11 ms·

Once you have started to use a tiling window manager (Awesome WM in my case), you can't go back, it's just a huge boost of productivity for developers - especia

by neumino 12y ago

Once you have started to use a tiling window manager (Awesome WM in my case), you can't go back, it's just a huge boost of productivity for developers - especially when you come from OS X where dragging/resizing windows is a real pain.

brandonbloom 12y ago
shrug I've heard this argument many times, but this is clearly a different strokes situation. I set my window layout up once at the start of a multi-hour working session. Most of the time, that's either 1) a large MacVim window and a terminal or 2) that plus a browser. It takes ~10 seconds to get it how I like it. After that, cmd+tab works just fine. Even on my 27" display, I usually prefer to have a little overlap where all three windows rest in such a way as to permit the most relevant bits to be visible simultaneously, while allowing for overall larger space when an individual app is focused. Tiling window managers tend to distort windows to less than ideal proportions, as they strictly eliminate overlap. That said, I utilize splits (ie tiling) within vim to great extent.
- dbpatterson 12y ago
  Obviously it's personal, but the main issue I've always had with Alt-Tab is that as soon as you have more than 2 windows, getting to a specific application is now something you have to think about (or hit key, look, possibly hit key again). Since I'm often doing web development, I usually have a terminal open, an editor, and a web browser. Except for terminals, I pretty much always have everything full screen - the benefit is that Super-1 gets me to terminal(s), Super-2 gets me to my editor, and Super-3 gets me to the browser.
  - gnud 12y ago
    Just a quick tip on that note: In win7+, Win+N opens the Nth application you have pinned to the taskbar, counting from the left.
    - marvy 12y ago
      Thank you for reminding me. It's actually even better than that. Let's say your taskbar looks like this: (1) Browser: pinned and now open (1 tab only). (2) Windows Explorer: pinned, open, several windows. (3) Windows media player, pinned, closed. (4) Notepad: not pinned, but open. Win+1 will bring the browser to the front, unless it's already there, in which case it will minimize it. Win+2 will bring a Windows Explorer window to the front, and if you keep pressing it will cycle between them. Win+3 will obviously open Windows Media Player, Win+4 will bring Notepad to the front.
      - dormento 12y ago
        Even better: Win + shift + number will start a new instance of the application in that taskbar position (multiple explorer windows, for example). Win + shift + left/right will move the current focused window between monitors.
        mkesper 12y ago
        I find Win + Left/Right (makes the program use left or right half of screen, Win+Up for fullscreen) the best news in Win7+. This saves so much time and makes me hate all programs that do not support it fully.
      - dbpatterson 12y ago
        I actually find that _worse_ than what the parent described. If I hit Win+1, I want to see the browser provided that it's open. I don't want the state of the system prior to hitting that to have any effect on it. If I accidentally hit Win+1 twice, it seems that I would end up minimizing the browser. At least for me, the primary value that tiling window managers provide (even though it has little to do with tiling!) is idempotency.
    - dbpatterson 12y ago
      This is also true in Ubuntu's Unity, but after trying to use it, a minor issue drove my crazy: if you switch to one that isn't open it will open the application. So if I accidentally Super-4'd (which I didn't think I did, but after trying to use Unity for a while, I'd do it at least several times a day), it would start whatever the 4th application was. And then you have to deal with it showing up a fraction of a second later. I don't want switching and starting applications to be the same action, because switching should _always_ be extremely fast. If there was a way to make it only switch if it was open, then this would be a viable option for at least my workflow.
