Saturday, March 21, 2009

fluxbox or openbox

fluxbox is based on blackbox code wirte in c++. openbox 3 rewrite all
source code in c.
openbox: xml configure file which means easy to config
fluxbox supports tag, openbox doesn't..
license: fluxbox is MIT, openbox is GPL ==> is it important for normal
user ??hehe
fluxbox supports panel and openbox itself does not

which one will you choose ? :)
openbox, just because it is the default window manager in LXDE.

here is some comments from freebsd forum:

Originally Posted by alie View Post

so i decided to choose between fluxbox or openbox.

anyway i have a lot of questions to this community:
1) is openbox and fluxbox still in active development ?
2) is JWM theme based Window manager ?
3) is there any window manager that can support plugin or applet ?
4) is there any good file browser that doesnt have a lot of
dependencies(note: i like ROX filer) ?
5) is there any text editor like GEdit that doesnt have a lot of dependencies ?
I think you made a good choice. Both Fluxbox and Openbox are in very
active development and have a very large user base. They might be in
too active development because they are slowly getting bloated. In my
bias opinion Openbox is better What kind of answer could you expect
from somebody who used Openbox for a very long time. Joking aside the
big thing for Openbox is the fact that is coded in pure C. If you like
to have panel, task bar and those things Fluxbox is probably better
All those things can be added to Openbox but then you end up
installing another thing or two. For instance Openbox+Xfce panel is a
killer combo for people who like more or less full desktop

Let me answer the rest of your questions

@2 JWM is not based on anything. It is written from the scratch.
It is really very, very good for people who like to have built in
task bar, pager, and the launching bar. It is incredible that all that
is just little bit bigger than dwm which has 2000 lines of C code.

@3 What do you mean by that?

@4 Rox is not a browser. It is a file manager. There are three
principle types of file managers.

i) Orthodox file managers (Norton commander type) Examples are
Deco, OFM, Midnight Commander,vifm (VI file manager) (console/xterm
based) and Norther Commander, Worker, emelfm2, krusader and similar if
you want to GUI.

ii) Navigational file managers (or explorer type) typical example is
konqueror web-browser, xfm (X File Explorer).

iii) Spatial file managers. Examples include Xfm, Rox, PCmanFM,
Desktop File Manager DFM, Nautilus file manager, Thunar, Xfiler the
part of Siag suite and similar.

Then you have file managers that really could not be categorized
easily like XTree file manager, Clex, pfm, (personal file manager),
vfu, TkDesk.

I probably left out some interesting examples but you got the idea.
The least bloated file manager is command line + commands
(ls, du, rm, mv, cp) and few filters. If you have to have a spatial
file manager I really like ROX. For a Ortodox file managers I really
like deco but it is not in active development and it is useless in
console as it can not adjust the screen. OFM is very good code base
for somebody who wants to write a good non bloated console based
ortodox file manager.
Be aware that it is GPL so you will have to write everything from
scratch if you prefer BSD license like me.

@5 Learn ed and vi pronto or you will regret very soon. I do NOT like
VIM for me vi is nvi that comes with the base or Heirloom vi.

Emacs sucks IMHO and I have used it seriously. I even learned the Lisp
because of it.

1 comment:

Eason said...

finally, I choose fluxbox and play with it well ...