Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux helpSpecial Offers
Feature
Four alternative Linux window managers
Share
Print
CommentsMy favorite four "alternative" Linux window managers include:
- AfterStep -- A NeXTStep clone with a nice mix of features
- Enlightenment -- A futuristic metallic look-and-feel environment
- IceWM -- A minimalist list-based window manager. These people really live what they preach -- just look at the Web site.
- FVWM -- A good balance of speed and features (my favorite)
All four are mature and stable. They are also highly configurable and fast to load, compared to KDE and GNOME. You can see an example of each of these window managers by clicking on its name in the section heading.
According to the AfterStep documentation, the program was a continuation of the BowMan window manager, which itself was based on the FVWM window manager. AfterStep has a number of nice features:
- Fast startup -- It's up and running in a matter or 15 to 20 seconds, even on my ancient Pentium desktop machine.
- Multiple desktop displays, known in AfterStep as the Pager. AfterStep gives you a little window pane that you can navigate around for the various virtual desktops.
- A powerful, high-performance, and high-quality image engine is built-in.
- Infinitely configurable with lots of themes, colors, and icons.
While I like the extremely crisp look of AfterStep windows and icons, the biggest problem I had was with documentation. The latest version of AfterStep is version 2.0 beta 4b, released on March 5. Most of the documentation I could find on the Web was for version 1.8.x and earlier. The AfterStep Web site did have a "visual" document to help explain the parts of version 2.0. You can click on an image of the desktop to bring up an explanation of the function of that part.
I like to use the AfterStep window manager occasionally for a change of pace. The speed, high contrast, and crisp colors are the main selling point for me. It has, by far, the cleanest look -- much better than KDE.
Enlightenment started out in 1997 to enhance the bland desktops of the day. It was one of the first Linux window managers to introduce high-quality graphics and icons.
Like other window managers, Enlightenment is a full-featured program, and includes:
- Fast startup -- 15 to 20 seconds.
- Multiple desktop displays -- Enlightenment has a pager function, just like AfterStep. What's cool is that when you move to a different desktop, the current desktop just slides over and the new one takes its place. Very smooth and very fast, even on slower hardware. It also supports a truly inspiring 2,048 possible desktops.
- One-touch right-click window settings -- you can change just about any behavior from focus settings to KDE support from this menu.
- Configuration program for window behavior, colors, themes, icons, etc.
- Keyboard support and key bindings. It's easy to navigate around the desktops and application windows using Alt-Tab, Ctrl-Tab, and the arrow keys.
- Simple text file configuration files -- the files reside in the ~/.enlightenment directory and provide for modification of menus, graphics, and so on.
The latest version is D16.6, with D17 in the works. Source and binaries are available on the Web site.
Enlightenment is easy to use and fast. It has a very modern metallic look. For efficiency, you could spend just a little time setting up the text-based menus and then enjoy quickly bouncing around between your computing jobs.
Again the documentation is a bit of a sticky point with me. The Web site has some FAQs, as does the online help, but they don't seem as comprehensive as other documents about setting up Linux applications.
Enlightenment is a good choice for people who like a modern and efficient desktop environment. It's sure to garner oohs and ahhs if you use Enlightenment during a presentation.
| Picking the right window manager |
|---|
|
As a laptop Linux user, I'm accustomed to interacting with my machine in several different modes.
All out speed mode:
Quick startup and run mode with a decent selection of options:
Totally integrated office, communications, maximum-option mode: Even if you have one of the latest whiz-bang 4GHz Xtremo chipset laptops, you might consider using an alternates for your quick-and-dirty computing sessions. If you have a slightly older, slightly slower machine, getting up and computing quickly might relieve some of your everyday stress. And, if you're a social bug (like me) and always looking for an attention-grabber, what better way to do it than with some "odd-looking" windows running on the old laptop. |
This window manager is the quintessential minimalist desktop environment. It is, without a doubt, the fastest window manager in this group. Load time on my old 200MHz Pentium was around 10 seconds. The GIMP loaded in about 15. IceWM is so light that its home page claims you can still run it comfortably on a 386-based PC!
