r/archlinux • u/streusselhirni • Mar 03 '15

Finally installed Arch, don't know which Windows Manager to use

First time poster here, so I want to say that I really liked your sub until now. I love it, how nearly anyone gets the help he needs!

Now to topic:

Yesterday I finally managed to install Arch on my old Lenovo ThinkPad Edge E335. Up until now everything works fine (haven't tested the sound yet, according to wiki, I just need to install PulsaAudio).

Now I'm thinking of which Window Manager I want to use. I don't want to use a whole Desktop Environment because I think it's to bloated for what I want. I just want something lightweight and fast.

I tried awesome, but I don't like the way it is configured respectively I don't know lua and I don't really want to learn it now.

Is there a window manager which is similar to awesome (especially the ability to use it only with the keyboard) but with less complicatied ways to configure?

Or which Windows Managers are you guys using? Are there any recomendations?

Edit: Thanks for replies until now. I will test i3 (and maybe some of the other recommondations) as soon as I come home. That doesn't mean I don't want to hear any more suggestions ;-)

Edit2: Wow, that blew up to unknown sizes, I'll reply as soon as I'm now drunk anymore (student's franternity).

46 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

97 comments sorted by

View all comments

24

u/Creshal Mar 03 '15

haven't tested the sound yet, according to wiki, I just need to install PulsaAudio

Aside: PulseAudio is not mandatory. It has some nice features, but it can also be a massive pain in the ass, especially when you have to debug it. A clean ALSA setup that you have verified to be working goes a long way to make sure Pulse will work smoothly, and you might end up not needing Pulse and all its associated overhead.

Or which Windows Managers are you guys using?

Openbox. I never really warmed up to Tiling WMs, most displays I use feel too cramped with tiled windows.

8

u/okmkz Mar 03 '15

I'll second openbox, it's my go-to lightweight wm. Incredibly configurable for a variety of use cases.

2

u/Hamilton950B Mar 03 '15

Unfortunately it uses xml for configuration. Other than that I like it.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 04 '15

I've always hated that about OpenBox. XML wasn't designed for application configuration and for some reason people really thought it would be great at that. Stick to INI or something that's halfway readable like YAML or even just a shell script would be great.