Mac OS X and Virtual Desktop Functionality?

[nologo]

There is some evidence of this feature hidden in Expose already.

download "xupport 2.0b2" off macupdate, and you'll see there is a "desktop box" option under settings > expose, as well as the "blob" feature (which i think is far less userful).

With this, hitting "f11" will hide all open windows into a small box. This box can be dragged anywhere on the screen, and can be restored back by hitting "f11" again.

One can also open up new windows while the former desktop is still "boxed"

This -borders- on virtual desktops, but is limited in functionality.

Here's a screenshot:

 

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by nologo
There is some evidence of this feature hidden in Expose already.

download "xupport 2.0b2" off macupdate, and you'll see there is a "desktop box" option under settings > expose, as well as the "blob" feature (which i think is far less userful).

With this, hitting "f11" will hide all open windows into a small box. This box can be dragged anywhere on the screen, and can be restored back by hitting "f11" again.

One can also open up new windows while the former desktop is still "boxed"

This -borders- on virtual desktops, but is limited in functionality.

Here's a screenshot:

......that's what we've been talking about this whole time.

 

[MM2270]

Don't use FileVault

Originally posted by ClimbingTheLog
Don't forget to use filevalut to crypt your home stuff at work. Don't need to worry about the data if you leave.

For the love of GOD man, don't use FileVault right now! Haven't you heard about the potential data loss problem some users are having when using this feature?? Read up on them if you haven't. There are articles right here on MR about it.

Now, granted, the probs only happen when you allow FileVault to compress unsued space on the Home directory, but it appears this technology is not perfected yet, so I personally am staying away from it until a fix is in place, or until Apple improves the way it works.
Call me crazy, but I'm a little concerned about locking down my whole Home directory with encryption that can't even be broken by a SuperComputer for like a BILLION years or something!

 

[JimmyJamesuk]

cool, but I would like virtual consoles too!

If this is true it is good news, and seems to indicate that Apple are willing to take on board good ideas from other types of unix.

However I really believe that OS X need virtual consoles, so that if your gui dies, you can get into a text based terminal and kill/restart the offending processes. It can't be that hard to do, I think pretty much every unix has it.

I had hoped that fast user switching was based on this technology, but alas I dont think it is. I know you can ssh into OS X and kill/restart that way, but that is too clumsy and relies on having other another box around and ssh running on the mac. I really think this would turn an already great os into, for me, a perfect os

 

[cb911]

oh sweet!! i've got to try this out when i get home to my Mac...

this would be so good if you could minimise more than one virtual desktop like that.

i also loved Minimise In Place, that thing for Jaguar. does anyone know if there's anything like that for Panther? having that combined with virtual desktops Expose style would be the best.

Originally posted by rjstanford
One of the frequent complaints my Mac users (esp powerBook users) is that the screen resolution is too low at 100dpi. Others complain that anything higher is too hard to read. With Expose, Apple has already demonstrated functional scaling of a window. Why not take this one step further and imagine a display where you can zoom in, or out, of a large, virtual display - smoothly? Multiple desktop size, single desktop convenience, plus the freedom to go wild on high-dpi monitors since users can always zoom-in or zoom-out to get the widget size that they want. Now that would be cool.

-Richard

i'm not exactly sure what you mean about zoom-in, zoom-out to get the widget size you want, but you do realise that you can zoom in and out on your screen right now? or at least you could on 10.2. i'm not infront of my Mac right now so i don't know the key combination to activate it...

 

[mainstreetmark]

He means my idea I already sent off to Apple.

Using my 17" powerbook, I, amazingly, have about the same amount of desktop space (resolution-wise) than my Dell 8100, even though the physical size of the screen is larger.

As, a result, everything feels too big for me, and I wanted a "Reverse Zoom", that would, for example, cram a 2000px-wide desktop in my 1400x900 LCD. In effect, everything would be a bit smaller. You'd get more desktop space at the expense of, perhaps, some clarity.

 

[Eric_Z]

Mmmm... virtual desktops...

That's it I'm getting a Mac!

*Looks at prices*
*Looks at savings*

But then again, mayby not.

 

[WM.]

Originally posted by rjstanford
One of the frequent complaints my Mac users (esp powerBook users) is that the screen resolution is too low at 100dpi. Others complain that anything higher is too hard to read. With Expose, Apple has already demonstrated functional scaling of a window. Why not take this one step further and imagine a display where you can zoom in, or out, of a large, virtual display - smoothly? Multiple desktop size, single desktop convenience, plus the freedom to go wild on high-dpi monitors since users can always zoom-in or zoom-out to get the widget size that they want. Now that would be cool.

