Window Maker: X11 window manager with the look and feel of the NeXTSTEP UI

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Window Maker Today & Nostalgia

  • Many recall Window Maker as their first or favorite Linux window manager from the late 1990s–2000s, often on Slackware, Red Hat, Gentoo, FreeBSD, and SPARC.
  • Several still use it as their primary WM, valuing its speed, stability, minimalism (often with dock disabled), and “solid” NeXTSTEP feel.
  • Others stopped using it as needs changed (multi-monitor setups, higher resolutions) or they moved to tiling WMs like i3, XMonad, herbstluftwm, bspwm, or minimalist options like Fluxbox/Openbox/Blackbox.

Dock Apps and UI Concepts

  • Dock apps (64×64 widgets for mail, network, clocks, monitors, etc.) are remembered as a “killer feature”; people miss the abundance and clever use of tight constraints.
  • Some compare them to modern panel widgets, but emphasize the fixed small-square constraint as distinctive.
  • Discussion clarifies NeXTSTEP had an app dock, while Window Maker’s dockapps are separate mini-programs; various WMs (FVWM, AfterStep, Fluxbox) can also swallow/use them.

Comparisons to Other WMs / DEs

  • Fans highlight Window Maker’s configurability, per-app/window rules, window shading, and window list menus as superior to taskbars.
  • Others found dock icons too large and distracting, especially on 4:3 screens, preferring taskbars and more compact UIs.
  • KDE3 is repeatedly cited as a high point in Linux desktop history; some like current Plasma 5/6, others feel KDE never reached KDE3’s polish again.
  • GNOME is seen by some as too opinionated; others appreciate its provisioning (dconf) and Evolution integration.

X11 vs Wayland Debate

  • Strong opinions about X11: some argue X11 “did nothing wrong” architecturally; others call its codebase a mess that lost maintainers.
  • Distinctions made between X11 protocol and Xorg implementation; suggestions to fork/clean Xorg and keep server-side rendering.
  • Critiques of X11: outdated assumptions (single cursor/input model), complex configuration, driver mess.
  • Critiques of Wayland: slower standardization (e.g., HDR), minimal core protocol (no built-in concepts for icons/titlebars/borders), and unresolved accessibility issues in some environments.
  • Mention of libraries/compositor frameworks (wlroots, Mir on Wayland, arcan) and an in-development NeXT-like Wayland compositor (wlmaker).

GNUstep, NeXTSTEP Clones & Related Projects

  • Multiple related efforts noted: GNUstep, Etoile, NEXTSPACE, helloSystem, NsCDE, Trinity, Cappuccino/Aristo.
  • Some wish Window Maker would drop its WINGs toolkit and integrate with GNUstep for better theming and potential Wayland benefits; others argue that would not automatically make it a compositor.
  • GNUstep Wayland support is described as experimental/incomplete; documentation and tooling for GNUstep GUI development are reported as poor and outdated.

Critiques and Practical Use Cases

  • One practical success story: using Window Maker for kiosk-like point-of-sale desktops with tightly controlled docks for non-technical users.
  • Skeptics call the design a historical dead-end: large dock icons, sticky menus, and visual busyness compared unfavorably to slimmer taskbars and modern paradigms.
  • Overall tone mixes affection, active niche use, technical critique, and interest in modern NeXT-style environments on both X11 and Wayland.