[SOLVED] What's the difference between a DE and a window manager?

[Catsbark]

I recently installed AntiX on and ancient NetBook with a 32-bit single-core Atom processor and 1 GB of RAM. (There aren't many light-weight 32-bit distros to choose from.) Among AntiX's characteristics, including some political bookmarks for Firefox and avoidance of SystemD, is using a window manager and not a Desktop Enviroment. Ultimately, they do the same thing: there's a menu from which you choose applications, there's a panel with buttons for the running apps, etc. So what, exactly, is the difference between a DE and a window manager? Is it just that DEs are elaborate window managers and window managers are simple desktop environments, or is there a more profound difference?

[rene]

In an original sense the difference is profound. A window manager is in that original sense, well, just that: the software that the windowing system calls upon to in fact construct windows that an application opens. It takes care of placement, a title bar, minimize/maximize buttons -- that sort of stuff. As you have noticed, that which is by now colloquially referred to as "window manager" would however also tend to provide utilities such as an application launcher (menu), taskbar, so on.

A desktop environment supplies that what said enhanced definition of "window manager" would but the window manager as such is more explicitly just one component. It would tend to include e.g. a terminal emulator, clock/calendar, configuration utilities, themes, "applets", so on. Depending on particular definition, maybe even a text editor, graphics viewer, audio and/or video player, ...

A window-manager under the mentioned enhanced definition together with any such set of basic applications could then be said to be a basic/simple desktop environment; conversely a desktop environment can not really be said to be an elaborate window manager without loosing sight of what's what.

[rambo919]

I think it's more accurate to call a DE a coherent collection of desktop elements which includes a window manager, file manger, compositor, etc.

You can technically change any component of a DE to almost anything else.

[rambo919]

OK Looking at AntiX... I think OP means he is confused about what they mean with window manager?

In my partial ignorance it looks like the window managers used by AntiX kinda straddle between tile and stacking?

Stacking window managers have floating windows that can "stack" over each other, tile window managers have windows you can "tile" around each other.

[mediclaser]

Here's my understanding of the difference between DE and WM (and please somebody correct me if this is wrong)...

* Cinnamon, MATE, Xfce are choices of DEs

* Choosing the "classic" appearance as opposed to modern default (in Cinnamon) is an example of switching to another WM

[all41]

de--the included packages, the panel, menu, desktop presentation
wm--what happens afterward.

[rene]

* Choosing the "classic" appearance as opposed to modern default (in Cinnamon) is an example of switching to another WM

Not that, no; Cinnamon's window manager is muffin (a fork of GNOME mutter) and although I'm admittedly not even sure what's here meant with classic vs modern, muffin it will in either case be. If you refer to that thing with window grouping on the taskbar that's not a window manager task even.

[Catsbark]

Thanks all for your cogent replies. Summing up, I think a DE includes a WM and a bunch of other stuff, while some WMs might creep really close to including features that would nudge them into a DE.

At any rate, I'm marking this solved so people won't waste time elaborating further on answers to my idle curiosity.

Again, thanks to all who replied.