16 ms·

I got REALLY excited when I read this title until I read the documentation and now I probably won't even bother testing it. If anyone is looking for an i3-like

by nickjj 7y ago

I got REALLY excited when I read this title until I read the documentation and now I probably won't even bother testing it. If anyone is looking for an i3-like tiling window manager (a Linux tiling wm) Fanzy Zones isn't it. This one requires pre-setting a bunch of layouts up front, unlike i3 where you can just seamlessly open and move windows that auto-split as you go with zero window configuration up front. IMO the mods should change the title of this post to define what type of tiling window manager it is, such as "Fancy Zones, a pre-defined layout based tiling window manager from Microsoft". In the title's current form it's borderline clickbait.

nailer 7y ago
It's an Open Source project. Send a PR or a feature request: https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/new?assignees=&labels=&template=feature_request.md&title= https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/new?assignees=...
- nickjj 7y ago
  > https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/new?assignees=&labels=&template=feature_request.md&title= https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/new?assignees=... This isn't something that's really a feature request. It would require changing how the whole entire application works at a fundamental level, or really building 2 applications in 1. That's why you have 2 different sets of tiling window managers on Linux. You either have fixed layout ones where it's automatic after configuration or manual tiling window managers instead of 1 tool trying to do both.
  - ndarwincorn 7y ago
    > You either have fixed layout ones or dynamic tiling window managers instead of 1 tool trying to do both. I must be missing something, because the 'dynamic' tiling window managers are 1 tool doing both fixed and floating (or stacking) layouts.
    - nickjj 7y ago
      Sorry, I should have been more clear in my words. I edit what you quoted for clarity. i3 acts much differently because if you open 1 window it takes up your whole screen and if you open another window it will be split 50/50 (the direction depends on what hotkey you hit). And it keeps going like this. You can just naturally use your system and let the tiling window manager worry about resizing things and you can fine tune the sizes with hotkeys on the spot if you desire to have non-symmetrical splits. This is why i3 is classified as a manual tiling window manager. You get to control how the splits happen on the spot, rather than it being automatic as long as you pre-configure the layouts beforehand. i3 also lets you optionally choose to make windows floating on demand with hotkeys or even pre-configure certain apps or window titles to be floating by default. There's stacking as well. This video does a good job showing how i3 works and feels: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKviflL9XeI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKviflL9XeI (and how it's drastically different than Fancy Zones).
      - ndarwincorn 7y ago
        Ah I realize how I misunderstood/how that was poorly worded, but I'm well aware of how i3 works, thanks. This may come as a shock to you, but some of us prefer our highly-tailored pre-configured tiling setups to the ad-hoc interaction that is i3.
        nickjj 7y ago
        > This may come as a shock to you, but some of us prefer our highly-tailored pre-configured tiling setups to the ad-hoc interaction that is i3. Yes, that's why i3 and other wms exist on Linux and everyone is happy using the tool they prefer. I'm more upset about the title of the post being clickbait because like you said, some people prefer different styles of tiled window managers. Having it defined as "tiling window manager" is going to make the 50% of the people who prefer i3 feel they got baited into clicking the link. I know I went from "omg best software day ever" to "..." between reading the title and clicking the link.
        7y ago
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- WorldMaker 7y ago
  From the existing backlog, this is a close representation of the feature request: https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/160 https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/160 It's not exactly the "zero configuration" the parent wants, but it's close, and aligned with how some tiling managers work. (As the other arguments get into, tiling window manager is a wide field with a variety of solutions and opinions differ.)
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
mtrower 7y ago
So, there are a great many tiling window managers out there. i3 is just one fish in the sea. Here's a starting point at a list just for X11: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/window_manager#Tiling_window_managers https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/window_manager#Tiling_w... The usual classification is static vs. dynamic: static managers maintain a certain fixed layout of slots which they then fill windows into, while dynamic ones adjust the number, layout and size of those slots on the fly as new windows are spawned. While I don't usually see them classified this way, there is also pre-defined vs. on-the-fly (manual?) layout. This is pretty much what it says on the tin; pre-defined managers have pre-defined zones (for static managers) or algorithms (for dynamic managers); generally you can customize these in some way if you wish. On-the-fly managers let you create custom layouts as you go. Examples of various combinations: static, pre-defined: Fancy Zones, Slate, most simple tools for windows / mac static, on-the-fly: stumpwm/ratpoison, emacs (not really a window manager but the paradigm is familiar to many) dynamic, pre-defined: dwm, awesomewm, xmonad dynamic, on-the-fly: i3 All of these models have strengths and weaknesses. Dynamic/pre-defined (e.g. dwm) is well suited for a workflow leaning on traditional unix tools (vi, sed, awk, lots of shell magic) where one tends to frequently spawn and despawn terminals (i3 is probably also decent here), but tends to fall down if you have a lot of windows to manage (workspaces can sometimes help with this, but they aren't always the answer). Static/on-the-fly (e.g. stumpwm) works really well if you have a lot of windows to manage, but only want to display a few of them at a time in some ad-hoc manner --- but isn't so great if you want to constantly adjust your layout. Static/pre-defined usually have a control system that is less automatic (more overhead on the user) but play nicer in environments that are traditionally dominated by stacking managers (so also less headache for the user). i3 is kind of it's own beast; it has a lot of power in creating whatever specific layout you might find optimal at the moment; downsides include evolved complexity as your layout develops, and simple lack of the specific strengths of other approaches. You seem to have found happiness with i3, which is great. I currently prefer the approach of dwm or stumpwm, depending. Others have other preferences, but all of the above are valid approaches to tiling. While I agree that more detail in the title could be a good thing, I definitely wouldn't call it clickbait.
- nickjj 7y ago
  It's especially clickbait because most people who exclusively use Windows aren't aware of any tiled window managers so they are going to assume this is the only way to do it and draw a conclusion about tiled window managers based on Fancy Zones specifically. Heck the 6 minute Youtube tutorial in the README is just 6 minutes of trying to explain the convoluted configuration to set up and use layouts. There's not even 1 second of video showing 2 tiled windows together when the project is supposed to be the official Microsoft tiled window manager.

by nickjj 7y ago

nailer 7y ago

It's an Open Source project. Send a PR or a feature request: https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/new?assignees=&labels=&template=feature_request.md&title= https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/new?assignees=...

nickjj 7y ago
> https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/new?assignees=&labels=&template=feature_request.md&title= https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/new?assignees=... This isn't something that's really a feature request. It would require changing how the whole entire application works at a fundamental level, or really building 2 applications in 1. That's why you have 2 different sets of tiling window managers on Linux. You either have fixed layout ones where it's automatic after configuration or manual tiling window managers instead of 1 tool trying to do both.
- ndarwincorn 7y ago
  > You either have fixed layout ones or dynamic tiling window managers instead of 1 tool trying to do both. I must be missing something, because the 'dynamic' tiling window managers are 1 tool doing both fixed and floating (or stacking) layouts.
  - nickjj 7y ago
    Sorry, I should have been more clear in my words. I edit what you quoted for clarity. i3 acts much differently because if you open 1 window it takes up your whole screen and if you open another window it will be split 50/50 (the direction depends on what hotkey you hit). And it keeps going like this. You can just naturally use your system and let the tiling window manager worry about resizing things and you can fine tune the sizes with hotkeys on the spot if you desire to have non-symmetrical splits. This is why i3 is classified as a manual tiling window manager. You get to control how the splits happen on the spot, rather than it being automatic as long as you pre-configure the layouts beforehand. i3 also lets you optionally choose to make windows floating on demand with hotkeys or even pre-configure certain apps or window titles to be floating by default. There's stacking as well. This video does a good job showing how i3 works and feels: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKviflL9XeI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKviflL9XeI (and how it's drastically different than Fancy Zones).
    - ndarwincorn 7y ago
      Ah I realize how I misunderstood/how that was poorly worded, but I'm well aware of how i3 works, thanks. This may come as a shock to you, but some of us prefer our highly-tailored pre-configured tiling setups to the ad-hoc interaction that is i3.
      - nickjj 7y ago
        > This may come as a shock to you, but some of us prefer our highly-tailored pre-configured tiling setups to the ad-hoc interaction that is i3. Yes, that's why i3 and other wms exist on Linux and everyone is happy using the tool they prefer. I'm more upset about the title of the post being clickbait because like you said, some people prefer different styles of tiled window managers. Having it defined as "tiling window manager" is going to make the 50% of the people who prefer i3 feel they got baited into clicking the link. I know I went from "omg best software day ever" to "..." between reading the title and clicking the link.
        7y ago
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
WorldMaker 7y ago
From the existing backlog, this is a close representation of the feature request: https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/160 https://github.com/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/160 It's not exactly the "zero configuration" the parent wants, but it's close, and aligned with how some tiling managers work. (As the other arguments get into, tiling window manager is a wide field with a variety of solutions and opinions differ.)