The problem is that, right now, almost all the widgets are bitmaps. The stoplight widgets, for example, are just bitmap images that are stored somewhere in the depths of OS X. Same goes for things like menu extra icons, and scroll and resize widgets. (Obviously the scroll widget can change height, but I doubt it can get wider.)

I'm not sure about things like buttons, radio buttons, checkboxes, etc., but I have to think there'd be a LOT of work to do before we see a resolution-independent GUI on OS X. Plus it would slow everything way down, because you'd have to re-render all the widgets all the time. Maybe there's some caching that could help with this, but that would make it less flexible, seems to me.

FWIW
WM

 

[WM.]

Originally posted by SilentPanda
Is it just me or does the expose blob look a lot like the banner graphic above Steve Jobs' blog (http://www.justonemorething.com)?

I hope that was sarcasm, but there's a distinct lack of smilies, so:

You are aware that that's not actually Steve Jobs' blog, right? It's just satire (and not great satire at that).

Just in case...

WM

 

[ryan]

Fast User Switching
+ Expose
--------------------------------------------------------
= A pretty good substitution for virtual desktops

 

[daveL]

Originally posted by Eric_Z
Mmmm... virtual desktops...

That's it I'm getting a Mac!

*Looks at prices*
*Looks at savings*

But then again, mayby not.

So why are you on these forums? You've obviously made your choice. You're a VHS person in a Betamax world (here). Not everything in this life is about absolute dollars. I sure hope you don't/didn't choose your spouse using the same criteria. You do, in fact, get what you pay for.

I'm not flaming you, it's just my opinion.

 

[Roller]

Re: Re: Mac OS X and Virtual Desktop Functionality?

Originally posted by MacSlut
Furthermore, I really don't see Virtual Desktops coming "by 2004". That would mean releasing this in the next 2 months.

The article and quote say "in 2004," not "by 2004." This would be in keeping with major yearly updates. I agree that Virtual Desktop support would be great, though!

 

[Dale Sorel]

Originally posted by cb911
i also loved Minimise In Place, that thing for Jaguar. does anyone know if there's anything like that for Panther?

WindowShade X 3.1

 

[Toppa G's]

Maybe the bank account is just low...it happens...future purchases may be in order. No need to assume that any "choice" has been made. I don't have enough cash to buy now; doesn't mean I'm not interested.

Originally posted by daveL
So why are you on these forums? You've obviously made your choice. You're a VHS person in a Betamax world (here). Not everything in this life is about absolute dollars.

 

[daveL]

Originally posted by Dale Sorel
WindowShade X 3.1

Works great!

 

[MacSlut]

Re: Re: Re: Mac OS X and Virtual Desktop Functionality?

Originally posted by Roller
The article and quote say "in 2004," not "by 2004." This would be in keeping with major yearly updates. I agree that Virtual Desktop support would be great, though!

Well ok, it says that *now*, which makes much more sense.

 

[Westside guy]

It'd be the last missing piece for me

Expose is nice, but I still find myself wanting real virtual desktops/workspaces. Perhaps it's just a holdover from my not-so-distant past using GIMP on a Linux box, but I'd love to be able to put all my X11 apps on one desktop, have Photoshop on a second one, and my browser + mail on a third!

Maybe once I'm more used to Expose this'll change, but right now it seems to slow me down when I'm trying to get work done.

Codetek's desktops do work - but they feel like a kludge when you compare them to, say, Enlightenment's pager on a Linux box.

 

[moki]

Originally posted by shadowfax
well, there's that, heh. but such a statement may simply be misinformation or just inaccurate. or it could be like marklar--probably worked on, but never to be released.

That's certainly possible, yes. However, there are some other interesting tidbits to consider.

You have a program running on your machine that you may not be aware of, called SystemUIServer. Among its duties are to handle the "menulings" that appear on the right side of the menu bar.

A change Apple made in Jaguar was to allow only a known list of "menulings" -- the SystemUIServer checks a "menuling" against this named list, and unless it's on the list, it isn't loaded.

How is this significant? Well, if you check out the SystemUIServer binary with the strings command under Panther, one of the Apple-sanctioned "menulings" is called "WorkspaceMenu"

It could be nothing, or it could be yet another piece of the virtual desktop idea that isn't quite finished yet.

 

[moki]

Re: It'd be the last missing piece for me

Originally posted by Westside guy
Expose is nice, but I still find myself wanting real virtual desktops/workspaces. Perhaps it's just a holdover from my not-so-distant past using GIMP on a Linux box, but I'd love to be able to put all my X11 apps on one desktop, have Photoshop on a second one, and my browser + mail on a third!

