Re: [S.u.S.E. Linux] why fvwm2 anyway ??
what about ICEwm ? is it good ? nice design ? never saw a screenshot :-( Pascal /nick SuSE52 on #linux (IRCnet) root on www.student.prov-liege.be -----Original Message----- From: Michael Lankton <satan@nfinity.com> To: suse-linux-e@suse.com <suse-linux-e@suse.com> Date: mardi 12 mai 1998 23:55 Subject: Re: [S.u.S.E. Linux] why fvwm2 anyway ??
This is from a p200mmx with 64mbs ram running only an xterm running top: Blackbox 1.4%memory usage Icewm 1.5% Afterstep 1.5% fvwm2 1.8% WindowMaker 2.6% Enlightenment 8.3% kde 26.6%
These numbers really don't mean a thing, I was just curious after reading
this
thread all day long. I use WindowMaker as my primary window manager, and I believe the memory usage it displayed was a little high because of excessive pixmap usage on my part. E has never claimed to not eat memory or cpu, and X used more of both while it was running, but I was a little shocked by how much kde used. In all fairness, kde is a collection of applications running simultaneously and not a single app like most window managers. I use Icewm as root, and I would have to say that it "feels" faster than any of the others, but the difference between how it runs vs. fvwm2, afterstep, or WindowMaker is splitting hairs.
Mike Hostetler wrote:
I like fvwm because of the ease of configuration and low resource drain. I have not seen a WM that proves to be less resource (RAM, swap space, hard disk space) intensive than fvwm. Maybe Blackbox would?
I have found fvwm2 to be even less of a resource drain then fvwm1. The rc file is different, though.
- mikeh
--
============================================================================ ==
|| Mike Hostetler || || <A HREF="http://www.binary.net/thehaas"><A HREF="http://www.binary.net/thehaas</A">http://www.binary.net/thehaas</A</A>> || || email1: mhostetl@cse.unl.edu || || email2: thehaas@binary.net ||
============================================================================ ==
|| `When you say "I wrote a program that crashed Windows", people just || || stare at you blankly and say "Hey, I got those with the system, || || *for free*".' - Linus Torvalds ||
============================================================================ ==
-- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
-- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
-- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Icewm is very no-frills, but lightweight and quite configurable. It's only about a 121k dload so check it out. <BR> <A HREF="http://ixtas.fri.uni-lj.si/~markom/icewm/doc/icewm-3.html"><A HREF="http://ixtas.fri.uni-lj.si/~markom/icewm</A">http://ixtas.fri.uni-lj.si/~markom/icewm</A</A>> Pascal Bleser wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>what about ICEwm ? <BR>is it good ? <BR>nice design ? <BR>never saw a screenshot :-( Pascal <BR> /nick SuSE52 on #linux (IRCnet) <BR> root on www.student.prov-liege.be -----Original Message----- <BR>From: Michael Lankton <satan@nfinity.com> <BR>To: suse-linux-e@suse.com <suse-linux-e@suse.com> <BR>Date: mardi 12 mai 1998 23:55 <BR>Subject: Re: [S.u.S.E. Linux] why fvwm2 anyway ??
<BR>>This is from a p200mmx with 64mbs ram running only an xterm running top: <BR>>Blackbox 1.4%memory usage <BR>>Icewm 1.5% <BR>>Afterstep 1.5% <BR>>fvwm2 1.8% <BR>>WindowMaker 2.6% <BR>>Enlightenment 8.3% <BR>>kde 26.6% <BR>> <BR>>These numbers really don't mean a thing, I was just curious after reading <BR>this <BR>>thread all day long. I use WindowMaker as my primary window manager, and I <BR>>believe the memory usage it displayed was a little high because of <BR>excessive <BR>>pixmap usage on my part. E has never claimed to not eat memory or cpu, and <BR>X used <BR>>more of both while it was running, but I was a little shocked by how much <BR>kde <BR>>used. In all fairness, kde is a collection of applications running <BR>simultaneously <BR>>and not a single app like most window managers. I use Icewm as root, and <BR>I would <BR>>have to say that it "feels" faster than any of the others, but the <BR>difference <BR>>between how it runs vs. fvwm2, afterstep, or WindowMaker is splitting <BR>hairs. <BR>> <BR>>Mike Hostetler wrote: <BR>> <BR>>> > I like fvwm because of the ease of configuration and low resource <BR>>> > drain. I have not seen a WM that proves to be less resource (RAM, <BR>>> > swap space, hard disk space) intensive than fvwm. Maybe Blackbox <BR>>> > would? <BR>>> <BR>>> I have found fvwm2 to be even less of a resource drain then fvwm1. <BR>>> The rc file is different, though. <BR>>> <BR>>> - mikeh <BR>>> <BR>>> -- <BR>>> <BR>>> <BR>============================================================================ <BR>== <BR>>> || Mike Hostetler || || <A HREF="http://www.binary.net/thehaas"><A HREF="http://www.binary.net/thehaas</A">http://www.binary.net/thehaas</A</A>> <BR>|| <BR>>> || email1: mhostetl@cse.unl.edu || || email2: thehaas@binary.net <BR>|| <BR>>> <BR>============================================================================ <BR>== <BR>>> || `When you say "I wrote a program that crashed Windows", people just <BR>|| <BR>>> || stare at you blankly and say "Hey, I got those with the system, <BR>|| <BR>>> || *for free*".' - Linus Torvalds <BR>|| <BR>>> <BR>============================================================================ <BR>== <BR>>> <BR>>> -- <BR>>> To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with <BR>>> this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>-- <BR>>To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with <BR>>this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e -- <BR>To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with <BR>this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e</BLOCKQUOTE>
Michael Lankton wrote:
This is from a p200mmx with 64mbs ram running only an xterm running top:
Blackbox 1.4%memory usage Icewm 1.5% Afterstep 1.5% fvwm2 1.8% WindowMaker 2.6% Enlightenment 8.3% kde 26.6%
swap space, hard disk space) intensive than fvwm. Maybe Blackbox
Cool thread ;) thanks for the run down on memory useage, Michael And Netsomnia for the good quote "Be creative with all the tools Linux has to offer." Cheers SuSE -- Steven Udell Wayfarers hettar@teleport.com for truth love sudell@teleport.com and courage <A HREF="http://www.teleport.com/~hettar"><A HREF="http://www.teleport.com/~hettar</A">http://www.teleport.com/~hettar</A</A>> -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
participants (3)
-
hettar@teleport.com
-
pbleser@prov-liege.be
-
satan@nfinity.com