Ian Zimmerman wrote:
<snipped>
> I tried both KDE and Gnome; in fact I tried installing Gnome multiple
> times, and always came to the same conclusion (which is: I run KDE :).
> The problem I have with Gnome is a bit subtle, and not obvious to
> someone who's installing Linux or even a Linux GUI for the first time
> and deciding between what's out there.
>
> Namely, Gnome does not include its own window manager; KDE does.
> Gnome depends on hooks for Gnome support compiled into an external
> window manager, and at present the only window manager with full
> support for Gnome seems to be Enlightenment, AKA `E'.
Also sawfish (aka The Window Manager Formerly Known As Sawmill), which is
the one I use with Gnome.
For me, the seperation of the window manager is a positive point. I like to
fiddle. ::grin:: I've gone through quite a few wm's during the time I've
used Linux. Currently, I'm on Gnome/Sawfish, but there's a better than even
chance that over the next year or so I'll try out a few more.
> And E is a _HOG_. I mean, it's a hogggg. There seems to be no easy
> way to make it not use bitmap textures for everything imaginable on
> the screen, including caption bars and even menus. The results are
> predictable. With KDE, the entire Linux boot sequence is still much
> faster than Windoze; with Gnome and E, it's a toss-up :-( That's on a
> 32M/P160 machine, which doesn't strike me as minimalistic.
Agreed - E is a hog. There are wm's that are lighter than sawfish, but I
find sawfish to be quite acceptable. I'm currently on a PII300, but not too
long ago was on a P166 - both machines with 64 megs RAM - and found sawfish
to work reasonably well on both machines.
But what it all comes down to, really, is what works best for *you*. That's
one of the things that I *really* like about Linux - you've got the choices
out there.
--
Mike Werner KA8YSD | He that is slow to believe anything and
| everything is of great understanding,
'91 GS500E | for belief in one false principle is the
Morgantown WV | beginning of all unwisdom.
