4 ms·
They're simpler than desktop environments in every way. I have found that I use 10% and absolutely require 0% of the larger DEs' features, so using a simpler s
by vesak 10y ago
They're simpler than desktop environments in every way.
I have found that I use 10% and absolutely require 0% of the larger DEs' features, so using a simpler system makes sense.
Your use case seems like it would work well with tiling window managers, since you can just arrange things so that you have a single fullscreen window per workspace.
- k__ 10y agoSounds good. I think I'll try them :) I guess the performance impact of these WMs is smaller than with full blown desktop environments?
- vesak 10y ago>I guess the performance impact of these WMs is smaller than with full blown desktop environments? Yes, although with modern processors, GPUs and memory prices that is probably not an issue.
- k__ 10y agoI use Xfce for a few years now, that's why I'm asking.
- buerkle 10y agoI used Xfce and switched to i3. I can't imagine going back whenever I'm in Linux. My work environment is MacOS and its frustrating having to manually move windows and like others have said is just plain clunky after having used a tiling window manager. It did take a bit of time to get used to i3, but once I did it was glorious.
- josteink 10y agoThey are typically lighter, but may not have as much "fancy" features such as GL-rendering and HW-compositing. Basically don't bother if your main objective is for things to be "faster". These are all about efficient and keyboard-driven UX.
- k__ 10y agomy main objective isn't "faster", but one of my objectives is "not slower" :D