papaschtroumpf Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 OK, I've been using Linux for quite a few years now but I have always used either Gnome or KDE (mostly KDE) so I never really thought about what Windows managers really were or did. KDE and Gnome seem to be mostly a look and feel thing since apps from one usually run fine in the other. I have been playing with a knoppix CD and even though it boots in KDE by default you can choose other WMs, like fluxbox and icewm. Are they also just a look and feel thing or is there more to using those "light" WMs? for example will some applications not run unless you're using KDE?for example would K3b stop working because it's a KDE app? I noticed that the "start" menu under icewm has way less apps in it than the KDE menu does, but it is just because they're not in the menu or becasue they won't run? for example I couldn't find Kate in the menu but Kate seemed to run fine when invoked from the command line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arctic Posted June 19, 2005 Report Share Posted June 19, 2005 lightweight solutions like rox,fluxbox, blackbox, fvwm or icewm are primarily some kind of gui that does not need much ressources, compared to kde or gnome. this is because they don't need additional libraries like kde or gnome for creating the gui. they do the job equally well, but they are lacking some comfort things. e.g. they won't give you desktop-icons by default, nor do they show you hotplugging devices when they are inserted (although it can be tweaked that way if i am not completely mistaken). furthermore they are a bit harder to theme for untrained users. the pros is that your apps will definitely load faster. and you can usually run any kde or gnome application in these environments. if you want to run e.g. kmail, the necessary libraries will be loaded nontheles but it won't drain your ressources as much as a native kde or gnome environment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramfree17 Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 aside from what arctic has said, KDE and GNOME are Desktop Environment/Managers while flux and the rest are just Window Managers. one quality usually attributed to DE are their ability to host desktop icons/shortcuts while on Window Mangers you usually have to use another application like idesk or rox. at least thats what i understand. :D ciao! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulSe Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 aside from what arctic has said, KDE and GNOME are Desktop Environment/Managers while flux and the rest are just Window Managers. one quality usually attributed to DE are their ability to host desktop icons/shortcuts while on Window Mangers you usually have to use another application like idesk or rox. at least thats what i understand. :D ciao! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What he said DEs also require Window Managers, like Gnome uses Metacity, but it can also be configured to use Fluxbox. Look and feel really depends on the DE/WM. IE, you can run any gtk app on Fluxbox, and that includes programs like gnome panel. And in Gnome, for example, Nautilus is drawing your desktop most of the time - so it really depends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havin_it Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 Going back to that point about Desktop icons for a moment, I kinda wondered what is the point of them? Given they seem kinda temperamental things, especially since I upped my KDE to 3.4, why not just use symlinks? Then it wouldn't matter what WM you used, they would always display correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papaschtroumpf Posted June 20, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 so I could run a more "lightweight" WM like icewm and still be able to run the same apps as usual, like K3b, etc...? cool! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulSe Posted June 20, 2005 Report Share Posted June 20, 2005 so I could run a more "lightweight" WM like icewm and still be able to run the same apps as usual, like K3b, etc...? cool! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes, although K3b will require the KDE base as a dependency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.