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
this is the first one I've found that even begins to revive this NECESSARY PRO FUNCTIONALITY
http://pennysmalls.com/change-space-grows-up
**************************************************
How has there not been a more robust solution yet? There's money to be made for an app that replaces mission control.
I often use a 4x3 spaces grid (12 Virtualdesktops on a multi monitor setup), with a number of apps (2d/3d/video/programing/appDev) and windows open, on a daily basis, and have intentionally not installed Lion on the OSX desktop just to retain this functionality. IMO to a pro user, even 1 click is a wasted click. I use xgestures, controllermate, an 11 button mouse, a g13, extended kb, and am planning on adding an emotiv epoc at some point possibly, not counting the bevy of other BG utils/apps that give me the fastest/most productive workflow I've ever seen/created (this side of linux). with controllermate + xgestures (gestures and multi button chording) my mouse alone has around 50 commands, some changing on an app-specific basis. And for anyone who dont know how the FCP debacle played out, you might not be aware of just how big these types of issues are for "pro users"; see the MP refresh timelines.... All this being said, with 10.7.3, it looks like we might get some (non netkas) graphics drives for cards not already obsolete, we'll see. That does nothing to remedy this "issue" though.
Until this area of Lion is filled by a 3rd party, or fixed by Apple, its SL time for me on the cpu's that have to actually be productive. No disrespect meant to anyone who isn't missing these features, this post is for the users that know what Lion is missing in this area. Lets encourage the Penny Smalls developer to continue fleshing out Change Space, link above.
http://pennysmalls.com/change-space-grows-up
**************************************************
How has there not been a more robust solution yet? There's money to be made for an app that replaces mission control.
I often use a 4x3 spaces grid (12 Virtualdesktops on a multi monitor setup), with a number of apps (2d/3d/video/programing/appDev) and windows open, on a daily basis, and have intentionally not installed Lion on the OSX desktop just to retain this functionality. IMO to a pro user, even 1 click is a wasted click. I use xgestures, controllermate, an 11 button mouse, a g13, extended kb, and am planning on adding an emotiv epoc at some point possibly, not counting the bevy of other BG utils/apps that give me the fastest/most productive workflow I've ever seen/created (this side of linux). with controllermate + xgestures (gestures and multi button chording) my mouse alone has around 50 commands, some changing on an app-specific basis. And for anyone who dont know how the FCP debacle played out, you might not be aware of just how big these types of issues are for "pro users"; see the MP refresh timelines.... All this being said, with 10.7.3, it looks like we might get some (non netkas) graphics drives for cards not already obsolete, we'll see. That does nothing to remedy this "issue" though.
Until this area of Lion is filled by a 3rd party, or fixed by Apple, its SL time for me on the cpu's that have to actually be productive. No disrespect meant to anyone who isn't missing these features, this post is for the users that know what Lion is missing in this area. Lets encourage the Penny Smalls developer to continue fleshing out Change Space, link above.
Mission Control is the Software version of No Firewire Macbooks!!!
Mission Control is the Software version of No Firewire Macbooks!!!
That's right, the title says it all.
Like many others, I've used the feedback site on apple.com to registrar my complaint and to inform them that I will not be upgrading unless or until as solution is found.
I've been a user of ProApps for sometime before Expose and Spaces. Those who've used music production/editing and video software instantly understood the value of such concepts because they've been apart of ProApps for some time. When the concept was expanded to the rest of OSX and increased work flow not only in terms of 'efficiency' but productivity and well.....sanity.
This has been replaced with a reasoning that says "a pile for everything and everything in its pile".
The idea behind Mission Control really screams of someone who doesn't understand how to simplify work flow.
While I don't make heavy use of Spaces, I cannot live with out Expose. And no App Expose doesn't cut it. Not by a long shot.
All windows means, ALL WINDOWS!! Not all windows that belong to Firefox, or all windows belonging to an single window app or windows that are not minimized or hidden. Dear Lord, Im getting angrier just typing this.
Don't get me started on dashboard.......
That's gone from a quick glance at the Dashboard to taking your seat belt off while driving to look behind you in the backseat!
I think the only way for Apple to quietly reconsider Spaces and Expose is to keep threads like this one up (like the Firewire mess) and hopefully the other Mac bloggers will keep the discussion and disgruntlement alive.
