Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 19th Nov 2007 21:22 UTC, submitted by irbis
Window Managers "Linux has proven amazingly flexible: after nearly 10 years of use, I'm still impressed by how the Linux operating system does exactly what I want on any type of hardware. Desktop customization is no exception; from the ultra-modern KDE and GNOME window managers to with the likes of Fluxbox and AfterStep, there's a Linux desktop to suit everyone."
Thread beginning with comment 285472
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: wm for a server?
by KenJackson on Tue 20th Nov 2007 14:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: wm for a server?"
Member since:

the equivalent on windows means you don't have to learn a set of command (that are different on pretty much every linux distribution).

This comment hearkens back to the 80's argument about which is better, the command line or the GUI. I referenced the commands instead of the GUI tools because that's my preference. Even though this article is about GUIs, the terminal window running a Bash shell is ever present, and is the primary application I run under any WM. But you don't have too--you can click on the menus until you find synaptic or rpmdrake or pup.

Yes, there are different management tools on different distros, but I hardly see choice as a disadvantage. Lack of choice and therefore lack competition are contributors to the problems with Windows.

lemur2's answer hit many excellent points also.

Reply Parent Score: 3