cga and window managers

[cga]

Since an old wm thread was revived recently, I thought that I'd make a quick note to update eveyone on my current UI situation.

On the "big box", I am using KDE as installed with SuSE 8.2 Personal in the "standard installation with office" option. I do customize the KDE- I prefer plain over fancy, so I use the "Windows" QT style, with KDE 1 window decorations. Plain and simple. I keep the Crystal icons though- I like them. No virtual desktop.

For my older, "hardware challanged" machines, I still go for IceWM.

And, frankly, I have quit playing with window managers.

[Tyr_7BE]

I also have quit jumping around...settled on Gnome. I tried going back to KDE after a stint in Gnome, and found I missed its UI just way too much.

[NGene]

Heh... I've stopped jumping around too. I'm back with Window Maker, actually i've been using it again for several months now.

Although I can configure KDE to look sweeter, I like WM's feel much more. Plus it's easier to make WM behave the way I like. There are some things that seem to be impossible to configure with KDE (or, are just too hard to figure out with my little brain).

I'll just have to accept it - no matter what I do, I *always* end up using Window Maker again!

After trying GNOME2.x there are types of brain surgery I would rather have done to me before switching to anything else.

[cga]

I kind of wonder if there is a distro influence here too, as SuSE's config tools are built on QT and integrated in the KDE control center an menu very nicely. The result being a very tight, complete feeling system.

Is RedHat rather like that, except more Gnome-centric?

[quote author=cga link=board=6;threadid=7407;start=0#msg68184 date=1058628624]
I kind of wonder if there is a distro influence here too, as SuSE's config tools are built on QT and integrated in the KDE control center an menu very nicely. The result being a very tight, complete feeling system.

Is RedHat rather like that, except more Gnome-centric?
[/quote]

Not really, there aren't any like really tightly integrated GUI tools for RH. Not that I use anyways. RH is so easy to manage that you basically only need the default setup and a GUI package manager for normal tasks.

[NGene]

[quote author=Lovechild link=board=6;threadid=7407;start=0#msg68181 date=1058611943]
After trying GNOME2.x there are types of brain surgery I would rather have done to me before switching to anything else.
[/quote]

Hmm...

[me=NGene]goes inventing a way to perform lobotomy over the internet...[/me]

:P

[gmoreno]

Blackbox on all my boxes. Newer or older. More cpu cycles for my apps not my wm.

[cga]

I always get in trouble when I make a comment about this stuff, but since I had some free time on my hands, I decided to do some playing around. ;D

The other day, I had a chance to play with an Apple iBook running GNU Darwin. It was using WindowMaker and damned if it did not impress me me enough to throw WindowMaker back on this box and play with it some. That always leads me to the love-hate thing i have with KDE. KDE is a great desktop; but, I have to admit that I don't think I want to run a whole desktop to use Linux. I do spend a lot of time in a terminal. Plus, I find that desktops are general not as fast or stable as a simple WM.

It drives me crazy sometimes.

[pbharris]

cga - i am starting to think you are wm slut!