Mission Control is the Software version of No Firewire Macbooks!!!
That's right, the title says it all.
Like many others, I've used the feedback site on apple.com to registrar my complaint and to inform them that I will not be upgrading unless or until as solution is found.
I've been a user of ProApps for sometime before Expose and Spaces. Those who've used music production/editing and video software instantly understood the value of such concepts because they've been apart of ProApps for some time. When the concept was expanded to the rest of OSX and increased work flow not only in terms of 'efficiency' but productivity and well.....sanity.
This has been replaced with a reasoning that says "a pile for everything and everything in its pile".
The idea behind Mission Control really screams of someone who doesn't understand how to simplify work flow.
While I don't make heavy use of Spaces, I cannot live with out Expose. And no App Expose doesn't cut it. Not by a long shot.
All windows means, ALL WINDOWS!! Not all windows that belong to Firefox, or all windows belonging to an single window app or windows that are not minimized or hidden. Dear Lord, Im getting angrier just typing this.
Don't get me started on dashboard.......
That's gone from a quick glance at the Dashboard to taking your seat belt off while driving to look behind you in the backseat!
I think the only way for Apple to quietly reconsider Spaces and Expose is to keep threads like this one up (like the Firewire mess) and hopefully the other Mac bloggers will keep the discussion and disgruntlement alive.
Well, Tiger does not show all windows in Expose, Leopard does not show all windows in Expose, Snow Leopard does not show all windows in Expose and Lion does not show all Windows in Expose (Mission Control). It has never ever showed all windows because the display/resolution is the limiting factor in it. If they were to put all windows up they would get unbelievably small and become absolutely useless. The way they got around it is by limiting the amount of windows you get to see. Mission Control works around that workaround by grouping the windows on an application level. You can get to all of the windows in the group by simply hoovering on top of it and then scroll. In theory this way of doing things gives you more windows in expose than the previous way of doing it.
The only problem is that you need an additional step and this can become very annoying for people that don't have that many windows open. People who do will most likely find it more useful because it makes their workflow easier (better overview of the windows).
There has gone lots of thought into Mission Control and it works well but only for certain workflows. And that's the moral of the story: it will work the treat for some, it will be annoying as hell for others, some will have mixed feelings, etc. It comes down to personal preference but that does not mean that things are not thought out (well) or people are idiots. I think it would help tremendously if the grouping by app would be an option in the system preferences. People who don't have that many windows will benefit from unsetting this option.
For spaces the same applies. It works for certain workflows but not for all. I think they only need to get the preferences we had in 10.5 and 10.6 back: presetting the amount of spaces and presetting in which space an app should open.
I like the fact that Mission Control now shows the windows in the active desktop as well as all the other desktops and the fullscreen apps with a relatively easy way of switching between them (ctrl arrows, or the mouse). It gives a better overview but it does need some little tweaks. We've seen Apple tweaking it with the 10.7 updates so there is still hope
The Dashboard rant only shows your own incompetence. The default is to assign a special space for Dashboard but in the system preferences you can easily turn that off to make it work like it does in 10.4, 10.5 and 10.6 (which is what I've done). There have been no other changes to Dashboard.
The only problem is that you need an additional step and this can become very annoying for people that don't have that many windows open. People who do will most likely find it more useful because it makes their workflow easier (better overview of the windows).
There has gone lots of thought into Mission Control and it works well but only for certain workflows. And that's the moral of the story: it will work the treat for some, it will be annoying as hell for others, some will have mixed feelings, etc. It comes down to personal preference but that does not mean that things are not thought out (well) or people are idiots. I think it would help tremendously if the grouping by app would be an option in the system preferences. People who don't have that many windows will benefit from unsetting this option.
For spaces the same applies. It works for certain workflows but not for all. I think they only need to get the preferences we had in 10.5 and 10.6 back: presetting the amount of spaces and presetting in which space an app should open.
I like the fact that Mission Control now shows the windows in the active desktop as well as all the other desktops and the fullscreen apps with a relatively easy way of switching between them (ctrl arrows, or the mouse). It gives a better overview but it does need some little tweaks. We've seen Apple tweaking it with the 10.7 updates so there is still hope
The Dashboard rant only shows your own incompetence. The default is to assign a special space for Dashboard but in the system preferences you can easily turn that off to make it work like it does in 10.4, 10.5 and 10.6 (which is what I've done). There have been no other changes to Dashboard.
