Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Wed 30 Jul 2014, 03:08
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Additional Software (PETs, n' stuff) » Desktop
Which Window Manager to Use?
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 3 [45 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2, 3 Next

What's your favorite WM?
JWM
48%
 48%  [ 24 ]
ICE WM
28%
 28%  [ 14 ]
Scwm
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Sawfish
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Metacity
2%
 2%  [ 1 ]
After Step
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Blackbox
4%
 4%  [ 2 ]
OLVWM
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Enlightenment
16%
 16%  [ 8 ]
CTWM
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
ZWM
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Haze
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Total Votes : 49

Author Message
Drone-87401


Joined: 03 Jan 2010
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Thu 14 Jan 2010, 10:28    Post subject:  Which Window Manager to Use?
Subject description: A discussion on what the most light-weight window manager?
 

With virtually dozens & dozens of window managers available, how do we pick the right one? Whether you are looking for speed or flare, there is surely a window manager to meet your needs. However, I am trying to investigate what the collective favorite window manager is that way it may be included in Pupbuntu (official release date set for 2-14-2010.) I am looking for the blunt input of the community.

Pupbuntu is going to be geared towards the low-end of the spectrum and will be capable of running on a 133MHz PC (or so we hope.) So I am leaning towards JWM right now set in front of the XFCE4 desktop. However, I am just trying to figure out what the general public wants to see. Please feel free to select your favorite window manager (and if you don't see yours feel free to leave a comment.) Thank you so much for your cooperation in helping us design a better product for the Linux community.


Ronald L. Harsh

_________________
// A word from our sponsors..
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
main()
{
cout << "Linux Rocks! \n";
return 0;
}


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
jemimah


Joined: 26 Aug 2009
Posts: 4309
Location: Tampa, FL

PostPosted: Thu 14 Jan 2010, 15:45    Post subject:  

The general public wants choices! Make it easy to switch.

My favorite: Flwm. Get it here: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=47192
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Drone-87401


Joined: 03 Jan 2010
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 01:12    Post subject:  Switching WM.
Subject description: We are trying to make it easier.
 

jemimah wrote:
The general public wants choices! Make it easy to switch.
My favorite: Flwm. Get it here: http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=47192


We are trying to make it easier to switch your Window Manager. We are going to include the top three window managers (as to be determined by this survey) built in to our system. They will be easier to change by simply using the login window and choosing what type of system you want to use. Thank you for your input, it is very much appreciated. and I will surely check out flwm.

Note: To all the FLWM users please PM or post here with your vote as I cannot add it to the poll survey! And thanks to our friend for suggesting it!

_________________
// A word from our sponsors..
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
main()
{
cout << "Linux Rocks! \n";
return 0;
}


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
disciple

Joined: 20 May 2006
Posts: 6426
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 01:57    Post subject:  

Choice is good, but I think the general public also wants a capable, reliable and easy to use default... and obviously for Puppy it has to be lightweight Smile

Quote:
and will be capable of running on a 133MHz PC (or so we hope.)

If you are aiming at really old machines like that you should forget things like xfce and openbox, and choose something with really minimal ram usage, like jwm. In fact I'd consider making a custom jwm build, with support for some of the optional libraries disabled.

Quote:
So I am leaning towards JWM right now set in front of the XFCE4 desktop.

IMNAAHO the only possible reason for running xfce with its memory hogging libraries is to use its window manager and panel, which seem to be reliable and nice enough to use, and actually have decent support for EWMH... e.g. utility windows. Why on earth would you want to run it without them? For Thunar? You do know that you can have Thunar without xfce, don't you?

BTW, do you know that forum surveys are pretty much meaningless?
Plenty of people can probably tell you the most popular WMs (which could actually just be a reflection of which ones have the most publicity, not which ones are best). - I suspect JWM and Icewm are most popular, and possibly xfce, due to the NOP puplet. I think if I were choosing three to put in a puplet it would be them, too. XFCE is the lightest of the desktop environments, and AFAIK there are no lightweight alternatives that support utility window hints and stuff.

