Linked by Eugenia Loli on Fri 6th Apr 2007 21:23 UTC, submitted by michuk
Window Managers "IceWM is perfect for Windows' 'immigrants' especially for users with older computers. IceWM will be suitable for advanced users who are looking for a lightweight and simple window manager." More here.
Thread beginning with comment 228393
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It lacks integration
by sweiss on Sat 7th Apr 2007 08:17 UTC
sweiss
Member since:
2005-10-01

Even though it might look like Windows, I doubt Windows emigrants will enjoy using it.

As stated, it is only a window manager, and so it has no desktop icons. That also means it doesn't have drag-n-drop nor does it have a built-in file manager (correct me if I'm wrong here).

It may be good for old machines, but what Windows emigrants really need is an explorer-like shell, and I have yet to see one.

Reply Score: 3

RE: It lacks integration
by Slapo on Sat 7th Apr 2007 10:04 in reply to "It lacks integration"
Slapo Member since:
2005-07-06

I think EDE is much closer to e.g. Windows 98 Explorer than IceWM in both looks and usability, especially when coupled with Xfe.
Unlike IceWM, it has desktop icons, and with Xfe, it flies. Just try STX Linux with EDE, you'll see what I'm talking about ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: It lacks integration
by Sophotect on Sat 7th Apr 2007 15:28 in reply to "RE: It lacks integration"
Sophotect Member since:
2006-04-26

In my personal opinion these "lighter" desktop alternatives are almost useless. You know why? Because any distro with some lighter WM and maybe some pager and a few statusmonitors flies. But, does it "fly" also when i`m using some larger applications with them? No. When the swapping begins you have a problem. "Lighter" Desktops only give you some more time until this happens. I feel very ambivalent towards this. On one hand the bloat on the application side is getting worse and worse. Windows Vista comes to mind. On the other hand some desktop environments seem to get it right and actually use (at least a little) LESS memory than their predecessors. KDE comes to mind. Now, there is another solution, use a sourcebased distro and compile with -Os and leave out unneccessary dependencies. Not feasible for lower end systems? Depends on the sort of system i guess. Use something like a PentiumIII@1GHz with 256 to 512 MB Ram as a gauge. These are to be had refurbished with one year warranty for about 100 to 200 EUR including shipping, depending on harddisk capacity which ranges from 40 GB to 80 GB in that class. These systems work perfectly well with all sorts of comfort under KDE or Gnome for day to day use with at least a handful larger applications open. Which means browser with at least a dozen tabs open, IM, larger music/video/tv-player, some office apps. Even with integrated Intel810 onboard graphics which is common for such systems f.e. google-earth is no slide-show. The only thing which they cannot do is compile OpenOffice for themselves, but, there is always a binary package available or one could use KOffice or GnomeOffice instead. So. What did i wan't to say with that? This is the 21st century. Get over it, despite Essays like "In the Beginning was the Command Line" from Neal Stephenson this is not the beginning anymore.
We don't use punch cards. Not everbody is happy with some rudimentary WM with a Mangababe or psychedelic mushroom illuminated by black light as background and some x(whatever)terms, screened and running ssh-sessions with vi in them. It`s O.K. to know how to use that. But it's also ok to not use that and have a comfortable desktop.

Edited 2007-04-07 15:47

Reply Parent Score: 4