Another 6 months old thread brought back from the dead, to hear the same complaints over and over again.
Then why did Mission Control simplify my work flow ?
Then why did Mission Control simplify my work flow ?
Well, Tiger does not show all windows in Expose, Leopard does not show all windows in Expose, Snow Leopard does not show all windows in Expose and Lion does not show all Windows in Expose (Mission Control). It has never ever showed all windows because the display/resolution is the limiting factor in it. If they were to put all windows up they would get unbelievably small and become absolutely useless. The way they got around it is by limiting the amount of windows you get to see. Mission Control works around that workaround by grouping the windows on an application level. You can get to all of the windows in the group by simply hoovering on top of it and then scroll. In theory this way of doing things gives you more windows in expose than the previous way of doing it.
The only problem is that you need an additional step and this can become very annoying for people that don't have that many windows open. People who do will most likely find it more useful because it makes their workflow easier (better overview of the windows).
There has gone lots of thought into Mission Control and it works well but only for certain workflows. And that's the moral of the story: it will work the treat for some, it will be annoying as hell for others, some will have mixed feelings, etc. It comes down to personal preference but that does not mean that things are not thought out (well) or people are idiots. I think it would help tremendously if the grouping by app would be an option in the system preferences. People who don't have that many windows will benefit from unsetting this option.
For spaces the same applies. It works for certain workflows but not for all. I think they only need to get the preferences we had in 10.5 and 10.6 back: presetting the amount of spaces and presetting in which space an app should open.
I like the fact that Mission Control now shows the windows in the active desktop as well as all the other desktops and the fullscreen apps with a relatively easy way of switching between them (ctrl arrows, or the mouse). It gives a better overview but it does need some little tweaks. We've seen Apple tweaking it with the 10.7 updates so there is still hope
The Dashboard rant only shows your own incompetence. The default is to assign a special space for Dashboard but in the system preferences you can easily turn that off to make it work like it does in 10.4, 10.5 and 10.6 (which is what I've done). There have been no other changes to Dashboard.
What version of Snow Leopard (or Tiger, Leopard) were you running that it didn't display all windows? They don't "limit the number of windows you can see".
See here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/burnflare/2387682004/
My comment was directed toward the idea behind the design, not the difficulty in changing it. If MC works well for you, congratulations. As others have pointed out, either you don't understand the complaint's or you're being obtuse in defending MC.
Like the now infamous FW removal from the Macbook line, there are many who didn't use FW to begin with, and therefore didn't miss it. For those who had no shortage of FW devices (where USB wasn't an option) the idea of dismissing it as a "minor annoyance" was unreal.
The complaints are all the same. MC should have been added as an additional set of options and not a replacement for Spaces+Expose.
Now that I think of it, you can add the FCX fiasco to this tell as well.
Another 6 months old thread brought back from the dead, to hear the same complaints over and over again.
Then why did Mission Control simplify my work flow ?
Damn right!
Im not talking about going from QT7 to QTX (where there was alot of complaints from people who didn't know QT7 was moved to the Utilites folder). This is introducing something good in the way of behavior and then replacing it with a different set of behaviors without any option and little warning (Hello FCX).
All of them.
150 apps opened but less than 100 windows in that screenshot. Like I said it does not show all windows only a certain amount of it (whatever fits on the screen, there is a minimal window size and this is the reason why it is limited).
I've been doing lots of tests with my Macs since 2006 (Tiger) by opening all my applications. Tiger, Leopard, Snow Leopard and Lion have never ever been able to display all the windows. There were quite a lot of apps with windows that were not in the Expose overview. I had to cmd-tab or click their dock icon to get to them. This is when I first noticed it and I tried to experiment with that. Got the same results over and over again from 10.4 to 10.7.2. It makes sense because there are limits to window sizes and to what your physical screen is able to display. The latter is simply physics. Am I the only one? Hell no! This complaining about Expose in 10.7 isn't new, there is another thread about a previous OS X version with people wanting the 10.4 version. Know why they want that one? Because it doesn't line out the windows on a grid, it doesn't make every windows as big as the other but most of all, it shows more windows.
