3 ms·

The multimonitor support has fairly recently become passable. It's hard to imagine that it took more than a decade to do that. It used to be almost entirely use

by bane 10y ago

The multimonitor support has fairly recently become passable. It's hard to imagine that it took more than a decade to do that. It used to be almost entirely useless. I think it's a case of overthinking it and trying not-to-be-windows that made it take so long. I'm not sure it's correct now, but at least it's useful. The Unix outdatedness is really annoying sometimes. I wouldn't even mind running some kind of big update after getting a new machine and waiting a couple hours for things to improve. The number of Macs I've seen with Linux VMs running on them just to get up-to-date things on them is really unfortunate.

matt4077 10y ago
brew install <whatever you want>. I have about 100 packages installed and haven't had a problem in months. Anything somewhat popular is updated within day. But I don't get the complaint about multiple screens either. It's always been plug in -> desktop extended. I wouldn't even know what to get wrong.
- bane 10y ago
  Only since maybe Yosemite has multi monitor support been what I'd call well modeled and decent. It's quite often been plug in -> useless grey screen on the other monitor you can't use, or some other nonsense. It took, what 3 entire revisions of the OS just for that not to happen? For a while, I had apps where I couldn't put different windows of the same app on different monitors, or one of the windows would randomly go away never to be seen again. Other apps would resize to 0,0 when disconnecting and then save the window position so I'd have to either reconnect to the same monitor I was no longer near, or uninstall, reinstall the app. There was always weirdness about the dock and menu bar that's sort of now settling down, but the dock used to display all sorts of bizarreness, especially when it was set to autohide. Fundamentally it came down to issues with Apple's way of thinking about workspaces, monitors, desktops, applications and windows. Even now I still have to spend far too much time hunting down things across multiple desktops and monitors. It seemed like Apple was dancing around what should probably just happen in an effort not to too closely mimic Microsoft. But to get at the heart of it, what happens when you full-screen an app? Apple had no idea what that meant when it was launched in 2011. However, what Apple chose to do in the case of full-screening an app on multiple monitors made absolutely no sense and was absolutely useless: the app would take on the role in the hierarchy of a desktop, and the other monitor would go grey. Why? nobody outside of Apple knows, but it took until 2013/2014 to fix.
  - rsync 10y ago
    "Fundamentally it came down to issues with Apple's way of thinking about workspaces, monitors, desktops, applications and windows. Even now I still have to spend far too much time hunting down things across multiple desktops and monitors. It seemed like Apple was dancing around what should probably just happen in an effort not to too closely mimic Microsoft." Everything you need to know can be summed up in the fact that, in OSX, you can click the green button with a '+' in it, and that window can get smaller.

by bane 10y ago

matt4077 10y ago

brew install <whatever you want>. I have about 100 packages installed and haven't had a problem in months. Anything somewhat popular is updated within day. But I don't get the complaint about multiple screens either. It's always been plug in -> desktop extended. I wouldn't even know what to get wrong.

bane 10y ago
Only since maybe Yosemite has multi monitor support been what I'd call well modeled and decent. It's quite often been plug in -> useless grey screen on the other monitor you can't use, or some other nonsense. It took, what 3 entire revisions of the OS just for that not to happen? For a while, I had apps where I couldn't put different windows of the same app on different monitors, or one of the windows would randomly go away never to be seen again. Other apps would resize to 0,0 when disconnecting and then save the window position so I'd have to either reconnect to the same monitor I was no longer near, or uninstall, reinstall the app. There was always weirdness about the dock and menu bar that's sort of now settling down, but the dock used to display all sorts of bizarreness, especially when it was set to autohide. Fundamentally it came down to issues with Apple's way of thinking about workspaces, monitors, desktops, applications and windows. Even now I still have to spend far too much time hunting down things across multiple desktops and monitors. It seemed like Apple was dancing around what should probably just happen in an effort not to too closely mimic Microsoft. But to get at the heart of it, what happens when you full-screen an app? Apple had no idea what that meant when it was launched in 2011. However, what Apple chose to do in the case of full-screening an app on multiple monitors made absolutely no sense and was absolutely useless: the app would take on the role in the hierarchy of a desktop, and the other monitor would go grey. Why? nobody outside of Apple knows, but it took until 2013/2014 to fix.
- rsync 10y ago
  "Fundamentally it came down to issues with Apple's way of thinking about workspaces, monitors, desktops, applications and windows. Even now I still have to spend far too much time hunting down things across multiple desktops and monitors. It seemed like Apple was dancing around what should probably just happen in an effort not to too closely mimic Microsoft." Everything you need to know can be summed up in the fact that, in OSX, you can click the green button with a '+' in it, and that window can get smaller.