RE: dumbass wm question
so is there a full-on desktop that's pretty tiny?
if i want to know what time/day it is i can look at the clock on my wall etc
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephan Engelke [mailto:engelke@math.uni-hamburg.de]
> Sent: 19 May 2000 10:06
> To: Dominic Blythe
> Subject: Re: dumbass wm question
>
>
> Hi Dominic,
>
> Dominic Blythe writes:
> > can somebody please explain the relationship between desktop,
> > window-manager, filemanager, X etc? i jus' don' get it.
>
> OK, let's start with the easy part: A filemanager is a program which
> helps you to manage your files (delete, copy, remove,...) Well known
> from the dark ages of DOS are e.g. the Norton Commander. Or more
> recently the Windows Explorer. The Midnight Commander ist an
> example of a filemanager running on UNIX systems.
> (The premier filemanager of course being the "cp-rm-mv-ln" combo :-)
>
> X, or the X-Server is a program which, overly simplified, enables the
> use of graphics on the screen as opposed to a pure text console. It
> puts the screen in a graphics mode and enables other programs, such as
> a windowmanager (e.g. sawmill or Window Maker) or a terminal emulator
> (e.g. xterm), or any other program.
>
> A window manager is a piece of software which provides functionality
> to drag windows around on the screen, to resize them, to close them,
> in short which enables any kind of handling a window.
> Starting an xterm will give you a window but without any boder - that
> what the windowmanager does for you. It's the "look & feel" part of
> X-windows.
>
> KDE and GNOME are so called desktops or rather desktop environments.
> They provide you with a windowmanager, a filenmanager and
> some other nifty things like a task bar, and such, some personal
> productivity software, all with a consistent look and feel and a
> consistent (sometimes even intuitive) behavior.
>
> Hope this helps a little.
>
> Cheers -- Stephan
> --
> Stephan Engelke
> engelke@math.uni-hamburg.de
> *** "He's dead, Jim. You grab his wallet, I'll grab
> his tricorder." ***
>
Reply to: