Re: Default window manager

[Peter Hawkins <peterhawkins ozemail com au>]

Hi there...
Adrian Hosey wrote:

>: > When for instance a beginner install it and use enlightenmnent they noticed
>: > that the memory isn't enough and it's slow... and they think. "Gnome is
>: > slow and buggy, better to use KDE instead".
>: > Why don't just replace enlightenment with another wm?
>
> Not to belittle the merit of this discussion, but isn't this a Redhat
> issue and not a GNOME issue? _No_ WM is considered part of the GNOME
> "core" bundle, right? Is there a Redhat forum where the discussion might
> find a better fit?

It is an issue, but surely it has already been discussed? See the GNOME summaries
for previous weeks.... could Havoc comment on this? I thought the decision was to
replace E as the default window manager for GNOME, so we could have something
better suited and better integrated, not to mention faster. Candidates for a
replacement were things like icewm-gnome, wmG, gnome-wm, and some others.

:-)
Peter

PS For the record, I strongly support the use of icewm as a default - it's
certainly a significant amount faster than E, having had E installed until last
week, on the default minimal theme. Not to mention much nicer to use, and
sufficiently configurable to make it almost as pretty as E.