Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- wm:stacking:comparison [2021/01/28 20:56] – senioradmin
+++ wm:stacking:comparison [2021/01/28 21:15] – senioradmin
@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 |jwm              |0 votes|
-The recommendation is a mix of these poll results and [[:about#our_criteria|our criteria]]. Actually, we have two recommendations.
+The recommendation is a mix of these poll results and [[:about#our_criteria|our criteria]].
 ==== For beginners ====
 Many stacking window managers are easy or very easy to use for novice users. Some do resemble a classic layout from Microsoft's proprietary OS. So we did choose the most lightweight of this easy to use window managers, and this is **Fluxbox**
-Fluxbox is one of the most popular lightweight window managers. It is usable right out of the box and highly configurable. The the most similar competitor is **Openbox**, which is no surprise, because they share the same ancestor Blackbox.
+Fluxbox is one of the most popular lightweight window managers. It is usable right out of the box and highly configurable. The most similar competitor is **Openbox**, which is no surprise, because they share the same ancestor Blackbox.
+If you are coming from a Microsoft system and are looking for an experience which you are used to have a look at **icewm**.
+==== For experienced users ====
+Experienced users might  prefer a window manager which is completely controllable by keyboard shortcuts and stays out of the way. This criteria are met by **cwm**. It has a minimalist interface, a short but comprehensive documentation it is the default window manager of OpenBSD (where it is also developed).
+==== I want a lightweight desktop environment ====
+So, you want to stay lightweight but also want an integrated look and feel with an ecosystem of small apps? Look no further than **Window Maker**