What you get in IceWM is a taskbar at the bottom, with a digital clock, main menu button, and a couple of tiny graphical process monitors. Click on the IceWM menu button, and up comes a text-based menu. Oh -- and a blank desktop area ready to be filled with application windows. Pure speed, not much flash.
IceWM sports some great features:
- Multiple desktop displays -- switchable on the task bar.
- Themes -- links to lots of them are available on the IceWM Web site.
- Customizable for many different languages.
- The text-based menus are configured with a companion program called
iceme. Startup window placement, taskbar, paths, commands, and so on are controlled by the programicepref. Other IceWM functions are controlled by other "ice*" programs that reside in the /usr/bin/X11 directory. - Basic icon support.
The current version is 1.2.14. Documentation was no frills -- surprise -- but comprehensive. You should be able to find just about anything you need with little fuss.
I like IceWM for fast jobs, where I need more than just the normal command-line task switching (F1, F2, F3, etc.). For example, you could set up your browser, mail client, OpenOffice.org, and a few other commonly used applications on your menu and then be up and running in a minute or two after booting up your laptop.
IceWM is pure speed.
Rob Nation started FVWM way back in 1993 as a way to get a reliable windowing system on his 486 with only 4MB of RAM. He also needed to be able to display ultra-wide spectrograms for his acoustic analysis. This homebrew window manager, that ran under X, filled the bill. The project switched hands a few times as developers came and went, but it has been well-maintained.
I've been using FVWM2 regularly for a couple of years. Here is the scoop:
- It's fast to start, 15 seconds average on an old Pentium.
- It is simple and plain.
- It has multiple desktops.
- It has a graphical menu bar at the top and one-touch right-click main menu.
- Configuration is via a text file call .fvwm2rc. You can save a desktop setup to the file and then edit it to change the configuration.
Today's current stable version is 2.4.18. FVWM is pretty well documented both via online how-tos and man pages.
The desktop is very mature and straightforward. If you are used to a conventional layout like KDE, the FVWM layout will be a bit of a change for you. Normally, it will start up with a "pager," xeyes, and some push buttons on the top and a window that logs system messages. The default background is a nondescript grey stone pattern. Take a look at the Web site for cool screenshots of various configurations.
FVWM is probably the second-fastest-loading program of the group, right behind IceWM.
Try the options
While these four fast, thin Linux window managers may not be as glitzy as KDE or GNOME, all have had faithful followers for years.
If you're really feeling adventurous, here are still more alternative window managers that you can explore.
Now it's up to you. Pick one that suits your needs and give it a try.
Rob Reilly is a professional technology writer and consultant whose articles appear in various Linux media outlets. He offers professional writing and seminar services on Linux desktop applications, portable computing and public speaking techniques/technology.
Comments
on Four alternative Linux window managersNote: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.
I was used to WindowMaker time ago, but i like
the power of Tabs Fluxbox has.
Sessions would be nice, though.
Next, Enlightenment has been included, although no real development has gone on with Enlightenment in years and it appears that v.17 will never be released. Also, v.16 has a permanent bug (with its handling of Epplets) which for technical reasons cannot be repaired.
Inexcusably, the popular *box window managers have been totally left out. Two readers here comment about Fluxbox, and mention should at least be made of BlackBox which really made big advances in the minimalist desktop trend, and the newest derivative of Fluxbox called Openbox which many now prefer.
Also, one final aspect of minimalistic desktops has been overlooked: that of interchangable components. For example, the window manager can be viewed as a totally independent application from the taskbar. So someone can run pypanel, fbpanel, or any other panel of choice configured as they like along with their compliant window manager.
Finally, IceWM is a minimalist window manager but is also quite ugly. I wouldn't mention it in an article enticing new users.
I think this article is incomplete and lacks good information about minimalist alternative window managers for Linux. Go check out <A HREF="http://icculus.org/openbox/" title="icculus.org">Openbox</a icculus.org> and <A HREF="http://fbpanel.sourceforge.net/" title="sourceforge.net">fbpanel</a sourceforge.net>.
