Re: Window Managers, A question Part Deux

["Orn E. Hansen" <oe.hansen@oehansen.pp.se>]

Þann 24-Jan-98 skrifar Gregory Bell:
> 
> question is, why should I (or anyone else for that matter) use Enlightenment
> (which I have
> had installed
> and deleted cause it seemed to be too much of a hassle) or Windowmanage????
> 

  A window manager should not stand in the way of your application program,
and only window manager modules, are actually dependant on comunicating with
the window manager itself, AFAIK.

  Enlightenment is a very good looking Window Manager, and it "appears" to be
able to configure itself according to the users liking.  Things, that are
called themes.  However, I've been trying it out today and I really don't like
the Default theme, and have been trying to get BeOS theme working... without
success (seems to be for an older version of E).

  Window Maker is, as I can see it, very much like AfterStep.  It looks and
feels like the NeXT Step window manager, with a wharf and stuff.  It is not
built on top of fvwm, like afterstep, but is a rewrite and thus smaller and
faster.  It also has some features built in, like you can click with the right
mousse button on a programs icon, to change it's attributes and/or change a
programs icon.  Also, you can take a programs icon and drag it into the wharf,
but other than that... it's pretty much like afterstep.

  These are my observations... Window Maker shows some tendancy towards an
intent of making it GUI configurable.  The 'theme' file is simple, and not a
whole language on it's own.  Enlightenment has a good appearance, and probably
will be pretty good, but I think it's gonna be some while until its stable.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orn Einar Hansen                         oe.hansen@oehansen.pp.se
                                          oehansen@daimi.aau.dk
                                        voice+fax; +46 035 217194