As a long time dwm[1] user and the developer of a tiling script for KDE, Krohnkite[2], I'm purely curious what makes i3 so popular. It makes you spend extra bra

As a long time dwm[1] user and the developer of a tiling script for KDE, Krohnkite[2], I'm purely curious what makes i3 so popular. It makes you spend extra brain cycles on managing windows, which isn't far from stacking WMs in my perspective. I mean, this extra cycle was the reason why I abandoned stacking WM. Especially on small ("13 ~ "15) laptop screens, where people usually have <= 4 apps per virtual desktop, I think i3 doesn't have much benefit, because there are only a few possible layouts: half-and-half, master-and-stack(│├│ or │┤│) and quarter(田). All of these are well covered by Tile layout (or nv-stack, according to Arch wiki[3]). On the other hand, I do admit manual layout can be really useful on large screens and ultra-wide ones. There's neither golden nor silver layout that always works well on large area. There are just too many possibilities, and imagination is the only limit in this case. [1]: https://dwm.suckless.org/ https://dwm.suckless.org/ [2]: https://github.com/esjeon/krohnkite https://github.com/esjeon/krohnkite [3]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Comparison_of_tiling_window_managers#Layouts https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Comparison_of_tiling_wi...