4 ms·

Also, you'd think Apple would natively support window tiling, but apparently their UX and desktop design philosophy is that they know best when it comes to wind

by wyclif 5y ago

Also, you'd think Apple would natively support window tiling, but apparently their UX and desktop design philosophy is that they know best when it comes to window size and placement.

aulin 5y ago
IIRC they recently added support for some half-assed tiling, only for two full screen windows side by side. It's called Split View.
- simongray 5y ago
  Not recently, 6 years ago.
rcthompson 5y ago
MacOS does support tiling. You can tile exactly one window across the entire screen by pressing the green button. If you want to tile more than one window, you can buy additional monitors. (This is sarcasm.)
- runjake 5y ago
  Wrong! You can tile two windows. :-) https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204948 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204948 But yeah, I use Recrangle for my macOS tiling. I use it all day, every day. Would love something that worked more like Pop!_os’ tiling, or perhaps i3’s.
- hulitu 5y ago
  Strange. Is this new because AFAIK Windows was copied from MacOS and it had tiling at least from 3.0 ? Also in X window managers tiling was an old concept.
  - ewzimm 5y ago
    Windows 1.0 was tiling only. Overlapping windows were added in 2.0.
kitsunesoba 5y ago
macOS window management philosophy is to not tightly manage windows, letting them live where they end up, not unlike papers on a desk. For occasions where windows need to be side by side and both fully visible (which at least for my workflow, isn’t all that often), they’re only loosely manually arranged that way. It works for me at least. I have Moom installed for the occasions where I temporarily need tiling and that’s more than enough. Full tiling WMs on Linux give me a headache because with most of the programs I use, windows need to take up 70%+ of the screen to be usable which means the remaining space for other programs isn’t particularly useful, which defeats much of the purpose of full tiling.
- maxwell86 5y ago
  macOS WM philosophy sounds like Outlook email philosophy: it should behave like paper mail. Worst philosophy ever. Instead of figuring out how new technology enables better solutions to current problems, their philosophy is to emulate current solutions instead. This is why I prefer gmail over outlook, and Linux over macos.
  - kitsunesoba 5y ago
    I’m not sure it’s so cut and dry. Workflows are highly personal things, so while something highly automated might work a charm for some while not working at all for others.
  - Veen 5y ago
    The mental model of windows having a consistent spatial location is deeply ingrained into MacOS because it's been done that way for decades. There are still old Mac users who complain that the Finder switched from a spatial model to a browser model. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2010/09/macos-x-beta/14/#b6 https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2010/09/macos-x-beta/14/#b6 That's an old article, but Siracusa is still complaining about the "new" non-spatial finder to this day.

by wyclif 5y ago

Also, you'd think Apple would natively support window tiling, but apparently their UX and desktop design philosophy is that they know best when it comes to window size and placement.

aulin 5y ago

IIRC they recently added support for some half-assed tiling, only for two full screen windows side by side. It's called Split View.

simongray 5y ago
Not recently, 6 years ago.

rcthompson 5y ago

MacOS does support tiling. You can tile exactly one window across the entire screen by pressing the green button. If you want to tile more than one window, you can buy additional monitors. (This is sarcasm.)

runjake 5y ago
Wrong! You can tile two windows. :-) https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204948 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204948 But yeah, I use Recrangle for my macOS tiling. I use it all day, every day. Would love something that worked more like Pop!_os’ tiling, or perhaps i3’s.
hulitu 5y ago
Strange. Is this new because AFAIK Windows was copied from MacOS and it had tiling at least from 3.0 ? Also in X window managers tiling was an old concept.
- ewzimm 5y ago
  Windows 1.0 was tiling only. Overlapping windows were added in 2.0.

kitsunesoba 5y ago

macOS window management philosophy is to not tightly manage windows, letting them live where they end up, not unlike papers on a desk. For occasions where windows need to be side by side and both fully visible (which at least for my workflow, isn’t all that often), they’re only loosely manually arranged that way. It works for me at least. I have Moom installed for the occasions where I temporarily need tiling and that’s more than enough. Full tiling WMs on Linux give me a headache because with most of the programs I use, windows need to take up 70%+ of the screen to be usable which means the remaining space for other programs isn’t particularly useful, which defeats much of the purpose of full tiling.

maxwell86 5y ago
macOS WM philosophy sounds like Outlook email philosophy: it should behave like paper mail. Worst philosophy ever. Instead of figuring out how new technology enables better solutions to current problems, their philosophy is to emulate current solutions instead. This is why I prefer gmail over outlook, and Linux over macos.
- kitsunesoba 5y ago
  I’m not sure it’s so cut and dry. Workflows are highly personal things, so while something highly automated might work a charm for some while not working at all for others.
- Veen 5y ago
  The mental model of windows having a consistent spatial location is deeply ingrained into MacOS because it's been done that way for decades. There are still old Mac users who complain that the Finder switched from a spatial model to a browser model. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2010/09/macos-x-beta/14/#b6 https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2010/09/macos-x-beta/14/#b6 That's an old article, but Siracusa is still complaining about the "new" non-spatial finder to this day.