Re: efficiency of windows managers
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 01:50:35PM -0600, Javier Vasquez wrote:
> On 9/27/07, Manu Hack <manuhack@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I have a general question which I got when trying out different
> > windows managers/desktop environments. When I try to use windowmaker
> > (I wanted to make my computer faster as it's getting old), it
> > certainly is fast for initialization. But after that when around
> > 10-15 windows are opened and distributed in different workspaces, I
> > found moving around different workspaces and windows pretty slow (I
> > compared with KDE which I usually use.) and thus I still decided to
> > stick with KDE for the moment. Maybe the comparison is not fair as
> > KDE definitely needs longer time to initialize. But my question is,
> > is there a reason for that?
> >
> Don't know about windowMaker, but you might try:
>
> fluxbox
> icewm
> pekwm
> fvwm2
>
> You might find some pretty light, and some besides offering lots of
> fun and good looking features... I use fluxbox and a machine with
> 512M main, and 64M ati-rage is performing pretty well...
>
I found that the litest is icewm. Works great on my P-II-133 with 64 MB
ram and on my 486DX4-100 with 32 MB ram. The 486 wouldn't run Etch so
it runs great with OpenBSD. Woody also runs great on it. Iceweasel
takes a long time to render.
Doug.
Reply to: