OK, fair enough. Although I doubt very much Apple will acquiesce and reenable the old Spaces and Exposé I hope for your sake that they do so as an option. It just may not be possible considering the rewritten code.
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
OK, fair enough. Although I doubt very much Apple will acquiesce and reenable the old Spaces and Exposé I hope for your sake that they do so as an option. It just may not be possible considering the rewritten code.
Here's an image of Spaces as I use it - I created all my different desktops (still wish I could rename them though...no word on that yet, is there?), and assigned D1 to Firefox/IM client, D2 is iTunes, etc...
Most of the ones in the middle are for just random apps as I need them. I keep a Terminal window open at the end (since I don't need it THAT often, but it's nice to have when I want it.)
It's just not as elegant as having a 3x3 grid...having to reach way over to the left or right, at the top edge of the screen.
So I have my scroll wheel button assigned to take me directly to MC, and I see this screen, click into whatever window I need, and it gets me there pretty quickly.
The thing that really had me worried about Spaces (before I had the chance to try Lion) was that I heard it was strictly linear - you could only pass from one space to the next, etc - basically, no random access, and if that had happened, I absolutely would NOT have upgraded.
So I hope someone eventually does make a Spaces replacement...I daresay they'd make a fair profit on people who like the old functionality.
Most of the ones in the middle are for just random apps as I need them. I keep a Terminal window open at the end (since I don't need it THAT often, but it's nice to have when I want it.)
It's just not as elegant as having a 3x3 grid...having to reach way over to the left or right, at the top edge of the screen.
So I have my scroll wheel button assigned to take me directly to MC, and I see this screen, click into whatever window I need, and it gets me there pretty quickly.
The thing that really had me worried about Spaces (before I had the chance to try Lion) was that I heard it was strictly linear - you could only pass from one space to the next, etc - basically, no random access, and if that had happened, I absolutely would NOT have upgraded.
So I hope someone eventually does make a Spaces replacement...I daresay they'd make a fair profit on people who like the old functionality.
Attachments
I always assumed the option for grid spacing in SL was a great response to the trend toward the more mobile sizes of [things like] the macbook air 11", i.e., the future, where phones, tvs, stereos, computers, and tablets merge into a pocket sized utopia of speed, mobility, and efficiency. my thinking was that the smaller the screens got, the more functionality we would get with managing our spaces. this is why I was so impressed by spaces - it perfectly addressed not only the shrinking spatial environments of the laptop universe, but also the more crowded multi-task work environment (where the need to spread tasks out effectively and easily is crucial).
I have a very specific workflow where I need up/down & linear flow, with certain programs assigned to certain spaces - that's why I don't work on an iPad, love it though I do.
So, but...
A question emerges:
Does anyone know why at the same time the world was trending toward smaller more mobile screens, and at the same time workflows were becoming more complicated, the spatial architecture for distributing tasks has become less functional? How could this ever have been allowed to happen at Apple, of all places. Have they become so fixated on iOS that it has clouded them to the far more complicated spatial requirements of the OSX work environment? Can anyone explain why they would willingly destroy the functionality of OSX?
Why can't the majority of people just admit that mission control, in its haste to move toward iPad/iPhone layouts, has destroyed the whole point of owning a non-mobile device?
I have a very specific workflow where I need up/down & linear flow, with certain programs assigned to certain spaces - that's why I don't work on an iPad, love it though I do.
So, but...
A question emerges:
Does anyone know why at the same time the world was trending toward smaller more mobile screens, and at the same time workflows were becoming more complicated, the spatial architecture for distributing tasks has become less functional? How could this ever have been allowed to happen at Apple, of all places. Have they become so fixated on iOS that it has clouded them to the far more complicated spatial requirements of the OSX work environment? Can anyone explain why they would willingly destroy the functionality of OSX?
Why can't the majority of people just admit that mission control, in its haste to move toward iPad/iPhone layouts, has destroyed the whole point of owning a non-mobile device?
Last edited:
Man, I miss expose + spaces so much. You are totally absolutely definetely right that nothing is more powerful than expose + spaces all together since it will allow me to jump directly to specific window of specific app on any specific space (desktop) with only 1 click, i.e. hit the spaces hot corner then move to expose hot corner then to the window that I want, then click ... boom, there I am.
