3 ms·

When I used Windows on a multi-monitor setup I never found myself wishing, "if only I had a taskbar on each monitor." (Similarly, I've never wished for multiple

by jbellis 15y ago

When I used Windows on a multi-monitor setup I never found myself wishing, "if only I had a taskbar on each monitor." (Similarly, I've never wished for multiple docks on OSX.) So YMMV.

pkamb 15y ago
The dock is an application organizer, the taskbar is a window organizer. Big difference. The windows on each monitor should be represented in a taskbar on that same monitor. Easier to comprehend, faster to mouse to. The app Ultramon does this very well, it's essential for any multi-monitor Windows install.
- Wilduck 15y ago
  Except I use one monitor almost exclusively for reference. I want as much screen real estate there as possible. Since my mouse is already on the editing monitor, it would take _more_ effort to move it over there to switch windows.
- drivebyacct2 15y ago
  With the default Windows 7 group and icon behavior, they're virtually identical in behavior...
  - pkamb 15y ago
    Power users go with the "Combine when taskbar is full" option. Reduces clicks and hover times tenfold.
    - sid0 15y ago
      Power users go with the "Combine when taskbar is full" option. What sample size do you have here?
      - pkamb 15y ago
        Me :)
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
  - jodrellblank 15y ago
    One puts a task bar on the same screen as the applications which makes it easy to switch applications per window, the other hides pictures of the application in a task bar on another screen which makes it harder to switch applications at all and completely ignores screen distinctions. They aren't virtually identical; they aren't even the same thing done differently, they're completely different.
    - drivebyacct2 15y ago
      What are you talking about? I'm dual monitoring with both windows and OS X right now. Both have their taskbar on my right hand monitor. Both have icons for launched applications with indicators representing each instance of the application. They both include icons for quick, often used apps that are present even when the application is not open. They're identical... Is there any chance that you're using "task bar" to mean the application's menu? There are lots of engrossing UI discussion surrounding the application menu and the global menu, but that's not what we're discussing here... Hell, if you ignored the fact that the Windows taskbar extends across the bottom of the screen and is grey rather than floating in the middle, and ignored the start button vs the finder button... my taskbar and dock look identical, Chrome, Firefox, VLC, Office Apps.
      - jodrellblank 15y ago
        I see; I interpreted you meaning Windows 7's solution is virtually the same effectiveness as Ultramon because of window groups. Missed that you were comparing the OS X dock and 7.

by jbellis 15y ago

When I used Windows on a multi-monitor setup I never found myself wishing, "if only I had a taskbar on each monitor." (Similarly, I've never wished for multiple docks on OSX.) So YMMV.

pkamb 15y ago

The dock is an application organizer, the taskbar is a window organizer. Big difference. The windows on each monitor should be represented in a taskbar on that same monitor. Easier to comprehend, faster to mouse to. The app Ultramon does this very well, it's essential for any multi-monitor Windows install.

Wilduck 15y ago
Except I use one monitor almost exclusively for reference. I want as much screen real estate there as possible. Since my mouse is already on the editing monitor, it would take _more_ effort to move it over there to switch windows.
drivebyacct2 15y ago
With the default Windows 7 group and icon behavior, they're virtually identical in behavior...
- pkamb 15y ago
  Power users go with the "Combine when taskbar is full" option. Reduces clicks and hover times tenfold.
  - sid0 15y ago
    Power users go with the "Combine when taskbar is full" option. What sample size do you have here?
    - pkamb 15y ago
      Me :)
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
- jodrellblank 15y ago
  One puts a task bar on the same screen as the applications which makes it easy to switch applications per window, the other hides pictures of the application in a task bar on another screen which makes it harder to switch applications at all and completely ignores screen distinctions. They aren't virtually identical; they aren't even the same thing done differently, they're completely different.
  - drivebyacct2 15y ago
    What are you talking about? I'm dual monitoring with both windows and OS X right now. Both have their taskbar on my right hand monitor. Both have icons for launched applications with indicators representing each instance of the application. They both include icons for quick, often used apps that are present even when the application is not open. They're identical... Is there any chance that you're using "task bar" to mean the application's menu? There are lots of engrossing UI discussion surrounding the application menu and the global menu, but that's not what we're discussing here... Hell, if you ignored the fact that the Windows taskbar extends across the bottom of the screen and is grey rather than floating in the middle, and ignored the start button vs the finder button... my taskbar and dock look identical, Chrome, Firefox, VLC, Office Apps.
    - jodrellblank 15y ago
      I see; I interpreted you meaning Windows 7's solution is virtually the same effectiveness as Ultramon because of window groups. Missed that you were comparing the OS X dock and 7.