Enlightenment D16 is still in development, a new maintainer appeared some time ago and new releases are appearing quite regularly, also development on D17 is going smoothly, a lot op applications are already there (entrance, erss, entice,...) it's just waiting for the desktop itself, which currently has rasterman's focus.
I agree with you that it's unexcusable that the *box wm's have been left out as they are used quite a lot these days.
I wouldn't go as far as not to mention IceWM, though I don't understand why it has been included while a lot of others (the *boxes and WindowMaker) have been left out.
First off, Bugs are fixed quite often with the E-16 versions.
Secondly, if you monitored E-17 CVS, you would notice that it is being activitly worked and daily changes taken place.
E17 is a complete re-write from the ground up, and you obviously have yet to see the features of E17! Because if you had checked-out a E17 CVS & taken the time to build just the test apps, you would see how wimpy GNOME & KDE really are!
Btw, the Enlightenment team will be at Linux World in San Fransisco -- see enlightenment.org for details:
<A HREF="http://enlightenment.org/pages/linuxworld.html/" title="enlightenment.org">http://enlightenment.org/pages/linuxworld.html/</a enlightenment.org>
I love Xfce I hate the time it takes me to set it up picking icons and other unneed stuff. I should just be able to take entrys out my gnome or kde menu and add it to its bar. Since gnome and Kde now share menus everyone less should be following to make a standard menu system.
Sometimes progress means losing something good. Maybe what is needed is not an enhancement to Xfce, but a standalone script that can produce the Gnome/KDE menu structure in a useable form. The next step, importing to Xfce, would then be a whole lot simpler.
fvwmfan: IANAD (I am not a dog)
Note that the author is talking about his four favorites, not anyone else's. Which means that Xfce and the various *boxes don't qualify. Sorry. For those interested in other alternatives, the author places a link at the end of the story to a site discussing various other window managers.
To the responder who said "IceWM is a minimalist window manager but is also quite ugly. I wouldn't mention it in an article enticing new users." Nowhere does the author state he is trying to entice new users. However, if he is, I disagree with your comment. When I first switched to Linux, I tried KDE and Gnome just long enough to realize how long they took to load on my older laptop. (I almost had time to fry up a couple of eggs and fix some toast.)
I checked out Enlightenment, WindowMaker, Fluxbox, and Xfce 3.8 just long enough to realize that they were a little too different for my tastes. Then I tried IceWM. While it does not natively support desktop icons (which I do still like), they can be added by using something like ROX or XtDesktop. What IceWM does have that I like is a menu button similar to what I was used to in Windows. I also like the fact that you can have buttons for subments (browsers, mail, file manager by default).
By the way, on my old Celeron 400, IceWM loads in just a few seconds after login. Could never do that with KDE or Gnome.
And to think I actually previewed the message three times before finally submitting it.
For your information, FVWM2 is still under heavy, active development. The latest Suse distro ships with version 2.6, Fedora ships with 2.4.
I have tried over 50 window managers, including Fuxbox and XFCE. IMHO, FVWM2 blows them both out of the water. I have yet to encounter a window manager as feature rich and powerful as FVWM2. And, for those who like eyecandy, FVWM does support 24bit colour, shaped anything, titlebars anywhere and all the usual image formats and gradients.
Some questions for you. Does YOUR window manager support mouse strokes, does YOUR window manager support scripting from arbitrary external processes, does YOUR window manager support dynamic re-configuration of all look and feel for any window, group or class of windows. In fact, can you name even ONE THING that YOUR window manager does that FVWM2 can't. (BTW, I don't mean the 1998 version that you tried once by mistake, I mean the cutting edge version shipped with modern distos).
RE the article, I note that both Enlightenment and AfterStep started out as FVWM forks.
Also, for the record, I do like WindowMaker, and I do like OpenBox and co, but XFCE still leaves me cold. I strongly encourange all GNU/Linux users to check out as many window managers and they can manage. There is a rich rich world of diversity out there! Don't let clowns like the above Anonymous Reader trick you into following sheep.
fvwmfan: IANAD (I am not a dog!)
I have to admit though that there's probably no much for FVWM in terms of configurability.
