The issues with it are on the development side mostly, other than its God awful hideous default wallpaper that when configuring your system you cannot escape from as it will default to the default configuration with said wallpaper if there are errors. LovelyAristaeus's Experience I have written a 400+ file configuration for it over two years and dozens of rewrites, so I like the platform alot and think it is a stand out in the WM category in terms of opening up the potential to truly make anything one wants out of their desktop UI available to users willing to learn how to configure it, which requires more than just Lua as Lua works great elsewhere but this implementation, not so much. Therefore, as they do not use many resources they are often used in distributions that target low-end hardware or power users.įor stacking only window managers, please look here.įor tiling only window managers, please look here. Many often work well on low-end systems because they do not use as many resources to run, due to the majority being minimal by design. Many window managers are used by those who enjoy having complete control over their computing experiences, as well as those who enjoy minimal interfaces.
While some window managers can, by design, take the place of a desktop environment, many of the features normally found in a desktop environment will not be included. This question in particular consists of all types of window managers, not to be confused with desktop environments. Within those three different categories are even more subcategories. Some window managers tile, some stack, and some float. Linux window managers are plentiful and can be very different from what most users are used to in the mainstream computing world. Window Managers are X clients that control the frames around where graphics are drawn (what is inside a window).
0 kommentar(er)
