. Unfortunately, gone are the days when i would install a base system (Server install) and build up from there.... Just haven't the time or the inclination to do it anymore. 
12 2011-03-15 14:36:46
Re: XFCE faster than Openbox? (24 replies, posted in CrunchBang Talk)
taklertamas wrote:
To solve some parts of your problem:
And the most important: You must remove the thunar --daemon & -part from your autostart.sh!!
Thanks for the reply. Indeed, i'll probably end up doing something like that. I'd rather use just one file manager if possible, and Nautilus is fantastic, but i don't really want (or need) the whole of Gnome along with it. I know that i can just grab Nautilus & install that (Along with whatever deps etc it needs) but i'm very wary of going down that path because from past experience it's just caused me more problems, mainly due to integration.
So i think i'll stick with Thunar for now and see how it goes..... there's always Midnight Commander as well. Thanks for the tip about removing it from Autostart. If i do choose PCmanFm then i'll remember to do that.
13 2011-03-15 11:06:56
Topic: XFCE faster than Openbox? (24 replies, posted in CrunchBang Talk)
It's been a long long while since i've posted on this forum, and even longer still since i've used XFCE. Always loved XFCE when i first came across it, and used it for quite a while, until i found the likes of Fluxbox/OpenBox etc, then came the never ending quest for the ultimate distro/setup & trying to get a system that just works without all the other stuff getting in the way.
Many times in this journey have i started using CB (64 bit version) only to switch at some point to something else (Again & again) mainly because of the shortcomings of a lightweight DE such as Openbox.
Having the same problems here recently, using CB64 with Openbox, and all works well until it comes to USB drives, Keys etc. For some reason they just never seem to work properly for me in Openbox.... there's always some kind of Permission problems etc.
Anyway, this latest batch prompted me to install XFCE, rather than just blitz the system and install another OS..... and i'm absolutely amazed!! HOW, can XFCE (In it's current form) be just as fast, if not FASTER, than the much loved Openbox et al??? I'm speechless!
OK, the footprint is probably bigger, but i don't mind that too much if it means i have a flexible/responsive system, and that's just exactly what this has given me. So much so that i broke my own vow of "Forum Silence" to write about it here.......
So apologies for ranting on about something that's probably so trivial and obvious to many, but again, i haven't used XFCE for ages and i'm very happy to see that it's still light & snappy as ever.... perhaps even more so, which is saying something considering that it's matured in the intervening years and has obviously grown somewhat?
Now all i need is some way of achieving Network shares fairly easily? Was always a problem for me with XFCE and looks like it still is even today..... shame. Oh, & why Thunar still doesn't have tabbed browsing i'll never know..... i thought that would have changed by now, especially in the light of all the other changes in XFCE etc. Can't have it all i guess...... PCmanFM will have to stay awhile longer i guess.
14 2010-01-15 11:20:01
Re: determined and confused... (2 replies, posted in Help & Support (Stable))
Hi there.
Sorry to hear about your #! install problems. Can i ask why you're trying to install on usb rather than directly onto the HD/SSD or a partition thereof? I've never tried the usb installer in #! so i can't help you there. I have however, installed #! on quite a few machines (both x86 & 64 bit, and apart from various small problems with some strange hardware, it's always installed fine.
Cheers.....
DJiNN
15 2009-12-23 21:13:33
Topic: Configuration Programs crashing!! (0 replies, posted in Help & Support (Stable))
Hi all, Merry Christmas!
So far, my 64bit #! has been running fine, but just lately (last few weeks/months) i've noticed that whenever i go to use something like "User Prefs" (lxappearance?) it starts to run, then just bombs out, drops to the text login shell, says something about x11 not being able to do something, then going to the SLiM login where it sits for 10 seconds then auto-login kicks in.
My apologies for the murky description, but it happens so fast that i can never read all of what it says. Has anyone hear experienced this problem before? Some programs work fine (Flock, PCManFM etc) but any config progs just do the above??
Cheers....
DJiNN
16 2009-11-06 12:21:37
Re: crunchbang 9.10 release (225 replies, posted in Feedback & Suggestions)
ulpianus wrote:
I do not like very much the idea of Debian. If the problem is the cycle of Ubuntu, why not an Ubuntu with 6 months in retard. I mean when Ubuntu have 10.4 Crunchbang made 9.10. Or what about a crunchbang with a 1 year release maybe on july.
Good idea ulpianus, but somehow i don't think many people would want that. Most people want the latest, greatest, all singing all dancing packages/releases etc, so being 6 months or a year behind could be a Major "Put off" for many people. For sure it would be stable, and if Stability is what you need then that's great! IMHO though, people seem to want both Stability and the latest packages/releases. That's kinda hard to pull off, but Debian testing seems to do it rather well, as do Arch i think.