Solution:

1) Launch X11, Photoshop, your web browser, and your email client.

2) When you want your "X11 desktop" with all of your X11 windows, click on the X11 icon in the dock

3) When you want your "Photoshop desktop" with all of your Photoshop windows, click on the Photoshop icon in the Dock

4) And so on and so forth...

If all you do with virtual desktops is keep all of the windows from one application on it, then OS X already gives you what you want.

 

[cb911]

Originally posted by WM.
I hope that was sarcasm, but there's a distinct lack of smilies, so:

You are aware that that's not actually Steve Jobs' blog, right? It's just satire (and not great satire at that).

Just in case...

WM

i was wondering about that. i thought Steve Jobs wouldn't have a blog. that would be kind of working against his own non-disclosure agreement.

Dale Sorel, thanks for that link. i'm looking for the seperate MIP thing though. for Jag there was a small installer that would put the MIP functionality back into Jag. i found this for the old MIP. that page says something about Panther, Expose and 'dumb MIP'. does anyone know what that is? is there a seperate version of MIP for Panther?

 

[Benjamin]

Originally posted by cb911
i was wondering about that. i thought Steve Jobs wouldn't have a blog. that would be kind of working against his own non-disclosure agreement.

Dale Sorel, thanks for that link. i'm looking for the seperate MIP thing though. for Jag there was a small installer that would put the MIP functionality back into Jag. i found this for the old MIP. that page says something about Panther, Expose and 'dumb MIP'. does anyone know what that is? is there a seperate version of MIP for Panther?

Thanks so much, seriously i didn't even re read my page about mip i ment to say dump not dumb MIP, thanks again.

just checking referrals to the site and saw your post

 

[Eric_Z]

Originally posted by daveL
So why are you on these forums? You've obviously made your choice. You're a VHS person in a Betamax world (here). Not everything in this life is about absolute dollars. I sure hope you don't/didn't choose your spouse using the same criteria. You do, in fact, get what you pay for.

I'm not flaming you, it's just my opinion.

Let's see where to begin.

So why are you on theese forums?

Computer hardware and software intererests me in general and Macs are one of the platforms that I have a soft spot for.

You've obviously made your choice.

To buy a Mac when I get enough money? Most defenetly. But please tell me this, why on earth is not people who are generally interested in computers allowed to browse Mac forums? You might find this chocking but it could actually lead to a decition for a purcase in some point in the future. Kind of like me.

You are a VHS person in a Betamax world?

*groan* Beleve it or not but Macs and OSX are not the best choise in all circumstances, I have however made the decition to buy a Mac when I get enough money to. As I have made the judgement that it's the best choise for me as an everyday computer and worktool. This does not however mean thatt I'll give up liking or being interested in other OSs, for hobby reasons mind you.

Not everything in this life is about absolute dollars.

Correct, if my feelings where all that counted, I'd be using AmigaOS as my main OS. However for the OS that I wan't to use as my main OS, logic starts to get involved and dualbooting between AOS and Linux just does not cut it for me. Noor does staying with this Dell and Dualbooting between WindowsXp and Linux.

I sure hope you don't/didn't choose your spouse using the same criteria. You do, in fact, get what you pay for.

Are you paying your wife to be with you?!?

 

[whooleytoo]

Re: Re: It'd be the last missing piece for me

Originally posted by moki
If all you do with virtual desktops is keep all of the windows from one application on it, then OS X already gives you what you want.

If I'm not horribly mistaken (not using my Mac at the mo..) clicking on a running application's icon in the Dock will only bring the active window to the front, not all the application's windows? If so, it's not really as good as a virtual desktop solution.

Mike.

 

[paulc]

Let's not forget that this concept has been around for quite a while. There even was a shareware virtual desktop as far back as the OS 7 days (might have been OS 8).

Some of you got it right on the money when you said something like this will be included in the next 130 buck update next fall. Funny how so many Mac users are falling into the trap of justifying a yearly tithe to Cupertino to continue using their OS.

 

[cb911]

i just wanted to double check something before i do the Expose virtual desktop thing...

from AppleInsider
In the terminal application evoke the following command string:

defaults write com.apple.dock wvous-olddesktop -bool false; killall Dock

To revert Expose´back to default functionality, simple re-evoke the command by passing 'true' to the boolean variable.

so i use the command defaults write com.apple.dock wvous-olddesktop -bool false; killall Dock to activate the virtual desktop thing, then defaults write com.apple.dock wvous-olddesktop -bool true; killall Dock to de-activate it?

i just want to be sure how to turn it off...