First off, Bugs are fixed quite often with the E-16 versions.
Secondly, if you monitored E-17 CVS, you would notice that it is being activitly worked and daily changes taken place.
E17 is a complete re-write from the ground up, and you obviously have yet to see the features of E17! Because if you had checked-out a E17 CVS & taken the time to build just the test apps, you would see how wimpy GNOME & KDE really are!
Btw, the Enlightenment team will be at Linux World in San Fransisco -- see enlightenment.org for details:
<A HREF="http://enlightenment.org/pages/linuxworld.html/" title="enlightenment.org">http://enlightenment.org/pages/linuxworld.html/</a enlightenment.org>
Why would you assume all articles on Newsforge should be helpful to users? It isn't a Linux support blog, it's news. This is a good article showing zealots like you that there is value in these less-talked about alternatives to the big two `desktop environments'.
PWM, Fluxbox, Blackbox, and Hackbox are also very lite.
- John from DSL
Also, you can't call XFCE lite when you compare it to FVWM or Afterstep, or even ICEwm, compared to KDE and Gnome, yes -- but those two are a dog at 500MHz and 128 RAM.
kindest regards,
Moritz "neofeed" Angermann
<A HREF="http://mdot.mine.nu/" title="mdot.mine.nu">http://mdot.mine.nu/</a mdot.mine.nu>
I could not even add or adjust the hideous fonts in the others, ie: wm fluxbox xfce. Not even going to say how easy apt-get install icewm is, or ms ttfonts are.
Perfect description of what's wrong with Linux
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 30, 2004 04:08 AMStart up Windows, notice that without doing anything special, fonts look great in all applications. You don't even have to know what "font" means. Text just looks good.
Now start Linux. Fonts look OK if the app you run plays nicely with the desktop manager you've chosen. Odds of this are slightly less than 50-50. Otherwise, fonts look like shit, if you're used to Windows.
There are more than enough open source developers to fix this. Problem is, it's so much more fun to develop (and trumpet) your own desktop manager than it is to fix someone else's. Consequently, the Linux desktop is probably doomed for the foreseeable future.
Re:Perfect description of what's wrong with Linux
Posted by: Daniel S. Washko on July 30, 2004 04:59 AMStill, I don't see the font problem you are describing across the Window Managers I use.
Re:Perfect description of what's wrong with Linux
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 30, 2004 05:18 AMNow, even for older apps, there are some reasonable defaults in the Xresources file.
Re:Perfect description of what's wrong with Linux
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 30, 2004 06:20 AMPS. The font problem is less and less. Nearly all my apps in PCLOS use the same font. Only Firefox, Thunderbird, and Xpdf use different fonts off the top of my head, and what they use are more than acceptable anyways.
Re:Perfect description of what's wrong with M$Win
Posted by: AnomalousUser on July 30, 2004 09:02 AMNo multiple desktops, no window shading, no mouse-based select and paste, no themes worthy of the name, no autoraise, no autofocus, no single click option<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. and that's just the basics!
Fonts. WTF? Nothing to do with the window manager. And even under the mighty (cough, cough) Windows, fonts only look okay if the app supports it. Nothing different here. Enlightenment supports antialiased, full colour fonts. Does Windows?
Wind.. doh!
fvwmfan: IANAD (I am not a dog)
Re:Perfect description of what's wrong with M$Win
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 01, 2004 02:09 PMRe:Perfect description of what's wrong with M$Win
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 02, 2004 11:28 PMRe:Perfect description of what's wrong with Linux
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 30, 2004 09:23 AMIt's configured by editing a file, so it probably won't appeal to the "GUI for everything" folks, but it's great for kids, who can be given a setup they can't mess with.
Somewhat like this, but with a few extra features is vtwm (or is it tvtwm - I always get those two names confused). Also a twm spin-off, you can create 'doors' that transport you to any position in a large virtual desktop, you can dynamically change the position of those title tabs you talk of, and you can dynamically add or remove windows from a group used for window cycling. It has a few other features I can't recall here. All in all, quite a powerful little window manager with a number of very unusual ideas built in (and believe me, I have tried a LOT of window managers).
fvwmfan: IANAD (I am not a dog)
I'm seeing kiddies that are entirely negative about these window managers because you must edit a few files to do something your own way && are quite wrong about Enlightenment!
