Window Managers
By: James Andrews
Saturday, May 29, 1999 01:36:47 PM EST
URL: http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reviews/218/1/
Introduction
As a user under Microsoft Windows and MacOS, you interact with the computer in a graphic user interface (GUI) -- linux is no different, aside from the wide choice of types of user interface. Collectively, these different GUIs are known as 'Window Managers' because one important task they perform is controlling the windows that the application programs appear in. As well as what you as a user see there are differences in how these Window Managers work behind the scenes.
Choosing a Window Manager that suits you is just one of the extra choices that linux offers.
History of Windows
The first graphical user interfaces were developed at Xerox Parc in the 1970s. All modern graphical user interfaces user the concepts of 'Window, Icons, Menus, Pointer' developed there. Linux Window Managers work just like other GUIs you may have seen. How they differ is that each one tries in distinct ways to find a better way for you to harness the computers power.What Window Mangers Provide
Window managers provide a set of functions that are available to programs. For instance that under the KDE Window Manager all of the programs are Internet aware. Under Enlightenment, everything seems to have a colorful graphic appearance and visual impact. Different Window Managers alter the way you can use the computer to a great extent. These differences in 'Look and Feel' can have a big impact on the speed and ease with which tasks can be carried out. They all relate back to fundamental design choices that the programmers made when they set out to write a better GUI. Outside the world of free software you are stuck with a single set of priorities that may not suit you. Under linux, there is intense competition to develop the GUI. You have the choice of several competing GUI paradigms.
The Choices
TWM
TWM has been around since the early days of X Windows and is very basic. On the plus side it is light on memory and CPU use. It is also standard with all the distributions as a kind of baseline. On the minus side its applications framework is almost nonexistent.FVWM http://fvwm.math.uh.edu/
FVWM has been in use for several years, and it does not use much memory. Compared with some of the others listed below, it does not seem that different from, say MS Windows 95 and there is even a version of it (FVWM95) that is an attempt to mimic the MS Windows 95 user interface. Behind the scenes, some differences are readily apparent. A lot of the set up of it is in plain text configuration files, which, if you go through the effort of ploughing through the documentation, provide a lot of fine grained control over all aspects of setup. There are also some features for centralized set up making for easy administration.AfterStep http://www.afterstep.org/
If you liked the look of the NeXTStep user interface then AfterStep could be the choice for you. Even if you haven't things like its 'Wharf' free floating application loader that can "Swallow" running programs and its carefully designed set of consistent icons may make this the one for you.Blackbox http://blackbox.wiw.org/
Blackbox is designed to be a very small window manager light on disk space, memory use and CPU use.Enlightenment http://www.enlightenment.org/
After Describing what a window manager is ( see above ) the Enlightenment web page says:"Enlightenment goes beyond this[ being a window manager], not just Managing Windows, but providing a useful, good looking graphical shell from which to work. It is open in design, and instead of dictating a policy it allows the user to define their own policy right down to the minute and infinitesimal details; from its functionality right on through to its looks.Enlightenment is IN DEVELOPMENT and as a result its stability can vary from day to day in snapshots. One thing you can be certain of is that it DOES work - the developers run it all day themselves - There is a reason it doesn't work for you - it is likely something on your system."
KDE http://www.kde.org/
KVM is actually the name of the KDE window manager. Most commentators refer to the KDE though, and very popular it is! The application framework that it offers is the main reason for this. KDE aware applications have Internet awareness. They provide seamless access to net protocols. For instance editors know about URLs so can easily be used to write web pages. KDE is based on a library called QT which is owned by a norwegian software company called trolltech. The licensing arrangements are such that even if TrollTech were bought out by Microsoft tomorrow KDE would still be available in source code form. This means that trolltech do a lot of work on KDE and we have no copyright worries.Window Maker http://www.windowmaker.org/
Window maker provides some appealing features like easily customization. For instance, it only takes a few mouse clicks to add an application to the Window Maker button bar. It is also popular and there are many Window Maker enabled applications. It is based on a similar set of concepts to Afterstep, but is developed by a different team.
Summary
Beware of Memory and Disk Use
You should be aware of the heavy memory and CPU utilization most of these window managers take. Linux will run quite fine on old hardware but something like KDE needs a modern machine with lots of RAM to run properly. They also use a lot of disk space with Icons, Themes and other graphical embellishments. On an older machine it is better to run something like FVWM, Window Maker or even TWM.Links of Interest
GNOME is the GNU Network Object Model Environment. This project intends to build a user-friendly desktop based entirely on free software. It is not a window manager in itself but co-opts with window managers. See fvwm2gnome for instance.XwwChooser is an application designed to ease the switching of window managers in X windows.
mlvwm is a window manager for X11 designed to look and feel like the Macintosh environment.