[Gwyrox732]

Those are the WMs I have on my computer (well, except for "other"). Personally I've grown attached to WindowMaker. I'm also curious to know your boot sequence. I start into runlevel 3 and start x/gdm/etc manually, saves time if I don't really need x for what I'm doing. Who needs that "GUI"?


edit...sorry, i made a mistake: wm and windowmaker are the same thing

[hitest]

Gwyrox732, on Sep 3 2004, 12:26 AM, said:

Those are the WMs I have on my computer (well, except for "other"). Personally I've grown attached to WindowMaker. I'm also curious to know your boot sequence. I start into runlevel 3 and start x/gdm/etc manually, saves time if I don't really need x for what I'm doing. Who needs that "GUI"?          


edit...sorry, i made a mistake: wm and windowmaker are the same thing 

Right now I'm running KDE 3.2, works well. Before I was using Black Box and Gnome.

[jcl]

Right now I'm bouncing between GNOME and Fluxbox, but I spend more time in the former.

As for booting, my Gentoo box boots into... erm... 'default'... just a second. Ah, runlevel 3. But it starts GDM automatically. I used to boot to the console for the same reason you do, but it turned out I very seldom didn't need X.

My DragonFly box on the other hand still boots to the console, so that I can fix things.

[Nerelda]

I've got KDE set up on my box.

[hitest]

Nerelda, on Oct 8 2004, 06:10 PM, said:

I've got KDE set up on my box.

I also like KDE, but, for pragmatic reasons. With Black Box and Gnome after a short time I would get strange video artifacts on my monitor. KDE works well with my hardware

[Nerelda]

hitest, on Oct 10 2004, 12:01 PM, said:

Nerelda, on Oct 8 2004, 06:10 PM, said:

I've got KDE set up on my box.

I also like KDE, but, for pragmatic reasons. With Black Box and Gnome after a short time I would get strange video artifacts on my monitor. KDE works well with my hardware

Through my research, I've found many people saying the same thing, hitest. I notice many people saying that KDE seems to be more compatable with their hardware.

[hitest]

Nerelda, on Oct 10 2004, 06:01 PM, said:

hitest, on Oct 10 2004, 12:01 PM, said:

Nerelda, on Oct 8 2004, 06:10 PM, said:

I've got KDE set up on my box.

I also like KDE, but, for pragmatic reasons. With Black Box and Gnome after a short time I would get strange video artifacts on my monitor. KDE works well with my hardware

Through my research, I've found many people saying the same thing, hitest. I notice many people saying that KDE seems to be more compatable with their hardware.

I think I've read that too some where. I think Gnome may have more dependency issues than KDE.

[jcl]

hitest, on Oct 10 2004, 11:21 AM, said:

I think I've read that too some where.  I think Gnome may have more dependency issues than KDE.

Far more. Build GNOME and KDE and few times and you come to appreciate the virtues of Not-Invented-Here syndrome. When KDE needs some functionality, they build it themselves and package it up in the regular distribution. On the other hand, GNOME in it's full glory depends on every damn piece of the software in the known universe.

This post has been edited by jcl: 11 October 2004 - 12:45 AM

[hitest]

jcl, on Oct 11 2004, 12:43 AM, said:

hitest, on Oct 10 2004, 11:21 AM, said:

I think I've read that too some where.  I think Gnome may have more dependency issues than KDE.

Far more. Build GNOME and KDE and few times and you come to appreciate the virtues of Not-Invented-Here syndrome. When KDE needs some functionality, they build it themselves and package it up in the regular distribution. On the other hand, GNOME in it's full glory depends on every damn piece of the software in the known universe.

Heh-heh, I thought I remember you saying Gnome was a pain to build in Gentoo. I really like Gnome, but, for my sytem KDE seems more stable. I know KDE is frowned upon by the l337 people, but, it works fine for me.
I noticed you edited your description of the software in your post. I liked the other descriptor

[Snaxe]

Right now, I use whatever was default in Red Hat 9, which I'm 99% sure is GNOME. I have been too scared to try anything else. Most likely I'm going to switch over to Blackbox once I get more not newbie as I use a variant of Blackbox for Windows on Windows.

[jcl]

hitest, on Oct 14 2004, 09:09 PM, said:

Heh-heh, I thought I remember you saying Gnome was a pain to build in Gentoo.

And if you think that's bad, try building it without a package system to do the heavy lifting.

Quote

I really like Gnome, but, for my sytem KDE seems more stable.

That's been my experience as well. The aesthetics of GNOME are what attract me. Technically speaking, I think KDE is more refined and reliable.

On the other hand, I'm using Enlightenment right now. Make of that what you will.

Quote

I know KDE is frowned upon by the l337 people, but, it works fine for me

Eh, I think it cuts both ways. KDE seems to attract fairly sophisticated users. They certainly target those users, what with the infamous four gazillion option control panels.

Quote

I noticed you edited your description of the software in your post.  I liked the other descriptor

What, the 'bloody software' thing? Yeah, I rolled it around in my mouth for a while and decided I didn't like the taste. I can put it back if you want

[jcl]

Snaxe, on Oct 14 2004, 09:23 PM, said:

Most likely I'm going to switch over to Blackbox once I get more not newbie as I use a variant of Blackbox for Windows on Windows.

You might also look at Fluxbox and Openbox. Both are forks of Blackbox. For what I've seen it looks like development of BB has slowed quite a bit, and the other *boxes seem to be picking up the slack.

[hitest]

Snaxe, on Oct 15 2004, 04:23 AM, said:

Right now, I use whatever was default in Red Hat 9, which I'm 99% sure is GNOME. I have been too scared to try anything else. Most likely I'm going to switch over to Blackbox once I get more not newbie as I use a variant of Blackbox for Windows on Windows.

Yep, in Red Hat 9 the default is Gnome. Red Hat 9 is an excellent version of Linux. I ran it for a year, I enjoyed it a lot. I used Black Box for a little while; it's fast and easy on your resources. Welcome to Linux, man:-)

[hitest]

jcl, on Oct 15 2004, 05:09 AM, said:

hitest, on Oct 14 2004, 09:09 PM, said:

Heh-heh, I thought I remember you saying Gnome was a pain to build in Gentoo.

And if you think that's bad, try building it without a package system to do the heavy lifting.

Quote

I really like Gnome, but, for my sytem KDE seems more stable.

That's been my experience as well. The aesthetics of GNOME are what attract me. Technically speaking, I think KDE is more refined and reliable.

On the other hand, I'm using Enlightenment right now. Make of that what you will.

Quote

I know KDE is frowned upon by the l337 people, but, it works fine for me

Eh, I think it cuts both ways. KDE seems to attract fairly sophisticated users. They certainly target those users, what with the infamous four gazillion option control panels.

Quote

I noticed you edited your description of the software in your post.  I liked the other descriptor

What, the 'bloody software' thing? Yeah, I rolled it around in my mouth for a while and decided I didn't like the taste. I can put it back if you want

Nope you can leave your post the way it is, jcl Your original post gave me a good chuckle.
I'm so pleased you've decided to camp out here for a bit and do the heavy lifting when people get stuck.

I'm kind of in a rut right now with Mandrake 10, pleasantly bored. It's stable, but, dull. In the next little while I'm hoping to get a new unit that'll run slack or gentoo.

[naraku9333]

personaly i like xfce4 best but have found it alittle buggy (still a great DE) havent tried new vcersion yet, right now i use gnome on my desktop also have fluxbox installed but dont use it and kde base for k3b

on my laptop i only use fluxbox since its only got 64MB's of ram