Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to Safari
Join our community
Top Pro
•••
Elias Van Ootegem's Experience
Top Con
•••
Caleb Maclennan's Experience
Top Pro
•••
Top Pro
•••
Top Pro
•••
Wayne Warren's Experience
Top Pro
•••Top Pro
•••
Top Con
•••
RandR provides more information about your outputs and connected screens than Xinerama does. To be specific, the code which handled on-the-fly screen reconfiguration (meaning without restarting the X server) was a very messy heuristic and most of the time did not work correctly — that is just not possible with the little information Xinerama offers (just a list of screen resolutions, no identifiers for the screens or any additional information). Xinerama simply was not designed for dynamic configuration. See More
I love i3, obviously, but like it or not, the push for wayland is real (and IMO it's the right thing to do). Once more distro's start adopting wayland over the old warhorse that is X server, I'd say sway will overtake i3. It's highly compatible with i3, to the point where you can (almost) drop in your i3 config and have it work, and you don't need the i3-gaps stuff anymore (they're standard). The man pages are a good source of documentation, too (really useful when making the switch from i3). See More
That's more for personal experience with Awesome that some Windows are not re-sized properly. Issues include: Terminals not re-sized to bottom of the screen to re-sizing back to 1 pixel size, cannot move windows, cannot re-size panes or doesn't re-size contained window properly (observed with Hangouts Chrome extension for example). See More
Of all the window managers I've ever test driven (which is dozens of them) Awesome WM stands out as the most configurable. If you like to tinker and make your computer conform to your way of working, this is the best tool for the job. The configuration is not a static set of options but a fully capable Lua scripting environment where anything can be linked to anything else. This does make it complicated to setup right the first time (esp. if you have limited experience with Lua) and it also makes upgrading between major versions more painful than other managers because you can have API breakage rather than just obsolete options. Not for the feignt of heart, but a strong tool for those that don't want to be manipulated by the tools they use. See More
All actions of the window manager (like opening or resizing a window, changing the workspace, etc.) are handled by a program called bspc, which communicates with bspwm over a socket connection. The config file is just a shell executable making calls to that program. This makes it very easy to write your own scripts to handle bspwm's behavior. See More
Dwm is part of the suckless suite of tools, and encourages users to extend and configure it by modifying the code itself. To this end, dwm is kept under 2000 SLOC, and is an exemplar of clean, readable code (C). This, while giving users all the flexibility they could ask for, also makes dwm as lightweight as possible, and means that users have a full understanding of how it works. See More
Dwm's design paradigm is to use tags to group clients (applications) that can then be pulled into a view (workspace); this allows you to view multiple clients at once and to assign or reassign those tags and their related views on the fly. Contrary to most other window managers, when you view a tag you are not ‘visiting’ a workspace: you are pulling the tagged windows into a single workspace. Combined with rules in the config.h, this makes for a flexible and responsive means to manage your workflow. See More
I've been using Haskell for about 7 years now and it meets all my basic needs. My favorite aspects of it compared with other tiling window managers I have tried: despite the use of Haskell for configuration, the most common needs are easily accomplished stability; reloading the configuration after making changes requires compilation which will fail and abort the configuration reload (rather than say load a system default that may be wildly different from the previous config as with Awesome) See More
Typesafe configuration! The whole language is available, basic configuration is a simple one-liner, lots of additional modules available for most setups. XMonad is written, configured, and fully extensible in Haskell. This means that users aren't limited to a small set of pre-programmed layouts and actions - anything can be programmed in to the configuration. It's simple to modify basic settings, and the example config has lots of comments to get you started. Haskell keeps this code clean, concise, and readable, and its type system keeps you safe from any serious mistakes. This makes it fast and light, even on very small and slow systems. See More
The use of Haskell as an Extension language means that popular pieces of functionality are easily shared and widely available as Haskell Libraries. Many default layouts, and tools for quickly and easily building your own, are available through xmonad-contrib, and highly re-usable configurations are commonly shared through blog articles and the Xmonad Wiki. See More
Compared to other window managers, notion is rather hard to configure. There are 5 different files that you have to tinker with in order to configure notion the way you want it to be. Which may not be too hard but still is a lot harder than wms that only require that you change one single text file. See More