Most productive. A good tag line for Apple.
"Apple. Are we dumbing down your operating system? Shut up and get used to it."
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mission Control Replacement?
- Thread starter strausd
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Most productive. A good tag line for Apple.
"Apple. Are we dumbing down your operating system? Shut up and get used to it."
I tried Spaces several times in earlier versions of OSX but never ended up using it in the long run. I found that having a big mess of windows open on my 2560x1600 display or even my work's 2x 1680x1050 screens worked better because I often needed to access data from various windows that would've normally been on different spaces and thus would've required going back and forth.
With OSX Lion I use Spaces on my 13" MBP. I especially like using fullscreen apps. The only issue is that due to the horizontal line of spaces and fullscreen apps is that when you have lots of them open it gets somewhat annoying to go thru them all. I really wish Apple brought back the possibility for a grid arrangement.
With OSX Lion I use Spaces on my 13" MBP. I especially like using fullscreen apps. The only issue is that due to the horizontal line of spaces and fullscreen apps is that when you have lots of them open it gets somewhat annoying to go thru them all. I really wish Apple brought back the possibility for a grid arrangement.
For why, see the previous posts.
It may work for *you* but you're not *me*. I'm really happy that it makes life easier for you; have some pity for me where it makes my life much slower (that's when not waiting for the system to spring to life, bluetooth problems, etc.).
I'm not discounting spaces for everyone, and I think Apple's integration of virtual desktops was a significant feature (though I consider a far less significant feature than Expose').
I also don't disagree that the current implementation of spaces is a step backward for most people that were actually using spaces.
I was simply agreeing that you sound arrogant when you imply people not using spaces are ignorant of what it is or use their computers in a less "advanced" way than yourself. (And I find it funny that anyone who's not out and out complaining about mission control is getting marked down and people that are are getting marked up... even the less coherent posts.)
Someone mentioned "use their computers 8hrs a day"... I use mine way more than that (mine is used for a combination of an 8hr workday and then most of my entertainment involves the same computer), so I understand liking the things that a lot of people consider to be trivial. A lot of people consider expose' to be trivial which always makes me
A lot of people think the ability to scroll a window that you don't have in focus to be trivial, which drives me crazy when I'm working on my Windows boxes. I don't consider my use of my computer as trivial either. I've got an IDE, text editor, browser, Mail, Word, multiple terminals, instant messaging client, virtual machines, and remote desktops running basically all the time. I get and appreciate window management.As I said, it depends on a lot of things if spaces makes sense for you. Nothing you've said about spaces makes it inherently better than using expose' alone. It works better for you. That doesn't make your use more or less "advanced" than anyone else's. Some people would prefer some of the changes you can't stand... like only being able to see windows in a given space when you expose'. It has to do (again) with how much screen real estate you have and how good your eyes are. Fewer windows means larger windows which are easier to see. Mind you, I prefer being able to see all windows across all spaces... but I can acknowledge the fact that not all people would without assuming that they're not "advanced" users or that they don't understand the features being discussed.
That's all I was saying.
I've always felt Apple should allow for more configuration options... especially when they change usability features. I should be able to change spaces back to how it was... I should be able to change the sorting order of expose'd windows... I should be able to disable applications being grouped together... etc.
Like someone already said, no you can't. If I am in desktop 1 and want to drag a window from desktop 6 into it, I can't do it. I would have to navigate to desktop 6, drag it to desktop 1, and then go back to desktop 1. It just adds more steps.
None of those are any faster than the combination of Exposé and Spaces. Before, I could hit my Spaces hot corner and then my Exposé hot corner all in less than a second. And in less than a second, I would be shown every window I have open in every space, not possible with Mission Control.
I'm on a desktop, so gestures are pointless to me. And I am definitely not going to waste $70 on a magic trackpad. But the equivalent to swiping is control-arrow key. And have you seen the animation for that? It is ridiculously slow, so how does that make my workflow any faster than it was in SL? And anytime you use the mouse, it is always slower than using a keyboard shortcut. Just think about it. The first time you move your cursor, you have to find where your cursor is. Then you start moving it in the direction of the desired location. The closer and closer you get to that location, the slower you move the cursor. And when you finally get there, you click, the same thing you would be doing with a keystroke, just pressing a different button. But what happens if you over shot it? Go back and move the cursor and click again. So really to me, using a cursor is always slower when you could use a simple keyboard shortcut. But I understand some people have trouble remembering keyboard shortcuts. But for those who do, it is much faster than a cursor.
