5 ms·

In regards to number 7: >7. Use a tiling WM I recall reading a Plan 9 pdf on the Acme editor (sorry cant find it right now). A unique feature to that text ed

by mdg 16y ago

In regards to number 7: >7. Use a tiling WM I recall reading a Plan 9 pdf on the Acme editor (sorry cant find it right now). A unique feature to that text editor is that it is heavily mouse-based. This is contrary to many peoples (myself, at the time, included) belief that both hands on the keyboard equals increased productivity. I used to be 100% dwm. The euphoria of navigating around with your home row was great (vim + vimperator + dwm). When I purchased a MB, I left my tiled-wm ways and have not really missed it. Switching my hand from keyboard to mouse feels more natural than a lot of awkward <Ctrl+__> or <Alt+__> commands. Plus, most TWMs I have used require a decent amount of time upfront to become accustomed to all the keybindings. The time difference in switching between mouse and keyboard vs just using the keyboard is so trivial that it really isnt worth the plunge in my opinion, though if you think you might like it better, by all means try it. Something such as a unified desktop (OS X, Haiku, Gnome, KDE) will make you more productive rather than a window manager that optimizes for pixel real estate.

yozhik 16y ago
I recently started using Bluetile (http://www.bluetile.org/ http://www.bluetile.org/). It has all of the keyboard bindings, but there is also a dock that allows mouse control of major features. It's been a pretty easy transition for me because of this.
javert 16y ago
Like the author, I use the Awesome window manager. I think you have a perfectly valid perspective, but just want to speak for the other side. The main benefit I get from Awesome is having 9 workspaces ("desktops"). I use my mod key (in my case CAPS but it can be Alt or anything) plus # to get to any workspace. I have web browser on one desktop, email on another, IM on another, terminals on another, programming on another, and it's really, really easy to switch around. This was a HUGE improvement for me over Windows (and even Gnome), just in terms of managing multiple windows/applications running at once. Also nice to be able to get two windows to share the screen with a keystroke, if I need to look at two things at once. And in the same vein, tiling is really nice for IMs, because on the workspace for IMs, I can see all my chats at once. Normally for other tasks, like web browsing, I just switch into the tiling "mode" that doesn't tile (i.e. application is "maximixed").
- mdg 16y ago
  Do you use a terminal multiplexer or something similar? I only ask because my set up was exactly like what you just described. Once I buckled down and started using one, it negated the need for a lot of the tags I had with dwm.
  - javert 16y ago
    I've never needed one, probably since a tiling WM allows you to accomplish something similar, as you point out. I know screen has some nifty features, but for the things I do, a tiling WM is a superset of the functionality screen would provide.
    - flogic 16y ago
      Screen's primary payoff is when your connection to another machine goes down a lot for whatever reason. A good wm can handle the multiplexing better but they don't restore context like screen.
      - aplusbi 16y ago
        I love this! I use dtach (with dvtm) instead of screen, but it's serves the same purpose. I'll be working at my desk and then have to head to a meeting (with my laptop) to another floor. My ssh connection will drop but once I log back in I just need to reattach and I'm right where I left off.
      - javert 16y ago
        I know, and I usually work locally.
  - silentbicycle 16y ago
    I use dwm and tmux (rather than screen). My muscle memory knows that I keep a tmux session local to the computer I'm physically located at on #1, remote (if any) on #2, side tasks on #3-7, Emacs on #8, and a web browser on #9. (I use a slightly different setup on a dual-head station, but usually w/ two Emacs windows, etc.)
jkkramer 16y ago
I'm reminded of a tidbit from an old AskTog[1] article: "We’ve done a cool $50 million of R & D on the Apple Human Interface. We discovered, among other things, two pertinent facts: * Test subjects consistently report that keyboarding is faster than mousing. * The stopwatch consistently proves mousing is faster than keyboarding." There are probably all sorts of caveats to this (and the research may have changed since then) but I'm reminded of it whenever I see people extolling the virtues of their ascetic, keyboard-centric dev environment. I'm not saying they're wrong, just that in lieu of benchmarks and studies, I'm skeptical. [1] http://www.asktog.com/TOI/toi06KeyboardVMouse1.html http://www.asktog.com/TOI/toi06KeyboardVMouse1.html
- loup-vaillant 16y ago
  Interestingly, I don't feel faster with the keyboard. I do, however, feel more comfortable when I stick to one mode (keyboard-only or mouse-only). It's switching that feels awkward. I also don't use Xmonad out of pure Geekiness (though I started that way). I use it because I find it more comfortable. I work at the same time with OSX, and while moving windows with the mouse is probably just as fast, it annoys me. Now the reason why the keyboard is slower than the mouse may be sub-optimal short-cuts. For example, when editing, one very often needs to change lines, or otherwise navigate the text. A sensible short-cut to support that could be alt + jkli (assuming a Qwerty layout). Then you don't have to leave the home row at all. But if you have to use the actual arrows, it's slower, and that may make the mouse the better choice.
