OSNews: http://www.osnews.com/story/19470/dwm_4_8_Released Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2013, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Sat, 18 May 2013 16:51:55 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif OSNews.com http://www.osnews.com Umm http://www.osnews.com/thread?304941 http://www.osnews.com/thread?304941 This is DWM?

http://www.suckless.org/shots/dwm-20070930.png

Looks good if it were released in the early 90's.

No offense.Edited 2008-03-14 00:06 UTC Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Xaero_Vincent) Comments RE: Umm http://www.osnews.com/thread?304943 http://www.osnews.com/thread?304943 Its not about looking pretty, its about being simple & small with transparent code, look around the website:

"Code complexity is the mother of bloated, hard to use, and totally inconsistent software. With complex code, problems are solved in suboptimal ways, valuable resources are endlessly tied up, performance slows to a halt, and vulnerabilities become a commonplace. The only solution is to scrap the entire project and rewrite it from scratch."

"But ingenious ideas are simple. Ingenious software is simple. Simplicity is the heart of the Unix philosophy. The more code lines you have removed, the more progress you have made. As the number of lines of code in your software shrinks, the more skilled you have become and the less your software sucks."

As someone who used to use ion pretty frequently, this is right up my alley. These guys seem to view software in the same way I do. Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (red_devel) Comments Not about eyecandy http://www.osnews.com/thread?304946 http://www.osnews.com/thread?304946 Why do some people assume everyone is after eyecandy? I've been using linux for 9 years and have used more wm's then I can remember. I see no need for compiz and all kinds of fancy effects, they just get in my way. Not saying their is nothing wrong with any of that stuff but it's not for everybody. I use fluxbox myself =) Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (pllb) Comments not just simplicity http://www.osnews.com/thread?304972 http://www.osnews.com/thread?304972 The benefits of a mouse-free WM are one of the few usability hints that ever worked for me. Of course, it's a big adjustment, and has its limitations (the web, for example, is not too keyboard friendly, although things like google's shortcuts and Opera's spatial navigation mean you can get through all but the nastiest of sites without having to tab through links); after you get it under your fingers, it is much easier to use your computer (especially with laptops, where you would have to go to the evil touchpad). Their speed and simplicity are just icing on the cake.

compiz sure is shiny, tho. Fri, 14 Mar 2008 05:45:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jadeshade) Comments Keep coming back to the conventional ones http://www.osnews.com/thread?304978 http://www.osnews.com/thread?304978 I've tried most of these - preferring fluxbox on the whole. But I keep coming back to gnome. Gnome rather than KDE partly because of the slightly simpler aesthetics, and partly because you don't have this default mode of click, click again like in KDE. Yes, you can customize probably, but Gnome does most things my way out of the box.

The problem is the file manager. Its not a very disciplined way of working, but if you're used to having everything on the desktop, flipping to another with the file manager on it doesn't quite feel right. Nautilus is terribly slow when folders get large, but it makes up for it by being just part of the desktop.

I do use fluxbox sometimes, like it in the main, and have tried both dwm, ion and wmii, but in the end keep coming back to gnome day to day. WindowMaker is interesting but the icons and way of using desktops are irritating. On lower powered machines the minimalist ones are a lot faster, that's certainly true.

The real place for them is where the user will never use the desktop as a work environment. If you ever install a one app machine with auto login, there is almost no reason to provide gnome or kde. Fluxbox or ion or wmii or dwm may do as well or better and a lot faster. At least until they have to fire up a file manager! Then they will be totally baffled, and you're in for a site visit. Fri, 14 Mar 2008 07:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (alcibiades) Comments oo... http://www.osnews.com/thread?304994 http://www.osnews.com/thread?304994 I've never tried this one... Must.. install.. Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (helf) Comments RE: Keep coming back to the conventional ones http://www.osnews.com/thread?304998 http://www.osnews.com/thread?304998 Have you tried replacing the wm inside Gnome ?
There is a Gnome-Openbox hybrid which is vastly quicker than standard Gnome. Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:01:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (raver31) Comments As a DWM user http://www.osnews.com/thread?305001 http://www.osnews.com/thread?305001 I like using DWM with small screen (12", 1024px*768px) like on my Thinkpad X31. I'm not always switching hands between keyboard and mouse moving windows.

I give you, i wouldn't recommend dwm to a newbie.

If you want effects, Awesome is a rewrite of dwm using compositing ;)
http://awesome.naquadah.org/

(English isn't my main language, sorry!) Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (holywood) Comments RE: As a DWM user http://www.osnews.com/thread?305008 http://www.osnews.com/thread?305008 stop apologizing! Your English is NOT that bad. I hate it when people always apologize for not speaking language perfectly. You are doing better than me, I barely know English, much less a foreign language ;) Fri, 14 Mar 2008 14:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (helf) Comments RE: Umm http://www.osnews.com/thread?305010 http://www.osnews.com/thread?305010 Tiling WMs are more about getting work done than impressing passerbys with things like alpha-blending or animated menus. First of all, those features consume finite system resources to produce useless eye candy. Those resources have a real cost in hardware upgrades and an opportunity cost in loading time and time wasted rearranging virtual workspaces. Secondly, feature bloat leads to more complex codebases, which in turn leads to more bugs. Given a fixed number of developers working on a piece of software, the larger the feature-base, the less time spent on any given feature, such as those that are the actual purpose of the application in the first place. Fri, 14 Mar 2008 14:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (bm3719) Comments RE: Umm http://www.osnews.com/thread?305017 http://www.osnews.com/thread?305017 The fact that DWM doesn't look like much is important. It's a window manager, it doesn't do anything so you shouldn't even have to notice it is there.
DWM does a really good job of hiding away and never getting in your way. Fri, 14 Mar 2008 15:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jessta) Comments RE[2]: Umm http://www.osnews.com/thread?305118 http://www.osnews.com/thread?305118 Funny that you comment "impressing passerbys" because I used wmii (dwm's "big brother", by the same author with a little more configurability- if you want to try a tiling WM I highly recommend it) and my co-workers watch me use wmii and are amazed at how fast and efficient it is compared to their gnome/kde systems.

If you find that you use a lot of terminals at a time like I do, I HIGHLY recommend checking out a tiled WM- you spend zero to little time managing windows and more time getting things done. Sat, 15 Mar 2008 03:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ceekay) Comments RE: Keep coming back to the conventional ones http://www.osnews.com/thread?305119 http://www.osnews.com/thread?305119
If you ever install a one app machine with auto login, there is almost no reason to provide gnome or kde. Fluxbox or ion or wmii or dwm may do as well or better and a lot faster. At least until they have to fire up a file manager! Then they will be totally baffled, and you're in for a site visit.


I can't remember how long it has been since I used a "file manager" in Linux... a terminal w/ bash completion is infinitely faster if you're a decent typist.

Check out thunar or rox-filer if you want a fast file manager, though. If you really want to view your files as icons they're a lot faster than nautilus/konqueror (especially if you aren't running KDE/GNOME already). Sat, 15 Mar 2008 03:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ceekay) Comments RE: not just simplicity http://www.osnews.com/thread?305286 http://www.osnews.com/thread?305286 http://vimperator.mozdev.org/ Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (lydgate) Comments RE[2]: Keep coming back to the conventional ones http://www.osnews.com/thread?305287 http://www.osnews.com/thread?305287 I occasionally use xfe ( http://roland65.free.fr/xfe/ ) when I get nostalgic for fileman.exe. But mostly I use zsh. Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (lydgate) Comments