[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Window managers-which one?



On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:55:40 -0800
Marc Shapiro <mshapiro_42@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Douglas Tutty wrote:
> 
> >On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 03:40:48PM +0000, Clive Menzies wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>On (31/10/06 14:51), B. Hoffmann wrote:
> >>    
> >>
> >>>I' ve been installing purely a base sytem this time as opposed to before
> >>>always going with the default install with Gnome.
> >>>      
> >>>
> > > 
> >  
> >
> >>>Also for example icewm and fvwm seem to be both window managers and
> >>>DE's?
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Since getting into Debian I've progressed down the scale (of bloat) from
> >>KDE to Xfce to Enlightenment to Fluxbox.  I'm very happy now but guess I
> >>may get bored and try something else but fluxbox is lean mean but pretty
> >>functional.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >I like basic functionality, configurability, without bloat; I have been
> >running a 486 for years...
> >
> >I use icewm.  It does everything I want without the struggle of adding
> >features to a less featurful wm and is low on resource usage.  It must
> >be fast because it doesn't get in the way on the 486.
> >  
> >
> I have been using fvwm since I started with linux and Debian about 8 
> years ago.  That was on a 486/33MHz with 12MB of memory.  I installed 
> Debian on a 128MB removable disk.  I have used KDE on a few occaisions, 
> but I generally prefer a clear, uncluttered screen.  I also don't care 
> for all of the extra processes that get started by KDE apps, even when 
> you are not running KDE. 
> 

One of the main reasons I don't run any kde apps. There are a few nice ones but
if you start one up you then need to kill off 7 others manually when you close it.



Reply to: