7 ms·

To be fair, OS X always worked well with multiple displays (I would know), but it's their intentionally and needlessly crippled full screen mode that made the c

by Udo 13y ago

To be fair, OS X always worked well with multiple displays (I would know), but it's their intentionally and needlessly crippled full screen mode that made the combination useless. And don't worry, they still haven't "solved" this completely.

taude 13y ago
Works well? You must have low expectations.
- Udo 13y ago
  I take that as a compliment. Yes, I like to think that my expectations are pretty minimal. All the more disappointing when they're not met.
siglesias 13y ago
Intentionally? Makes sense. Not like they manufacture dedicated external displays with built in MagSafe adapters.
- Udo 13y ago
  The way full screen worked was clearly intentional, not a bug, they obviously invested a lot of time into making this objectively less useful. Don't talk to me as if I'm an idiot simply because I won't speculate as to why they did this. I only know they did - and that's not some new thing I just made up, it's common knowledge. Don't be so hostile.
  - wisty 13y ago
    > Don't talk to me as if I'm an idiot simply because I won't speculate as to why they did this. I only know they did - and that's not some new thing I just made up, it's common knowledge. Don't be so hostile. Let's assume best faith. siglesias might have just mean "that design choice makes no sense", not "you make no sense". On to speculation - I'd guess they don't want you to use full screen, and only included it as a concession to things like movies / games.
    - Udo 13y ago
      Sorry, you're right, I might have misunderstood him there. As to the speculation, my guess is you're correct there also: they do want to enable people with multiple displays, they just can't imagine why you would want fullscreen like that as well so they make sure you can't. It's probably about dictating "the user experience".
    - comex 13y ago
      > On to speculation - I'd guess they don't want you to use full screen, and only included it as a concession to things like movies / games. On the contrary, the Lion fullscreen mode, which caused the issue, was a relatively large push towards fullscreen, by giving it a standardized and better (if you don't have multiple displays :) UI and integrating it into built-in applications.
    - interpol_p 13y ago
      I believe the fullscreen mode, as implemented in Mountain Lion, was largely intended to be used on Apple laptops with smaller displays. The first time I used the feature on a Macbook Air without an external display I suddenly 'got' it. It made a lot more sense. (That said, at least Mavericks doesn't make it unusable on a multi-display setup.) Edit: Incorrectly thought fullscreen mode was introduced in Lion
      - 0x09 13y ago
        > Edit: Incorrectly thought fullscreen mode was introduced in Lion It was.
adamnemecek 13y ago
Why would "[you] know"?
- Udo 13y ago
  Because I've been a somewhat extreme multi display user for a long time, with a lot of OSes :)
  - gprasanth 13y ago
    And with what OS was the experience, the best?
    - Udo 13y ago
      I'd say WinXP (and greater) and OS X both make it very easy to set up and use multiple screens effectively, with OS X being overall drastically better for my purposes in almost every other aspect and - due to the full screen thing - slightly lagging behind in multi screening. Disclaimer, it's been a few years since I last tried, but: Linux and other unixy OSes were the absolute worst, due to failures at every level from the drivers to the window managers, plus of course the endemic configuration pains. Some distros and drivers have halfway-decent support for two displays driven by the same card, but that's it. Clearly, in that entire ecosystem nobody saw why you would ever have more than 1-2 displays.
      - Groxx 13y ago
        Words cannot describe how much I hate their new-since-Lion full-screen thing. Other than that, I agree, OSX does multi-desktop better than most, and far simpler setup.
      - inthewind 13y ago
        Funny that, I bought a copy a copy of Windows 8 because I'd read that multi-monitor support was better. But it still didn't work for me. Mainly because I don't necessarily want both my displays on at the same time. And I want to switch my primary monitor as and when I feel like it. I don't want windows appearing on off monitors. And if they do I want to be able to grab and group them. Then there's window management. Which I think is pretty woeful on both Windows and OSX. I want to be able to send a window to another display easily. Switch focus etc Without having to fumble about with the mouse like an idiot. Not wonder why I can't do anything because some modal window is hidden somewhere on another monitor. I've given up on multi-monitors, they are just not worth it for me until these issues are addressed. Multi-desktops will have to suffice instead. In short: I want plug and play monitor support and good window management baked into OSs.
27182818284 13y ago
>To be fair, OS X always worked well with multiple displays (I would know), As I work with multiple displays, I think you're sugar-coating it to say it works "well." In fact, Apple knows how horrible it is. That's part of the reason they are displaying the full-screen support as a major upgrade with their new OS release. It is currently so bad, that not only do I find myself frustrated, the PR and dev teams at Apple want to shout about their fix from the rooftops.
- Udo 13y ago
  Did you read the rest of my comment? Was I really "sugarcoating" it when I said they intentionally and needlessly crippled full screen?
  - gambiting 13y ago
    Even without using full screen mode the multi display support is passable at best. There is no way to turn off any of the connected displays, which is a problem when giving presentations or even when just connecting my mac to the TV so we can watch a film with friends - mac's display needs to stay on, there is no way to turn it off.
    - unfamiliar 13y ago
      Funny, I can turn it off just by turning the brightness way down.
      - gambiting 13y ago
        It's not actually off. It's still displaying your screen if you look closely - it's just the back light that is off.
    - Volpe 13y ago
      Laptops will output to external screen while closed, and all connected monitors brightness can be adjusted independently (to off if need be). Exactly what can't be done?
Teckla 13y ago
OS X always worked well with multiple displays Not if you want multiple independently color corrected displays... (unless they added that feature post Snow Leopard)

by Udo 13y ago

taude 13y ago

Works well? You must have low expectations.

