CrunchBang Linux Forums » Feedback & Suggestions » change the WM
rigosantana3 tried jwm and thinks its faster than Openbox. Hence this thread.
There's no conversion going on, I think most people agree openbox works best for #!. Nothing bad about looking at alternatives though. Plus it seems like a lot of the people using #! are tinkerers and this is a good thread to fuel that.
Amen 
kelean wrote:If a WM change were to happen and I hope it doesnt. I am very happy with openbox. I would like icewm to be added to the mix. It is light and very customizable through config files. Or you can get a gui for that. I used it on Absolute linux and was very nice.
Awesome wm is pretty cool once you get use to the commands. I have used it before and will use it again.
Kelean.
The problem I would have with icewm is it brings a few of its own things with it and it doesn't have any clear advantages over Openbox. If a change was to happen let's not make it a change for the sake of change.
I do not want to change from openbox. I have it set up to my liking and am use to it now. My point is that for me icewm works better than jwm or lxde.
I am farly confident that Philip is not going to change any time soon. I just wanted to put my opinion out there.
Kelean.
I see your point iggykoopa and i (like pretty much everyone else) tinker with everything but at the same time i have fallen completely in love with openbox and #!Crunchbang. As a matter of fact this very Distro started me on openbox in the first place. I am and always will be a STRONG follower to #!Crunchbang!
I'm fairly sure that if corenominal thought that changing the wm was a good idea it would have been mentioned by now as a something to investigate. That said these types of threads are great as they allow our community to explore new ideas and concepts. This I think is what crunchbang is all about 
I don't get it. It's easy enough to change window manager if you want to, and openbox is very easy to configure, pretty "standard" in looks and operation, and offers a nice set of features (extensive k/b shortcuts, "undecorate" in the window menu, etc). ie a pretty good default.
What's the deal with "lightweight"?
Nearly all window managers are tiny anyway. Is there really much performance difference between the simpler ones, I don't think so - I think the "performance" actually comes from forcing you to use the keyboard, which is a lot quicker than the mouse if your apps are mainly keyboard driven too.
I agree there is a "conceptual" divide between window managers that are primarily manual (eg openbox), and those that are "computer enhanced", I guess tiling managers, devilspie, etc come in this category - I've heard it described as writing assembler, vs using a compiler.
Last edited by jackbang (2009-07-28 03:39:43)
Joe's is way too Windows 95 for me to work with for an overly long period of time. It's the default in Puppy (which I like as a quality low impact distro) but isn't up to the task of being the main WM on a modern PC. The setup now with Openbox is, to me, an ideal combo of lightweight (when compared to the big boys of Gnome and KDE) and fully functional and attractive (moreso than the smaller distros like Puppy and DSL that use Joe's and IceWM).
If anything, I would like to see some tinkering with Enlightenment. I haven't given it a long look at, but what I've seen has looked sharp.
Little known facts, Episode 103: The english wikipedia article lists #! for beeing openbox based.
I started using #! because it seems more simplistic and out of your face than standard *buntu. I like it just the way it is clean, informative, but enough to make you not feel like you are ssh'd into your own machine.
Posts [ 26 to 34 of 34 ]
CrunchBang Linux Forums » Feedback & Suggestions » change the WM
Forums powered by PunBB. Hosted by Linode.
Copyright © CrunchBang Linux.
Proudly powered by Debian GNU/Linux.
Debian is a registered trademark of Software in the Public Interest, Inc.