Aside from window tabbing(best feature ever) and great resource usage, is there some reason I should be using FB over GNOME or KDE? I'm in Fluxbuntu and it works well on my old computer, but I'm not sure I use it often enough to learn the quirks of the WM that doesn't look like it has the conveniences of GNOME.

Am I missing something here?

If you only need minimal help in maneuvering through Linux or are using older hardware, fluxbox is a great choice. GNOME and KDE offer a lot of extra programs and features that most hardcore Linux users don't really need. While fluxbox is mainly a window manager, KDE and GNOME are full blown MS Windows replacements.

So if you think Fluxbox is great then just continue using it. It's pretty obvious that you like it.

Hope that helps a little.

I use fluxbox a lot and what I like is its speed and configurability. Keybindings are easy and you don't need to muck about with Xmodmap like you have to in, say, xfce4 or KDE. I use keybindings for the stuff I use a lot. Building my own menu is another feature I really like. I use Debian so I keep the Debian Menu and the Fluxbox menu as a submenus, and in the root menu I keep the stuff I use fairly often. It takes some effort to build it by hand but I think it's worth it, as I get exactly what I want on it, and I use it to change theme and wallpaper as well.

I think what it boils down to is that some people like to have the full-blown desktop environment and if you do, well, you have kde, gnome or xfce4 (plus some other less known). If you like it light and nimble and clean, well, you're more likely to just use a window manager. There are tons of them available but as window managers come and go, you can do a hell of a lot worse than fluxbox.

/CZ

Good choice for older hardware. On newer hardware, it doesn't really make any difference.

Go ahead and install both Gnome and KDE. See if you like them.

Weird question, that only you can answer.

Just install both, and use both depending on the mood you are each day. Eventually you will get to know which option is better for you.

Fluxbox is one of dozens of Window managers. They are all lighter than Gnome or KDE which are usually thought of as desktops.

Linux is all about choices and alot of us HATE the bloatware that is Gnome and KDE. It all depends on what you like. I use Fluxbox on alot of my systems even on fast hardware.

I use it because I can't take the bloat and bugginess of GNOME and KDE. Really I can't take KDE at all, it's way too much like Window$, completely scatterbrained. It's hard to find options, hard to configure, the configuration folder needs to be deleted once in a while because KDE f's it up. GNOME is better, but last time I tried it nautilus was really buggy and crashed plenty, and it was slow, really both KDE and GNOME are slow and bloated and unresponsive. Even XFCE is not too light, and it had a memory leak last version I tried. I could go on and on about the other WMs I've tried, so far fluxbox seems to be the best for me. Now, there are a few others which may be worth looking into, you can try icewm for a more Window$-like atmosphere, while being light and responsive. Openbox is also reasonable. Some of them I could not get working or are too crappy to bother trying.

Here's a list of them, try a few of them:
http://freshmeat.net/browse/56/

Just try out a bunch of different WMs. I used fluxbox for a while, but I just switched to awesome, and I don't think I'm going back. It's smaller than fluxbox, and I like tiling WMs.

Thanks for the input. I was looking at it from the perspective of my experiences with Gnome and KDE. Thinking of it is a WM I do see its value.