Great idea nonetheless though.
17 2009-11-06 12:17:06
Re: crunchbang 9.10 release (225 replies, posted in Feedback & Suggestions)
Raffles10 wrote:
Sid was never meant to be the basis for a desktop system, it's called unstable for a reason. If you like to live on the edge and enjoy fixing frequent breakages then Sid might be fun to play with, but for anyone who wants their computer to boot every time they turn it on Sid is best avoided.
There are projects like Sidux that have tried to turn Sid into a stable usable system, anyone who's tried Sidux will know how unstable it can still be.
For most people Testing will be as far as they want to go with Debian and will provide the best desktop experience.
+1 for the move to Deb!
I also agree with Raffles with regards to "Debian sid". "sid" is incredibly fast, but boy when it breaks, it breaks good! I have tried both the normal sidux releases and also turned my antiX box into a "sid Machine". It was great while everything worked, but it always ended up getting borked one way or another.
Debian Testing is good..... easy to update, fairly cutting edge & plenty of support & advice when needed. As has been said here before, check out "antiX" for a really sleek Deb distro. I've been using antiX on my main machine for a couple of years now, and it's always been 100%!!
18 2009-09-11 16:24:11
Re: Bizarre "I am alive!" appearing on browsers (36 replies, posted in Help & Support (Stable))
teamsdf10 wrote:
I don't think my computer is possessed... although XP still resides on the other partition!
Could be something to do with the upcoming game of the same name.... maybe some kind of Viral campaign?
19 2009-09-08 15:48:35
Re: Tint2 systray issue (8 replies, posted in Help & Support (Stable))
I'm don't know how to correct your problem, but i'm sure someone will give you some help soon.
In the meantime, here's some links to some of the tint2 help topics etc currently available here. You may find something useful there? Ooi, are you using the tint package from the repos or the svn version? (svn may be a better choice, and certainly worth a try)
Good luck.
20 2009-08-25 15:17:09
Re: How can I alt-tab across all apps (even those on other desktops) (8 replies, posted in Help & Support (Stable))
Just a thought, but what about just clicking the middle mouse button (on the desktop), which brings up a list of all desktops and all apps etc?
21 2009-08-25 15:13:23
Re: A few issues ? (2 replies, posted in Help & Support (Stable))
iDIEDaLONGtimeAGO wrote:
I've been hooked on #! but there are a few annoying issues. Firstly if i use PCManFM to overwrite lots of files, and select the Overwrite All option when it pops up, the process fails. But if i choose "overwrite" and do it one by one, it succeeds. I tried thunar as well and there's no issues in it, but i want to stick to pcmanfm mainly due to tabbed browsing. I checked the necessary permissions and they were alright. This error stays even if i open as root.
I've had similar problems with PCManFM, both on #! and on antiX. Simplest solution for me, was just to exit PCManFM, then either run "killall pcmanfm" in a terminal (or just run htop to make sure it's not still running) then restart PCManFM and all is usually OK again (At least for a while). I think it's a bug in PCManFM.
22 2009-08-18 20:11:45
Re: Specific Keys in rc.xml (2 replies, posted in Help & Support (Stable))
23 2009-08-15 19:33:13
Re: BlackBox User here, converting to Linux FINALLY! (7 replies, posted in Introductions)
Hi CheekyBangBang, welcome to #!. After reading your great intro, i don't think you'll have many problems with getting your styles & themes etc into #!. Both the boxes (Flux & Open) work really well on #!.
Have fun.
24 2009-08-15 19:27:39
Re: xcompmgr start at startup [resolved] (5 replies, posted in Help & Support (Stable))
Hi MattDobson, welcome to #1.
Right click on the desktop (to bring up the menu) then go to Preferences/OpenBox Config/Autostart.sh <-- Select this
This will open the Autostart.sh for editing.... Scroll down until you find the line that says
#xcompmgr-crunchbang --startstop & and remove the hash "#" from the start of that line, then save and restart and all should be well.
25 2009-08-15 13:29:58
Re: NTFS recovery [Solved] (24 replies, posted in Help & Support (Stable))
Sorry to hear about the Grub issue. FYi, here is a great site for "Grub Stuff" that may be of use. It's just a guess, but most of the time that i have Grub issues, is when i've changed the Partitions in some way (ie: Installing a new Distro on say, sda4 and using a different file system).
It seems to be something to do with the new UUID's that are used in fstab and Grub. This site has some info regarding this. It should be recoverable as long as your partitions are in good order, which they probably are, otherwise testdisk/photorec would have mentioned it and possibly tried to put it right.