Kids, try helping with some of the coding besides just whining! Linux or GNU was built so you can contribute freely and easily without legal hassles! Try giving code rather then giving us your whining! (I'm trying to say this with some humor<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)
ANYWAYS! Onward!!
First off, Bugs are fixed quite often with the E-16 versions.
Secondly, if you monitored E-17 CVS, you would notice that E17 is being activitly worked and daily changes taken place.
E17 is a complete re-write from the ground up, and you obviously have yet to see the features of E17! Because if you had checked-out a E17 CVS & taken the time to build just the test apps, you would see how wimpy GNOME & KDE really are!
Btw, the Enlightenment team will be at Linux World in San Fransisco -- see enlightenment.org for details:
<A HREF="http://enlightenment.org/pages/linuxworld.html" title="enlightenment.org">http://enlightenment.org/pages/linuxworld.html</a enlightenment.org>
1) I use Enlightenment as my primary desktop for years -- probably since it was developed.
2) I use four virtual desktops with ea. desktop having the following:
a) Eterm (transparent), gaim, gkrellm2, xeyes (for sunny days)
b) mozilla (full screen with LCARStrek theme)
c) blank (but usually for oowriter, xpdf, etc)
d) Evolution (full screen)
3) Enlightenment is extremely light
4) The main reason I've never really used any other desktop is because Enlightenment handles virtual desktops with the stroke of the mouse! No other desktop compares with this feature.
5) Never really had a desire for anything else<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)
My only gripe with the author is, I use Enlightenment for everything! All eye candy & frills turned off. I think a persons favorite desktop is mainly their preference. If they enjoy it and can work with it, sobeit!
The one thing that disturbs me is the utter lack of any useful documentation. I can see how customizable it is by looking at the configuration files, but it will take me a few more days before I get anything customized myself...
Don't get me wrong, E is probably a great environment, and I'll notice that soon enough. But the E team should _really_ consider some documentation efforts.
I run this on modern hardware, like athlon xp1700 to xp2600. I like the options and it's one of the reasons why linux is as great as it is. I also really admired enlightenment in the old days, but it was awkward for me to use. Had to squint most of the time to see the menu's and the like, but it was beautiful. I think I'll give it another go when 17 is made stable.
Also, in regards to enlightenment, the creator of it once gave an interview on linuxandmain about how the desktop was doomed and focus should be placed on server development. I never understood that, practically or historically, and always wondered what "Rasterman" I think his name is was thinking. But, a tree is known by it's fruit despite the intentions. And E looks damn nice. I'll test functionality as 17 matures.
Again, good article. The author didn't mention every desktop, but shit, how many are there.. it's his opinion, and no problem. We each have our own workflow and preference for speed vs. functionality. My preference is fluxbox and iceWM.
It does seems like the author was picking older WM that aren't as popular anymore. It would have been interesting to see an article about XFCE, Blackbox/Fluxbox, Sawfish and Window Maker. Maybe the author will do a followup.
I did try some others, but Fvwm95 is very small and was noticeably faster -- I don't know how long it takes to startup because it is too quick to time, like less than a second.
Fvwm2 and Fvwm95 are also highly configurable, when you get the hang of the rather large config file! -- but there are gui tools as well.
Why Fvwm95 specifically, not Fvwm? I was specifically wanting that retro Win95 look, which it does admirably.
For anyone interested, Puppy's kennel is here:
<A HREF="http://www.goosee.com/puppy/" title="goosee.com">http://www.goosee.com/puppy/</a goosee.com>
Even on my P 75, I had faster startup time for a window manager.
To make a test, start with window manager X, and change window manager once you get your desktop environment up and running. Also make sure that your window manager doesn't start any application at start up.
You should probably go down by 5-10 seconds these numbers.
Jerome
I can highly recommend it.
15-20 seconds?
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 29, 2004 08:12 PM#