(screenshot of a rxvt window decorated with a fvwm theme. The title bar is rotated to the left and highlighted in red with white text, and reads ‘marada@kalutika:~’.

The window is green-on-black and contains a vim session with the text 'You may not like it, but this is what peak desktop performance looks like.

Each window has a clear, square border around the edge. You know where one window ends and the next begins, and exactly where you can drag to resize them, even if you stack one Dark Mode window slightly ajar of another.

There’s a titlebar that has a huge segment which can be clicked and dragged to move the window, rather than tiny icons and a search bar eating up all but a handful of pixels. The active window has a distinct colour you can immediately pick out.

That title bar is mounted on the side, so it’s not consuming precious screen real estate when the trend is towards 52:9 aspect-ratio ultrawide monitors whichbarely have enough vertical space for one full-sized window.

It’s generated by a Window Manager. Not a Desktop Environment. Not a Compositor. It draws windows and menus, and launches other programs. It does not include a mixer, stopwatch timer, Mastodon feed reader, or half the video drivers. It has a memory footprint of fourteen megabytes, and a configuration file format that hasn’t meaningfully changed since Bill Clinton was in the WhiteHouse.

GNOME was a mistake.’

  • @Rooty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    61 year ago

    Minimalist window managers are fine and dandy if you’re churning out code or slinging containers around, but just about any program that runs in a desktop enviroment will need GTK+ or QT libraries. I hope the OP doesn’t plan on using a web browser anytime soon.

    • @HakFooOP
      link
      English
      81 year ago

      There’s a difference between ‘requires GTK or Qt’ and ‘pulls in several hundred megabytes of dependencies that are pretty much unrelated to the narrow task the tool is built for.’