Openbox vs XFCE? (Page 7 of 7)

I suppose, but really the windows 7 bar goes: Start Menu, Dock, Task List, Sys Tray
The start menu can be emulated by many docks, even adeskbar you could just make it a 'sliding drawer'.
The dock part is just part of a normal dock... and your list and sys tray is just tint2...
So /functionality/ wise, i think you can get pretty close. Is there any specific feature that I'm missing that really makes it impossible to use a dock+panel?

Oh, i didn't realize that anonymous. Alright then, well unless I find or make a dock that fits those requirements, you win
Also, i didn't even realize what thread this was in

One vote for Openbox+Tint2, efficient, configurable, fast...  XFCE is somewhat too "GNOME" for me.

I'm a definite Xfce die-hard and even before I installed #! on my computer, I had always admired what Corenominal has done with #!.  I'm enough of a geek that I could probably use Openbox and get used to its way of doing things.  But I prefer to use something that Linux newbies could easily get used to, and with the changes that both KDE and GNOME implemented that I don't care for, it's Xfce for me.

Also, even though it's a bit of a challenge to do with #!, I'd miss the ability to use Compiz, and as far as I know, I don't think that's possible in Openbox short of installing LXDE (someone correct me if I'm wrong on this).  Besides, the few times I've used Openbox, it felt disorganized to me, and LXDE doesn't feel quite as polished as Xfce does.

Besides, several people in this thread (who are obviously Openbox die-hards, no doubt), said that Xfce is slow.  That's probably because Xubuntu is the only Xfce distro you've ever tried, which is bloated and has, in my opinion, given Xfce an undeserved bad reputation in the speed department.  #! Statler Xfce, however, is setting things straight and is, IMHO, what Xfce was meant to be.

Do you use Compiz with Xfce? Xfce's own compositing is more than enough for me

True that If you do a basic Xfce install in Debian you pretty much get what CrunchBang provides minus some custom tweaks and configurations.

WARNING* Nix newbs opinions to follow.*

Just installed #! openbox yesterday ... love it. One of the best and brightest examples of gnu/nix I've seen. Am newbish, but already been through probably going on 20 diff distro's to date. CB has jumped right to the top of my list ... Awesome imo. Strange how most of the nix distro's I've found that I like the most are made by one or a handful of devs. VS the big boys, like ubuntu, which I've disliked from the moment I 1st tried it. After hearing all the hype about it. CB is a diff story, this is pure, distilled gnu/nix at it's finest.

Because my comp is oldish, 512mbs ddr2. I've grown a fetish for all things light weight linux. The functionality, user friendly and feature richness #! packs into such a small footprint is amazing to me. Hats off to the mad linux scientist behind and community surrounding #!.

As for the topic of the thread. Don't see why there can't be both ... xfce and openbox. Guessing like anyone who's made something awesome the guy behind CB wants people to use it. So adding xfce as an officially supported option to me makes perfect sense. Easier n lower learning curve. Should make it more accessible to da masses. If it performs as well and is as of high quaility as I'm finding #! openbox to be and I'm sure it does/is. Just gives people another/fuller DE option.

Had no problem digesting CB's openbox. Though have too much time on me hands and a degree in googology. Guessing for some, not having a fully stocked DE would be a major put off to using #!. Their loss really but CB's loss too. Cause it should be more widely used, known and credited imo.

So think the person and supporting people behind this distro have a real idea of what they're doing. I really like the openbox release myself. It's the resource miser in me. Even on high spec hardware I'd more than likely run obox. Probably both ... debating installing the xfce release along with the others on this dinosaur. Betting on newer hardware #! would blaze along like no other. Does the same on oldish/low spec too apparently. Whichever changes they make or additions they bring to CB. Guessing it'll be for good reason and an improvement. Pretty obvious to me the CB dev/s know their stuff and are talented as hades when it comes to nix.

Was here researching sys stats comparing the openbox and xfce release. RAM/cpu ... etc. Anybody had the pleasure of both and care to enlighten newbs like myself with some actual numbers ? Thanks ... just a nix newbs 2 cents. Worth probably less than that ... I know, sighs.

Last edited by CBizgreat! (2011-07-28 06:38:06)

I like openbox more.  I don't like the thought of having a standard window tray and "start" menu, just not fast enough for me.  I know I could use dmenu and the sorts, which would already defeat the purpose of navigating any application menu.  Maybe I'm just looking for something lighter than openbox but still has the same feel.

I have an old Pentium 3 with 756mb of ram and crunchbang just runs a bit a sluggish.