How I rank Linux window managers

On the floor, most Linux window managers look deceptively comparable. It’s solely when you begin utilizing them that you just notice how in another way they deal with your workflow. Right here’s a fast breakdown of how Linux window managers differ—and which of them I rank above the remaining.

What are the primary issues I search for in a Linux window supervisor?

There are three most important issues I search for in a Linux window supervisor (WM): the way it handles window layouts, how its configuration system works, and whether or not it runs on Wayland or X11. Right here’s a extra detailed breakdown of how these components affect your total workflow.

How is the window supervisor managing the home windows?

There are three basic methods a window supervisor can deal with your home windows: floating, tiling, and the very new—scrolling.

Floating window managers—also referred to as stacking window managers—are what most individuals are already accustomed to from utilizing Home windows or a standard Ubuntu desktop. App home windows float freely on the display, can overlap one another, and are moved round primarily with the mouse—consider it like organizing papers on a desk. It’s intuitive, however the extra papers (home windows) you add, the more durable it will get to search out what you want. Frequent examples embrace Openbox, IceWM, and Fluxbox.

Subsequent are tiling window managers. They ditch the paper-like metaphor and as a substitute deal with your display like a grid of tiles. Each window will get its personal devoted house (tile), and nothing overlaps by default. You’ll be able to nonetheless permit sure home windows—like a calculator or media participant—to drift, however most home windows will tile mechanically.

Credit score: i3wm

Now, there are two most important tiling approaches: handbook and dynamic. With handbook tiling, you resolve the place every window goes and the way a lot display house it will get. i3 and Sway are common examples of this fashion. With dynamic tiling, you select from predefined structure algorithms—akin to master-stack or monocle—and the window supervisor mechanically arranges home windows based on that structure. AwesomeWM, dwm, and XMonad are well-known examples.

Personally, dynamic tiling is my preferred style. Nonetheless, for those who’re simply getting began, handbook tiling can really feel extra predictable. When you determine the layouts you retain returning to, switching to a dynamic window supervisor and automating these layouts can considerably streamline your workflow.

Scrolling window managers are the most recent and most area of interest of the three. As a substitute of becoming home windows into a hard and fast grid, they organize them on an infinitely scrollable canvas—typically horizontally—so you progress by your workspace relatively than reshuffling tiles. Niri is at the moment probably the most notable instance of this method. Right here’s a 1-min YouTube video displaying how that works:

Associated

What Is a Tiling Window Manager on Linux? (and 5 to Try)

When you prefer to maintain your palms on the keyboard, these could be price a attempt.

Is it configurable with an actual programming language?

On GNOME, KDE Plasma, or other desktop environments, you get a graphical settings web page with toggles and dropdown menus that can assist you configure its habits. Nonetheless, all the favored window managers are configured by a config file—a plain textual content file the place you outline precisely the way you need all the pieces to behave.

Now, not all config recordsdata are created equal. Some window managers—like i3 and Hyprland—use a customized syntax. You write easy, human-readable textual content directives that inform the WM what to do. It is easy to select up and perceive, even with out a programming background. The draw back is that you just’re restricted to no matter choices the developer has chosen to reveal. If you’d like a function that isn’t supported by the syntax, you might want to resort to exterior scripts or third-party plugins.

Then there are window managers the place the config file is basically a full programming language. For instance, Qtile makes use of Python, AwesomeWM makes use of Lua, and XMonad makes use of Haskell. This successfully makes the customization prospects almost limitless. The one actual constraint is your familiarity with the language. Since I’m not a programmer, I keep on with customized syntax-based WMs—and actually, for many use instances, they’re greater than succesful.

Associated

Learn the Basics of Python in 1 Hour With These 13 Steps

Welcome to the world of Python!

Is it utilizing Wayland or X11?

Most trendy WMs are constructed on high of both X11 or Wayland as its show protocol and the selection shapes what software program is accessible to you, how your system behaves, and what sort of expertise you find yourself with. In our dialogue on WMs, probably the most related level of distinction between X11 and Wayland is that X11 is modular and the window supervisor and compositor are totally different, whereas in Wayland, the compositor replaces the show server and integrates window administration performance.

