4 ms·

I'll echo what I said on the Siracusa thread: Has everyone managed to overlook how patently awful and useless Mission Control is on multiple monitors? Whereas

I'll echo what I said on the Siracusa thread: Has everyone managed to overlook how patently awful and useless Mission Control is on multiple monitors? Whereas in the Spaces view in Snow Leopard I could move a window to a different space AND a different monitor with a quick drag, Mission Control doesn't allow this - I have to first move the window to the correct "Desktop", then exit MC and drag it to the correct monitor. Full Screen Apps are similarly useless on multiple monitors - regardless of which monitor the window originates on, clicking the full screen button returns it to whatever display is designated "primary". Even worse, while you're in full screen on one display, the others become useless as it blocks them out with Apple's new favorite canvas texture. Why? At first I thought all this was intentional and that Apple was leaving multi-monitor users in the dust to focus on Macs that are very close to iOS devices (11" Macbook Air comes to mind), but today they also announced a new Cinema Display that lets you daisy chain two monitors off a single Thunderbolt port. Clearly it's still a mode of operation they intend to support for some time - so why have they crippled it so horribly in this release?

vito 15y ago
I wish they would go the xmonad route, and simply treat each display as an independent "workspace container". Being able to switch independently (and still use the other display when using a fullscreen app) is a huge productivity gain.
- bengl3rt 15y ago
  This past week a co-worker introduced me to Moom... he said it was the closest he would ever get to xmonad on the Mac: http://manytricks.com/moom/ http://manytricks.com/moom/
- zcid 15y ago
  This is the main reason I use linux on my mbp instead of os x. Being unable to manipulate my monitors independently is asinine.
masklinn 15y ago
> so why have they crippled it so horribly in this release? I'm guessing it's because they decided to put full-screen apps on their own space (sensible), but there's nothing else you can put in there since the application essentially is the space (if you shut down the full-screen mode, the application goes back to its original space). Basically, lack of foresight: they built full-screen for small-screen machines (e.g. the Air) and it's just broken for multi-screen.

vito 15y ago

I wish they would go the xmonad route, and simply treat each display as an independent "workspace container". Being able to switch independently (and still use the other display when using a fullscreen app) is a huge productivity gain.

bengl3rt 15y ago
This past week a co-worker introduced me to Moom... he said it was the closest he would ever get to xmonad on the Mac: http://manytricks.com/moom/ http://manytricks.com/moom/
zcid 15y ago
This is the main reason I use linux on my mbp instead of os x. Being unable to manipulate my monitors independently is asinine.

masklinn 15y ago

> so why have they crippled it so horribly in this release? I'm guessing it's because they decided to put full-screen apps on their own space (sensible), but there's nothing else you can put in there since the application essentially is the space (if you shut down the full-screen mode, the application goes back to its original space). Basically, lack of foresight: they built full-screen for small-screen machines (e.g. the Air) and it's just broken for multi-screen.