Martin Dietze <[email protected]> writes: > I don't see any suicide battle in this
I don't see it either. > - WM is stable and far less resource consuming than any other desktop > environment. Yet it is a complete (while slim) environment rather than > a bare bones window manager. True, but still I wouldn't call it an environment. I like it because it is: (1) small & fast, (2) stable and, (3) featureful for a window manager. > I haven't seen anything in WM that crashes all the time for the last 7 > years. This cannot be said about other desktop environments. Very true. > I've tried different enviromments in the past, have even been using > GNOME for the last half year (just for the kick of an occsasional > change), but so far I've always been back to WM after a while. I have a special interest in trying out and using different window managers and environments. Some of them are really nice, but for some reason I keep coming back to WMaker. > I don't see why this should be a political question or anything > related to some kind of sentimentality. If soemthing does the job > better than others, then it is a valid and good choice, nothing less, > nothing more. Choice is good. Charles -- Your job is being a professor and researcher: That's one hell of a good excuse for some of the brain-damages of minix. (Linus Torvalds to Andrew Tanenbaum)
pgp03VQ3ZTxsB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
