Slashdot Mirror


Window Maker 0.80 Released

An anonymous submitter points out that Window Maker, the window manager behind GNUStep, is now up to version 0.80. There is NEWS which describes some of the recent changes, as well as a Changelog.

5 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. Windowmaker (the UNIX way) vs KDE (Windows way) by Bronster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Now that I've put all the flamebait in the title...

    I'm quite impressed with KDE for general use, but damn is it slow to start and a little clunky to use. Even on a PIII/866 (current home box) with 512Mb memory, it's really not quick. There's also heaps of background tasks running providing 'services' to all those windows.

    The end result is a slick user experience (once you're logged in), but also a more Windows feel - cutesy icons everywhere, preferences almost-all-in-one-place-but-don't-try-anything-tri cky. Widgets that just don't fit right if you resize or change your fonts (I blame this on bad coding - both in Windows Apps and in KDE Apps). A help system that looks nice, but pops up half off the screen if you're on an 800x600 laptop.

    Enough about the off-topic stuff though, to Windowmaker.

    I started using Windowmaker all of a couple of years ago (boo, hiss - before that amiwm a lot (reminded me of the Amiga, and was good over networked X sessions because it's so light weight - looked good on grey dumb-terminals too) - also twm and fvwm on VNC sessions, and on my Sony NWS-3410 which sort of worked, just, as an X terminal on good days.

    Anyway, I've always been impressed with the simplicity of Windowmaker - dock apps have enough room to really show useful information (two wmbiff docks gives the 10 most commonly used mailboxes, mix in some fetchmail or isync and custom mutt command lines for each, and it's a one click mail solution). Back when I was using Linux as my primary desktop on the laptop, and Windows was just a VMware that got booted up for the occasional Word.doc, Windowmaker was a massive productivity boost over the others.

    I still think that if I was using a Linux desktop for work rather than experimentation and games (ksame here I come!), Windowmaker would plain let me get more work done - KDE has too much kruft. With a desktop menu with 3 options:

    rxvt

    * exit

    * save

    - yep, that's it, and a docked netscape (now Opera or Mozilla) launcher, what more does one need? Not much for programming, mail (the wmbiffs above) and web. Any other tools can be launched from a handy shell quicker than navigating those menus. Sure it costs in time to learn, but it pays off bigtime in productivity, and the speed and simplicity of the WM means it's never in your way.

    The improvement in Windowmaker I've enjoyed recently is that windows now automatically appear over blank bits of screen rather than over other windows. I really like that.

    P.S - my config has everything in the top right corner, docks going down, minimised icons going across - 4 virtual screens (Main,Work,Net(Web),Personal) - Netscape/Opera auto-launches on Screen3, Email on Screen2 or Screen4 depending on Mailbox, rxvt's on current screen. All is happy.

  2. Re:Linux needs a standard window manager by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sigh. The best thing about Linux is CHOICES! I agree having a standard window manager may be seen as something that's needed, but I don't really think it is. I have yet to see a window manager that doesn't act similarly to another window manager. GNOME is similar to KDE(Ok I know they aren't window managers but to newbies they seem like it....so think sawfish to kwin) in the way it works and Window Maker is similar to Afterstep and so on and so on. Nothing is so different from one window manager to another that makes them totaly unusable. The only exception to this may be twm (who want's to use THAT ugly thing?). So, since they are all pretty similar one can deduce that a standard is not needed. So what if it takes a user 3 weeks to learn how to change the background? As long as they can use it to do real work, I have yet to see a window manager that would totally baffle a windows user to the point that they can't do work.

    --

    Gorkman

  3. Easter Eggs by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Out of interest, did anyone else happen to check the version of WindowMaker they're running on Christmas eve?

    I did. Freaked the crap out of me until I realised what was going on... (Why Christmas Eve though? Or does it start even earlier?)

    (This was in 0.65, as compiled by those nice people at Slackware, but I assume it'll be in the default version of WindowMaker shipped with other distributions)

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  4. Re:umm by Glytch · · Score: 5, Informative

    In a way, I wish I had never discovered Windowmaker. I've been spoiled by it too much. I'm too used to 0% cpu and 0% mem usage (as measured by a whole slew of cpu and mem meters) from my window manager. Every time I try out a new build of KDE or Gnome, I get to impatient and irritated and go right back to Windowmaker and DFM.

    Damn you, Alfredo Kojima! Damn you to hell! ;)

  5. Re:GTK vs Windowmaker vs AfterStep by aussersterne · · Score: 5, Informative

    I haven't used AfterStep in a while, but if it's still more or less similar to the 1.0-era AfterStep, then it's not really all that similar to NextStep.

    AfterStep began as a hack to FVWM 1.0 (originally, the dotfile format was almost identical) and thus is much more similar in terms of the way it behaves for the user to any other of the "old-school" window managers, with a dotfile to control behavior and little in the way of dynamic configuration or application management once you're in.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW