Subject: FVWM: Some suggestions

From: Remko Troncon <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:23:07 +0100

Hello,

I have a minor suggestion for the FvwmButtons module. Currently, it is
only possible to get relief for both the 'up' and 'down' state of a
button, or none at all. I personally would also like an option to have
relief only in the down state (or only in the up state). This should be
a simple patch i suppose.

Finally, i also have a question regarding fvwm-root: is it possible to
put a small image in the center of the background ? Because at the
moment, i have to make a full screen image for each background i want,
which takes a long time to load (so switching images between desktops is
not feasible), and is not portable from screen to screen.

cheers,
Remko
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: coerver <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:23:50 -0500 (EST)

rant:

	I have been using fvwm(2) for awhile  < 2.0 and think its the
cat's meow.  I recently joined the mailing list and several times I have
wanted to address the "default" look and feel.  I recently installed
the latest stable fvwm2 on a solaris2.7 box at work and had to spend a
good deal of time getting the conifguration to look good.  The man pages
are truly a(maze)ing ___but___ it takes time and how much time _do_ you
_really_ want to spend configuring your window manager?  I am the first to
admit there are many things I don't understand about fvwm but I don't
care.. I just use it and like it.  The default pager could look alot
better, the mwm-ishness could be minimized a bit etc.. etc.

my point: fvwm2 could
have a nicer default look I think...

don't get me wrong.. the web site is nice, the list is great fvwm2 is the
perfect wm... etc
but the discussion to make default config prettier is justified and should
continue.. sorry for the rant next time I include some concrete
suggestions

Rob Coerver

[email-masked]

end_of_rant:

	thanks

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:44:41 +0100

> have a nicer default look I think...

Yes, definitely - you are telling us no news.  I think it's one of
fvwm's major flaws.  Fortunately, there is the fvwm-themes package
nowadays, but we should do a better job of advertising it.

> continue.. sorry for the rant next time I include some concrete

Bye

Dominik ^_^  ^_^

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:52:49 -0500

> continue.. sorry for the rant next time I include some concrete

Some concrete suggestions would be nice.

Which default config are you referring to?

With current versions of fvwm, you get 2 defaults from fvwm.  You press any
mouse button on the root and it offers to create various configs.  The windows
config looks like Windows.  (Its not our fault if you don't like it.)

The other one is sort of ugly but someone must have liked it.
Is that the one you don't like?
Send some suggestions for changes.

-- 
Dan Espen                           E-mail: [email-masked]

---

From: Remko Troncon <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 17:29:14 +0100

> have a nicer default look I think...

I agree with the fact that the default look (the pink one) is rather
ugly, which is the reason for most people not to use FVWM at all.
However, a lot of window managers and desktop managers seem to have a
sober default look and feel, probably because maybe nobody likes that
look, but it irritates no one either.
My impression is that most people however use most of these window managers,
because they have seen a lot of fancy screenshots, proving that you _can_ 
make it look verry classy. And personally, i think this is a problem
with FVWM: most of the screenshots on the webpage are not stylish. Don't
get me wrong, the screenshots show different nice features of FVWM, but
if you look at the big picture, the screenshots seem to revolt a lot of
people.
So a suggestion for making FVWM more appealing: add some screenshots of
'designer' look and feels (with nice title bars with pixmaps etc.)
I am currently changing the look of my FVWM again, and maybe i can
contribute a screenshot in the near future.

> don't get me wrong.. the web site is nice

Personally, i think the site could be a lot more appealing and modern
too (without making it heavy). But of course, it is easy to criticize
someone else's work, and i am not too great at original web design
either. When i have some time, i might propose a new look for the
FVWM website.

Just my 2 cents,
Remko

PS: It goes without saying that i think FVWM is the best window manager
around ;)

---

From: parv <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 12:44:57 -0500

in message <[email-masked]>, wrote Remko
Troncon thusly...
>
> My impression is that most people however use most of these window
> managers, because they have seen a lot of fancy screenshots, ...
> this is a problem with FVWM: most of the screenshots on the
> webpage are not stylish. Don't get me wrong, the screenshots show
> different nice features of FVWM, but if you look at the big
> picture, the screenshots seem to revolt a lot of people.

funny you would say that!

if all i had seen are fancy screenshots, i would not be using fvwm
today.  i also must say that i skip those wms whose pictures are
bare minimum (no window title, or pager).