  - hboon 12y ago
    I work this in OS X by using Alfred (Spotlight would work too). It's just Cmd+space to bring up the search bar and then another another letter or 2 (v = MacVim) and hitting Enter to switch.
  - Alupis 12y ago
    I've come down to just using Terminator terminal emulator[1] (which allows you to open multiple sessions in the same window with a CTRL+SHIFT+E or CTRL+SHIFT+O) and a web browser. I used to care about which desktop I used (KDE or Gnome, etc) and how it was setup... but lately that just hasn't bothered me. As long as I can have 3-4 terminals open in the same window, and some browser, I'm productive. [1] http://gnometerminator.blogspot.com/p/introduction.html http://gnometerminator.blogspot.com/p/introduction.html
eridius 12y ago
I've never worked in a situation where I could use a tiling window manager (OS X here), but I've always wondered how that's supposed to work when my normal workflow involves opening and closing a lot of windows. Especially terminal windows. I open throwaway terminal windows all the time, and then close them if I'm done with them, or keep them open behind my other windows if they have some information in them I need to reference later. Often when I'm done working, I end up closing perhaps a dozen scratch terminal windows.
- michaelsbradley 12y ago
  Optimal Layout[1] works pretty well as a tiling window manager (or close enough) for OS X. I've been using it as an essential part of my workflow for 2+ years. I also make heavy use of emacsclient and tmux[2] sessions and windows in conjunction with iTerm2[3]. When I have some time to experiment, I'd like to look at replacing Optimal Layout with mjolnir[4] or one of the similar tools listed in mjolnir's README, under Mjolnir vs. other apps.[5] Amethyst[6] looks like another option worthy of consideration. [1] http://most-advantageous.com/optimal-layout/ http://most-advantageous.com/optimal-layout/ [2] http://robots.thoughtbot.com/a-tmux-crash-course http://robots.thoughtbot.com/a-tmux-crash-course [3] http://iterm2.com/ http://iterm2.com/ [4] https://github.com/sdegutis/mjolnir https://github.com/sdegutis/mjolnir [5] https://github.com/sdegutis/mjolnir#mjolnir-vs-other-apps https://github.com/sdegutis/mjolnir#mjolnir-vs-other-apps [6] https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst
  - eridius 12y ago
    Optimal Layout looks interesting. I'll have to give it a shot. Another one you might want to look at is Witch[1]. I've tried it before but it never really "stuck" for me. Maybe I should give it another shot. Witch isn't a window manager though, it's only concerned with making it easy to switch between windows rather than laying them out. Why do you use iTerm2? I've looked at it in the past, but it just feels non-native enough to bug me. I know they advertise tmux integration, but the one time I tried to find out what that actually entailed, it didn't seem to work for me (though I've been told it basically just uses iTerm2 native splits in place of tmux splits). [1] http://manytricks.com/witch/ http://manytricks.com/witch/
frou_dh 12y ago
I find keyboard-driven grid-based window flingers to be Good Enough. On OS X, that's SizeUp (or Divvy, ...) with a custom grid to suit my screen and then I never have to use the mouse to move/resize windows.
- hughes 12y ago
  ShiftIt is a nice free alternative to SizeUp and Divvy.
  - ash 12y ago
    Last ShiftIt release was in 2012. And it requires XQuartz for some reason. On the other hand, Spectacle (also open source) is supported and it doesn't require XQuartz. That said, I don't like Spectacle default shortcuts (hard to remember for me and there's a conflict with Chrome switch-tab command). I now use http://spectacleapp.com http://spectacleapp.com, but with ShiftIt-inspired configuration: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/fikovnik/ShiftIt/develop/docs/schreenshot-menu.png https://raw.githubusercontent.com/fikovnik/ShiftIt/develop/d...
  - girvo 12y ago
    Honestly, since I tried Amethyst [0] no other tiling WM for OS X has come close. [0] https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst
    - frou_dh 12y ago
      It's amazing how many of these things there are. Thanks, that's yet another bookmark!
- silasb 12y ago
  I'm still using Hyrda with some simple commands, like moving window to the left half, right half, full screen, center. Haven't tried the new version of Hyrda yet.
dsrguru 12y ago
Agreed in concept, but you can get similar if not greater productivity gains from stacking/floating WMs that let you move and resize windows into a tiling-like configuration. Examples are goomwwm and subtle. This "manual tiling" approach is also probably the only viable option for tiling-like window management on OS X. While not nearly as powerful or productivity-promoting as the above-mentioned WMs or conventional tiling ones, the OS X program Spectacle (http://spectacleapp.com http://spectacleapp.com) makes life a lot easier on OS X for those of us who are used to the screen real estate and keyboard control afforded by tiling WMs. Edit: Another commenter mentioned the non-free Optimal Layout (http://most-advantageous.com/optimal-layout http://most-advantageous.com/optimal-layout) for OS X. I haven't downloaded the trial yet, but the website makes it look very promising.
- simon_weber 12y ago
  I've used an xmonad clone for osx [0] for about a year now. It's a lot buggier than xmonad - mostly due to osx's terrible apis - but it gets the job done. [0] https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst
- jb55 12y ago
  Recent versions of Amethyst https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst have made a pretty much xmonad-like experience on osx. There are a few quirks but I don't see me going back at this point.
zak_mc_kracken 12y ago
I find that "follow mouse" mode helps alleviate this pain a lot: when you can interact with a window (mouse or keyboard) without having to bring that window in the foreground, you end up moving windows around a lot less. I like tiling in general but doing it well requires a big monitor.
- dghf 12y ago
  I don't know, I run dwm on my 11" wide(ish) screen laptop, and it works for me, certainly better than a more traditional WM: generally, the less screen estate you have, the more it pays to make efficient use of it. If I'm coding in Clojure, I have a vim window on the left, and a repl and a plain terminal (mostly for leiningen and git commands) stacked on the right. I could set this up in a traditional WM: but [a] it would take (a bit) more initial effort and [b] more importantly, with dwm I can temporarily bring in extra windows (e.g. a web browser) and then get rid of them again without having to restore my layout from scratch. I agree with you about focus follow mouse (though it can be more trouble than it's worth if you have an overly sensitive trackpad).
coned88 12y ago
I thought OSX autosized everything. I have never used it personally.
nXqd 12y ago
I just use Slate to snap window to left or right. It's not quite like tilting wm but it works quite well. I have no problem with it. And I do use Emacs, so there wouldn't any problem of splitting with those either. The only thing I miss from tilting wm is its minimal an simplicity. I used to use arch linux with dwm, configuring, patching creating shortcut just take a few line of code here and there, love it :)
Touche 12y ago
My issue with tiling WMs is that there just isn't enough room. I use vim splits in a full-screen terminal but can only fit 2 columns comfortably. I can pull off 3 but then I can't see the full 80 characters in each.