Udo 13y ago
I take that as a compliment. Yes, I like to think that my expectations are pretty minimal. All the more disappointing when they're not met.

siglesias 13y ago

Intentionally? Makes sense. Not like they manufacture dedicated external displays with built in MagSafe adapters.

Udo 13y ago
The way full screen worked was clearly intentional, not a bug, they obviously invested a lot of time into making this objectively less useful. Don't talk to me as if I'm an idiot simply because I won't speculate as to why they did this. I only know they did - and that's not some new thing I just made up, it's common knowledge. Don't be so hostile.
- wisty 13y ago
  > Don't talk to me as if I'm an idiot simply because I won't speculate as to why they did this. I only know they did - and that's not some new thing I just made up, it's common knowledge. Don't be so hostile. Let's assume best faith. siglesias might have just mean "that design choice makes no sense", not "you make no sense". On to speculation - I'd guess they don't want you to use full screen, and only included it as a concession to things like movies / games.
  - Udo 13y ago
    Sorry, you're right, I might have misunderstood him there. As to the speculation, my guess is you're correct there also: they do want to enable people with multiple displays, they just can't imagine why you would want fullscreen like that as well so they make sure you can't. It's probably about dictating "the user experience".
  - comex 13y ago
    > On to speculation - I'd guess they don't want you to use full screen, and only included it as a concession to things like movies / games. On the contrary, the Lion fullscreen mode, which caused the issue, was a relatively large push towards fullscreen, by giving it a standardized and better (if you don't have multiple displays :) UI and integrating it into built-in applications.
  - interpol_p 13y ago
    I believe the fullscreen mode, as implemented in Mountain Lion, was largely intended to be used on Apple laptops with smaller displays. The first time I used the feature on a Macbook Air without an external display I suddenly 'got' it. It made a lot more sense. (That said, at least Mavericks doesn't make it unusable on a multi-display setup.) Edit: Incorrectly thought fullscreen mode was introduced in Lion
    - 0x09 13y ago
      > Edit: Incorrectly thought fullscreen mode was introduced in Lion It was.

adamnemecek 13y ago

Why would "[you] know"?

Udo 13y ago
Because I've been a somewhat extreme multi display user for a long time, with a lot of OSes :)
- gprasanth 13y ago
  And with what OS was the experience, the best?
  - Udo 13y ago
    I'd say WinXP (and greater) and OS X both make it very easy to set up and use multiple screens effectively, with OS X being overall drastically better for my purposes in almost every other aspect and - due to the full screen thing - slightly lagging behind in multi screening. Disclaimer, it's been a few years since I last tried, but: Linux and other unixy OSes were the absolute worst, due to failures at every level from the drivers to the window managers, plus of course the endemic configuration pains. Some distros and drivers have halfway-decent support for two displays driven by the same card, but that's it. Clearly, in that entire ecosystem nobody saw why you would ever have more than 1-2 displays.
    - Groxx 13y ago
      Words cannot describe how much I hate their new-since-Lion full-screen thing. Other than that, I agree, OSX does multi-desktop better than most, and far simpler setup.
    - inthewind 13y ago
      Funny that, I bought a copy a copy of Windows 8 because I'd read that multi-monitor support was better. But it still didn't work for me. Mainly because I don't necessarily want both my displays on at the same time. And I want to switch my primary monitor as and when I feel like it. I don't want windows appearing on off monitors. And if they do I want to be able to grab and group them. Then there's window management. Which I think is pretty woeful on both Windows and OSX. I want to be able to send a window to another display easily. Switch focus etc Without having to fumble about with the mouse like an idiot. Not wonder why I can't do anything because some modal window is hidden somewhere on another monitor. I've given up on multi-monitors, they are just not worth it for me until these issues are addressed. Multi-desktops will have to suffice instead. In short: I want plug and play monitor support and good window management baked into OSs.

27182818284 13y ago

>To be fair, OS X always worked well with multiple displays (I would know), As I work with multiple displays, I think you're sugar-coating it to say it works "well." In fact, Apple knows how horrible it is. That's part of the reason they are displaying the full-screen support as a major upgrade with their new OS release. It is currently so bad, that not only do I find myself frustrated, the PR and dev teams at Apple want to shout about their fix from the rooftops.

Udo 13y ago
Did you read the rest of my comment? Was I really "sugarcoating" it when I said they intentionally and needlessly crippled full screen?
- gambiting 13y ago
  Even without using full screen mode the multi display support is passable at best. There is no way to turn off any of the connected displays, which is a problem when giving presentations or even when just connecting my mac to the TV so we can watch a film with friends - mac's display needs to stay on, there is no way to turn it off.
  - unfamiliar 13y ago
    Funny, I can turn it off just by turning the brightness way down.
    - gambiting 13y ago
      It's not actually off. It's still displaying your screen if you look closely - it's just the back light that is off.
  - Volpe 13y ago
    Laptops will output to external screen while closed, and all connected monitors brightness can be adjusted independently (to off if need be). Exactly what can't be done?

Teckla 13y ago

OS X always worked well with multiple displays Not if you want multiple independently color corrected displays... (unless they added that feature post Snow Leopard)