rodperson at rodperson.com
Sat Aug 6 17:47:51 UTC 2011
On Sat, 6 Aug 2011 08:26:39 -0600
Chad Perrin <perrin at apotheon.com> wrote:
> > Sorry, but why? I went with OpenBox, because it seemed like it was
> > under current development, and Fluxbox is stagnant, otherwise, I
> > didn't see much difference. But I do find it curious that so many
> > on this thread are recommending Fluxbox, and almost no one
> > OpenBox. What would be the reason?
> Fluxbox supports window tabbing. Last I checked, OpenBox did not. In
> fact, amongst the 'box window managers, window tabbing is pretty much
> the killer feature.
> That, and it has a better license than OpenBox.
I'll agree that Fluxbox license is better. But I find OpenBox more responsive and
it seem to just look better to me. I'm not a fan of tabbing so that doesn't matter to me. I've been using Openbox as my WM for 4 or 5 years, before that it was Fluxbox.
"If you are not paying for it, you're not the customer; you're the
product being sold" blue beetle - MetaFilter
More information about the freebsd-questions