This structure makes X11 extra modular. For instance, if the compositor breaks, you’ll nonetheless have a working window supervisor—with a drop in visible constancy. Moreover, X11 has been the usual show protocol because the late 80s, which implies dozens of window managers have been constructed on high of it—throw a dart blindly, and you will virtually actually land on an X11-based WM.

That being stated, this isn’t a case of previous being gold. X11 has well-documented safety vulnerabilities—apps can log your keystrokes or seize different home windows’ contents. It’s sometimes not an issue for those who’re cautious, however a safer platform ought to exist, and that’s what Wayland presents. The challenge began again in 2008 and, other than being safer, presents some actual trendy advantages like higher multi-monitor assist, VRR, fractional scaling, and native vsync.

On the flipside, making a Wayland-based WM is barely extra sophisticated as a result of it “owns the stack”—which means the developer has to construct (or implement libraries for) your complete ecosystem, together with display locking, idle administration, and wallpaper dealing with. Coupled with the truth that it’s a comparatively new protocol, and there aren’t many Wayland-based choices to select from. Just a few notable mentions embrace Hyprland, Sway, River, Wayfire, and Niri.

One other difficulty with going with Wayland is that many apps and workflows that have been suitable with X11 won’t work. Happily, the XWayland compatibility layer has solved this to a great extent. Moreover, it’s additionally price contemplating that this difficulty is just momentary because the neighborhood at giant is transferring to standardize Wayland and substitute X11.

What are another components price contemplating?

Past the three most important standards I simply lined, a number of different components are price preserving in thoughts when selecting a window supervisor—issues like how keyboard-centric it’s, how a lot time you’ll spend setting it up, and the general measurement of the neighborhood. For me personally, these factors don’t make a big impact, so I’m not closely specializing in them.

Credit score: Ismar Hrnjicevic / How-To Geek

For instance, because you’re transferring to WMs, it’s a given that you really want a extra keyboard-centric workflow. Now, there are a number of WMs like Ratpoison (i.e., poison on your mouse) and XMonad that go to the intense and make the mouse virtually ineffective in your workflow. Nonetheless, most WMs nonetheless maintain some mouse-based utility—you should use it to entry a right-click menu, give attention to home windows, and even transfer them round. As a WM person, although, the precedence needs to be on changing into extra keyboard-native.

Subsequent comes the query of how minimal the WM actually is. For instance, XMonad is famously barebones and ships with nothing—no panel, no system tray, no app launcher, no wallpaper setter. That you must do all of this your self. On the flipside, AwesomeWM and Qtile include a pre-configured panel, a system tray, and an info bar—which is useful to some and bloat to others. For me particularly, I desire having one thing relatively than nothing, particularly since these instruments are tremendous minimal, and could be simply changed if I don’t like them.

Lastly, we have to speak about neighborhood measurement. When you’re somebody who likes searching boards, asking questions, or grabbing different individuals’s config recordsdata and scripts to make use of as a place to begin, choosing a extra common WM makes a variety of sense—bigger communities imply extra shared sources. I additionally fall into this group. Nonetheless, for those who’re comfy studying documentation and figuring issues out your self, you possibly can go together with one thing area of interest or common—it actually doesn’t matter.

So, which Linux window supervisor tops my checklist?

Whereas my most important work system is operating KDE Plasma, I’ve been casually testing Linux window managers for a bit over a yr now. On this time, I’ve used 5 WMs: Openbox, i3, AwesomeWM, Qtile, and Hyprland. Right here’s a fast overview of every:

Now, I think about myself an “superior” newbie on the earth of Linux WMs—and, from my expertise, I’d put i3 at the top of my list. It’s the simplest WM to get began with. Hyprland is available in at an in depth second due to how good it may possibly look with a number of hours of setup and configuration. That stated, for those who’re comfy programming and prepared to be taught Lua, I feel AwesomeWM is a good possibility, even for rookies.