WM or Desktop on Debian?
Submitted by Anonymous on Sun 28 Jan 2007
| FVWM |
   8% | 161 votes |
| KDE |
33% | 621 votes |
| GNOME |
32% | 614 votes |
| IceWM |
2% | 53 votes |
| XFCE |
11% | 209 votes |
| Enlightenment |
2% | 45 votes |
| Other WM |
7% | 139 votes |
| Other Desktop |
2% | 38 votes |
| Total 1880 votes |
Posted by Anonymous (85.216.xx.xx) on Sun 28 Jan 2007 at 16:08
I use KDE because of lack of good alternatives. I mainly open mozilla for web and mail and konsole for all the rest of my work.
I am working on a solution that really fits my needs, for none of the above mentioned and more do so.
cb
I am working on a solution that really fits my needs, for none of the above mentioned and more do so.
cb
[ Parent ]
I take it you use your keyboard way more then your mouse.
Maybe you can have a look at ion3. Really productive if you are a touchtyper.
Maybe you can have a look at ion3. Really productive if you are a touchtyper.
[ Parent ]
ion3 is hot. i use it and love it. problems do sometimes arise, though, since it really is a different paradigm. many x programs don't properly conform to the standards, and therefore have some difficulties. most work fine, though.
exterminate the rodents!
exterminate the rodents!
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (85.216.xx.xx) on Sun 28 Jan 2007 at 17:50
It's not a question of keyboard vs. mouse. I need a desktop which supports both adequately. I did review ion2 and ion3.
My problem is spread around the whole system. It starts with the filesystems, includes the window manager and ends with the applications.
I look at my system as information in a given state and this information gets altered by certain rules and after that it's still consistent information and not a heap of unrelated data.
My problem is mainly, that all these systems put the logic and management of the data stored on the machine into the hands of the user, supplying more or less helpful tools to manage it, though the computer itself is much more able to handle it itself.
I give an example, which at first glance shows not to be a desktop or wm problem:
If I use a text processor and leave it, then the application asks me what to do -- save it, discard it or abort the task. You might tell that this is correct behaviour as you don't want the machine to decide which data to keep and which not. But is there really a necessity to decide between discarding one or the other version of your text? Not really.
Indeed, it's ridiculous, as filesystems do store the new version and then point the meta data to the new version, leaving behind the old version to be overwritten somewhen in the future. The data is still there, not reliably as it is freed to be overwritten, not accessible by the user, but it is still there.
You may say this is a problem of the application and some applications use techniques to get around this. But is that really the only and best solution? I don't think so. Oh, and why didn't I save the text in the first place? Then the text processor wouldn't have asked in the first place.
This kind of things is all around the system, not helping with someones work but even making it more complex, errorprone, requiring the users to know lots of useless information about internals of the system -- information, only the system needs to know about (Ok, developers need to know and admins as well to a certain degree -- but that is development, installation and configuration level and not user level).
cb
My problem is spread around the whole system. It starts with the filesystems, includes the window manager and ends with the applications.
I look at my system as information in a given state and this information gets altered by certain rules and after that it's still consistent information and not a heap of unrelated data.
My problem is mainly, that all these systems put the logic and management of the data stored on the machine into the hands of the user, supplying more or less helpful tools to manage it, though the computer itself is much more able to handle it itself.
I give an example, which at first glance shows not to be a desktop or wm problem:
If I use a text processor and leave it, then the application asks me what to do -- save it, discard it or abort the task. You might tell that this is correct behaviour as you don't want the machine to decide which data to keep and which not. But is there really a necessity to decide between discarding one or the other version of your text? Not really.
Indeed, it's ridiculous, as filesystems do store the new version and then point the meta data to the new version, leaving behind the old version to be overwritten somewhen in the future. The data is still there, not reliably as it is freed to be overwritten, not accessible by the user, but it is still there.
You may say this is a problem of the application and some applications use techniques to get around this. But is that really the only and best solution? I don't think so. Oh, and why didn't I save the text in the first place? Then the text processor wouldn't have asked in the first place.
