On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 00:10 +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote: > On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 08:57:27PM -0500, Joel Ewy wrote: > > > > For what it's worth, fvwm would probably still fall under the category of > > a Window Manager rather than a full-blown desktop environment like KDE or > > Gnome. But yes, it does do pretty well on low-resource computers. I > > still use fvwm-95 on an old '486 laptop with 20M RAM running RedHat 5.1 > > and I suspect it would also be a good choice on a '68k machine. > > I am using fvwm on my 2GHz Athlon and P4 machines with 1GB RAM each. Do you > have to switch to a memory wasting wm once you have a faster machine? fvwm > rocks, unfortunately the current version in testing does not like my config > anymore that I started writing 10 years ago. So maybe I have to switch to > gnome, which already can do a few things, that fvwm can do, or start reading > about what changed in the new versions. Until I decide, I am keeping an old > fvwm version around. What are your primary apps? -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B "Why do we have to hide from the police, Daddy?" "Because we use vi, son. They use emacs."
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part