3 ms·

> Can’t do two video outs on one usbc. He means TB3, which has a DP signal inside it. Sure you can. you need some device (dock) on the usbc, that can split of

> Can’t do two video outs on one usbc. He means TB3, which has a DP signal inside it. Sure you can. you need some device (dock) on the usbc, that can split off the 2nd signal. However, what you can't do is 3 video outs (MST). PC can do that. Of course there's only so much bandwidth so I suppose that's why Mac has decided this isn't worth supporting. Well, there used to be a MBA and MB (not P) that only had USBC and not TB3. Sure, on those you could only get 1 video out per port. I'm guessing this is again a decision about bandwidth limitation. > Can’t have a window stretch across multiple monitors. You can, it's just not the default. I think that was a misfeature and I like the constraint personally. I don't think I've been reality distorted, I think I do really like it. Yes, I like it. Srsly, I usually have some kind of dashboard, doc reference, chats and what not, over there. When I slide a window over on the main monitor, to get more space on some primary app, I don't want that space release to cause me to shuffle a window over there, like a domino effect. It's a good thing that windows stay only on one monitor. As well, it becomes clear which screen owns the menu bar when that app is active. (No comment on whether global menu bar is a good thing.) System Preferences > Mission Control > Displays have separate Spaces is the setting to change this behavior. > menu bar disappears when you have firefox full screen on another monitor Sounds like a firefox bug. I guess it's still fair game for this web page.

rsync 4y ago
(RE: Can’t have a window stretch across multiple monitors.) "You used to be able to do that. Long ago." I am doing this right now on El Cap with three monitors on a 2009 Mac Pro. This is basic, boring, functionality. If, in fact, you cannot do this now, the correct response is merciless ridicule. Who even works at Apple if this basic function was allowed to break and stay broken ? Buffoons - that is who.
- matthewmacleod 4y ago
  Relax – you've just misunderstood. As the comment above points out, this functionality is affected by a specific setting on a Mac – there's a toggle labelled "Displays have separate Spaces", which is checked by default. When it's checked, each display has its own independent set of virtual desktops and fullscreen apps, which can be navigated independently of the others. When it's not checked, there is one shared set of virtual desktops that span all displays, and navigation affects them all. When using the former option, windows are restricted to appearing on a single display only – they cannot span multiple displays. This is a reasonable choice, as it would be otherwise unclear what the interaction between windows, desktops, and displays would be. Each display is its own independent canvas and interaction is limited to migrating windows and apps between them. If you are using the latter option, then windows can be stretched arbitrarily across multiple displays. This doesn't present a problem, because the extended display then represents one common canvas and it's clear how interaction between the windows, desktops and displays should work. See? It's no magic, or broken, or the outcome of buffoonery. It's just a normal computer feature working normally.
  - rsync 4y ago
    Thanks - good to know. And, just to clarify - the "merciless ridicule" was to be aimed at Apple, not the end user.

rsync 4y ago

(RE: Can’t have a window stretch across multiple monitors.) "You used to be able to do that. Long ago." I am doing this right now on El Cap with three monitors on a 2009 Mac Pro. This is basic, boring, functionality. If, in fact, you cannot do this now, the correct response is merciless ridicule. Who even works at Apple if this basic function was allowed to break and stay broken ? Buffoons - that is who.

matthewmacleod 4y ago
Relax – you've just misunderstood. As the comment above points out, this functionality is affected by a specific setting on a Mac – there's a toggle labelled "Displays have separate Spaces", which is checked by default. When it's checked, each display has its own independent set of virtual desktops and fullscreen apps, which can be navigated independently of the others. When it's not checked, there is one shared set of virtual desktops that span all displays, and navigation affects them all. When using the former option, windows are restricted to appearing on a single display only – they cannot span multiple displays. This is a reasonable choice, as it would be otherwise unclear what the interaction between windows, desktops, and displays would be. Each display is its own independent canvas and interaction is limited to migrating windows and apps between them. If you are using the latter option, then windows can be stretched arbitrarily across multiple displays. This doesn't present a problem, because the extended display then represents one common canvas and it's clear how interaction between the windows, desktops and displays should work. See? It's no magic, or broken, or the outcome of buffoonery. It's just a normal computer feature working normally.
- rsync 4y ago
  Thanks - good to know. And, just to clarify - the "merciless ridicule" was to be aimed at Apple, not the end user.