This kind of things is all around the system, not helping with someones work but even making it more complex, errorprone, requiring the users to know lots of useless information about internals of the system -- information, only the system needs to know about (Ok, developers need to know and admins as well to a certain degree -- but that is development, installation and configuration level and not user level).
cb
[ Parent ]
i need hep you
i create miror server, but not succes
configuration like this
i have 14 CD Sarge
#cp -R /media/cdrom /debian/sarge
cd /debian/sarge
# dpkg-scanpackages pool/contrib /dev/null | gzip -9c > Packages.gz
# dpkg-scanpackages pool/main /dev/null | gzip -9c > Packages.gz
cd /var/www
# ln -s /Debian/sarge
# vi /etc/apt/source.list
deb http://10.252.10.254 /sarge contrib main
testing
# apt-get update
not found
i create miror server, but not succes
configuration like this
i have 14 CD Sarge
#cp -R /media/cdrom /debian/sarge
cd /debian/sarge
# dpkg-scanpackages pool/contrib /dev/null | gzip -9c > Packages.gz
# dpkg-scanpackages pool/main /dev/null | gzip -9c > Packages.gz
cd /var/www
# ln -s /Debian/sarge
# vi /etc/apt/source.list
deb http://10.252.10.254 /sarge contrib main
testing
# apt-get update
not found
[ Parent ]
flx-desktop-session (my own X session manager) with openbox & perlpanel
- Felix
--
Felix C. Stegerman [flx@obfusk.net] [http://obfusk.net]
~ "Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature."
~ -- R. Kulawiec
~ vim: set ft=mail tw=70 sw=2 sts=2 et:
- Felix
--
Felix C. Stegerman [flx@obfusk.net] [http://obfusk.net]
~ "Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature."
~ -- R. Kulawiec
~ vim: set ft=mail tw=70 sw=2 sts=2 et:
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (70.84.xx.xx) on Sun 28 Jan 2007 at 17:30
FVWM - for years.
Don't want the unnecessary bloat of KDE or Gnome (not to mention the windoze imitation); prefer minimalist look (no icons!), plus FVWM is so easy to customize, like starting heavily used programs using the Fn keys and placing them where I want.
Great thing is with Debian is that it gives us all a choice; we don't have to have KDE/Gnome if we don't want it, when we install for first time or on a new box.
Don't want the unnecessary bloat of KDE or Gnome (not to mention the windoze imitation); prefer minimalist look (no icons!), plus FVWM is so easy to customize, like starting heavily used programs using the Fn keys and placing them where I want.
Great thing is with Debian is that it gives us all a choice; we don't have to have KDE/Gnome if we don't want it, when we install for first time or on a new box.
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (65.57.xx.xx) on Sun 28 Jan 2007 at 17:41
I keep to FVWM - tried both Gnome and KDE, and hated them, since like someone else commented, I don't want the M$ Windows look.
Once you've learnt how to write your own .fvwm2rc you realize just how good FVWM is.
Once you've learnt how to write your own .fvwm2rc you realize just how good FVWM is.
[ Parent ]
Posted by Steve (62.30.xx.xx) on Sun 28 Jan 2007 at 20:30
[ Send Message | View Steve's Scratchpad | View Weblogs ]
[ Send Message | View Steve's Scratchpad | View Weblogs ]
I have GNOME installed upon my desktop machines, but for my lightweight old laptop I need something smaller - so in that case I use IceWM.
I moved to that from FVWM a few years ago, and find it just the right balance of power and configurability.
When it comes to a light system I want three things:
- A "taskbar" to show me open windows.
- A simple menu to launch new commands.
- A sensible placement of new windows
- ie. New windows shouldn't overlap existing ones, unless that is unavoidable.
I find that the window placement options of a lightweight system are the biggest issues - IceWM suits me because it gets it "right". GNOME bugs me at times because the default window manager will happily place two new terminals one atop the other - even when the rest of the desktop is empty...