And as for moving between spaces and pressing the space bar to see a window that is hidden behind another, in SL you can just do your two quick hot corners and bam, you see all your windows in every space. And then, you're not limited to only seeing some windows in 1 space. Mission Control just makes everything worse!
Well what happens if you want to move a window from a different space into the one you are already in? You can't do it. Could you do it with Snow Leopard? Yes.
There are many things to say about Mission Control, not just 1. Go back and read my original post. And I would say the grid layout is much more organized. Also with the grid layout, your windows from other spaces were bigger so you could see it better. And if you are on your first space in MC and need to get to your last one, you have to swipe through each one LINEARLY which takes up much more time than being able to just do control-backarrow because it loops around. Now if they added the ability to loop around spaces then it would be better. But I think Steve is too in love with his little rubber band animation when you try and do that.
The fact that you are asking the first question you just did makes me think you didn't even read the original post.
You don't strike me as someone who really understood the real, more advanced, and more efficient spaces. Tell me why you think the new implementation is much better and I will tell you why I disagree. Just saying it is much better isn't backing up your point at all.
So you suggest that all the pro users out there who knew how to use the more advanced and more productive features that were included in Snow Leopard should just shut up and get used to the inefficient and unproductive ways of Mission Control along with the many features that were taken out of Lion that really helped people become more productive? If you say yes then you must not understand the difference between Mission Control and the Exposé/Spaces combo.
I'm not discounting spaces for everyone, and I think Apple's integration of virtual desktops was a significant feature (though I consider a far less significant feature than Expose').
I also don't disagree that the current implementation of spaces is a step backward for most people that were actually using spaces.
I was simply agreeing that you sound arrogant when you imply people not using spaces are ignorant of what it is or use their computers in a less "advanced" way than yourself. (And I find it funny that anyone who's not out and out complaining about mission control is getting marked down and people that are are getting marked up... even the less coherent posts.)
Someone mentioned "use their computers 8hrs a day"... I use mine way more than that (mine is used for a combination of an 8hr workday and then most of my entertainment involves the same computer), so I understand liking the things that a lot of people consider to be trivial. A lot of people consider expose' to be trivial which always makes me
As I said, it depends on a lot of things if spaces makes sense for you. Nothing you've said about spaces makes it inherently better than using expose' alone. It works better for you. That doesn't make your use more or less "advanced" than anyone else's. Some people would prefer some of the changes you can't stand... like only being able to see windows in a given space when you expose'. It has to do (again) with how much screen real estate you have and how good your eyes are. Fewer windows means larger windows which are easier to see. Mind you, I prefer being able to see all windows across all spaces... but I can acknowledge the fact that not all people would without assuming that they're not "advanced" users or that they don't understand the features being discussed.
That's all I was saying.
I've always felt Apple should allow for more configuration options... especially when they change usability features. I should be able to change spaces back to how it was... I should be able to change the sorting order of expose'd windows... I should be able to disable applications being grouped together... etc.
Like I said before, I wasn't trying to come across as arrogant, that's just how it was taken. And it sure seems like you are putting words in my mouth with that.
So you are saying that everyone's workflow is on the same level. I don't see how a teenager running one safari window and iTunes has just as advanced a workflow as mine, so I disagree with you on that. And for me, since I am using as many pro apps as I do, I see the benefit of having features that increase efficiency, but I understand why you don't use it considering your main apps.
So would you say that Mission Control has more functionality than the old Spaces and Exposé? Would you say that the Spaces/Exposé combo is more powerful than MC?
So lets say you have 18 apps open and 6 spaces. Each space has 3 apps, one app on each monitor, or even just resized to fit perfectly on one monitor. And you need to see all three of these apps at the same time to be doing your work because they work together. So say I am on space 1 and I need to switch to a different three apps. I could either just do a quick control-arrow to get to them, or I could go your way and use Exposé. So then I would go into Exposé by however way you want. Then click on each app, and go back into Exposé each time. It is so obvious that this will take so much more time than just control-arrow! Do you see why Spaces is so powerful and increases people's workflow? I don't see how you can still say Exposé alone isn't better than the Exposé and Spaces combo.
