Why do these lightweight distros always have some weird ass obscure shit for WM instead of say OB or XFCE?

Why do these lightweight distros always have some weird ass obscure shit for WM instead of say OB or XFCE?

Attached: antix_02.jpg (1216x795, 69.15K)

How else do you think they're able to make it lightweight?

Sorry to you this but XFCE hasn't been light in years

have you seen OB? you can't go any lighter

icewm, fluxbox, dwm...

>OB
Because OB is abandoned.

What do people like about Openbox?
Its featureless XML trash you can do so much more with IceWM or Fvwm while also being lighter.

- just works
- easy to hack
- development is finished, so your hacks won't get broken by updates

>you can do so much more
Such as?

And it still works fine you faggot.

Go download your hourly Arch updates.

>openbox
I never use it, but, having i3, dwm and bspwm, why people uses it?
>XFCE
XFCE never was a real light DE, Mate and a KDE good optimized consume the same ram that XFCE, and GNOME is not so "bloat" who many ramlets thinks.

>XFCE never was a real light DE
It was before xfce 4.16

>why people uses it?
Some people prefer floating window management.

Fuck off man. Antix is based

It's not abandoned. It's finished.

I dunno, it's kind of nice using something so different, it's more flexible than the usual DEs.
I'm using Fluxbox at the moment, and I'll be dabbling in WindowMaker because I'm curious about it.

Can't speak about the rest but,
>bspwm
>super + s
>your window now floats

openbox and debian

> I never use it, but, having i3, dwm and bspwm, why people uses it?
Because they want to. Options are one of the nice things about GNU/Linux after all.

That you can make windows float (which is basically necessity for some software) doesn't make it floating window management same way that OB isn't a tiling window manager because you can tile the windows around.

Openbox has half the features of Xfwm, with no tangible performance gains