Excerpts from Ramon Diaz-Uriarte's message of Tue Aug 18 14:02:47 -0400 2009: > On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 5:58 PM, James Pearson<xiong.chiam...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Jochen Schulz <m...@well-adjusted.de> > > wrote: > >> > >> Julien Danjou: > >> > > >> > I've published the results here[1] and wrote some analyzes too. You're > >> > free to redo it yourself if do not trust me. :-) > >> > >> Just one little thought I had when reading your summary: you mention you > >> should/are going te remove "tabulous, telak and invaders since they are > >> not used." > >> > >> I don't know about the others, but I never really got what tabulous is > >> about in the first place. Maybe it is just me, but I think that one may > >> be actually more of an issue regarding the documentation and not > >> tabulous itself. > > > > I'd tend to agree with this. I just modify what's in the default > > configuration file (Awesome has been the first wm that works like I want by > > default!), so if tabulous was included in there, even commented out, I'd > > probably be using it. *shrug* > > > >> Most of our users do not seem to come from the tiling window manager > >> world. > > > > This seems reasonable, as the general consensus on the Arch Linux forums > > (where I went for information about tiling wms) seems to be that Awesome has > > useful defaults and is generally easy to configure (and so is good for those > > making their first foray into the world of tiling), and XMonad is faster > > and more configurable, but requires you to invest a large amount of time > > (you have to learn Haskell!) to get it to how you want it, the first time at > > least. > > > > I have to disagree here. XMonad does NOT require you to learn Haskell > at all. I know no Haskell whatsoever, and I am using XMonad, though I > have also used Awesome. In fact, the documentation for XMonad makes it > easy to configure XMonad without any knowledge of Haskell. There is a > lot of documentation and step-by-step tutorials, and even the docs for > the contributed staff make it simple to play around with it. > > In contrast, the docs for Awesome directly tell you to go learn Lua. > > For instance, here > > http://awesome.naquadah.org/wiki/Awesome_3_configuration > > it says, explicitly, that "We're talking about Lua, so first, learn > Lua. Don't want to? Do not use awesome 3 and stop reading right now. > (Alternatively fetch a config file from the source tarball or from > someone, and just tweak it accordingly, which should work even without > any lua language knowledge). " > > Exactly the second sentence above applies to XMonad just the same if > you know no Haskell. > > Best, > > > R. > > >> Most of our users are using awesome for a long time, we do not get new > >> users that much. > > > > It may also be that the new users just don't subscribe to the mailing list, > > and thus didn't know about the survey. If it works like you want it to, > > your motivation to subscribe to a program's list is much lower than if you > > need lots of help, which was probably more the case for earlier users. ;) > > > > -- > > James Pearson > > -- > > The best way to predict the future is to invent it. > > - Alan Kay
Yeah, that's reasonable. Power users of both awesome and xmonad must learn lua and haskell respectively. Haskell's arguably harder to learn. -- Andrei Thorp, Developer: Xandros Corp. (http://www.xandros.com) -- To unsubscribe, send mail to awesome-devel-unsubscr...@naquadah.org.
