Talk:X window manager

[Untitled]
could someone explain how window managers relate to things like KDE and gnome? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarquin (talk • contribs) 12:22, 2 September 2003 (UTC)


 * KDE, Gnome, Enlightenment and Xfce are desktop manager. They contain a window manager but add things to it. Basicly they add an extra api and some rules for application programmers. So that the whole desktop is more integrated.


 * Afcourse to do this, they also have to be a window manager.


 * Extra note: Some will see Enlightment as a window manager and some will see it as a desktop manager, the same with some other desktop/window manager. Both are right, it is how you see it that coints.


 * An other note: Some (more pure) desktop manager allow for an other window manager (part). That other window manager will afcourse need to be written in a way that it kan be used with that desktop manager. Usually with an special api. -- ppareit —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppareit (talk • contribs) 13:13, 26 September 2003 (UTC)


 * So a desktop manager is a window manager with more bits for better integration? -- Tarquin 20:34, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

list of x window managers
how about splitting out some of this, and creating a "list of x window managers" page, with nice tables and comparisons (like so many other "list of" pages) 85.165.200.1 (talk) 18:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

rename
Centrx, isn't "window manager" unique to X? In other words, I don't see why move it when it's not namespace pollution. --Shallot 21:27, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Reverts
I've reverted these edits for the following reasons:

* xfce: a window manager aims to low resource consumption

Xfce isn't a window manager, it's a desktop environment. Xfce uses Xfwm as its window manager, but that's already listed. Therefore, I've removed this entry.

''Most users do not need to care the X window managers, however, one might to do so if the popular default window manager/desktop is too slow on old machines. As a result, some lighweight window managers such as Xfce and Fluxbox are worthing trying.''

I'm not sure if this article needs a ==choice of window managers== section; I think the second paragraph and corresponding bullet points explain how different users make choices on which window manager to use. If we want to keep this section, it should be rewritten and made NPOV (removing the Xfce and Fluxbox references), but I've removed it for now.

Poll links
* a poll for favorite window manager, another poll by tech geeks, yet another poll, [one more poll]

Do we need the polls? I'm hesitant to remove them, so I'm leaving them for now. --Sether 5 July 2005 06:25 (UTC)


 * Nah, removed them. --Phatmonkey 18:39, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Peer review of a related article
I submitted X Window core protocol for peer review, as I intend to candidate it for featured status. I would appreciate comments (Peer review page). - Liberatore(T) 18:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Suggesting merge from Virtual window manager to here
I'd earlier proposed to merge the Virtual window manager article with the Virtual desktop article, but User:Jonabbey pointed out that it'd probably merge into this one better, which I agree with. (Also see the VD talk page) Are there any objections? Izogi 23:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

It just occurred to me that there's also a Tiling window manager article, so I've also added a merge suggestion for that one. In any case, I'm just going to go ahead and do it now, and it can be reverted if anyone thinks it's a bad idea. Izogi 22:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Modification of Window manager lists
It seems like this is (and should be) a good resource for someone researching various window manager choices. In light of that, maybe it would be wise to note that current status of these projects. I mean that some seem to be dead (ie Weimia), and others are not yet extant (ie Aegis). Maybe we could use a table, discussing various attributes like size, availability, brief purpose...

Which managers to include?
The page is now protected until the issue of which links are allowed here. IMO, two things that are uncontroversial are:


 * if a window manager has a Wikipedia page, it should be linked; if it's not notable, that article should be deleted first;
 * some window managers are historically significant, such as OLWV; if there is evidence that an article about them could be written, they can stay in the list with an external link in the meantime;
 * all others go.

Opinions? Tizio 17:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * in the other wikipedia pages there are list of things that aren't yet implemented. the red links and related external links there should be so that anybody in the future can make related article.
 * --83.190.219.68 01:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, per WP:NOT, we should not describe things that does not exist. On the other hand, we can describe a notable project for realizing something. I do not clearly understand why Beryl (window manager) is so far a separate article from Compiz, but so far I'd rather have the two being listed on the same item of the list, such as:


 * Compiz (a compositing window manager) and Beryl (window manager) an under development fork of it