  - natep 16y ago
    You seem to be describing vim's hjkl (left, down, up, right, IIRC)
    - loup-vaillant 16y ago
      I am, except modifier key, makes the trick possible on (customizable) mod-less editors. The idea is not mine, by the way: http://xahlee.org/emacs/ergonomic_emacs_keybinding.html http://xahlee.org/emacs/ergonomic_emacs_keybinding.html
bitwize 16y ago
Amen. When are people going to get it through their heads that using the mouse is faster than the keyboard? This has been determined by Apple's UI research and known for some decades now.
- jbarham 16y ago
  Source: http://www.asktog.com/TOI/toi06KeyboardVMouse1.html http://www.asktog.com/TOI/toi06KeyboardVMouse1.html "We’ve done a cool $50 million of R & D on the Apple Human Interface. We discovered, among other things, two pertinent facts: * Test subjects consistently report that keyboarding is faster than mousing. * The stopwatch consistently proves mousing is faster than keyboarding." This is the reason that the Plan 9 folks gave for making their UI mouse rather than keyboard based.
  - mynameishere 16y ago
    It takes two seconds to decide upon which special-function key to press. Why would you link to something so foolish?
- javert 16y ago
  How can this be? I'm just not convinced. The main thing I use my WM for is switching applications. Any application I want to switch to is modkey+number, and I know the numbers.
  - albemuth 16y ago
    That's why you do research, because "It feels faster for me" usually doesn't lead to the best decision making.
    - technomancy 16y ago
      The problem is research costs money, and people with money are more likely to be interested in average users. Nobody's going to do research on obsessive HN-reader-type users who are willing to go out of their way to memorize lots of Emacs commands in order to ensure their exocortex is fully optimized.
wzdd 16y ago
I use both OS X and ion3 (depending on whether I'm using a Mac or a Linux box). Ion3 is a tiling WM and about as far removed from the OS X GUI as you can imagine. Nonetheless, my workflow in both is exactly the same: one large Vim window, one large terminal window. I never move the windows around once they're open, and I can switch between them using the keyboard. Once you've got an editor you're comfortable with, there doesn't seem to be much advantage to using a tiling window manager in terms of productivity. Things like browsers are a separate issue, but if I'm switching to a browser I'm already distracted. :)
silentbicycle 16y ago
Plan9's acme editor was based on Oberon, FWIW - you can probably find more info there. I have a lot of respect for the design, but have never gotten comfortable with it. (I've used Emacs for years, vi for several years before that.) Its "every word in every buffer is also a command if you click on it the right way" seems like the best mouse/keyboard UI synthesis I've seen, though, if you're doing actual work with complex tools you can invest time in learning. A lot of GUI design seems optimized for people doing simple stuff and hoping the UI will be self-evident / "intuitive". I wouldn't expect AutoCAD to be "intuitive", for example - the problem domain itself is far too complex. Also, I use dwm, and got a netbook recently (dual-booting Windows 7 and Debian). On a screen that smal, tiled wms really shine, and Windows 7's interface feels like a joke in comparison. The low-hanging fruit on a tiling window manager makes the biggest difference, though - having N different workspaces, automatically arranging windows, and being able to hit alt-3 to switch to the third workspace / alt-enter to open a shell is most of what you need to know.
- mcn 16y ago
  Another thing in favor of a tiling WM (and a keyboard centric setup in general) on a netbook is that it is often more convenient to use a netbook without a mouse. I am happy to reduce my track pad use in general, especially hold-button-and-drag operations.
  - silentbicycle 16y ago
    No kidding! The trackpad on mine is too close to the spacebar, anyway. I just have it turned off (Fn-F7) most of the time. dwm + dmenu + emacs has me pretty much covered for mouseless usage. I was skeptical about netbooks, but saw a great deal on craigslist and decided to try one. With dwm, Emacs, and terminus, I have two 80x45 buffers, which is quite adequate. (I also bike nearly everywhere, and it weighs so little that I don't hesitate to carry it with me all the time.)
jamii 16y ago
> Something such as a unified desktop (OS X, Haiku, Gnome, KDE) will make you more productive ... Its not an either-or thing. XMonad works perfectly well Gnome, panels and all. It only replaces metacity/compiz, not the whole environment.
- mdg 16y ago
  The same can be done with Openbox. I am not so sure that makes it a good idea though. Why undermine something so deliberate?
ori_b 16y ago
I use awesome (a tiling wm) in a very mouse heavy way. Tiling does not mean you're stuck with using the keyboard. It does mean that you don't have to worry about managing screen real estate nearly as much.
jrockway 16y ago
Something such as a unified desktop (OS X, Haiku, Gnome, KDE) will make you more productive rather than a window manager that optimizes for pixel real estate. UNIX is my unified desktop. I only use the window manager to manage windows.

