4 ms·
I've been using i3 for about two years. I sampled a few other tiling WMs, including awesome, before settling on i3. Realistically there isn't much difference be
by siddboots 13y ago
I've been using i3 for about two years. I sampled a few other tiling WMs, including awesome, before settling on i3. Realistically there isn't much difference between them in terms of the features that I personally use, but these are the main things that sealed it for me:
* Tree-based/hierarchical tiling.
* Simple as hell multi-monitor.
* Beautiful config file [1].
* JSON API [2]
* Modal, vim-like key bindings.
[1] http://code.stapelberg.de/git/i3/tree/i3.config http://code.stapelberg.de/git/i3/tree/i3.config
[2] http://i3wm.org/docs/ipc.html http://i3wm.org/docs/ipc.html
- m_ram 13y agoI haven't used i3, but I did use awesome for about a year before settling on Xfce. The thing all the tiling window managers don't have is a compositor. I don't care about shadows or animations, but it makes everything seem smoother and faster. The compositor in Xfce uses xrender instead of opengl, so it works pretty well even on low-end machines.