i3 is the best, I would say. See docs/testsuite for details. herbstluftwm was the easiest one to install over bspwm and monsterwm. All things Linux and GNU/Linux -- this is neither a community exclusively about the kernel Linux, nor is exclusively about the GNU operating system. Lustre recommends the best products at their lowest prices – right on Amazon. In any case, you can't really go wrong with either one. There is no config file that can be edited after the window manager is compiled: all changes need to be made prior to compiling. Dwm divides the screen into a master and a stack area. I tried FrankenWM and fall in love with it. Nothing in i3 remotely compares, Less screen waste, the title bar and status bar are merged. You can do it on a desktop, but the whole workspace feels lopsided when you do. The functionality simply isn't there and the dev refuses to include it as a part of i3 core. Just seen another note about a distro featuring such a window manager: Awesome has been around for a few years now, but may be gaining some visibility now that Sabayon Linux has added an awesome edition.Guest author Koen Vervloesem has been using awesome for a number of years, and subscribers can click below for his look at the window manager from this week's edition. The developer refuses to allow this feature. In i3, I used to have an audio mode for adjusting my volume, a gaps mode for gaps, a "passthrough" mode for disabling i3 bindings, etc. make check runs the i3 testsuite. When comparing dwm vs bspwm, the Slant community recommends dwm for most people. Window managers have this same split. I went back and forth between dwm and i3 before finally settling onto dwm. When usin… Thanks to the small codebase, many users contributed patches to the suckless website. Obviously, your preferences may be different if that's not the case for you. You can use a workaround - a shell script to config parts on demand. Firefox child windows (option dialog) is an example. Sway allows you to arrange your application windows logically, rather than spatially. Dwm is a low-resource window manager that is entirely simplistic in design. Floating mode can be toggled by pressing $mod+Shift+Space. I've used both for over a year, and I really prefer i3. … And i3 has been great. Dwm's design paradigm is to use tags to group clients (applications) that can then be pulled into a view (workspace); this allows you to view multiple clients at once and to assign or reassign those tags and their related views on the fly. There's even a keybinding for temporarily assigning all windows to the current tag, i.e. much cleaner config syntax. It actually has to do with the physical orientation of laptops and my desktop....the "main" section is on the side of the screen. frankenwm. i3 uses test driven development with an extensive test suite to prevent bugs from ever happening again. When comparing dwm vs i3, the Slant community recommends i3 for most people. Also, I really like using a manual tiling wm, rather than a dynamic one. You can configure i3 so that your keys for moving windows is similar to vim, for example, M-j to move the window down. You can easily switch between two workspaces but not two windows (which are not adjacent to each other). I believe the second best that I used over i3 would be bspwm even though you have a separated keyboard config file. Combined with rules in the config.h, this makes for a flexible and responsive means to manage your workflow. (In i3, you can do something similar with marks, but I never figured it out.) Terminal-bell gets passed through and marks the workspace visibly. You may run dmenuwith: This makes it pain to play games on laptops using discrete GPU. "it's ugly without ricing" does not have a lot of weight as an argument, if you want to rice it anyway. Configuration is achieved via plain text file and extending i3 is possible using its Unix domain socket and JSON based IPC interface from many programming languages.. Like wmii, i3 uses a control system very similar to that of vi.