shen Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 Up until lately I never knew there was a difference.... After doing some reading here on the boards I am finding out that Gnome and KDE are just DE's and things like Flux and such are only window managers and can be run in gnome and such.. Is there any links or sites that really explains this indepth? Also is what WM does KDE use ? Basically any links anyone can provide where I can really research this for learning purposes would be great. I seem to learn something new about linux every day that just intregues mean more and more.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvc Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 I don't know about any links that 'explain' it really. Google is always helpful though, and check this link; http://www.plig.org/xwinman/ google_x_window_managers kde has it's own wm called kwin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shen Posted June 17, 2003 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 Yeah I started poking thru google....I figured I'd psot here incase someone had some that i didn't inf..:) I always just considered KDE and Flux to be the same..lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
static Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 <GASP> Oooohhhhhhh, you're lookin' fer a verbal thrashin' you are! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shen Posted June 17, 2003 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 lol hey now I am learning..:P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest smoketoomuch Posted June 19, 2003 Report Share Posted June 19, 2003 Up until lately I never knew there was a difference.... After doing some reading here on the boards I am finding out that Gnome and KDE are just DE's and things like Flux and such are only window managers and can be run in gnome and such.. Is there any links or sites that really explains this indepth? Also is what WM does KDE use ? I'm still not sure I got it right, but here is how I understand it. There is X, the graphical subsystem, which can't do much on its own. It provides support for basic windowing and mouse support and such. The window manager sits on top of that, and is responsible for drawing the actual windows on the screen - it is responsible for defining how a window is drawn on the screen, but not much else. For instance, it defines the way (or rather, it is the means for) displaying a graphical application, like OpenOffice on the screen. Its the skeleton on which desktop enviroments are built on. DE's can do a lot more, like for instance, they can have mosfet's liquid theme :wink:, filemanagers, and so forth. GNOME has two window managers: sawfish and metacity. KDE's window manager is Kwin. That's all I know. Not much. :? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JaseP Posted June 20, 2003 Report Share Posted June 20, 2003 Smoketoomuch got it pretty close. X is indeed the substrate on which the WM are built. X in an of itself is all that is truely needed to display graphical programs. Unfortunately, they won't look very good just displayting in X, and there's no good way to get programs started easily. To do it, you need to open up a console and type the command line that starts the graphical app... etc etc. OpenOffice/StarOffice will work without Gnome or KDE... Sometimes you may want to have a login that goes straight into one app alone (i.e. a gaming login for Quake3Arena for max performance or something, or a kiosk program for a retail display, etc). In that case you may wish to do some work to create a login where it automatically goes straight into the app running in X with no frills. Window Managers go a step further in that they give you pretty open and close buttons, frames around stuff, Many allow you to put icons on the screen just like Micro$haft Windoze. People who want to run something leaner and meaner without so much over head, shy away from KDE or Gnome. Many like Enlightenment. I personally find it too stark. Desktop envirnments like Gnome or KDE go even one step further in that they offer some extra support services for the graphical layer, like having the ability to select themes, having mini-apps built specifically for them, and have support for specific functions that can be included in apps made specifically for that environment. They often include native multifunction browsers etc. (KDE has konqueror, Gnome has nautilis). In and around 1998, these desktop envirnments were fairly new and underveloped. This was the time when Linux was first getting a buzz in the press. Now, they can pretty much compete toe to toe with M$ and MAC for flexibility and features. The bottom line with Linux is that you can essentially make it look and behave any way you wish. If there isn't a look and feel you want available for one WM or another, you can go create one for yourself... If you know how. The bottom line is that for newbies, you kind of want to stick with the tried and true desktop environments, and save your adventuresome spirit for when you have a little console command time and understanding of system architecture under your belt. 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.