Re: Window managers

[Paul Warren <pdw ferret lmh ox ac uk>]

On Thu, 29 Apr 1999, Nathan Clegg wrote:

> What's so great about WindowMaker if it isn't the dock and clips?  I
> haven't used it much and am generally interested in what could possibly
> make it better than enlightenment.

OK, here is why _I_ prefer Window Maker.  Please don't start a massive "my
wm is better than yours" war on this list.

- It is faster.
- It is more "polished" (although E is catching up rapidly).  It is rock
solid stable, and has been for ages.  <flamebait>If we were using the
gnome numbering scheme it'd probably be on a 2.1 release by
now</flamebait>:)
- It looks good & smart, without going OTT.  Careful application of
gradients is just as (more) effective than overuse of overcustomisable
themes, IMHO.
- Can be used effectively from the keyboard
- Reads config whilst running (no restarts necessary) (I think E does
this)
- The WINGs stuff is smart (a small toolkit used by WM with a Next feel)
- There are some really neat applets available for it.
- The authors have a very good eye for feature bloat, and good judgement
on what should be a compile-time option, and what should be a run-time
option.

I could spend hours preparing the most beautiful theme and screenshot in
E, or I could spend a few minutes changing my gradients around in WM, and
then get on with using it.

However, I feel that both of these excellent window managers are
compromises when it comes to Gnome.  I feel very strongly that there
should be a window manager that is very lightweight, but is fully
integrated with the Gnome/GTK look and feel.  Sure people should still be
able to use any wm they fancy, but I think an "integrated feel" one should
be an option too.  For E or WM to become this would be wrong, and a
compromise of their design goals (E's cutting edgeness and beauty, WM's
NeXT look & feel).

yours,

Paul