by mdg 16y ago

yozhik 16y ago

I recently started using Bluetile (http://www.bluetile.org/ http://www.bluetile.org/). It has all of the keyboard bindings, but there is also a dock that allows mouse control of major features. It's been a pretty easy transition for me because of this.

javert 16y ago

Like the author, I use the Awesome window manager. I think you have a perfectly valid perspective, but just want to speak for the other side. The main benefit I get from Awesome is having 9 workspaces ("desktops"). I use my mod key (in my case CAPS but it can be Alt or anything) plus # to get to any workspace. I have web browser on one desktop, email on another, IM on another, terminals on another, programming on another, and it's really, really easy to switch around. This was a HUGE improvement for me over Windows (and even Gnome), just in terms of managing multiple windows/applications running at once. Also nice to be able to get two windows to share the screen with a keystroke, if I need to look at two things at once. And in the same vein, tiling is really nice for IMs, because on the workspace for IMs, I can see all my chats at once. Normally for other tasks, like web browsing, I just switch into the tiling "mode" that doesn't tile (i.e. application is "maximixed").

mdg 16y ago
Do you use a terminal multiplexer or something similar? I only ask because my set up was exactly like what you just described. Once I buckled down and started using one, it negated the need for a lot of the tags I had with dwm.
- javert 16y ago
  I've never needed one, probably since a tiling WM allows you to accomplish something similar, as you point out. I know screen has some nifty features, but for the things I do, a tiling WM is a superset of the functionality screen would provide.
  - flogic 16y ago
    Screen's primary payoff is when your connection to another machine goes down a lot for whatever reason. A good wm can handle the multiplexing better but they don't restore context like screen.
    - aplusbi 16y ago
      I love this! I use dtach (with dvtm) instead of screen, but it's serves the same purpose. I'll be working at my desk and then have to head to a meeting (with my laptop) to another floor. My ssh connection will drop but once I log back in I just need to reattach and I'm right where I left off.
    - javert 16y ago
      I know, and I usually work locally.
- silentbicycle 16y ago
  I use dwm and tmux (rather than screen). My muscle memory knows that I keep a tmux session local to the computer I'm physically located at on #1, remote (if any) on #2, side tasks on #3-7, Emacs on #8, and a web browser on #9. (I use a slightly different setup on a dual-head station, but usually w/ two Emacs windows, etc.)

jkkramer 16y ago

I'm reminded of a tidbit from an old AskTog[1] article: "We’ve done a cool $50 million of R & D on the Apple Human Interface. We discovered, among other things, two pertinent facts: * Test subjects consistently report that keyboarding is faster than mousing. * The stopwatch consistently proves mousing is faster than keyboarding." There are probably all sorts of caveats to this (and the research may have changed since then) but I'm reminded of it whenever I see people extolling the virtues of their ascetic, keyboard-centric dev environment. I'm not saying they're wrong, just that in lieu of benchmarks and studies, I'm skeptical. [1] http://www.asktog.com/TOI/toi06KeyboardVMouse1.html http://www.asktog.com/TOI/toi06KeyboardVMouse1.html

loup-vaillant 16y ago
Interestingly, I don't feel faster with the keyboard. I do, however, feel more comfortable when I stick to one mode (keyboard-only or mouse-only). It's switching that feels awkward. I also don't use Xmonad out of pure Geekiness (though I started that way). I use it because I find it more comfortable. I work at the same time with OSX, and while moving windows with the mouse is probably just as fast, it annoys me. Now the reason why the keyboard is slower than the mouse may be sub-optimal short-cuts. For example, when editing, one very often needs to change lines, or otherwise navigate the text. A sensible short-cut to support that could be alt + jkli (assuming a Qwerty layout). Then you don't have to leave the home row at all. But if you have to use the actual arrows, it's slower, and that may make the mouse the better choice.
- natep 16y ago
  You seem to be describing vim's hjkl (left, down, up, right, IIRC)
  - loup-vaillant 16y ago
    I am, except modifier key, makes the trick possible on (customizable) mod-less editors. The idea is not mine, by the way: http://xahlee.org/emacs/ergonomic_emacs_keybinding.html http://xahlee.org/emacs/ergonomic_emacs_keybinding.html

bitwize 16y ago

Amen. When are people going to get it through their heads that using the mouse is faster than the keyboard? This has been determined by Apple's UI research and known for some decades now.

