Re: X:blackbox is fast but ...
In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com wrote:
I'll start answering my own queries, so that this can be googled by others.
> Fortunately, I picked up from some user that blackbox was fast,
> because it's expensive to do user familiarisation on EACH wm.
Blackbox is not just a weak substitute for kde. It's powerful.
> My style of work needs several Terminals per workspace.
> Can blackbox do that?
Yes ! It's got 2 dimensions: WorkSpace & applications/Terminals
A terminal IS an application.
It's easy and convenient to have 4 terminals open simultaneously
on a workspace; where you can cutNpaste between them;
and ENLARGE anyone if need be.
> When I open my main-app [in X] it covers the tool-bar,
> and if I reposition it, it goes back to the default position
> every time I switch out and back to that workspace.
The unobstrusive  frame-button toggles the frame size between
FullScreen/PartScreen. In 'PartScreen' mode the tool-bar is
> Is blackbox a realistic choice to be able to switch rapidly from:
> WS1/terminal2 to WS2/terminal4 to WS3/terminal1 ..etc
> like you can with kde or xfce?
Most definitely. I'm using WS1, Terminal1 as my
'index of what all the other WS,TerminalS contain.
> Yes I've read the man.
And it seems that the right-mouse-button-menu
can easily be edited.
I get the feeling that blackbox is influenced by Wirth's ideas of
effective minimalism. It feels a lot like ETHOberon.
> == TIA.