PDA

View Full Version : Help a Windows user understand the point of Spaces




Mikegs
Jul 31, 2011, 04:17 PM
So I have a MBA with Lion.

I am used to working with Windows 7, where all apps almost can be considered "full screen apps" if they are maximized. So, I only see one app at a time, because it fills the screen. To switch between them, I move the mouse to the taskbar and choose which one to go to or use alt-tab.

It appears that Mac users historically are more used to work with smaller windows distributed throughout the desktop space, so they can see several/all of their open apps simultaneously but at the cost of cluttering the desktop. Therefore multiple desktop spaces is a step forward i guess, by providing more space/less cluttering in the individual desktop. Or what...?

I just don't get the point. I maximize all apps I'm working with in Lion and then use mission control to switch between them, just as I did using the task bar in windows. Why is several desktops with a maximized app window in each better? Am I just being a very window'ish Mac user? Also it appears that you can't even have different files/folders present in specific desktop spaces only (e.g. a "work" desktop space with all you work related folders present on this desktop only)?

I think I just prefer one desktop, keeping all open apps as large as possible, so the active one covers the desktop entirely and the switch by mission control... Unless you guys explain the points I'm missing....?



WSR
Jul 31, 2011, 05:03 PM
I'm currently use 9 Spaces but is Snow Leopard. I haven't updated to Lion because for me Spaces and Expose was downgraded in Lion.

I use Spaces to separate different tasks on to their own desktops. For example, I usually have Itunes, Safari and Entourage in there own space.
Also when I'm doing something like converting and attaching audio files to make MP3 CD's to use in my car, I can have only the converter program and a Finder window open in the same space without any other windows getting in way. If multiple Finder windows are open it would be easier to make mistakes like dragging to the wrong window.
Also if I need to get to something on the desktop, I usually just switch to an empty space.

So Spaces is not just about full-screen apps. Through if you have only used a Mac with Lion, I can see way you might think that. Spaces is more about organizing your tasks especially when they involve multiple windows.

I hope Apple will give back the option of Spaces and Expose as it is in Snow Leopard.

*LTD*
Jul 31, 2011, 05:14 PM
This thread should address some of your questions:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1202142

Whiteman007
Jul 31, 2011, 05:30 PM
Well for me Why have a App in Full screen when there will be a lot of dead space that can be used with other apps. This is of course if your res and screen size is good enough.

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/8034/screenshot20110731at323.png

robgendreau
Jul 31, 2011, 06:19 PM
It depends on what applications you use. I need lots of windows with lots of PDFs and Word documents open at the same time. One Word window per document doesn't cut it.

And I use the different spaces or desktops to organize different things I'm doing. They've been around a long time in Linux, where I got used to using them.

rob

Mikegs
Aug 1, 2011, 11:27 AM
It depends on what applications you use. I need lots of windows with lots of PDFs and Word documents open at the same time. One Word window per document doesn't cut it.

And I use the different spaces or desktops to organize different things I'm doing. They've been around a long time in Linux, where I got used to using them.

rob

But don't you maximize the document you're currently reading/writing? This is a must on my 11'' MBA. But I don't care if I have a maximized (not full-screen as they are always assigned a separate desktop) safari windows, two maximized word documents, and three maximized PDF's hiding behind each other. Switching to the one I wan't to work with is just a click in mission control. If i used several desktop, switching would also require a click in mission control. So wheres the advantage?

Do you find it easier to switch between desktops that to switch between a stack of windows hiding behind each other in one desktop?

I'm really not trying to say that it is unusable, I'm sure I just need som clarification. And I would really love it, if it could prove to enhance my workflow.

PS: I think I can see how it could be useful with a large screen, where you actually work in windows, that only fill part of the desktop.