I'm wondering if it wouldn't be nice to have a tiling windowmanager in Slackware. So I created this poll, how many Slackware-users are already using a tiling WM or are considering to use one.

If you use a tiling WM, please post which one and explain your experiences. Can you imagine to have a tiling WM as a choice on a stock Slackware-system? and if yes, which one?

Markus

I used Xmonad and wmii in the past and am now using i3 on all my systems. Tiling WMs are more or less the only environments that make sense on the 10" display of my netbook and on the 27" monitor of my workstation, in exactly the same setup.
So for me it would be a nice addition to have i3 in Slackware, but it is in no way a must. Users of tiling WMs normally know how to get them installed in Slackware anyways and it is not very time consuming to compile them, they aren't as large as KDE (if you don't count in the dependencies for Xmonad).

I use xmonad but I think the inclusion of a tiling window manager is unnecessary. Most of the tiling window managers are pretty complex and it would be an interesting choice finding one fit for inclusion. Certainly xmonad is out of the running (ghc is a huge dependency). dwm needs to be configured at compile time so there is no benefit to including it. wmii requires plan9 (or equivalent) and its configuration is 'unique'. AwesomeWM is too much of a moving target and requires modifying some stock packages as far as I know. i3 is really the only one I can think of that may be included, but it requires libev which has a conflict with libevent, introducing a possible source of frustration for those not using i3. That covers most of the major tiling window managers, and while there are others it makes no sense to include an obscure window manager that may only get a few users.

Basically, I think, despite the fact that I myself use a tiling window manager, they are best installed as third-party packages by those that intend to use them. If there was a popular tiling window manager that didn't require any special treatment then maybe it would make sense, but as it stands most of the tiling window managers have their own quirks that are best absent on a default installation.

I either use kde for my office work and dwm for super-fast startx and any work where a mouse isn't useful.

I suppose I should try dwm as the WM for kde, just for a laugh

I use awesome wm on all of my slackware and other linux pcs, it's just the best way to make use of my laptop even when i'm in tight spaces, it's super low on resources and if you're a good typer using a tiling wm is faster for most tasks than using a mouse. I've tried other window managers as dwm and so on but awesome just seems to be the more complete to me. Only downsides are the dependecies on xcb-util-wm for the latest versions which is not present on 13.37 (but will be in -current) and a certain version of lua (it does not compile with the latest one as far as i know). It would be nice to have it by default but it's so small that it doesn't really take much time to compile and install anyway, honestly i'd be happy to have any of the mentioned tiling wm on stock.

Looking to have a serious go at getting Slackware running on my laptop and would go for spectrwm for X and probably screen or tmux for console only stuff.

When it comes to productivity I normally use dwm as my tiling wm. I like it's simplicity and since I am not missing any features I just stick with it.

I voted "from time to time", because I have had i3 on in the past and used it occasionally. But I keep regressing to KDE.

I have been using i3wm (almost exclusively) for the last 2 years or so.

I've heard of them, but I don't see the point of them. I probably should try one to see if there is a point, but fluxbox works great and always has. I do not multitask, I only have 1 window up at a time and rarely need more than one up at a time, and if I do I tile it manually.

If you don't see the point of them, doesn't mean that there isn't one As with everything, it's a question of personal preferences.

Obviously, we all have different working habits and some people will not benefit from tiling WMs. For over 10 years I used "standard" DE/WMs and also didn't see the point in doing anything a 'tiling' way. Now when I have to use anything other than i3wm, I get a feeling that the experience is much poorer, windows are managed in a very 'clumsy' way and I definitely do things slower than in i3... or to put it differently, I don't waste my time on windows management (ie. moving, resizing, adjusting, switching, etc) - it's done for me. If I really need, I just rearrange them.

The only environment that might not benefit from tiling WMs are IMHO small displays of netbooks.

I personally like the way i3 works. I'm sure people will say the same about dwm, xmonad, etc.

Just my 5p.

If you can get used to tiling WMs (and I think not all can, in the same way that I can not get used to Unity or Gnome Shell), you will very fast become so used to it that you forget that there were other ways to do it.
My favorite points in using a tiling WM:
- anything can be done with the keyboard: Moving Windows, starting apps, whatever. No need for the mouse at all. This can maybe be done with other WMs also, but tiling WMs are especially designed for it, making this much easier.
- Windows arrange themselves. Usually I have a main window, taking up a large part of the space, and a terminal window besides it. If I need another terminal (for example for a quick look at a man-page or a configuration file) I just press Windows+v (split the existing terminal vertical) followed by Windows+Enter (open a terminal). This usually takes only a second, much faster than starting a terminal and arranging it with the mouse).
- I know this can be done with other WMs also, but it is especially easy with i3: I have several applications that start every time I start X, just because I almost always need them: Firefox, Claws-Mail, newsbeuter, Ranger. I have set them up that they always start at separate named workspaces, Firefox at workspace 1: Web, Claws-Mail and newsbeuter at 2: Mail, Ranger at 3: Files. This way I just need to press the Windows-key in conjunction with the particular number and switch automatically to that workspace. The layouts are kept in place and all. If I need more applications I just switch to workspaces with higher numbers. Comes in very handy for me.
- Tiling WMs, due to its simple nature, are very small and fast. They work on any machine from old Pentium machines to 6- or 8-core workstations. True also for the *boxes and similar WMs, of course.
- I disagree with sycamorex on the netbook part, I use i3 on all my machines including the 10" netbook. It makes totally sense, you won't make much use of the tiling features, but the tabbing features are quite handy. Also, again, you can do anything with the keyboard, much more comfortable than to use those tiny touchpads and no menus, docks and window decorations needed that take away the small amount of screenspace you have.

In short, if I have to use a machine without tiling WM I feel limited, in the same way I feel limited when :reload or :tabopen dw Slackware doesn't work on a Firefox without Pentadactyl (the latter one is a custom search that looks for Slackware on Distrowatch and opens the result in a separate tab). Or, maybe more common, how many vim users have already sat in front of a Windows machine, editing a file with Notepad and have automatically tried to close the window with <Esc>:wq and then had to think a few seconds why that didn't work?

I also use i3 on my netbook. I just don't see that it's much more beneficial than running eg. fluxbox on it. The tabbed mode here is not much different than Alt+Tab in other environments and Fluxbox can also be controlled only with the keyboard.

Generally, the bigger the display (and the bigger the number of displays), the more sense it makes to use a tiling WM.

Haven't tried that, so I can't comment on that. For me it just very beneficial that I can run exactly the same configuration on all my machines, so I don't have to adapt to a different setting or even a different WM on one of the machines.
of course tiling makes more sense when you use larger screens.

This reminded me how I needed to type some math formulas in OpenOffice Writer the same year I started using Vim. After typing the formula I would quickly hit <ESC> without thinking... Took me at least twice as long to finish the document. Nowadays I am able to switch my brain to a different "mode" while typing text not inside Vim, unfortunately, sometimes I manage to press ^W to delete last word, which works great in terminals (and insert mode in Vim), but does something completely different in browsers and other GUI programs. Great way to "clear" all the form fields in some webpage.

As for tiling WMs, I would like to try them out some day, but I feel too comfortable with KDE to switch to something else entirely.