How can you say everybody is on the same level and nobody is considered an advanced user and then you yourself start to consider some more advanced than others? Make up your mind.
Last edited:
No, I didn't say that. I said your use of spaces isn't equivalent to being a more advanced user. There are obviously people that use more of their machine than others. But it's not a: basic (whatever) -> intermediate (expose') -> advanced (expose' and spaces) gradient. Spaces simply doesn't work well for some people regardless of what their level of knowledge or use is. So to say people just don't get it... or Apple's change to how spaces works is a demonstration that they don't care about "advanced" users... doesn't really hold up in the real world.
eeyoredragon said:
?
Sure, I said "most" and not "all", but I stand by that. The added functionality of being able to (rather being forced to with the old model) expose' windows across all spaces is useless to someone that has so many windows open that they can't find what they want when they do that. Some people would prefer seeing only the windows open in a given space because not everyone sticks single apps in a single space. For many, it makes sense for there to be several apps per space.
Like I said, ideally, this would all be configurable. If I were going to use spaces again, I'd like to have the grid layout again, and I would like to have an extra expose' call that does all windows again. So you'd have one for "application windows", one for "spaces windows", and one for "all windows".
But we all know how likely that is to happen :-/
The way addition of how I incorporate spaces into my workflow adds to the complexity of my workflow, so I would say my workflow is more advanced than others. Would you say someone who only uses 1 safari window and iTunes has a more advanced workflow than me? And I never said there is that sort of gradient, you are just making stuff up now. Once again, everyone I have talked to face to face who did not use spaces said it's because they didn't get it, and I have talked to many people about this. Also, I have seen many people on MR say they didn't use it because they didn't use it! So heres a little fact for you, people didn't use spaces because they didn't understand it.
And Apple doesn't care about the pro users anymore. Head over to the Mac Pro forums and see. Or maybe look at FCP X as an example. Or maybe the discontinuation of their servers. Or maybe the obvious increase in attention to their consumer products. How often do they update their iMacs and laptop line? Think about that and compare it to how often they update their Mac Pro line. So would you disagree with me saying that they are continually turning more and more into a consumer company? Because its obvious they are.
You still sound as if you are saying everyones workflow is on the same level. So tell me, do you think there are people with more advanced workflows than others? It's such a simple question. And how could you say that someone who uses more than 5 pro apps at once
And when workflows get more complex, the ability to organize everything using Spaces makes it so much better.
Basically here is my whole point. I believe that people who use tons of windows at once can benefit from Spaces. And when they implement it the right way into their workflow, it speeds it up. Take my last example when someone has 18 apps open. Do you think someone with a workflow like that and uses Spaces like that does not benefit from Spaces? Do you think Spaces does not speed up their workflow? Would you say their workflow is more complex than someone with just a Safari window and iTunes open?
You seem to not have been getting anything I have said on this thread. And you didn't answer my questions in the last post.
It seems to me that the biggest problem is that Apple didn't take the time to ask "how" Mission Control would be used by all of their different types of customers.
It seems that Apple puts less and less time into broad user work flow, like they only go 85% of the way and just stop.
I remember when I first used Leopard thinking, "How am I going to see my windows and spaces, what if I don't want to see all my windows, only a few?" And Leopard had a good answer for all of those. A lot of Lion seems poorly thought out.
- Mission Control only works with one workflow instead of a lot of work flows.
- Gray icons are good for only those people that don't mind studying the Finder each time they want to get to their Applications folder.
- The Address Book used to show Groups, List of People and Individual cards all at the same time. Now it only shows two columns of data.
- iCal only shows information when you double-click on an event, which blocks the rest of the calendar when it used to show up on the side.
- Full screen doesn't really work with dual monitors
- Mission Control always overlaps Windows
It's like they have some good ideas but some manager doesn't want to give or push programmers to spend the extra time to really think things out.