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (85.99.xx.xx) on Sun 28 Jan 2007 at 20:41
Ion3 is really cool, and fluxbox is simple... I also used PekWM for some time (compiled from source). After trying all of those, I found out that I needed a window manager that is flexible enough for me, like ... ehmm ... like ... Emacs! So the choice is obvious.
tonguc@terra:~$ wc -l < .sawfishrc 133 tonguc@terra:~$
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (213.164.xx.xx) on Mon 29 Jan 2007 at 09:37
None. Debian is for servers.
[ Parent ]
> None. Debian is for servers.
Darn! I'd better tell my 60+ Debian-Desktop-Users!
Darn! I'd better tell my 60+ Debian-Desktop-Users!
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (66.90.xx.xx) on Mon 29 Jan 2007 at 11:55
Interesting that Gnome currently leads KDE by a slight margin, how many use XFCE, and how many, like me, just use a WM.
My vote went to fvwm.
My vote went to fvwm.
[ Parent ]
KDE just because I can easily turn features off that I want and tweak others. I tried GNOME, didn't like the defaults and couldn't change them easily. I use Fluxbox on older boxes when I want things to run quickly.
It's not the initial look and feel I like, it's the ability to change things. Now I know KDE it's hard to swicth because of my time investement in KDE.
--
"It's Not Magic, It's Work"
Adam
It's not the initial look and feel I like, it's the ability to change things. Now I know KDE it's hard to swicth because of my time investement in KDE.
--
"It's Not Magic, It's Work"
Adam
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (201.42.xx.xx) on Mon 29 Jan 2007 at 15:10
The good and old Window Maker!
[ Parent ]
I use fluxbox on every box which needs graphical working. I dislike those big desktop enviroments, but they fit to someone really good :)
[ Parent ]
I used XFCE for a short while because it was more lightweight than Gnome.
However, XFCE 4.4 now seems to take about the same time as Gnome to get started. Also, Gnome really has come on in leaps and bounds, and now provides a very nice working environment.
However, XFCE 4.4 now seems to take about the same time as Gnome to get started. Also, Gnome really has come on in leaps and bounds, and now provides a very nice working environment.
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (80.109.xx.xx) on Tue 30 Jan 2007 at 18:50
First WM I ever used with Debian was FVWM (-One, i think. Later -Two). Well that was waaaay back, even I was still young back then...
First time KDE hatched from its .debs was on me first P2, out of blunt curiosity ("So... let's see what this doodah looks like", you get the idea...). FVWM was still my WM of choice for a very long time, but slowly I started to change sides...
So now I'm using KDE almost exclusively, somehow never got hooked on GNOME etcetera. FVWM is still around, for hysterical reasons and for "just in case...".
Hmmmm... on the other hand, I'm still doing about 90% on eleven TTYs. :-)
First time KDE hatched from its .debs was on me first P2, out of blunt curiosity ("So... let's see what this doodah looks like", you get the idea...). FVWM was still my WM of choice for a very long time, but slowly I started to change sides...
So now I'm using KDE almost exclusively, somehow never got hooked on GNOME etcetera. FVWM is still around, for hysterical reasons and for "just in case...".
Hmmmm... on the other hand, I'm still doing about 90% on eleven TTYs. :-)
[ Parent ]
WindowMaker on desktop for years
BlackBox over network with vnc (seems a bit faster)
I use terminals a lot as well as mc and GNU Emacs and I hate to see if default keyboard mapping maps the Tab or the Meta+Tab to something. WM and BB both do not do such a weird thing :-).
Not mention both managers are (1) simple enough (both feature and gui), (2) easily configured via normal txt files, (3) quite fast even over network, (4) allows multiple desktops and that's all I need.
BlackBox over network with vnc (seems a bit faster)
I use terminals a lot as well as mc and GNU Emacs and I hate to see if default keyboard mapping maps the Tab or the Meta+Tab to something. WM and BB both do not do such a weird thing :-).
Not mention both managers are (1) simple enough (both feature and gui), (2) easily configured via normal txt files, (3) quite fast even over network, (4) allows multiple desktops and that's all I need.
