In two of my boxes, dwm is running about 10 MB lighter than fluxbox. I'm planning to test it in a desktop, but I suspect that the result will be the same. Also, appears to clean up better than fluxbox. What I mean by that is that after running fluxbox a while, I notice that the RAM usage is higher than at startup (even when I have no windows/apps running), while dwm comes back to the initial RAM usage.

Pedro

malanrich wrote:I'm mainly using the default fluxbox and icewm. But I keep wandering into new worlds like Window-Maker, which was fun for a while because configuring it is like playing in a theme park. But lately I've gone for JWM because I've been using it in DSL and I've wanted to find the lightest WM anywhere. But frankly I don't see any real performance jump from either flux or ice. And online evaluations of these are pretty inconsistent. I wonder if anyone agrees on what WM is actually the lightest of all...?

Interesting that you should ask that. I have been doing my own very informal memory usage study, ranging from lightweight window managers to full desktop environments. My data is certainly not authoritative or conclusive, nor official in any way. I can tell you that if memory footprint is your most important criteria, JWM does seem to"win" that battle with the smallest footprint. However, IceWM does not come very far behind that. In fact, IceWM and Fluxbox are extremely close in memory footprint, and it seems to depend which implementation you choose. Openbox is right in the same range in memory footprint as IceWM and Fluxbox; not enough different to be concerned. In fact, though JWM comes in the smallest, there really is not much cause for concern there either. If you are in that much need of space, you are in more need of a system with more memory!

JWM is truly ugly without any skins put on it, but the Puppy project and the SliTAZ projects have demonstrated that you can put a nice cover over JVM and give it a nice appearance; you really can with ANY window manager, so don't let looks deter you from any of them.

For me, I'd say the way in which the task bar can be managed is what I personally look for, and understandably, that is why I prefer IceWM as a lightweight window manager, XFCE as a lightweight desktop, and KDE as a heavy weight desktop; all three of them provide easy task bar management, and that is what I prefer to use in my personal navigation.

For those who prefer no task bar, in that case, a right mouse click with Fluxbox makes a lot of sense and you can do a lot with Fluxbox, which is why so many people like it. For me, it's not my style, so it is not what I use on a regular basis, but saying"it is not my style" does not mean I don't like it; actually it is quite flexible and useful; it's just not what I use for the 3/4 of the time that I am focused on desktop use; that's where I go with XFCE or KDE. When I want to go light, I pick IceWM #1, Fluxbox #2, JWM and others only if they are nicely preconfigured. LXDE makes a decent alternate desktop, and Openbox a decent alternate window manager.

Yes, Brian, it's all about configuration. JWM can look good. I even got idesk figured out to see whether I'd actually want to go back to desktop icons (don't think so...).

To crash to the opposite extreme, I got ratpoison working. Holy cow. The thing is, once you get those windows figured out by dividing up your screen by halves and quarters, you really can work efficiently by bouncing from app to app. But most people probably don't have the patience to get over that initial learning curve.

malanrich wrote:Yes, Brian, it's all about configuration. JWM can look good. I even got idesk figured out to see whether I'd actually want to go back to desktop icons (don't think so...).

To crash to the opposite extreme, I got ratpoison working. Holy cow. The thing is, once you get those windows figured out by dividing up your screen by halves and quarters, you really can work efficiently by bouncing from app to app. But most people probably don't have the patience to get over that initial learning curve.

Yeah, ratpoison carves out a very special niche, and it is extremely fast and efficient, but it has a unique interface, which makes its niche a small and special niche! It makes fluxbox look ordinary in comparison, even though fluxbox is anything but ordinary!

I am really pleased to see that we still have IceWM as the default window manager in M8.2 Test 1. I really like all of the themes and alternatives available, but I'd like to nominate IceClearlooks as a candidate for the default appearance. I think that the task bar panel is clear, clean, nicely visible, and --- this is helpful for the newcomer, a somewhat familiar look, particularly for those just finding antiX on an old box coming from Windows 98 or XP. I would not be offended if others disagree with this, but I think this look would do real well as the first thing a user sees when they login. Speaking of that, the boot splash screens are outstanding, as is all of the art work, both in Fluxbox and in IceWM - a work to be very proud of - VERY well done! Man, what have I been missing these past few weeks! Impressive!

openbox FTW!