It seems that Apple puts less and less time into broad user work flow, like they only go 85% of the way and just stop.
I remember when I first used Leopard thinking, "How am I going to see my windows and spaces, what if I don't want to see all my windows, only a few?" And Leopard had a good answer for all of those. A lot of Lion seems poorly thought out.
- Mission Control only works with one workflow instead of a lot of work flows.
- Gray icons are good for only those people that don't mind studying the Finder each time they want to get to their Applications folder.
- The Address Book used to show Groups, List of People and Individual cards all at the same time. Now it only shows two columns of data.
- iCal only shows information when you double-click on an event, which blocks the rest of the calendar when it used to show up on the side.
- Full screen doesn't really work with dual monitors
- Mission Control always overlaps Windows
It's like they have some good ideas but some manager doesn't want to give or push programmers to spend the extra time to really think things out.
The issue I'm seeing with that is you're saying you're running one app per space? Why not just click on the app you want in the dock and it will come to focus? The individual little windows on the Mac can get kind of annoying with Expose or Mission Control (without Spaces), but if you bring the whole app to focus, they all come with it... If you need more room for Finder windows, I'd say get a bigger screen, or software to quad them up on a screen. That way you won't have to switch spaces.
I've found that using DoublePane to replicate the half-screen apps from Windows 7 is great, especially on my 23" screen. That helps screen organization, and I miss it so much at work (XP).
I'm a student, so at the moment my apps are Firefox, Word, and iTunes. Yeah, I know really intense there. Probably could run on a PIII. I used to use Indesign and Photoshop for newspaper design, but that was back when Macs couldn't get out of their own way (PPC), so it was on a PC with two giant CRT monitors, and I really wanted a third at the time. I've used FCE on my old Macbook, but it was the only thing open, and it used up the whole screen, so no issues there. I did find Expose pretty annoying for FCE, as each part of the screen would separate, which was just dumb. I really want to play with the new FCP, but I can't justify $300 for something I probably wouldn't use that much.
Agreed.
The issues are in the first post, go read it.
I have multiple apps running in each space. Take a look at my previous example where I was talking about a workflow with 18 apps in 6 spaces. And even if I did have one, I have mentioned on here at least once or twice that using a mouse is much slower than a keyboard shortcut. I also explain why, go read that again too.
And I have two monitors right now, one 24" and one 23", and plan on adding another 23" soon. Having multiple monitors adds to the benefits of SL Spaces and Exposé along with better organization. However, it is pretty obvious that Lion does not work well with multiple monitors, and I am NOT the first to say that.
You can also do so by simply clicking on the app of choice in the dock once you've entered App Exposé. It will switch that app without leaving App Exposé. No keyboard required.
cheers didn't realise i could do that
its been bugging me since i installed Lion
I say **** Mission Control. I'm not going to describe why, as I've done it countless times around the forums already. It makes my life much more difficult. It's not a minor annoyance, it's like going from having a car to having a bike. For those of you who already had a bike before, you won't mind. But for the ones who use Spaces and Exposé for REAL, you'll hate it.
RIP window management.
RIP window management.
Hopefully there'll be an app for that; if Apple aren't willing to use common sense, someone else can copy it.
I'm sure Spaces+Exposé could be improved. Lauch pad + mis-control is a real retrograde step, apart from the people who've never used Spaces+Exposé in anger; the silent power users who are all fed up with Apple's Vista.
For everyone who hates Mission Control, like myself, write to www.apple.com/Feedback for OS X.
Hopefully, Apple will listen. Make sure to mention how it isn't easy and that Mission Control is inefficient.
Hopefully, Apple will listen. Make sure to mention how it isn't easy and that Mission Control is inefficient.
Or you can just walk.
Multiple monitors seem to work fine too, I can still drag stuff off of one onto the other....
I've already said there are differences how advanced peoples' workflows are. I'm not sure what you're looking for here.
You imply it over and over again. People don't use spaces because their workflows aren't "complex" or they just don't get how spaces work. That's what you've been saying this entire time. I'm simply saying that using spaces doesn't make for a more complicated workflow in and of itself and that someone with complex workflows doesn't necessarily benefit from using spaces. It's simple user preference.
