On Sat, 6 Aug 2011 08:26:39 -0600 Chad Perrin <per...@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. -- Rod Person http://www.rodperson.com "If you are not paying for it, you're not the customer; you're the product being sold" blue beetle - MetaFilter _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