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

mtrower 7y ago

So, there are a great many tiling window managers out there. i3 is just one fish in the sea. Here's a starting point at a list just for X11: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/window_manager#Tiling_window_managers https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/window_manager#Tiling_w... The usual classification is static vs. dynamic: static managers maintain a certain fixed layout of slots which they then fill windows into, while dynamic ones adjust the number, layout and size of those slots on the fly as new windows are spawned. While I don't usually see them classified this way, there is also pre-defined vs. on-the-fly (manual?) layout. This is pretty much what it says on the tin; pre-defined managers have pre-defined zones (for static managers) or algorithms (for dynamic managers); generally you can customize these in some way if you wish. On-the-fly managers let you create custom layouts as you go. Examples of various combinations: static, pre-defined: Fancy Zones, Slate, most simple tools for windows / mac static, on-the-fly: stumpwm/ratpoison, emacs (not really a window manager but the paradigm is familiar to many) dynamic, pre-defined: dwm, awesomewm, xmonad dynamic, on-the-fly: i3 All of these models have strengths and weaknesses. Dynamic/pre-defined (e.g. dwm) is well suited for a workflow leaning on traditional unix tools (vi, sed, awk, lots of shell magic) where one tends to frequently spawn and despawn terminals (i3 is probably also decent here), but tends to fall down if you have a lot of windows to manage (workspaces can sometimes help with this, but they aren't always the answer). Static/on-the-fly (e.g. stumpwm) works really well if you have a lot of windows to manage, but only want to display a few of them at a time in some ad-hoc manner --- but isn't so great if you want to constantly adjust your layout. Static/pre-defined usually have a control system that is less automatic (more overhead on the user) but play nicer in environments that are traditionally dominated by stacking managers (so also less headache for the user). i3 is kind of it's own beast; it has a lot of power in creating whatever specific layout you might find optimal at the moment; downsides include evolved complexity as your layout develops, and simple lack of the specific strengths of other approaches. You seem to have found happiness with i3, which is great. I currently prefer the approach of dwm or stumpwm, depending. Others have other preferences, but all of the above are valid approaches to tiling. While I agree that more detail in the title could be a good thing, I definitely wouldn't call it clickbait.

nickjj 7y ago
It's especially clickbait because most people who exclusively use Windows aren't aware of any tiled window managers so they are going to assume this is the only way to do it and draw a conclusion about tiled window managers based on Fancy Zones specifically. Heck the 6 minute Youtube tutorial in the README is just 6 minutes of trying to explain the convoluted configuration to set up and use layouts. There's not even 1 second of video showing 2 tiled windows together when the project is supposed to be the official Microsoft tiled window manager.