Try before you even attempt to discuss things like these first. And please do count the windows you see and check if all of them are there like I did
The only one not understanding things would be you (and the ones saying Expose shows all windows because they never actually tested it unlike me). I've explained that MC is thought out and it works well for certain workflows but not all of them. Apparently your workflow would be part of the latter, mine would be somewhere in between because the window grouping only works for me when the windows have 1 window or I'm only looking for the front most window of the application. When I'm looking for one further down the line I have to scroll on the app group to reveal all the windows and pick the right one. Ads a little bit more to my workflow. On the other hand the grouping is nice when you have a gazillion windows like on previous screenshot. You can at least differentiate between apps and get to the front most windows. So maybe it would even be better to do something like MS Windows XP does with the taskbar entries: it only groups them when the taskbar is full -> Expose only grouping windows when there are too many to display properly. For me that would be the ideal set up, maybe for some others too.
This is one of the biggest misunderstandings and I have no idea where that comes from. Mission Control has NOT replaced spaces and Expose and is NOT a replacement for them. Mission Control is merely a new overview that COMBINES Expose, Spaces AND fullscreen apps. The problem people have with that are aimed at how Expose in Mission Control shows the windows (it is grouped per app which is not settable like in MS Windows) and how Spaces are implemented throughout OS X (not just limiting to Mission Control!). And yes, like I said in my previous post it would have been better if Apple provided options for these. Mission Control itself is fine (= the idea of combining stuff into 1 overview), the new Spaces is not and the windows grouping should be a user setting.
Last edited:
Another 6 months old thread brought back from the dead, to hear the same complaints over and over again.
Then why did Mission Control simplify my work flow ?
Yet you complain about complaints and contribute to an old thread you think shouldn't even be here. How does that make you any better? It doesn't. Not even close.
Why did it make mine slower? Because it is took out the more advanced and professional qualities that were in Snow Leopard.
Some people could not grasp the more advanced features. But that does not mean all people could not grasp them. Thus they should have left those advanced features in Lion for people that understood them and were able to utilize them to increase workflow.
Plain and simple, thank you.
Lion's "All windows" does not even come close. Try opening up 3 finder windows in Lion and go into mission control. Then open 3 finder windows in SL and go into Exposé. Huge difference.
I was hoping someone would've come up with a tweak for this by now. Apparently not. I wish minimally, when in MC, it would show which desktop the windows were in.
Folks that don't have a zillion Safari windows open 24/7... I think they don't understand the problems.
I wish minimally, when in MC, it would show which desktop the windows were in. Folks that don't have a zillion Safari windows open 24/7... I think they don't understand the problems.
I was hoping someone would've come up with a tweak for this by now. Apparently not.
Folks that don't have a zillion Safari windows open 24/7... I think they don't understand the problems.
They definitely do not. My workflow consists of at least 6 windows inside of Maya at any time in addition to many of my textures in Photoshop and reference images in Preview. MC is a big step backwards.
What makes your workflow more professional than mine ? What makes those qualities more professional ?
I use my Mac for my job. The new Lion features made my job go faster. Hence Snow Leopard's qualities weren't more professional.
You make the mistake of thinking Snow Leopard is superior. I know it's just different.
When did I say mine was more professional? Not once. All I said is that Lion took out the more advanced and professional features that was in Snow Leopard. You have to be blind not to see that. Apple even advertises Lion as being the best of the iPad on the Mac. That is a great example of them dumbing down their OS.
What makes those qualities more advanced and professional is the flexibility and power behind those features. Mission Control is a dumbed down version of Exposé and Spaces for people that could not understand them or effectively use them together. The combination of those two and hot corners inside of Snow Leopard made OS X the powerful and unique OS that it was. You could easily see all of your windows in a space at one time. You cannot do that on Lion. Not even if you have 2 Finder windows! One will get cut off. Any application that has more than 1 windows open will not be full seen in MC. It is absolutely awful. Tell me, if you are looking for a specific window in a space with 20 windows open, how will not being able to see the window speed up your workflow? It won't. What will speed it up is being able to see every window you have open at any given time. Not to mention you could activate Exposé inside of spaces so that you could see all windows on all spaces! You can't even do that with 2 spaces in MC! You have to manually switch through them which takes time and slows you down. You are 100% wrong. Mission Control is slower than the combination of Exposé and Spaces in Snow Leopard.
