Desktop Environments and Window Managers

Of course KDE and GNOME are the most commonly used desktop environments in Linux. For some time, I was only comfortable with KDE, but later I got used to GNOME. I can't say which is my favorite, but I probably lean towards the former because there are a few KDE apps (such as Konqueror and Amarok) that I always use, even in GNOME.

What really changed my comfort level in GNOME, besides spending more time playing around with it, was experimenting with other desktop environments and window managers. Once I got a feel for how things generally work, it was easier to go back to GNOME and understand how to get it set up the way I wanted it.

The website Window Managers for X provides a nice overview of various DEs and WMs available for Linux.

Also: Interesting article about the development of KDE for Windows, here.

Following are some notes on some of my favorite alternative DEs and WMs, in no particular order.


IceWM

I installed IceWM in Debian Etch -- as usual, using Synpatic to find, download, and install the important packages. One of the things I really liked about IceWM is that post-installation, just about everything I needed to know about configuring things was found in the Help document that's included in the main menu. With most WMs I've tried, I've had to Google around to find info on how to set things up. Not the case with IceWM.

IceWM provides a nice, clean interface that should be familiar to folks who are used to Windows or KDE.

According to my notes, these are the packages that I initially installed for IceWM:

fspanel, iceconf, icemc, icewm, icewm-common, icewm-gnome-support, icewm-themes, libgtk-perl

Also, although this doesn't really pertain to me (because I use Konqueror instead of Nautilus), I happened upon this note:

“By the way, if you decide to use Nautilus as your file browser, be sure to add the --no-desktop option at the end... Omitting that option is bad for two reasons:

1. One of the advantages of running IceWM is that it's lightweight. Having Nautilus manage the desktop makes things a little "heavier" than need be, even after you close the file browser window.

2. When you try to log out of IceWM, you won't be able to unless you first issue the command killall nautilus

Might be an important piece of info for someone, if you're installing IceWM onto a system that already contains GNOME.

Fluxbox

I've been using Fluxbox longer than anything besides KDE and GNOME, and I've become quite comfortable with it. I first tried installing it in Mepis. I had to dig a little bit to find good installation and configuration instructions. I kept good notes, and I've noticed that each subsequent installation of Fluxbox has been easier, gone more smoothly.

I like the way Fluxbox uses text files for configuring just about everything. It's fairly easy to see how everything works; and, for things like the main menu, what I've done is keep copies of the ~/.fluxbox/menu files that I've used previously. Now when I do a new Fluxbox installation, I copy and paste an old ~/.fluxbox/menu file, then edit it to fit the distro I'm using.

If there's one thing I like most about Fluxbox, it's that you can tab application windows. It's a feature that I'd really like to see in other DEs/WMs.

Openbox

Here's one that took me a little while to warm up to, but has become one of my favorite window managers. It's similar in many ways to Fluxbox -- in fact, I guess both of them are based on the Blackbox window manager.

Openbox doesn't come with its own panel, so I've been using pypanel with it. Some other important packages that I included for my Openbox installation in Ubuntu Hardy: obconf, obmenu, openbox-themes, feh, numlockx, and menu, the app for the Debian menu.

I've found obmenu to be a clever GUI for configuring the Openbox menu.

My Openbox installations required a considerable amount of configuration to get things the way I wanted them, but it wasn't too difficult. Once I get everything put in place, Openbox is one of the most pleasant environments that I use.

LXDE

LXDE is a lightweight desktop environment that uses the Openbox window manager. If you install LXDE, you'll also have Openbox to work with, if you wish.

LXDE doesn't allow as much configuration as other DEs, but that's not altogether a bad thing. There's something to be said for simplicity. LXDE is one of the easiest environments when it comes to getting it installed and set up. The interface is a comfortable one for folks used to Windows or KDE. It comes with its own file manager, pcman, and it's a nice one (although I generally use Konqueror for most things).

LXDE was not available in the main repositories when I wanted to install it in Mint Elyssa, so I had to add the following repos:

deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/lxde/ubuntu hardy main
deb-src http://ppa.launchpad.net/lxde/ubuntu hardy main

I believe I had to do the same thing when installing LXDE in Ubuntu Hardy.

LXDE seems to have become a popular alternative to KDE.

Xfce

Xfce is almost as much of a full-fledged desktop environment as KDE or GNOME. Some folks might even argue with my using the word "almost." I like to have Konqueror and Amarok available with Xfce, but I think this DE stands on its own fairly well, and offers a more crisp experience, generally, than KDE or GNOME. It has a nice GUI tool for mounting partitions, its own file manager (Thunar), and one thing I really like is that you can move the panels around to anywhere on the screen.

Xfce is more akin to GNOME, but my installations are set up to look more like KDE, with the panel usually placed at the bottom of the screen (see screenshot, above). The Xfce panel is quite easy to configure to your tastes.

Enlightenment

I haven't tried the most recent version of Enlightenment, E17, because I was not sure about its stability. Also because E17 has not been available in the main repos of the distros I'm using. But I've installed E16 a couple of times. Very pretty. In terms of "eye candy," it's one of the more interesting environments.

Aside from KDE, the environments I've tried so far all use "workspaces" instead of "virtual desktops." In any environment, I like to have three or four workspaces or desktops available. For the most part, there's not much difference, but in KDE you can have different wallpapers for each desktop, or even have an automatic wallpaper changer set up for one or more desktops while not affecting the others.

In GNOME and other environments, the same wallpaper is shared among each workspace (although there are some ways to get different wallpapers for each workspace). This is the main reason I prefer KDE's desktops over workspaces.

E16, however, offers both workspaces and desktops! Nice approach. My E16 set-ups have two of each. Best of both worlds.

...

Overall, I feel that KDE makes things easier on the user than any of these others. It comes with an automatic wallpaper changer and a nice screensaver set-up that's pretty easy to configure. It's easy to get used to for folks coming over from Windows. It really seems easier, overall, to configure to your own tastes than the other DEs or WMs. And I think KDE comes with the best set of applications.

But, not everyone prefers KDE; and I myself enjoy being able to bounce around, using one environment on one day, and perhaps switching over to something else the next day. This is something that I could not do with Windows, and it's one of the biggest reasons why I love Linux.