From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 23 21:03:57 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5704A16A4CE for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:03:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ns1.tiadon.com (SMTP.tiadon.com [69.27.132.161]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E11443D1F for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:03:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kdk@daleco.biz) Received: from [69.27.131.0] ([69.27.131.0]) by ns1.tiadon.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Wed, 23 Feb 2005 15:03:10 -0600 Message-ID: <421CEFB3.4070102@daleco.biz> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 15:03:47 -0600 From: Kevin Kinsey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041210 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <20050223104701.3981c839@jacob.6texans.net> <200502231419.54629.m.hauber@mchsi.com> <1505159320.20050223203426@wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: <1505159320.20050223203426@wanadoo.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Feb 2005 21:03:10.0578 (UTC) FILETIME=[14BBAD20:01C519EB] cc: Anthony Atkielski Subject: Re: Different OS's? Marketshare X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:03:57 -0000 Anthony Atkielski wrote: >I'm still quite ambivalent about it. I keep wondering if Linux is >different enough and useful enough to be worth dedicating this machine >to it ... or if I should just continue with FreeBSD and install X on the >machine (and KDE, probably, since it seems to be popular, although I >welcome suggestions). > >Which window manager is the closest to classic UNIX window managers (as >opposed to wannabe Windows products)? > > Well, you can do a little research yourself (I'm sure you will at some point, anyway): (Hmm, a "store"? Browse screenshots and descriptions): http://xwinman.org/ (A comparison article, 5 wm's and the XFCE environment): http://rootprompt.org/article.php3?article=8346 IIRC, there's also a rather large thread on bsdforums.org where people are showing off their "desktops". You could also get a "look-see" there... As for my own experience, I can't really answer your question, because "classic UNIX window managers" is somewhat meaningless to me as a newbie. Part of Free Software is "freedom of choice" as you well know. There are so many choices out there that your head can spin while looking. My experience: 1. BlackBox. Small, light, fast. To me, rather mouse oriented. Collapsing menus. A small "app" bar at the top, but no default icon support, etc. 2. FluxBox. BlackBox with more themes*. 3. Enlightenment. Larger then bb/fb. I didn't stick with it long at all, so I can't say much else. 4. XFCE. I liked it ... BSD licensed (IIRC), no larger than Enlightenment, certainly. One toolbar in default install, a few default tools. Icons on the toolbar (can't remember if you can put 'em on the desktop in default install). 5. GNOME. On my desktop now ... why? Curiosity, I guess. Lots of tools, takes lots of muscle. Probably a "windows wannabe" as you say (but it crashes less ... ;-). I wouldn't put a new KDE or GNOME on a very old box, but maybe I don't know how to go about that very well (I know there is a "gnome-lite", and there is probably a corresponding "light KDE"). It seems a tad slow ATM, but this box runs as gateway/firewall, SMTP/POP3, http (development server), DNS, rsyncd, samba on the office network, plus currently 9 windows in Mozilla, 23 in Opera, mail client, Dictionary app, this compose window, 5-6 terminals running SSH to 3 servers across 4 desktops, the GIMP with a rather big photo open, and a small word processor document.) There are so many other WMs. It all depends on how you work. And, you can run some toolbars/docks, iconifying program, pretty much any X application, whatever, on just about anything -- "tools, not policy" after all. Greg Lehey, for example, states (~to the effect of~) "I'm not into eye candy", and runs something rather simple (twm? fvwm?) that's all configured exactly the way he wants it across several monitors, at rather/very high resolution(s). He either has great eyesight, or has good glasses, I guess (and it's pure speculation and nothing personal at all) because he works surrounded by words, words, and more words, I suppose, whether it's code, mail, whatever. I'm different, I was a M$ user for quite a while, and apart from the differences in the "toolbar" at the bottom and the fact that I have top and right-side toolbars also, I'm not sure my desktop looks much different than it did back on Win98. (Well, on 10 items on this desktop --- but the toolbars [32 launchers now] make up for it.) Except, it never turns blue and give me ominous white letters, nor does it ever lockup without leaving me some option besides a power cycle. Kevin Kinsey *I'm sure there are other things, and my descriptions are at best those of the uninitiated. My apologies to the devoted, I do not aim to offend. That would extend to all users of $YOUR_WM_HERE....