_________________
DEATH TO SPREADSHEETS
- - -
Classic Puppy quotes
- - -
Beware the demented serfers!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
ttuuxxx


Joined: 05 May 2007
Posts: 10747
Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 02:24    Post subject:  

I don't believe for a second that xfce is lighter that jwm+rox or icewm+rox, it needs dbus, plus thunar, plus, panel, gui, it has a lot of deps. actually if you want lite, think gtk1, gtk1 rox is much faster than gtk2, gtk2+glib2 has many deps, for a 133 to work fast and stable, I would ditch gtk2, you can even download the latest Seamonkey compiled as gtk1.

Results GTK1.2 Deps
# ldd /libgtk-1.2.so.0
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000)
libgmodule-1.2.so.0 => not found
libglib-1.2.so.0 => not found
libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0xb76ed000)
libXi.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXi.so.6 (0xb76e0000)
libXext.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXext.so.6 (0xb76d3000)
libX11.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libX11.so.6 (0xb75d6000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0xb75ae000)
libgdk-1.2.so.0 => not found
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb746d000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb77e5000)
libxcb.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libxcb.so.1 (0xb7458000)
libXau.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXau.so.6 (0xb7455000)

Results GTK2.0 Deps
# ldd libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0.1600.1
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000)
libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0xb731c000)
libXinerama.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXinerama.so.1 (0xb7319000)
libXi.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXi.so.6 (0xb730d000)
libXcursor.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXcursor.so.1 (0xb7305000)
libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 (0xb72f0000)
libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 (0xb72e7000)
libXcomposite.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXcomposite.so.1 (0xb72e4000)
libXext.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXext.so.6 (0xb72d7000)
libXdamage.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXdamage.so.1 (0xb72d4000)
libXfixes.so.3 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXfixes.so.3 (0xb72ce000)
libatk-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libatk-1.0.so.0 (0xb72b7000)
libcairo.so.2 => /usr/lib/libcairo.so.2 (0xb725e000)
libpixman-1.so.0 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libpixman-1.so.0 (0xb7213000)
libpng12.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpng12.so.0 (0xb71f6000)
libXrender.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXrender.so.1 (0xb71ed000)
libX11.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libX11.so.6 (0xb70f0000)
libXau.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXau.so.6 (0xb70ed000)
libXdmcp.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 (0xb70e8000)
libgio-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgio-2.0.so.0 (0xb7086000)
libpangoft2-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpangoft2-1.0.so.0 (0xb706b000)
libpango-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 (0xb7037000)
libfontconfig.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libfontconfig.so.1 (0xb700f000)
libfreetype.so.6 => /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 (0xb6faa000)
libz.so.1 => /lib/libz.so.1 (0xb6f9a000)
libexpat.so.1 => /usr/lib/libexpat.so.1 (0xb6f7d000)
libgobject-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 (0xb6f5a000)
libgmodule-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 (0xb6f57000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0xb6f53000)
libglib-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0xb6eb2000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0xb6e8a000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb6d4a000)
libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0xb6c60000)
libXrandr.so.2 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXrandr.so.2 (0xb6c59000)
libxcb.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libxcb.so.1 (0xb6c44000)
libresolv.so.2 => /lib/libresolv.so.2 (0xb6c30000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb7711000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0xb6c22000)
ttuuxxx

_________________
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games Smile

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
disciple

Joined: 20 May 2006
Posts: 6426
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 02:44    Post subject:  

Ttuuxxx wrote:
I don't believe for a second that xfce is lighter that jwm+rox or icewm+rox

Is that in response to this?
disciple wrote:
XFCE is the lightest of the desktop environments

Of course XFCE is much heavier than jwm + rox (or similar). That's what I was saying - it is much heavier and therefore not good for old hardware. It is lighter than other desktop environments - KDE and Gnome.

