Hi, author of tmuxomatic here. My personal use of tmux includes windows with 10+ panes. It's not easy to define these layouts using other means, and often mak

Hi, author of tmuxomatic here. My personal use of tmux includes windows with 10+ panes. It's not easy to define these layouts using other means, and often making simple modifications is a big hassle. I didn't want to be an expert in tmux to maximize my use of it. I wanted something so simple and intuitive that documentation is virtually unnecessary. For those who only ever use simple 1 or 2 split layouts, a traditional manager may suffice. But even in these cases, tmuxomatic is much easier to deal with. Definitions in tmuxomatic are readable at-a-glance, and the flexibility afforded by windowgrams make layouts clear and unambiguous. As for the tedium of ASCII, there's the Flex command set that's being added to tmuxomatic 2.x. Using a handful of basic commands, virtually any layout is possible without doing any ASCII art at all. I'd say this qualifies as better. Of course it's different, it has to be.