  - parv

--

---

From: Maciej Kalisiak <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:00:23 -0500

> contribute a screenshot in the near future.

Agreed, but don't forget the other side of the coin: if you're going to provide
a nice snapshot, PLEASE provide the .fvwm2rc (or just the key bits of it to get
most of the look)!  There's nothing more frustrating then seeing a tantalizing
screenshot and then spending hours trying to get anywhere close.  The implied
"here's what to aim for; here's the man page; go to it", although theoretically
sound, practically *really* sucks.  Fvwm is one of the most configurable window
managers out there, but this carries a price: configuring it takes longer (for
a general user), as there is so many things to tweak and tune.

-- 
Maciej Kalisiak       mac "at" dgp.toronto.edu       www.dgp.toronto.edu/~mac

---

From: Maciej Kalisiak <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:14:12 -0500

> nowadays, but we should do a better job of advertising it.

(I might be stating the obvious, so my apologies upfront if that's the case.)

Note though that fvwm-themes is not a panacea for new FVWM users... not yet.  I
tried it a couple of days ago, and was seriously impressed by its power, but it
currently has one major flaw: scattered, scarce, and incomplete documentation
on making your own modifications/themes.  What I think is needed is a single
text file/document which details how fvwm-themes works, as well as a complete
reference for writing your own flavours of all the components.  As it is, with
the weak documentation, the user trades-in the "highly-modifiable-but-homely
initial configuration" for "it looks nice, but I'll be darned if I know how to
tweak this one feature which is bugging me".  The latter can be often just as
frustrating as the former.

---

From: martin sepulveda <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:23:43 +0100

i agree with some of your rant, but what i personally like of fvwm is not the look 
(let's face it, it so configurable it may look anyway you want it, or take a look at
fvwm-themes), but the great thing about fvwm is that it's as configurable in it's
behaviour as it is in the looks. if i send a screenshot of my configuration you'll see
only titlebars, no buttons, and a root menu for each mouse button. 
no modules and many keyboard bindings don't show up in screenshots, but are 
what make me use fvwm (1 and 2) more than 8 years straight.
many times i've tested other wm, and i always came back.
most people are amazed at fancy icons and fonts, wiches you can use in any wm,
but i don't believe anyone out there choosing a wm based on a screenshot will
ever choose fvwm, even when it might look as good or better than typical kde or
gnome/sawfish themed configurations, but at a fraction of the resources' cost
and with much better stability.
and ease of configuration only comes from having a gui to do it, i guess. of course 
i'll prefer editing files as i always did, but fvwm-themes looks great for that.

my worthless 2 cents...

m.

On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:23:50 -0500 (EST)

> continue.. sorry for the rant next time I include some concrete

PS: sorry for the missdirection, rob

-- 
The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
	-- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Remko Troncon <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:30:17 +0100

> fvwm-themes),  but  the  great  thing  about  fvwm  is  that  it's  as
> configurable in it's behaviour as it is in the looks.

I don't think any of us doubts about that. But you can't 'show' how
handy and configurable a window manager's feel is; however, you _can_ show how
configurable a window manager's look is.

Using a window manager is like falling in love: first you need shallow,
visual attraction, and after a while you discover the internals, the
'real stuff', and only then you truly know that this is the one for you. 
Without the latter it can't last, but without the former it won't start.

cheers,
Remko

---

From: Glen Lee Edwards <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 22:21:10 -0600

> bare minimum (no window title, or pager).

Parv,

Agreed. I use Fvwm because of its low overhead, and because of its high 
degree of user configurability.  I have a page of screenshots for Fvwm; 
http://members.fcwm.org/glen/fvwm .  I have 15+ screen shots.  Each is 
intended to show what you can do with Fvwm.  The emphasis is on 
functionality, not looks.

Remko,

Regarding the screenshots on the Fvwm site; I would hardly call them 
ugly.  The one thing that stands out is the lack of consistency in the 
look from one screenshot to the next.  Which is another reason I use 
Fvwm - I can make my desktop look the way I want it to.  I'm not stuck 
with what someone else thinks is appealing.  Cool, huh!?

If you aren't content with the way Fvwm looks on your computer, you can 
redesign the look.  Fvwm has predefined themes you can use to mimic 
Windows and several other window managers.  Or you can create your own 
look and feel.

I'll stick with Fvwm.  Every now and then I get bored and out of 
curiosity try something else.  In a few minutes I'm back.  You can't 
beat Fvwm.

Glen