_________________
DEATH TO SPREADSHEETS
- - -
Classic Puppy quotes
- - -
Beware the demented serfers!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Drone-87401


Joined: 03 Jan 2010
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 03:02    Post subject: @disciple
Subject description: WM
 

Well actually I am working on a rebuild of JWM. Personally I am making the XFCE4 system only as an alternative build (it's not going to be in the lightweight distro.) I currently use OpenBox+LPanel right now on the system I'm on (and I like it.) I am not trying to make the main distro heavy or anything like that (I personally feel its a little ridiculous to make puppy w/XFCE4 and load it with bloatware which makes it 600+MB.) Puppy was designed to be fast and I do agree the full XFCE4 would surely slow my distro down. But different strokes for different folks eh'? I like the way a nice simple WM operates (without hogging all of the resources,) I mean after all that is kind of the whole point of why puppy is here. Thank you disciple for all of the technical specs and input, it just seems that choosing three or four WM to include is a tough one to pull of (if you intend to keep the users happy.)

I love XFCE4 & KDA, hell even GNome. However, I do not think that the general public wants a distro built around these (using puppy anyways.) I do however plan to build a KDE & Gnome alternative though for those daring enough to use it! I really like the OpenBox so I am thinking that along with LPanel will be the defaulted WM, and the user can always use my simple application to choose another WM of their liking.

Thank you all for the great tips and advice that you are giving. You are all really shedding some light on my wonderful dilemma.

_________________
// A word from our sponsors..
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
main()
{
cout << "Linux Rocks! \n";
return 0;
}


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
ttuuxxx


Joined: 05 May 2007
Posts: 10747
Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 03:06    Post subject:  

disciple wrote:
Ttuuxxx wrote:
I don't believe for a second that xfce is lighter that jwm+rox or icewm+rox

Is that in response to this?
disciple wrote:
XFCE is the lightest of the desktop environments

Of course XFCE is much heavier than jwm + rox (or similar). That's what I was saying - it is much heavier and therefore not good for old hardware. It is lighter than other desktop environments - KDE and Gnome.


Ok if you put it that way:)
what about? http://equinox-project.org/ I've compiled it in the past, its small and lite.
ttuuxxx

_________________
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games Smile

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Drone-87401


Joined: 03 Jan 2010
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 03:07    Post subject:  

ttuuxxx wrote:

...
Results GTK2.0 Deps
# ldd libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0.1600.1
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000)
libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0xb731c000)
libXinerama.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXinerama.so.1 (0xb7319000)
libXi.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXi.so.6 (0xb730d000)
libXcursor.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXcursor.so.1 (0xb7305000)
libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 (0xb72f0000)
libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 (0xb72e7000)
libXcomposite.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXcomposite.so.1 (0xb72e4000)
libXext.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXext.so.6 (0xb72d7000)
libXdamage.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXdamage.so.1 (0xb72d4000)
libXfixes.so.3 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXfixes.so.3 (0xb72ce000)
libatk-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libatk-1.0.so.0 (0xb72b7000)
libcairo.so.2 => /usr/lib/libcairo.so.2 (0xb725e000)
libpixman-1.so.0 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libpixman-1.so.0 (0xb7213000)
libpng12.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpng12.so.0 (0xb71f6000)
libXrender.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXrender.so.1 (0xb71ed000)
libX11.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libX11.so.6 (0xb70f0000)
libXau.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXau.so.6 (0xb70ed000)
libXdmcp.so.6 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 (0xb70e8000)
libgio-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgio-2.0.so.0 (0xb7086000)
libpangoft2-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpangoft2-1.0.so.0 (0xb706b000)
libpango-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 (0xb7037000)
libfontconfig.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libfontconfig.so.1 (0xb700f000)
libfreetype.so.6 => /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 (0xb6faa000)
libz.so.1 => /lib/libz.so.1 (0xb6f9a000)
libexpat.so.1 => /usr/lib/libexpat.so.1 (0xb6f7d000)
libgobject-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 (0xb6f5a000)
libgmodule-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 (0xb6f57000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0xb6f53000)
libglib-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0xb6eb2000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0xb6e8a000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb6d4a000)
libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0xb6c60000)
libXrandr.so.2 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libXrandr.so.2 (0xb6c59000)
libxcb.so.1 => /usr/X11R7/lib/libxcb.so.1 (0xb6c44000)
libresolv.so.2 => /lib/libresolv.so.2 (0xb6c30000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb7711000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0xb6c22000)
ttuuxxx


And now that is one hell of a list ttuuxxx! Thanks for those great resources, and this will surely help me in my quest to make yet another little puppy! Oh by the way kind sir, I submit to you a S/S of Pupbuntu running the XFCE4 environment (and let me tell ya' @ 133MHz the load time was less than appealing.)


