Re: Question about WindowMaker

[Charles Philip Chan]

Martin Dietze <di@fh-wedel.de> writes:

> I don't see any suicide battle in this

I don't see it either.

> - WM is stable and far less resource consuming than any other desktop
> environment. Yet it is a complete (while slim) environment rather than
> a bare bones window manager. 

True, but still I wouldn't call it an environment. I like it because it is:
(1) small & fast, (2) stable and, (3) featureful for a window manager.

> I haven't seen anything in WM that crashes all the time for the last 7
> years. This cannot be said about other desktop environments.

Very true.

> I've tried different enviromments in the past, have even been using
> GNOME for the last half year (just for the kick of an occsasional
> change), but so far I've always been back to WM after a while.

I have a special interest in trying out and using different window
managers and environments. Some of them are really nice, but for some
reason I keep coming back to WMaker.

> I don't see why this should be a political question or anything
> related to some kind of sentimentality. If soemthing does the job
> better than others, then it is a valid and good choice, nothing less,
> nothing more.

Choice is good.

Charles

-- 
Your job is being a professor and researcher: That's one hell of a good excuse
for some of the brain-damages of minix.
(Linus Torvalds to Andrew Tanenbaum)

pgpiyw0xYaOz2.pgp
Description: PGP signature