Now the combination was not an easy thing to grasp for most people. Which is why I completely understand Apple dumbing it down and making it more user friendly for people who were not able to understand it.
MC making your workflow go faster proves that either did not use Exposé and Spaces or that you simply did not understand it. There is no problem with that as most people did not understand it, which is why Apple dumbed it down for the larger portion of their consumers.
It is superior. Maybe you should go read the first post on this thread and that will shed some light on your ignorance. But again, there is no problem with using MC as it is now easier for people to understand. And if it makes your workflow faster, then by all means use it
But do not judge those who were able to work even faster because of Exposé and Spaces. And do not assume things that are not true.And let me tell you something, Lion features making your job faster ≠ Snow Leopard features being less professional. If you want to play the faulty logic game then I will use it right back against you and say that Mission Control slowed down my work flow, hence Lion's features are for stupid people who cannot understand more advanced features. Now obviously that statement is false and I do not believe it at all, I am just using it to show you that you are using faulty logic.
Hahahahahaha this made me laugh. I find it funny when people judge other people by their complaints when they are complaining themselves. Has it ever dawned on them that they are complaining about complaints? My view is to just let people work how they want to work. But Lion took that away for many people.I love how you go to all the Mission Control threads and judge others' workflows
I love how you go to all the Mission Control threads and judge others' workflows
I don't, I come to Mission Control threads because I like using it and want to help others in learning about it. I bump into the same old 6 months old complaints everytime.
And these people have the gal to judge my workflow, telling me it's not "professional". Because if I listen to them, "all professionals don't like Mission Control".
----------
You just did it again. Are you claiming that my job is not professional enough that I didn't notice these "professional" features ?
There's nothing "professional" about the features you're talking about, they're just features of Apple's virtual desktop and application/window switching implementations. They're now different, not less professional.
Professional is quite the wrong qualifier. I dunno why people on Macrumors need to always go back to it.
Not only are you wrong in every single way, but you also have problems reading what people are saying. I suggest you understand a comment before replying to it. And everything you have just said I have already answered and responded to in my previous posts. Maybe you should read over them a few more times to help you understand them.
There is no point arguing with him, he either doesn't get it or (most likely) pretends not to. I don't know which is worse. Just add him to your ignore list like I have. =)
I'm sorry, you quite didn't. You offered a subjective opinion about the features, but you failed to objectively qualify them so we can rank them "professional" or not. While you may have liked them, if they can't be fit in the new paradigm, then the new paradigm would've broke.
And really, we're stretching hairs here. Lion, Snow Leopard, both have very primitive implementations of virtual desktops. "Professional" features ? Please. There's nothing "professional" there where a home user doesn't need it, but some guy working a job does (that's what professional means).
Enlightenment has Virtual Desktops and Areas. You could have a grid of unlimited areas, in a square, in a rectangle, and then you could have virtual desktops on top of that, where you had 1, 2, 3, 10 "grids". You could change the wallpaper of virtual desktops so they're different. You could switch between them and slide apps into them by overlapping the virtual desktops, using a top bar to "open" the layers underneath. You could scroll areas by moving the cursor as you would into a 2nd monitor. Heck, you have pager utilities that showed you everything, either as a sort of map with squares or even a full thumbnail of every area/desktop you have. You can place them anywhere in your background and even use them to navigate.
It is multi-monitor support for single monitors essentially, with powerful virtual desktops on top of it. And you know when all of this was and on what hardware it ran ?
This was 1998. It ran on a friggin Pentium with 32 MB of RAM and a 4 MB video card. Rasterman and Mandrake might not have been Apple or Microsoft and their code was quite sloppy, but it was darn fast and efficient.
So really, people being pissed off at "All windows expose" and declaring Mission Control a failure for switching from a "tons of visual scanning" to a more organized paradigm (because yes, subjectively, I think Mission Control is better organized with more emphasis on going where you want, rather than Snow Leopard's "visually scanning and trying to find what you want" way) is really laughable to me.
I find Mission Control better than the old Spaces/Expose. It's useful to me now, way more organized for my personal and professional workflow. However, both are light years behind stuff I've tried before on Linux.
