4 ms·
> It has vertical splits So has screen and has been for years. tmux just had it first. > a saner config I never had any trouble configuring screen to do anyt
by muuh-gnu 15y ago
> It has vertical splits
So has screen and has been for years. tmux just had it first.
> a saner config
I never had any trouble configuring screen to do anything I needed.
Can you give a practical example of what somewhat important for the average user you can do in tmux with less effort than in screen?
- technomancy 15y agoI used screen for five years and could never internalize the copy/paste key bindings for scrollback, and screen doesn't let you configure them. I was more comfortable in tmux after an hour than after years of screen due to it being able to just work with Emacs bindings. Apart from this, most of the advantages are only noticeable in a multi-user setup. The socket-based session sharing is great, (it just uses unix permissions) and the fact that it automatically resizes to the smallest display is a huge usability improvement. When we paired with screen we would always have to jump through hoops to make sure the guy with the smaller display joined last or he'd be unable to see everything.
- derwiki 15y agoI've still not run into a `screen' installed anywhere that has vertical split support compiled in. Yes, you can get a version of screen that does -- but EVERY version of tmux has vertical splits.