[ Parent ]
I normally use XFCE. Now that 4.4.0 is out,you may be getting many more voting for it, especially when the Sid freeze is over and the new release comes out so that 4.4.0 can be uploaded.
(^>
(^>
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (59.92.xx.xx) on Fri 2 Feb 2007 at 11:29
I have used KDE, Fluxbox and Gnome on my Debian 'Etch'.
KDE - Quite eye candy, lot of overhead on CPU, lots of crashes, sooner or later you get bored. Customizable
Fluxbox - Minimalistic WM, loads of configuration (but its fun), highly customizable, extremely eye candy, light on CPU, good for use at home or on personal laptop, cannot be used for business and other production activities. Best fits student life
Gnome - Rustic on first looks but is simple, elegant and relatively light on the CPU. Prefect for Business and office use. Customizable to a certain extent(or probably I am still exploring).
Bipin
KDE - Quite eye candy, lot of overhead on CPU, lots of crashes, sooner or later you get bored. Customizable
Fluxbox - Minimalistic WM, loads of configuration (but its fun), highly customizable, extremely eye candy, light on CPU, good for use at home or on personal laptop, cannot be used for business and other production activities. Best fits student life
Gnome - Rustic on first looks but is simple, elegant and relatively light on the CPU. Prefect for Business and office use. Customizable to a certain extent(or probably I am still exploring).
Bipin
[ Parent ]
I always get the feeling from both Gnome and KDE that their developers think that most users are stoopud. I use WindowMaker.
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (200.245.xx.xx) on Sat 3 Feb 2007 at 12:20
I use many of them...
Ion3 is my choice for my work PC. It's really, really, REALLY productive once you get used to it. And that "bad behavior" that some programs have are solved by making the frames "floatable".
Gnome is my choice for my home PC. It's somewhat lighter than KDE, and I think it's also highly productive. Their workspace management is really cool. However, it's a little though if you want to get it different from the default.
IceWM is my choice for my LTSP server. Simply do not install the "menu" package, and with 1 or 2 hours of customization you will have FULLY control on the users' desktop. Much more than you would have with any other desktop manager or window manager
Enlightenment (e17) is my choice to show my friends how they M$-WINDOW$ is "not good looking at all". Enlightenment is not productive, is not easy to configure, but it's surely eye-candy!!!
FVWM was my choice on the LTSP server before I switched to IceWM. I think both of them are pretty good, but Ice is, IMHO, slightly easier to configure.
I also like WindowMaker and FluxBox, but I was never able to get used to them :-)
Ion3 is my choice for my work PC. It's really, really, REALLY productive once you get used to it. And that "bad behavior" that some programs have are solved by making the frames "floatable".
Gnome is my choice for my home PC. It's somewhat lighter than KDE, and I think it's also highly productive. Their workspace management is really cool. However, it's a little though if you want to get it different from the default.
IceWM is my choice for my LTSP server. Simply do not install the "menu" package, and with 1 or 2 hours of customization you will have FULLY control on the users' desktop. Much more than you would have with any other desktop manager or window manager
Enlightenment (e17) is my choice to show my friends how they M$-WINDOW$ is "not good looking at all". Enlightenment is not productive, is not easy to configure, but it's surely eye-candy!!!
FVWM was my choice on the LTSP server before I switched to IceWM. I think both of them are pretty good, but Ice is, IMHO, slightly easier to configure.
I also like WindowMaker and FluxBox, but I was never able to get used to them :-)
[ Parent ]
I use GNOME on Ubuntu for everyday tasks and its pretty good. I will admit that XFCE has the best applications. They are all small, fast and use less memory. This includes the xfce-terminal, mousepad, and Thunar which is arguably the fastest desktop file-manager and includes mouse-gestures.
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (59.176.xx.xx) on Sun 4 Feb 2007 at 07:05
Definitely icewm. Look, it's so cool, all of debian is turning to using the ice prefix - icedove, iceweasel, see?