jbarham 16y ago
Source: http://www.asktog.com/TOI/toi06KeyboardVMouse1.html http://www.asktog.com/TOI/toi06KeyboardVMouse1.html "We’ve done a cool $50 million of R & D on the Apple Human Interface. We discovered, among other things, two pertinent facts: * Test subjects consistently report that keyboarding is faster than mousing. * The stopwatch consistently proves mousing is faster than keyboarding." This is the reason that the Plan 9 folks gave for making their UI mouse rather than keyboard based.
- mynameishere 16y ago
  It takes two seconds to decide upon which special-function key to press. Why would you link to something so foolish?
javert 16y ago
How can this be? I'm just not convinced. The main thing I use my WM for is switching applications. Any application I want to switch to is modkey+number, and I know the numbers.
- albemuth 16y ago
  That's why you do research, because "It feels faster for me" usually doesn't lead to the best decision making.
  - technomancy 16y ago
    The problem is research costs money, and people with money are more likely to be interested in average users. Nobody's going to do research on obsessive HN-reader-type users who are willing to go out of their way to memorize lots of Emacs commands in order to ensure their exocortex is fully optimized.

wzdd 16y ago

I use both OS X and ion3 (depending on whether I'm using a Mac or a Linux box). Ion3 is a tiling WM and about as far removed from the OS X GUI as you can imagine. Nonetheless, my workflow in both is exactly the same: one large Vim window, one large terminal window. I never move the windows around once they're open, and I can switch between them using the keyboard. Once you've got an editor you're comfortable with, there doesn't seem to be much advantage to using a tiling window manager in terms of productivity. Things like browsers are a separate issue, but if I'm switching to a browser I'm already distracted. :)

silentbicycle 16y ago

Plan9's acme editor was based on Oberon, FWIW - you can probably find more info there. I have a lot of respect for the design, but have never gotten comfortable with it. (I've used Emacs for years, vi for several years before that.) Its "every word in every buffer is also a command if you click on it the right way" seems like the best mouse/keyboard UI synthesis I've seen, though, if you're doing actual work with complex tools you can invest time in learning. A lot of GUI design seems optimized for people doing simple stuff and hoping the UI will be self-evident / "intuitive". I wouldn't expect AutoCAD to be "intuitive", for example - the problem domain itself is far too complex. Also, I use dwm, and got a netbook recently (dual-booting Windows 7 and Debian). On a screen that smal, tiled wms really shine, and Windows 7's interface feels like a joke in comparison. The low-hanging fruit on a tiling window manager makes the biggest difference, though - having N different workspaces, automatically arranging windows, and being able to hit alt-3 to switch to the third workspace / alt-enter to open a shell is most of what you need to know.

mcn 16y ago
Another thing in favor of a tiling WM (and a keyboard centric setup in general) on a netbook is that it is often more convenient to use a netbook without a mouse. I am happy to reduce my track pad use in general, especially hold-button-and-drag operations.
- silentbicycle 16y ago
  No kidding! The trackpad on mine is too close to the spacebar, anyway. I just have it turned off (Fn-F7) most of the time. dwm + dmenu + emacs has me pretty much covered for mouseless usage. I was skeptical about netbooks, but saw a great deal on craigslist and decided to try one. With dwm, Emacs, and terminus, I have two 80x45 buffers, which is quite adequate. (I also bike nearly everywhere, and it weighs so little that I don't hesitate to carry it with me all the time.)

jamii 16y ago

> Something such as a unified desktop (OS X, Haiku, Gnome, KDE) will make you more productive ... Its not an either-or thing. XMonad works perfectly well Gnome, panels and all. It only replaces metacity/compiz, not the whole environment.

mdg 16y ago
The same can be done with Openbox. I am not so sure that makes it a good idea though. Why undermine something so deliberate?

ori_b 16y ago

I use awesome (a tiling wm) in a very mouse heavy way. Tiling does not mean you're stuck with using the keyboard. It does mean that you don't have to worry about managing screen real estate nearly as much.

jrockway 16y ago

Something such as a unified desktop (OS X, Haiku, Gnome, KDE) will make you more productive rather than a window manager that optimizes for pixel real estate. UNIX is my unified desktop. I only use the window manager to manage windows.