Say I have 10 Safari windows in Desktop 1, 15 in desktop 2, 8 in desktop 3, 20 in desktop 4.
If I say 'show all windows', it does just that. And in no order. I see all windows from all desktops. What desktop are they in? It should say or separate them per desktop in 'show all windows' view.
Also, If I'm working in Desktop 4 with 20 safari windows, I can't see the windows. If I hit Mission Control (because 'show all windows' is useless).... Then they are all in a 'pile' that can be spread to help a 'bit' but is also useless.
I just want to see my Safari windows LOL
If I say 'show all windows', it does just that. And in no order. I see all windows from all desktops. What desktop are they in? It should say or separate them per desktop in 'show all windows' view.
Also, If I'm working in Desktop 4 with 20 safari windows, I can't see the windows. If I hit Mission Control (because 'show all windows' is useless).... Then they are all in a 'pile' that can be spread to help a 'bit' but is also useless.
I just want to see my Safari windows LOL
I'm (not really)wondering if anyone who continues to post in this thread about how great or competent iMissionControl is, ALSO runs a dual or triple monitor setup. If you haven't/don't, you imo really havent seen what a fail MC is, compared to SL expose/spaces (or kwin). I'm not going to go over the litany of issues with using more than one monitor on MC, compared to SL or KWin on Linux. One is productive and mostly works, the other does not at all(by comparison). IMO, anyone who has/does not run a dual/triple monitor setup doesnt have a reference point for the drastic fails in MC. Why waste your time posting, if you've never even exercised espose/spaces or kwin. iMissionControl BREAKS a dual/triple monitor workflow in a number of ways. If you use a single monitor/display, maybe MC works for you, I'd still prefer SL/KWin, but I can see how you could say MC works on a single display setup; this however is a totally different story on dual+ monitor setups.
I'm glad that iMissionControl works for you, I would feel better about my iLion purchase if I could say the same, but I cant, given my workflow. Apple knows how to go in a more "pro" direction, look at the new xcode 4, its not an iOS app, its a "pro" app, with an ever more "pro" interface than xcode3, unlike the "fail" that FCPX was(just look at the percentage of 1star reviews in the appstore). (like the great new features added to xcode 4, a "pro" app that got more robust functionality, not less in the iLion upgrade).
I dont personally know a single dual/triple-monitor OSX user that enjoys using iLion, but then again, this thread is titled "Mission Control Replacement?", so we're here to find/create solutions; hopefully before more people revert back to SL, like me, or just leave the mac platform(reluctantly). I've used Apple, every version of the os since around MacOS 6, and, for my particular workflow, I'm likely going to attempt a switch to Linux if 10.8 goes(and it likely will) any moreso into an iOS direction for the operating system, which is great for their shareholders/marketshare & some/many users, but not for users that have, um how can I put this without offending, a "complex" workflow (flame on ;-).
oh joy, I cant wait until a 2gig+ PSD file is autosaved in 10.8 ;-)
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/os_x_lion_is_auto_save_a_savior_or_nightmare/
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3195261?start=0&tstart=0
I dont personally know a single dual/triple-monitor OSX user that enjoys using iLion, but then again, this thread is titled "Mission Control Replacement?", so we're here to find/create solutions; hopefully before more people revert back to SL, like me, or just leave the mac platform(reluctantly). I've used Apple, every version of the os since around MacOS 6, and, for my particular workflow, I'm likely going to attempt a switch to Linux if 10.8 goes(and it likely will) any moreso into an iOS direction for the operating system, which is great for their shareholders/marketshare & some/many users, but not for users that have, um how can I put this without offending, a "complex" workflow (flame on ;-).
oh joy, I cant wait until a 2gig+ PSD file is autosaved in 10.8 ;-)
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/os_x_lion_is_auto_save_a_savior_or_nightmare/
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3195261?start=0&tstart=0
Last edited:
Really ? Because frankly I much preferred XCode 3's interface to XCode 4's. Guess I'm just used to multiple windows rather than tabs and with the options provided, there's just no way to get XCode 4 to replicate XCode 3's file opening patterns. I still haven't gotten my mojo quite back up to speed in XCode 4 as I had in XCode 3.
But frankly, but are awful compared to other IDEs out there so it's a toss really.