_________________
// A word from our sponsors..
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
main()
{
cout << "Linux Rocks! \n";
return 0;
}


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
battleshooter


Joined: 14 May 2008
Posts: 1060
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 03:11    Post subject:  

I'm just a huge sucker for Icewm. Can't live without the command line in the taskbar. If I use other WM, I have to add it as a key combination using Gexec. I like the ease of adding shortcuts, themes, and tweaks but that might just be because I know my way around it.

Sometimes I do use other WMs, but that's just for an occasional change in scenery, or for novelty. Smile

Battleshooter
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Drone-87401


Joined: 03 Jan 2010
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 03:20    Post subject: @battleshooter
Subject description: yep
 

Yeah, gotta love the simplicity of IceWM, it is truly one of the greats as far as speed, user friendliness and efficiency are concerned!
_________________
// A word from our sponsors..
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
main()
{
cout << "Linux Rocks! \n";
return 0;
}


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
ttuuxxx


Joined: 05 May 2007
Posts: 10747
Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 03:55    Post subject: Re: @battleshooter
Subject description: yep
 

Drone-87401 wrote:
Yeah, gotta love the simplicity of IceWM, it is truly one of the greats as far as speed, user friendliness and efficiency are concerned!


You left one out, the most important, The lite themes, :)In the past I made so revolutionary themes for it Smile the largest was 20kb extract because I used system links on one main theme and reused images http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/puppylinux/pet_packages-4/icewm-402-v9.pet came with 5 custom themes, a shutdown script, xdg template, blinky, freememory applet, absvolume, parcellite, refresh menus, ttuuxxxview, libImlib2, icewm, and it was 611kb, 100kb smaller than the main repo's icewm. It took a lot of work to get that one so small, but the end result was really impressive. lol
ttuuxxx

_________________
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games Smile

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
disciple

Joined: 20 May 2006
Posts: 6426
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 04:06    Post subject:  

Light window managers benchmarked here not too long ago. I think the only widely used ones are JWM and Icewm... I compared some of the popular window managers myself a while back and concluded that Openbox + Lxpanel wasn't really light, which will be why they didn't include it.
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?mode=attach&id=22500

_________________
DEATH TO SPREADSHEETS
- - -
Classic Puppy quotes
- - -
Beware the demented serfers!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
disciple

Joined: 20 May 2006
Posts: 6426
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 04:24    Post subject: other desktop environments  

Ttuuxxx wrote:
what about? http://equinox-project.org/ I've compiled it in the past, its small and lite.

Yes, I tend to ignore others like it because development is so slow and I can't find any particular reason to use them rather than a combination of apps like JWM and rox.

_________________
DEATH TO SPREADSHEETS
- - -
Classic Puppy quotes
- - -
Beware the demented serfers!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Drone-87401


Joined: 03 Jan 2010
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Fri 15 Jan 2010, 04:35    Post subject:  Equinox
Subject description: Check it out....
 

Good link: http://equinox-project.org that looks promising. Perhaps I'll giver 'er a go later on and see what that's all about. It looks a lot like JWM, perhaps if it is indeed lighter and just as good - it might be something to run with. 20Kb theme? That's incredible! Very light-weight indeed. Nah, I just use the OpenBox + Lxpanel because I like it - truth be told there are many, many more WM that I'm sure we might be overlooking, it's gonna take some time (that's for sure.)

So do ya'll gents say that rox is the lightest (whilst maintaining good usability) file manager? Was thinking of Thunar but damn, that's slow lol.

_________________
// A word from our sponsors..
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
main()
{
cout << "Linux Rocks! \n";
return 0;
}


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 3 [45 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2, 3 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Additional Software (PETs, n' stuff) » Desktop
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.1109s ][ Queries: 15 (0.0053s) ][ GZIP on ]