And you are right too, I have found so many average Mac users that really do not know how to use space and expose properly and they would say that they are ok with their workflow but honestly, sometimes I lose my patient looking at them slowly moving from 1 window to another window. On the other hand, they do not know what I am doing when I was hitting space and expose hot corner then clicking on the specific windows that I want. But again, they never really learn how to use spaces + expose optimally and said to me that they are not in a hurry to move from 1 window to another window. Honestly, I still do not get why people do not want to learn a new good simple way (habit) in using spaces + expose combo.
But hey, I guess I am wrong and they are right since Apple take this "combo" out of lion and give us Mission Control that makes an average user say wow to mission control and its desktop for each "full screen" app.
I am still hoping that Apple would give us at least an option to have this combo back.
I just remember that once I read a story whenever Apple developed the 1st iPod menu. That story revealed that Jobs asked the developer team to reduce number of clicks to get on the songs that the user want to. The story said that Jobs did not want to have more than 3 clicks to get him the song he wanted.
Now, with Mission Control, we get more "clicks" than before (spaces + expose). Still wondering what reason behind this? Just for the sake of full screen app to have its own desktop (space)? Just to be able to swipe left and right just like iOS? It seems to me that Mission Control is more similar to the "rollodeck" model of task manager in windows vista. This rollodeck model requires us to roll one by one application until we get the app that we want to use. In Mission Control we swipe our desktop then we choose the app and then the windows. Or without Mission Control, we could click the app on the dock then choose the windows we want.
At least give me back my "all windows" option. I need that.
Now, with Mission Control, we get more "clicks" than before (spaces + expose). Still wondering what reason behind this? Just for the sake of full screen app to have its own desktop (space)? Just to be able to swipe left and right just like iOS?
It seems to me that Mission Control is more similar to the "rollodeck" model of task manager in windows vista. This rollodeck model requires us to roll one by one application until we get the app that we want to use. In Mission Control we swipe our desktop then we choose the app and then the windows. Or without Mission Control, we could click the app on the dock then choose the windows we want.At least give me back my "all windows" option. I need that.
Last edited:
There are times when you need to see more than one Safari window at the same time.
The main problem with the Expose part of MC is as illustrated in the screenshot, if there are lots of windows with the same program then it becomes impossible to use. I hope that a future bugfix will make them spread out like in the old Expose at least in application window view.
It's not like the old Expose was perfect. It tended to arbitrarily move windows around so on one go your window was there and the next it was somewhere else even though you hadn't opened any new apps or windows.
The lack of a grid and arranging fullscreen apps is the most glaring problem with MC's Spaces implementation, making it unnecessarily difficult to switch quickly. The poor multi-monitor support is also a big issue. I hope that they patch it so that if you fullscreen an app that is on one display it will be fullscreen only on that and not do anything to the other one.
IMO Spaces isn't some miracle workflow solution. I find it doesn't really make it much faster than simply having a whole pile of windows and using Expose to select the one you need. Spaces is good for organising your apps especially if you use several big programs like the Adobe CS or having certain windows visible at the same time. Fullscreen apps are generally only useful on laptops because they give limited display resolution some extra pixels for viewing content.
For handling application windows, I much prefer the Win7 way, which is also available for OSX using Hyperdock. Win7 offers a clear indicator for how many windows there are and thumbnail previews in an obvious location as opposed to OSX which has no indicator to tell if an app has any windows in the first place.
It's not like the old Expose was perfect. It tended to arbitrarily move windows around so on one go your window was there and the next it was somewhere else even though you hadn't opened any new apps or windows.
The lack of a grid and arranging fullscreen apps is the most glaring problem with MC's Spaces implementation, making it unnecessarily difficult to switch quickly. The poor multi-monitor support is also a big issue. I hope that they patch it so that if you fullscreen an app that is on one display it will be fullscreen only on that and not do anything to the other one.
IMO Spaces isn't some miracle workflow solution. I find it doesn't really make it much faster than simply having a whole pile of windows and using Expose to select the one you need. Spaces is good for organising your apps especially if you use several big programs like the Adobe CS or having certain windows visible at the same time. Fullscreen apps are generally only useful on laptops because they give limited display resolution some extra pixels for viewing content.
For handling application windows, I much prefer the Win7 way, which is also available for OSX using Hyperdock. Win7 offers a clear indicator for how many windows there are and thumbnail previews in an obvious location as opposed to OSX which has no indicator to tell if an app has any windows in the first place.
