3 ms·

The fact that they've chosen to go with a horizontal-only grid (instead of both horizontal and vertical) simplifies everything greatly and makes switching to an

by jorvi 9y ago

The fact that they've chosen to go with a horizontal-only grid (instead of both horizontal and vertical) simplifies everything greatly and makes switching to another Space a breeze: either swipe with 3 fingers or press ctrl+left/right or (if enabled) press ctrl+Spaces number. As far as your point goes: it depends on if you see your Spaces as isolated desktops, or just 'more desktop space' which you can then loosely thematically organise. I fall into the latter category, and I suspect as Apple has chosen that cmd-tab style because most people do.

StavrosK 9y ago
Why does the size of the grid matter? In Linux, you can press mod+arrow key to move to the desired desktop, no matter the layout. If you just want more desktop space, why not alt-tab between programs? They're all going to show on the same screen, anyway. Even disregarding all this, the fact that Apple didn't even give me the simple option of hiding programs on other spaces from alt-tab was one of the main reasons that made me switch to Linux.
- jorvi 9y ago
  That’s true for 4 desktops, but what once you start having 8? Or 10? Having a row instead of a grid keeps things simple, both in terms of gestures, shortcuts and mentally. For me, I like functional simplicity like that, especially when I know Apple put a lot of thought (and probably some UI focus groups) on it. As far as Apple not giving you the simple switch.. that’s just how Apple is. Again, I like it, because it means any Mac or iPhone I pick up I can instantly work on.. with Linux, the shortcuts differ even between Ubuntu and Fedora! That unified ‘foundation’ gives developers a solid base they can bolt stuff onto. For example, Spectacle. Its a sort-of window manager that would never work if it had to keep dozens of key configurations in mind.
  - StavrosK 9y ago
    Certainly, but I think that's an unfair comparison. You're comparing the single available thing in OS X to the multitude of options available in Linux. If you want consistency, always use the defaults, and they'll always be consistent. That's what Apple forces you to do.
    - jorvi 9y ago
      Wouldn't that cut both ways? If its unfair to laud macOS for its consistency i.e. forced defaults, you likewise cannot laud Linux for its multitude of options i.e. tweakability. On a sidenote, you needn't have switch to Linux. Command-Tab-Plus[1] has the feature you want ('Isolate applications in Spaces'). [1]http://commandtab.noteifyapp.com http://commandtab.noteifyapp.com
      - StavrosK 9y ago
        No, "forced defaults" is a trivial definition for consistency, as then everyone could be lauded for being consistent simply by removing all the options. Consistency is presenting a familiar interface despite having options. It's like how you can't have courage when there's nothing to fear. Thanks for the command-tab-plus shoutout, I later found Witch (IIRC) that did the same, but it was a bunch of annoyances that drove me to switch (no "Cut" in the Finder, homebrew didn't exist, the Spaces thing, etc). I do miss Photoshop and Lightroom, but I have a second Windows partition I use for those.

by jorvi 9y ago

StavrosK 9y ago

Why does the size of the grid matter? In Linux, you can press mod+arrow key to move to the desired desktop, no matter the layout. If you just want more desktop space, why not alt-tab between programs? They're all going to show on the same screen, anyway. Even disregarding all this, the fact that Apple didn't even give me the simple option of hiding programs on other spaces from alt-tab was one of the main reasons that made me switch to Linux.

jorvi 9y ago
That’s true for 4 desktops, but what once you start having 8? Or 10? Having a row instead of a grid keeps things simple, both in terms of gestures, shortcuts and mentally. For me, I like functional simplicity like that, especially when I know Apple put a lot of thought (and probably some UI focus groups) on it. As far as Apple not giving you the simple switch.. that’s just how Apple is. Again, I like it, because it means any Mac or iPhone I pick up I can instantly work on.. with Linux, the shortcuts differ even between Ubuntu and Fedora! That unified ‘foundation’ gives developers a solid base they can bolt stuff onto. For example, Spectacle. Its a sort-of window manager that would never work if it had to keep dozens of key configurations in mind.
- StavrosK 9y ago
  Certainly, but I think that's an unfair comparison. You're comparing the single available thing in OS X to the multitude of options available in Linux. If you want consistency, always use the defaults, and they'll always be consistent. That's what Apple forces you to do.
  - jorvi 9y ago
    Wouldn't that cut both ways? If its unfair to laud macOS for its consistency i.e. forced defaults, you likewise cannot laud Linux for its multitude of options i.e. tweakability. On a sidenote, you needn't have switch to Linux. Command-Tab-Plus[1] has the feature you want ('Isolate applications in Spaces'). [1]http://commandtab.noteifyapp.com http://commandtab.noteifyapp.com
    - StavrosK 9y ago
      No, "forced defaults" is a trivial definition for consistency, as then everyone could be lauded for being consistent simply by removing all the options. Consistency is presenting a familiar interface despite having options. It's like how you can't have courage when there's nothing to fear. Thanks for the command-tab-plus shoutout, I later found Witch (IIRC) that did the same, but it was a bunch of annoyances that drove me to switch (no "Cut" in the Finder, homebrew didn't exist, the Spaces thing, etc). I do miss Photoshop and Lightroom, but I have a second Windows partition I use for those.