More seriously, whatever the window manager, one thing I'll say is that debian is so solidly tested, that you can switch from one to another with a trusty old apt-get, and apt does the figuring out for you. In ubuntu dapper I had to do a bit figuring out during a switch from the default gnome to icewm (I suspect xubuntu doesn't have this problem, but I don't know).
Apparently Beryl (bundled with knoppix 5.1.1) does pretty 3d eye-candy that will impress people, and works ok with 1GHz systems.
PJ
More seriously, whatever the window manager, one thing I'll say is that debian is so solidly tested, that you can switch from one to another with a trusty old apt-get, and apt does the figuring out for you. In ubuntu dapper I had to do a bit figuring out during a switch from the default gnome to icewm (I suspect xubuntu doesn't have this problem, but I don't know).
Apparently Beryl (bundled with knoppix 5.1.1) does pretty 3d eye-candy that will impress people, and works ok with 1GHz systems.
PJ
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (82.195.xx.xx) on Mon 5 Feb 2007 at 14:32
WindowMaker on my laptop
Gnome on my bedside Desktop, as i have a windescreen and WMaker dont look that good, may go back to it later and diddle about with it.
Gnome on my bedside Desktop, as i have a windescreen and WMaker dont look that good, may go back to it later and diddle about with it.
[ Parent ]
Seems like I have tried every window manager on the planet. My current setup is all about the eye candy. XFCE4.4 + gdesklets. I pretty much kill off anything that lets you know I am using XFCE4 and use gdesklets for everything from start bar to system monitors. While this isn't the most lean setup in the world, I can still game and run really memory applications no problems no worries. I also really liked openbox and blackbox.
[ Parent ]
Posted by Utumno (61.229.xx.xx) on Tue 6 Feb 2007 at 20:00
[ Send Message | View Utumno's Scratchpad | View Weblogs ]
[ Send Message | View Utumno's Scratchpad | View Weblogs ]
I started using Debian the day Potato was released ( 2000/08/15 :) and WindowMaker was the default WM. Have been using it till last year, when I finally jumped the ship and now it's Gnome w/ Beryl for me. I guess I went all the way from a stubborn minimalist to an enthusiastic eye-candyist.
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (24.128.xx.xx) on Tue 6 Feb 2007 at 23:59
The first WM I ever used was TWM. Then I moved to MWM, then to VTWM.
I've tried GNOME, KDE, XFce, AfterStep 1, WindowMaker, GWM, and
probably a bunch of others.
I've never been happy with anyone of them except VTWM. Simple, light, and does
what it is supposed to do, manage windows ! I heard someone mention Sawfish,
and I might give that a try again, without it being used from GNOME 1.x whatever,
which is the last time I used Sawfish.
I wonder if the old X10 UWM is available somewhere ? :)
cheers,
mehul
I've tried GNOME, KDE, XFce, AfterStep 1, WindowMaker, GWM, and
probably a bunch of others.
I've never been happy with anyone of them except VTWM. Simple, light, and does
what it is supposed to do, manage windows ! I heard someone mention Sawfish,
and I might give that a try again, without it being used from GNOME 1.x whatever,
which is the last time I used Sawfish.
I wonder if the old X10 UWM is available somewhere ? :)
cheers,
mehul
[ Parent ]
None - server.
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (62.191.xx.xx) on Wed 7 Feb 2007 at 13:17
I use wmii. It's very interesting: I don't like it a lot, but I keep
using it. Perhaps it's because it just doesn't put obstacles between
me and what I want to achieve. wmii was also the first WM I tried
that had sane default keybindings. (Not that the default keybindings
are important; I change them all anyway.)
It is so liberating that I don't have to move or resize windows anymore!
using it. Perhaps it's because it just doesn't put obstacles between
me and what I want to achieve. wmii was also the first WM I tried
that had sane default keybindings. (Not that the default keybindings
are important; I change them all anyway.)
It is so liberating that I don't have to move or resize windows anymore!
[ Parent ]
Posted by Anonymous (68.250.xx.xx) on Thu 8 Feb 2007 at 00:18
Fluxbox on older systems and Gnome on newer.
[ Parent ]