by neumino 12y ago

brandonbloom 12y ago

shrug I've heard this argument many times, but this is clearly a different strokes situation. I set my window layout up once at the start of a multi-hour working session. Most of the time, that's either 1) a large MacVim window and a terminal or 2) that plus a browser. It takes ~10 seconds to get it how I like it. After that, cmd+tab works just fine. Even on my 27" display, I usually prefer to have a little overlap where all three windows rest in such a way as to permit the most relevant bits to be visible simultaneously, while allowing for overall larger space when an individual app is focused. Tiling window managers tend to distort windows to less than ideal proportions, as they strictly eliminate overlap. That said, I utilize splits (ie tiling) within vim to great extent.

dbpatterson 12y ago
Obviously it's personal, but the main issue I've always had with Alt-Tab is that as soon as you have more than 2 windows, getting to a specific application is now something you have to think about (or hit key, look, possibly hit key again). Since I'm often doing web development, I usually have a terminal open, an editor, and a web browser. Except for terminals, I pretty much always have everything full screen - the benefit is that Super-1 gets me to terminal(s), Super-2 gets me to my editor, and Super-3 gets me to the browser.
- gnud 12y ago
  Just a quick tip on that note: In win7+, Win+N opens the Nth application you have pinned to the taskbar, counting from the left.
  - marvy 12y ago
    Thank you for reminding me. It's actually even better than that. Let's say your taskbar looks like this: (1) Browser: pinned and now open (1 tab only). (2) Windows Explorer: pinned, open, several windows. (3) Windows media player, pinned, closed. (4) Notepad: not pinned, but open. Win+1 will bring the browser to the front, unless it's already there, in which case it will minimize it. Win+2 will bring a Windows Explorer window to the front, and if you keep pressing it will cycle between them. Win+3 will obviously open Windows Media Player, Win+4 will bring Notepad to the front.
    - dormento 12y ago
      Even better: Win + shift + number will start a new instance of the application in that taskbar position (multiple explorer windows, for example). Win + shift + left/right will move the current focused window between monitors.
      - mkesper 12y ago
        I find Win + Left/Right (makes the program use left or right half of screen, Win+Up for fullscreen) the best news in Win7+. This saves so much time and makes me hate all programs that do not support it fully.
    - dbpatterson 12y ago
      I actually find that _worse_ than what the parent described. If I hit Win+1, I want to see the browser provided that it's open. I don't want the state of the system prior to hitting that to have any effect on it. If I accidentally hit Win+1 twice, it seems that I would end up minimizing the browser. At least for me, the primary value that tiling window managers provide (even though it has little to do with tiling!) is idempotency.
  - dbpatterson 12y ago
    This is also true in Ubuntu's Unity, but after trying to use it, a minor issue drove my crazy: if you switch to one that isn't open it will open the application. So if I accidentally Super-4'd (which I didn't think I did, but after trying to use Unity for a while, I'd do it at least several times a day), it would start whatever the 4th application was. And then you have to deal with it showing up a fraction of a second later. I don't want switching and starting applications to be the same action, because switching should _always_ be extremely fast. If there was a way to make it only switch if it was open, then this would be a viable option for at least my workflow.
- hboon 12y ago
  I work this in OS X by using Alfred (Spotlight would work too). It's just Cmd+space to bring up the search bar and then another another letter or 2 (v = MacVim) and hitting Enter to switch.
- Alupis 12y ago
  I've come down to just using Terminator terminal emulator[1] (which allows you to open multiple sessions in the same window with a CTRL+SHIFT+E or CTRL+SHIFT+O) and a web browser. I used to care about which desktop I used (KDE or Gnome, etc) and how it was setup... but lately that just hasn't bothered me. As long as I can have 3-4 terminals open in the same window, and some browser, I'm productive. [1] http://gnometerminator.blogspot.com/p/introduction.html http://gnometerminator.blogspot.com/p/introduction.html

eridius 12y ago

I've never worked in a situation where I could use a tiling window manager (OS X here), but I've always wondered how that's supposed to work when my normal workflow involves opening and closing a lot of windows. Especially terminal windows. I open throwaway terminal windows all the time, and then close them if I'm done with them, or keep them open behind my other windows if they have some information in them I need to reference later. Often when I'm done working, I end up closing perhaps a dozen scratch terminal windows.

michaelsbradley 12y ago
Optimal Layout[1] works pretty well as a tiling window manager (or close enough) for OS X. I've been using it as an essential part of my workflow for 2+ years. I also make heavy use of emacsclient and tmux[2] sessions and windows in conjunction with iTerm2[3]. When I have some time to experiment, I'd like to look at replacing Optimal Layout with mjolnir[4] or one of the similar tools listed in mjolnir's README, under Mjolnir vs. other apps.[5] Amethyst[6] looks like another option worthy of consideration. [1] http://most-advantageous.com/optimal-layout/ http://most-advantageous.com/optimal-layout/ [2] http://robots.thoughtbot.com/a-tmux-crash-course http://robots.thoughtbot.com/a-tmux-crash-course [3] http://iterm2.com/ http://iterm2.com/ [4] https://github.com/sdegutis/mjolnir https://github.com/sdegutis/mjolnir [5] https://github.com/sdegutis/mjolnir#mjolnir-vs-other-apps https://github.com/sdegutis/mjolnir#mjolnir-vs-other-apps [6] https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst
- eridius 12y ago
  Optimal Layout looks interesting. I'll have to give it a shot. Another one you might want to look at is Witch[1]. I've tried it before but it never really "stuck" for me. Maybe I should give it another shot. Witch isn't a window manager though, it's only concerned with making it easy to switch between windows rather than laying them out. Why do you use iTerm2? I've looked at it in the past, but it just feels non-native enough to bug me. I know they advertise tmux integration, but the one time I tried to find out what that actually entailed, it didn't seem to work for me (though I've been told it basically just uses iTerm2 native splits in place of tmux splits). [1] http://manytricks.com/witch/ http://manytricks.com/witch/

frou_dh 12y ago

I find keyboard-driven grid-based window flingers to be Good Enough. On OS X, that's SizeUp (or Divvy, ...) with a custom grid to suit my screen and then I never have to use the mouse to move/resize windows.

