4 ms·

iTerm2 -> Dislike, it doesn't offer me any benefits to my current workflow. Alfred -> If you don't have this installed before upgrading to Lion, which the arti

by jnoller 15y ago

iTerm2 -> Dislike, it doesn't offer me any benefits to my current workflow. Alfred -> If you don't have this installed before upgrading to Lion, which the article is about, then I think you might have something wrong with you :) Witch -> Never used it.

makecheck 15y ago
I wrote an alternative, MacTerm (http://macterm.net http://macterm.net). I think it has some advantages over the iTerms or Apple's Terminal.
riobard 15y ago
I'm wondering what's your screen resolution? I'm using it on 1920x1080 + 1600x1440 dual screen. To me, the ability of iTerm2 to vertically and horizontally split multiple terminals fullscreen on a big monitor is a huge plus. And for a lone time, Terminal.app before Lion only supports 16 colors, which is a big reason for me to switch to someone better. iTerm2 fits the bill.
- jnoller 15y ago
  I don't like splitting terminal windows - I use the tabs built into terminal.app and sizeup (http://irradiatedsoftware.com/sizeup/ http://irradiatedsoftware.com/sizeup/) to split/stack essentially "tab groups". I normally have multiple spaces, each with 50% of the horizontal screen dedicated to vim, and the other 50% to two groups of terminals (each one taking 50% of the vertical). I'm not running dual screen - just 1900x1200 and 1440x900 depending on where I am. Like I said, it's a workflow thing. I didn't even notice the increase in terminal colors - all my good coloring is in mac vim, not in the terminal.
  - Pewpewarrows 15y ago
    The autocomplete and "instant replay" features are also very handy to have when you need them (from iTerm2).
Groxx 15y ago
I've actually just switched to iTerm2, for one reason in particular (because Terminal.app is indeed pretty good): it launches faster. Noticeably so, at times. Even on a clean install, Terminal occasionally takes a couple seconds to appear and get into my default directory. iTerm2 so far has never taken more than a second, and usually far less.

by jnoller 15y ago

makecheck 15y ago

I wrote an alternative, MacTerm (http://macterm.net http://macterm.net). I think it has some advantages over the iTerms or Apple's Terminal.

riobard 15y ago

I'm wondering what's your screen resolution? I'm using it on 1920x1080 + 1600x1440 dual screen. To me, the ability of iTerm2 to vertically and horizontally split multiple terminals fullscreen on a big monitor is a huge plus. And for a lone time, Terminal.app before Lion only supports 16 colors, which is a big reason for me to switch to someone better. iTerm2 fits the bill.

jnoller 15y ago
I don't like splitting terminal windows - I use the tabs built into terminal.app and sizeup (http://irradiatedsoftware.com/sizeup/ http://irradiatedsoftware.com/sizeup/) to split/stack essentially "tab groups". I normally have multiple spaces, each with 50% of the horizontal screen dedicated to vim, and the other 50% to two groups of terminals (each one taking 50% of the vertical). I'm not running dual screen - just 1900x1200 and 1440x900 depending on where I am. Like I said, it's a workflow thing. I didn't even notice the increase in terminal colors - all my good coloring is in mac vim, not in the terminal.
- Pewpewarrows 15y ago
  The autocomplete and "instant replay" features are also very handy to have when you need them (from iTerm2).

Groxx 15y ago

I've actually just switched to iTerm2, for one reason in particular (because Terminal.app is indeed pretty good): it launches faster. Noticeably so, at times. Even on a clean install, Terminal occasionally takes a couple seconds to appear and get into my default directory. iTerm2 so far has never taken more than a second, and usually far less.