Are you a Linux geek, using Linux without X?

[frenchn00b]

Hi,

You've never thought about using X, not convenient? Is there / Are you a Linux geek, using Linux without X? Then what's your browser? What do you do with your box?

:

[Greg]

While I've considered tossing X to the curb a few times (mainly due to k.mandla's blog ) I've decided that the overhead isn't significant enough on my computer for it to matter, the ease of a graphical browser is, if not a need, at least a want, and I like Xmonad more than screen or dvtm alone.

[MikeTheC]

I've never not used X on my desktop Linux machines.

I *do* have a server without X installed on it. But then it's a headless Mac mini sitting on a planter shelf in the living room.

[RiceMonster]

My desktop boots into the console but I start x right after login. The closest I get to console only is when I use dwm.

[kevdog]

I'm not sure why you would want to but -- hey that's me.

[inobe]

must take advantage of mainstream hardware and video acceleration and tweak the graphical user interface.

[DarkPanther]

I rarely ever use the command-line other than installing things, and running programs as root, I probably never use Linux with just the command line only

[earthpigg]

i use LXDE, but use the cli for simple tasks.

[Barrucadu]

I have used my laptop without X, but currently use X.

[toupeiro]

I'm used to supporting shared linux servers so yes, I could, but .. what does it prove really?? That I can run an OS based on a command parser .. with a command parser? I work at the command line for easily over 90% of my linux based activities. I manage command lines with gui's and virtual desktops, and I also use X-based apps. Seems like if I went to complete CLI, I would miss out on the gui apps I do like and would want to run. The whole concept really makes less and less sense the more I think about it.

It must be an OCD thing.