hughes 12y ago
ShiftIt is a nice free alternative to SizeUp and Divvy.
- ash 12y ago
  Last ShiftIt release was in 2012. And it requires XQuartz for some reason. On the other hand, Spectacle (also open source) is supported and it doesn't require XQuartz. That said, I don't like Spectacle default shortcuts (hard to remember for me and there's a conflict with Chrome switch-tab command). I now use http://spectacleapp.com http://spectacleapp.com, but with ShiftIt-inspired configuration: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/fikovnik/ShiftIt/develop/docs/schreenshot-menu.png https://raw.githubusercontent.com/fikovnik/ShiftIt/develop/d...
- girvo 12y ago
  Honestly, since I tried Amethyst [0] no other tiling WM for OS X has come close. [0] https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst
  - frou_dh 12y ago
    It's amazing how many of these things there are. Thanks, that's yet another bookmark!
silasb 12y ago
I'm still using Hyrda with some simple commands, like moving window to the left half, right half, full screen, center. Haven't tried the new version of Hyrda yet.

dsrguru 12y ago

Agreed in concept, but you can get similar if not greater productivity gains from stacking/floating WMs that let you move and resize windows into a tiling-like configuration. Examples are goomwwm and subtle. This "manual tiling" approach is also probably the only viable option for tiling-like window management on OS X. While not nearly as powerful or productivity-promoting as the above-mentioned WMs or conventional tiling ones, the OS X program Spectacle (http://spectacleapp.com http://spectacleapp.com) makes life a lot easier on OS X for those of us who are used to the screen real estate and keyboard control afforded by tiling WMs. Edit: Another commenter mentioned the non-free Optimal Layout (http://most-advantageous.com/optimal-layout http://most-advantageous.com/optimal-layout) for OS X. I haven't downloaded the trial yet, but the website makes it look very promising.

simon_weber 12y ago
I've used an xmonad clone for osx [0] for about a year now. It's a lot buggier than xmonad - mostly due to osx's terrible apis - but it gets the job done. [0] https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst
jb55 12y ago
Recent versions of Amethyst https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst https://github.com/ianyh/Amethyst have made a pretty much xmonad-like experience on osx. There are a few quirks but I don't see me going back at this point.

zak_mc_kracken 12y ago

I find that "follow mouse" mode helps alleviate this pain a lot: when you can interact with a window (mouse or keyboard) without having to bring that window in the foreground, you end up moving windows around a lot less. I like tiling in general but doing it well requires a big monitor.

dghf 12y ago
I don't know, I run dwm on my 11" wide(ish) screen laptop, and it works for me, certainly better than a more traditional WM: generally, the less screen estate you have, the more it pays to make efficient use of it. If I'm coding in Clojure, I have a vim window on the left, and a repl and a plain terminal (mostly for leiningen and git commands) stacked on the right. I could set this up in a traditional WM: but [a] it would take (a bit) more initial effort and [b] more importantly, with dwm I can temporarily bring in extra windows (e.g. a web browser) and then get rid of them again without having to restore my layout from scratch. I agree with you about focus follow mouse (though it can be more trouble than it's worth if you have an overly sensitive trackpad).

coned88 12y ago

I thought OSX autosized everything. I have never used it personally.

nXqd 12y ago

I just use Slate to snap window to left or right. It's not quite like tilting wm but it works quite well. I have no problem with it. And I do use Emacs, so there wouldn't any problem of splitting with those either. The only thing I miss from tilting wm is its minimal an simplicity. I used to use arch linux with dwm, configuring, patching creating shortcut just take a few line of code here and there, love it :)

Touche 12y ago

My issue with tiling WMs is that there just isn't enough room. I use vim splits in a full-screen terminal but can only fit 2 columns comfortably. I can pull off 3 but then I can't see the full 80 characters in each.