Most user don't like to use a window manger like i3. The screenshot was from Bodhi liunx/ Openbox I guess...I don't remember. Though true in every sense we can even create an alpine build with tiling wm which uses about 80mb ram. Yes even 400mb is a lot in Linux terms.
I have no experience with Awesome, but I had a friend that used it. i3 seems simpler to set up and Awesome seems more powerful to tweak. After that. both would use sub-1% of CPU at most, and everything feels instant.
In the past, using i3 on Arch Linux, I had a fast booting system with complete GUI support in under 150 MB of RAM used :) 400 is already a lot here.
Most user don't like to use a window manger like i3. The screenshot was from Bodhi liunx/ Openbox I guess...I don't remember. Though true in every sense we can even create an alpine build with tiling wm which uses about 80mb ram. Yes even 400mb is a lot in Linux terms.
The possibilities are endless.
That what I love about it and sometimes hate it also. Which one is better i3 or awesome?(interm of performance). Curious why you use i3.
I have no experience with Awesome, but I had a friend that used it. i3 seems simpler to set up and Awesome seems more powerful to tweak. After that. both would use sub-1% of CPU at most, and everything feels instant.
Cool.