 * I think this is an acceptable compromise. Tizio 17:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * no, the red links are intended as an articol that hasn't yet written on wikipedia but exist in the web and in the world. anyone has deleted a true word that don't exist in wikipedia. --83.190.138.45 23:05, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Not everything that exist in the world will have an article on Wikipedia (see WP:SOFTWARE for a proposed guideline regarding software; this guideline is in addition to WP:V). Red links are useful if their corresponding articles can stay in Wikipedia; otherwise, they just invite people to create articles that would then be deleted. So the question is: which ones of the redlinked WM's may deserve an article? I still do not see any specific proposal on this. Tizio 23:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Unprotected. Since I see nobody disagreed on my proposal, I have implemented it. Tizio 20:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

merge
uhhhhhhhhhhhh... why does window manager redirect here? — Omegatron 13:30, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Compositing Window Manager
I have the following issues with the "Compositing Window Manager" list which I am not sure are correct:
 * Since the compositing window manager article exists, there should be a link pointing there. However, I am not sure if it would be fine to make the header a link or whether adding a reference to the main article would be more appropriate.
 * It would seem that it should be a sub-section of "Popular X window managers", given that Luminocity is listed under the "Other X window managers".
 * Metacity is listed both in the Compositing Window Manager" section and under the "Popular X window managers" one. However, other popular WM like Xfwm are listed only as Compositing WM. I would go for either mentioning Metacity only once, or if twice (Metacity and any other for which there would be a reason to do so), specifying in both entries the point at which it incorporate compositing facilities.

-- Gonhidi. —Preceding comment was added at 20:25, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Tiling window managers came first
i deleted "The first approach to this new window manager model was larswm followed later by Ion. " from the tiling wm section. Tiled windows go back at least to the Xerox Star so it wasn't a new model (http://toastytech.com/guis/star.html) —Preceding unsigned comment added by A plague of rainbows (talk • contribs) 20:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Metacity's compositor: requested fix
The article says that Metacity has had a compositor since version 2.2. This is untrue. Firstly, there was no version 2.2 (the first version was 2.3). Secondly, the first releases with compositors in were:


 * Havoc Pennington's first draft of a compositor: 2.7.0 (Feb 2004)
 * Søren Sandmann's compositor merged in: 2.13.34 (stable: 2.14, March 2006)
 * Current (Iain Holmes's) compositor merged in: 2.21.5 (stable: 2.22, March 2008)
 * Iain's compositor turned on by default: 2.21.8 (stable: 2.22)

I can't update the article myself through WP:COI. Marnanel (talk) 23:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Better late than never: corrected.  As of yesterday, the article was saying 2.20 (still incorrect), rather than the grossly incorrect 2.2 which Marnanel noted back in 2008.  Below is a copy of the current revision, as edited by moi.  Note that I could not verify the 2.7 unstable codebase by Havoc; the earliest reference I could find was for 2.8.4, which could not have been the earliest compositor devbranch, because it specifically talks about *disabling* some compositor features.  Any cite on the 2.7 release having a compositor?  Put a note on my  talkpage if you want some additional NPOV-editor assistance, since I don't monitor this article.  74.192.84.101 (talk) 02:37, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Historically, the Amiga in 1985, OSX in 2001 (which in many ways is a window manager for X), Java Looking Glass in 2003, and the Windows Longhorn demo in 2003 (delayed until Vista in 2007) preceded compositing efforts under X11. Compositing window managers for X include:
 * * GNOME's Mutter nee Metacity (first dev-branch compositor in 2.7 or 2.8 of 2004 -- original stable-branch compositor since 2.14 in 2005 or 2006 -- current compositor architecture since 2.22 in 2008 -- Metacity+Clutter begat Mutter in 2011),
 * * Xfce's Xfwm (since 4.2 of 2004 or 2005),
 * * Unity's Compiz (since 2005 -- was forked as Beryl in 2006 but the projects re-merged in 2007), and
 * * KDE's KWin (since 4.0 of 2008).

C programming with a window manager
I would appreciate links in your window mangager pages to a story about how to program a C program linked with Xlib to work with all or most window managers in a least-common-denominator style. Specifically, I want to ask the window manager if I need to deal with expose events or if the window manger will handle this, and I want to know how to tell (i.e., what event chain I look for,) when a user resize action is finished (i.e., when the mouse comes-up in the border.) [I only want to repaint the final re-sized window.] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.205.3.84 (talk) 19:59, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Desktop Environment
We are missing the relationship with DE's (desktop environments). This article needs to clearly differentiate between the various related systems. It would help the reader understand the subject's postion in the scheme of things related to graphical systems on operating systems. Thanks. - KitchM (talk) 19:01, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on X window manager. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140607010531/http://webapp5.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/SuSe-Dokumentation/packages/metacity/NEWS to http://webapp5.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/SuSe-Dokumentation/packages/metacity/NEWS
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150923235500/https://mail.xfce.org/pipermail/xfce/2005-January/012328.html to http://mail.xfce.org/pipermail/xfce/2005-January/012328.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:17, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

ICCCM and EWMH
Should this article go into more details on ICCCM and EWMH and how most X11 toolkits tend to have window manager support built in? Seems to be a bit light on the topic besides mentioning that the core X11 protocol doesn't cover much of the window manager interfaces and later briefly mentioning these standards. Also might be good to explain the relationships between a window manager and session manager. PaleAqua (talk) 20:19, 16 September 2018 (UTC)