Sure. They're going after the market that makes them the most money. I agree with that.
I'm not sure what that has to do with spaces is what I said. Spaces isn't a "pro" feature or they'd just get rid of it assuming they so obviously don't care about "pro" users.
For that matter, I don't know what rack mounted servers have to do with spaces either. Typically your racked machines are headless. You pop in with remote desktop and the GUI front ends are not nearly as big of a deal as they are on workstations, so... where's spaces in all of that?
Again, no I don't
Someone said it was arrogant of you to assume people that don't use spaces either are not advanced users and/or don't understand how spaces works and I agreed and gave an example of why someone might not benefit from it (i.e. me). That's really it in a nutshell."You sound kinda arrogant..."
"I'm not trying to sound arrogant. I'm just saying if people aren't using spaces, they either aren't advanced users or don't understand spaces."
"Right... that's pretty arrogant..."
It makes it better for you.
Right, if everyone else would stop being silly and actually use spaces the Right Way(tm). Oi...
Someone with 18 apps open does not necessarily benefit from spaces, no. Might they? Sure. Would everyone? No.
No. It speeds up your workflow.
Actually, what's your example of a workflow that's so improved by using spaces? Your posts all seem to be about how spaces' flexibility is limited in Lion. It doesn't actually mention why spaces is all that and a bag of chips for everyone in the first place.
I acknowledge that you like spaces... obviously... and that's great. More power to you. I used to love spaces too back when it was just called virtual desktops. I also agree that the use of spaces has been greatly limited in Lion in some ways. (I don't agree with all your complaints. I'd like the idea of being able to just "space expose'" in addition to "all expose'" if I were using spaces.) I do not agree that spaces + expose' is inherently better than just using expose' even with a complex work flow and/or a large number of open apps and that people who do not use spaces would use spaces if only they understood the Right Way to use spaces.
eeyoredragon's argument in a nutshell :
Simple way to find out. I have the following open as a pretty standard workload of apps:
23 safari windows
15 chrome windows
5 open office documents
6 text docs
6 finder windows
evernote
netbeans IDE
Dreamweaver
Photoshop
Mail
VMWare fusion
Skype
SPACES + EXPOSE
In the 6 spaces I have running the finder windows containing images, the text docs listing changes needed and photoshop are in one space. The others are similarly logically grouped into other spaces. Expose spreads things out nicely to get at them. So far so good.
JUST EXPOSE
Now kill spaces and see the horror of 62 windows on one screen and scream, then spread out the randomly organised pile with expose to the size of microdots.
Simple way to find out. I have the following open as a pretty standard workload of apps:
23 safari windows
15 chrome windows
5 open office documents
6 text docs
6 finder windows
evernote
netbeans IDE
Dreamweaver
Photoshop
VMWare fusion
Skype
SPACES + EXPOSE
In the 6 spaces I have running the finder windows containing images, the text docs listing changes needed and photoshop are in one space. The others are similarly logically grouped into other spaces. Expose spreads things out nicely to get at them. So far so good.
JUST EXPOSE
Now kill spaces and see the horror of 62 windows on one screen and scream, then spread out the randomly organised pile with expose to the size of microdots.
That is a great way of putting it, thank you!
Hopefully someone will make a good copy of it, and soon!
I agree. People need to submit this so Apple knows. I did it myself already.
It was a simple yes or no question.
Sure, user preference can be a factor. But it is a fact that there are many people out there who didn't use it BECAUSE they did not understand it and not that they understood it and just didn't prefer it. Once again, I feel like I have to repeat myself so many times for you, I have talked to so many people about how they feel about Spaces and everyone has said they didn't use it because they didn't understand it. And when they see me using it with all of my apps, they see it as too complex for them.
You're getting a little off here. I didn't mention spaces even once in that quote. If you would maybe pay a bit more attention then you would have noticed that I was saying examples as to why I think, just my opinion here, Apple does not care as much about the pro market as they once did.
And when I hear someone mention "Pro", sometimes the word "advanced" can go with it. I think that those with complex and advanced workflows can really benefit from spaces.
Again, no I don't
"You sound kinda arrogant..."