My whole point is that it is much faster to use a single keystroke to get to multiple windows than using Exposé to bring them all to the front. But if you only need one windows, then Spaces won't be much faster. But I still think a single keystroke is faster than enabling Exposé and then clicking on the window. It's faster, but not by much. Exposé in that case only has one extra step, which is clicking on the window itself.
I use hyperdock and I love it. What I really love about it is window snapping. But really, the window previews are much better using hyperdock than in windows 7. That is because is will show you the space it is in and if you click on the app icon, it will bring all of its windows to the front. But if you click on the icon in windows 7, you then have to click on one of the window previews. If you know how to click on the icon and have them all show up in windows 7, please tell me!
This thread has 4,300 views so far. If you want spaces back or a mission control that provides at least the same level of functionality, click the link and let apple know . A few thousand feedback reports will get noticed:
http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.html
. A few thousand feedback reports will get noticed:http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.html
Last edited:
This thread has 4,300 views so far. If you want spaces back or a mission control that provides at least the same level of functionality, click the link and let apple know
http://www.apple.com/Feedback
your link leads nowhere.
http://www.apple.com/feedback/
This thread has 4,300 views so far. If you want spaces back or a mission control that provides at least the same level of functionality, click the link and let apple know . A few thousand feedback reports will get noticed:
http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.html
http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.html
If you like Mission Control and think Spaces are just fine in Lion because you're able to think progressively and happen to enjoy the new implementation, click the link and let Apple know.
A few thousand notes of approval will get noticed.
http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.html[/QUOTE]
A few thousand notes of approval will get noticed.
http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.html[/QUOTE]
Sometimes people are so rude you just have to laugh
. You couldn't imagine people being this rude in person.Sometimes people are so rude you just have to laugh
If you're so confident in your position my post shouldn't matter.
Does the potential outcome worry you?
If you're afraid to roll the dice then let us know. Otherwise I'm allowed to do the exact same thing.
Good luck.
How does using a dumbed down version of Exposé/Spaces (Mission Control) mean you think progressively?
There's a lot of tech that could really use a similar "dumbing down."
The more the better.
An OS isn't the bridge of a nuclear sub. It's a way to quickly and easily get to your apps and documents.
Yes it does worry me.
I am confident in my statement that mission control has removed functionality that was in Spaces that I and other (mostly pro and techy users) came to rely on. I however am not confident that there are anywhere near enough of us to make a difference for apple to consider putting the functionality back in as an option. Most Apple customers just use whatever they are given.
Mission control is there because for the average consumer it puts things in a single place and forces them to use spaces where before it was only an option. Its goals are towards the average consumer and I can see where they are going with it.
What I am doing here is trying to get the people who liked the functionality of Spaces to let apple know they liked it. Apple will not get rid of mission control but with enough feedback they may improve it or add options for the functionality which was lost.
Your side of the argument is well won, Apple don't tend to listen and most people don't have such complex workflows that it matters. But give our side a chance, we don't want to spoil anyone else's party, we just want a few options to put the functionality back that was lost.
Especially when you can't name your virtual desktops.
'Desktop 3' really has a cool semantic, aint it?
So you want more software that slows things down, just like Mission Control when compared to the Spaces/Exposé combo. That makes sense.
And Spaces/Exposé let you get to those things quicker than Mission Control does.
However with apps, I prefer Alfred for opening mine.
Especially when you can't name your virtual desktops.
'Desktop 3' really has a cool semantic, aint it?
That's a Lion problem. With Spaces/Exposé, they never showed a name for each space when you saw your grid layout. Although I think it would have been interesting if they put the number for the space back in SL...
Still to me it's an utter FAIL to not allow user naming of a Space. It's missing details like that which make me relegate OS X more to the "kiddie bin" then a full professional OS.
Ya, Mission Control is missing a lot more than just being able to rename a space though.
Fortunately for me the iMac I upgraded to Lion on is my "testbed" for trying out all things Mac-related. No critical work gets done there, so I have time to figure out how to fix my Mouse settings for one thing.
I do use tabs. There just aren't any in that screen because I set that up to illustrate a point. But under normal circumstances, if I didn't use tabs I'd often have something like 25 open Safari windows.