Whats the difference between the boxes?

[Freddy]

Greetings all.

I just wondered what the big difference is between some of the *boxes out there. There are plenty of these leaner windows managers but some of them sort of look very similar.

For example: Why is OpenBox better than Fluxbox, why do you choose to use PekWM instead of OpenBox or whats you excuse for using IceWM or AwesomeWM. Please don't just say "I use PekWM, it's the best" explain why and why you choose that over some of the the WM's out there!

I already know that Enlightenment17 rule em all but E17 is somewhat different from the other WM's so we can exclude that from the topic.

[Dr Small]

I use IceWM, it's the best

(Sorry, I just had to say that! :) )
Generally, it's just user prefference.

[~LoKe]

I use AwesomeWM simply because it's as basic as it seems to get. No menus, no icons, no images and no tray. It's almost like a clean slate, and you're free to add things if you want them. There's also the feeling of accomplishment when you do make it work the way you want it.

Also, the tagging is just simply amazing. AwesomeWM has unmatched dual display support. A separate set of tags (consider them tabs) on each display, and you can set windows to spawn on specific tags.

Excellent.

[fwojciec]

Awesome stands out among the WMs you've mentioned -- it's not a *box, it's a tiling window manager (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiling_window_manager) based on dwm. Tiling managers are a whole different breed of WMs and people generally use them because, well, they prefer tiling window managers to non-tiling window managers.

With *boxes it's mostly a matter of preference. Personally I like openbox because it has been extremely reliable for me in the past, it's very stripped down to begin with and very configurable, it can be used without a panel, it's fast (but so are other *boxes) and I've gotten used to it by now. I also like the simplicity, consistency and the general aesthetics of its graphic design (no transparencies anywhere, no baroque title bars, no icons in the menu, no rounded corners etc.).

[p_quarles]

Moved to Recurring Discussions.

Personally prefer Fluxbox, but agree with those that have said it's a matter of taste.

[urukrama]

For me, a good window manager needs two things: a right click desktop menu and an alt-tab dialog (so I can work without panels). Pekwm and Openbox have both, and that is why I prefer them over Fluxbox (no alt-tab dialog).

I like Openbox for its simple and clean aesthetics and its ease of use. It doesn't stand in the way, and manages windows very well (better than other window managers, I think). I like Pekwm for its tabbing, screen edges and other nice details.

Occasionally, I use Icewm. I find it nice, except for the fact that if you call up the menu with a keybind, it doesn't appear below your mouse cursor. I do love that you can make the alt-tab list vertical. I hope this is implemented in Openbox at some point.

It all depends what you prefer.