"I'm not trying to sound arrogant. I'm just saying if people aren't using spaces, they either aren't advanced users or don't understand spaces."
"Right... that's pretty arrogant..."
I just looked back and didn't find that quote of me anywhere. So either I just missed it, or you made it up. If I just missed it, let me know which comment number it is. Otherwise, I will not respond to a fake quote.
Haha, I think it's pretty obvious from all the other commenters that I'm not the only one
Again with putting words in my mouth. I never used the word "silly" even once. And once again, it is obvious that there are many other people who implemented it into their workflow and are extremely disappointed that the Spaces/Exposé combo is now gone.
My example was with organizing 3 apps into a space. I don't see how going and clicking on each icon individually would in any way be faster than one single keystroke to get to all those apps laid out perfectly.
And not everyone uses a lot of applications at once. But I would not consider those who do use 18 apps at once laid out perfectly like that using spaces for better productivity would be a more advanced user than someone who just uses a safari window and iTunes.
By answering no, you are saying that clicking each of the 3 apps individually or doing command-tab for each app is faster than doing one single keystroke to get to all of the apps laid out. There is something wrong with you. Explain to me exactly why you think that clicking each one individually would be faster.
I already gave one, but apparently you didn't understand it all too well
It isn't all that and a bag of chips for everyone, because not everyone even understands it. For those that do understand it, they can make use of its features to speed up their workflow. That is what I have been saying this whole time. And Spaces is limited in Lion!!! Haha, I think someone needs to go read the first post again
By capitalizing "Right Way" you are saying it in a totally different way than I was and ignoring context, almost putting words in my mouth... again. Obviously many other people agree than the combo is better than exposé by itself. People have different workflows when it comes to Spaces too, so they have their own way of using it. But I don't understand why you think just clicking the icons for multiple apps or using Exposé to get to them is faster than a single keystroke. You have not explained why you think that even a little.
Great explanation. Some people need to read it.
Haha, I think it's pretty obvious from all the other commenters that I'm not the only one
You've still got my vote for most arrogant.
These forums are a place to share opinions, not a popularity contest.
Enough, already. You have your way of doing things and others have theirs.
If Lion is not up to your demanding standards, save yourself $30 and go back to Snow Leopard.
Everyone absolutely has their own workflow, and as a pretty hardcore supporter of the old Spaces, I still think it's the better way to work, but that's just me.
As I previously posted, I've found a workable solution for Lion's "Mission Control", but as decent as it is, it's still not "Spaces".
I do hope Apple gets enough bad feedback (I've certainly contributed several of my own), they might actually give us the *option* (rare, I know) of using either Spaces/Dock Exposé OR Mission Control - unless they literally rewrote the whole thing, which is kinda how it looks now...
As I previously posted, I've found a workable solution for Lion's "Mission Control", but as decent as it is, it's still not "Spaces".
I do hope Apple gets enough bad feedback (I've certainly contributed several of my own), they might actually give us the *option* (rare, I know) of using either Spaces/Dock Exposé OR Mission Control - unless they literally rewrote the whole thing, which is kinda how it looks now...
I'm tending to agree that it might be a rewrite issue. I also don't happen to think Apple is going to offer any "options" for the old ways regardless. For better or worse (depending on your preferences), this is the way they are taking things.
You will, however, undoubtedly get your desired third party apps to restore/emulate some of the old functionality if there is enough demand.
You've still got my vote for most arrogant.
These forums are a place to share opinions, not a popularity contest.
Enough, already. You have your way of doing things and others have theirs.
If Lion is not up to your demanding standards, save yourself $30 and go back to Snow Leopard.
Never said it was a popularity contest, but I have stated that this is my opinion multiple times on here.
I have also said people work differently.
And I have said that I already went back to SL.
To illustrate the point...on what planet is what you see in the attached screenshot good window management? This is nine Safari windows in Mission Control (to get it like this, open Mission Control, then do a scroll gesture over a stack of windows to spread them out). Windows overlap each other--some are almost entirely obscured. While this may seem contrived, I end up with this many windows open in one app quite frequently.
EDIT: Yes, I know about tabs. I use them all the time. This is just to illustrate the point.
Attachments
Last edited: