You see, I can't tell you what I really think of you, because personal attacks are a violation of this site's terms which I and you agreed to.
/irony
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.
Video Shows Differences Between Mavericks and Mountain Lion Multiple Monitor Support
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You see, I can't tell you what I really think of you, because personal attacks are a violation of this site's terms which I and you agreed to.
/irony
Man i though Mac users were better than PC users, that is just not true it seems.
So as a couple of others have pointed out, the wallpaper image is a proxy for the fact that under ML the desktop acts as a singular entity where as in Mavericks they can be setup as independent.
Personally, I hope they keep it as a configurable setup as I can see the value in bot setups depending on the needs of the person using the system. As a long time multi screen user under Window, Linux and Mac OS X, I have found that Linux offered the widest options but they came with pros and cons.
X Windows runs an X server for each display and the default setup is they are all independent. This works ok but for a while it impeded my work flow because I really wanted more real estate. I then started using Xinerama in X Windows to merge the displays to get that real estate and it made thing a lot better (I also starting using large sized, at the time, wallpapers like 2560x1024 to keep things cohesive.)
Under OS X I have gotten used to the independent setup and since I use higher resolution displays it was not as big an issue. The full screen was a disappointment when I first played with it and it was basically a no go on my Mac Pro desktop. I had to wait for Parallels to do stuff to fullscreen without using the native support and things like that. I thought about why things were the way they were and came to the conclusion it was probably related to the X server equivalent in OS X. My thought was it would be great if they made them independent again such that everything worked in a separated fashion. That being said I only care about my use case but for those who run large multi display setups for post production work, design and stuff, I can see the value in the way the workflow would work and why it is good the way it is.
Final note: The options should be customizable and if the way it seem it is probably the only way (logging out will restart the X server in Linux and is probably the same here) do I hope it stays with those options.
So as a couple of others have pointed out, the wallpaper image is a proxy for the fact that under ML the desktop acts as a singular entity where as in Mavericks they can be setup as independent.
Personally, I hope they keep it as a configurable setup as I can see the value in bot setups depending on the needs of the person using the system. As a long time multi screen user under Window, Linux and Mac OS X, I have found that Linux offered the widest options but they came with pros and cons.
X Windows runs an X server for each display and the default setup is they are all independent. This works ok but for a while it impeded my work flow because I really wanted more real estate. I then started using Xinerama in X Windows to merge the displays to get that real estate and it made thing a lot better (I also starting using large sized, at the time, wallpapers like 2560x1024 to keep things cohesive.)
Under OS X I have gotten used to the independent setup and since I use higher resolution displays it was not as big an issue. The full screen was a disappointment when I first played with it and it was basically a no go on my Mac Pro desktop. I had to wait for Parallels to do stuff to fullscreen without using the native support and things like that. I thought about why things were the way they were and came to the conclusion it was probably related to the X server equivalent in OS X. My thought was it would be great if they made them independent again such that everything worked in a separated fashion. That being said I only care about my use case but for those who run large multi display setups for post production work, design and stuff, I can see the value in the way the workflow would work and why it is good the way it is.
Final note: The options should be customizable and if the way it seem it is probably the only way (logging out will restart the X server in Linux and is probably the same here) do I hope it stays with those options.
While I wouldn't mind the setup in the original post, for a screen of that size I'd probably use a big HDTV or an HD projector, but then I don't have huge resolution requirements, but I just hate the idea of having several screens with bezels in between.
While I'm pleased to see multi-monitor improvements, I can't help but feel that it should have been more like this sooner. The change to spaces sounds a bit annoying though; being able to switch monitor spaces individually is nice, but there should really be keyboard shortcuts or something for switching all screens at once, if that's how you happen to have set things up.
While I'm pleased to see multi-monitor improvements, I can't help but feel that it should have been more like this sooner. The change to spaces sounds a bit annoying though; being able to switch monitor spaces individually is nice, but there should really be keyboard shortcuts or something for switching all screens at once, if that's how you happen to have set things up.
Cool. If MacRumors wants to ban me or delete my post, they're free to. Go ahead and flag my post even. But good job addressing anything else I wrote.
FWIW, I deleted the personal attack on the previous post because I understand how words hurt others deeply and that is just plain inconsiderate.
Last edited:
So the OS has gone backwards?
You used to be able to have Applications spread across multiple screens. Have the art board on one screen, colour palettes on another tools on another.
It's not difficult, if they could do it in the early versions of OSX they sure as hell can do it now.
Ugh... they fix one problem (full screen app doesn't prevent other screens from being used) and introduce two more (no switching all monitors between spaces and no having windows that can span multiple monitors).
Guess I'll stick with the ML behavior and not use full screen apps like I do now.
So basically, every screen is it's own space now. Wonder how TotalSpaces will help to fix these problems.
Guess I'll stick with the ML behavior and not use full screen apps like I do now.
So basically, every screen is it's own space now. Wonder how TotalSpaces will help to fix these problems.
@Macrumors - This video is not at all useful for the person who is really looking for differences between two. I don't understand why he wants to stretch an application to another display. Whole point of having multiple displays is to do multiple things simultaneously on different screens, without having to minimize current application. And he wants to change all screens in one go and see single wallpaper spread across all displays? What a wired requirement. I'm sure most of us don't want that.
I am pretty sure that a single *window* can't span multiple screens but the limit is NOT to an application as a whole.
I have no intention of reporting you, nor am I angry. I appreciate your gesture and don't see any value in further discussion of this.
Or in the words of HAL "This discussion can serve no purpose any more."
Interesting side note: I run with Dell UltraSharp 24 displays, I dare some one to find me a TV that would an upgrade over one of these displays that does not cost 3k or more.
As far as I know the only upgraded TVs would be the 4k ones and they are several 1000s of dollars. For 2000 dollars I can get 4 24" displays running at 1920x1200 for a total resolution of 3840x2400.
A 40" or whatever display at 1920x1080 is really not a workable display (for me or probably anyone else who considers displays outside of what Best Buy sells for under 300/400 dollars.)
As far as I know the only upgraded TVs would be the 4k ones and they are several 1000s of dollars. For 2000 dollars I can get 4 24" displays running at 1920x1200 for a total resolution of 3840x2400.
A 40" or whatever display at 1920x1080 is really not a workable display (for me or probably anyone else who considers displays outside of what Best Buy sells for under 300/400 dollars.)
The new version is much better!!!
This guy obviously has some niche use that is not typical of how most users use multiple spaces. The Mavericks interation is much more lik the unix multiple desktops of old that are far superior to SL/L/ML spaces
This guy obviously has some niche use that is not typical of how most users use multiple spaces. The Mavericks interation is much more lik the unix multiple desktops of old that are far superior to SL/L/ML spaces
I use two externals (three monitors) and I love it. However, I don't use any of the capabilities like he is describing. He really needs to invest in a video wall system by matrox or something.
My question however is, say your using Photoshop, can you have some pallets on one screen and the image your editing on the other?
it is not better and even it is faster. You much more and from 10.7 and on you have much more better OpenGL and cpu usage. I can list like 100 features which are usefull to 90% of users in 10.7 and 10.8... but hey you're just trolling.
Whatever!
This dude must be rich. All those macbooks and ipads. Plus the monitors. He's got too much time and money on his hands.
This dude must be rich. All those macbooks and ipads. Plus the monitors. He's got too much time and money on his hands.
I agree that this model is likely better for the majority of users. Just hope that they leave he setting in to leave it how it is. I can live without full screen apps on my desktop. Just need efficient ways to switch between contexts (I often have Photoshop, Lightroom, Premier, After Effects, Firefox, and email open simultaneously. Many of them with multiple windows in the same space. Switching between spaces on individual monitors would be confusing. Long as there is a "classic" setting is there us niche users are good.
The below is a simple project in AE. Now think of there being a similar setup for Premier in another space, and Photoshop in another... Long as the option for having spaces span monitors is there, all is good.
Attachments
Never thought I'd hear 'snap' referred to as a decent tradeoff; one of the few things I really don't like about Windows 7/8, but hey, it can be turned off!! Cool eh
.I find reactions to this issue really odd; I can't see Apple giving options in this area, rather yet again they are just deciding "this is how you want to work; you don't need to see my ID, move along". The inability to spread windows between displays is just bizarre; development apps especially just scream out for this, and the same with Excel and plenty if others. Yes this is an improvement over Lion/ML, but still not nearly as good as SL, or just the most obvious approach. And yet all I hear here is "Apple knows best!" ><.
Or people will just use the option in Mavericks to make your spaces switch together. The guy who made the video did not try very hard. Maybe he should have spent 30 seconds in the preferences and a full 50% of the complaint would be gone.
----------
I think the secon screen dock pop-up is just flaky. I can't make it work at all right now.
I like that each display can be a different SPACE. That's briliant. All they need to do is add a modifer key or swipe gesture that allows you to once again move all screens to the same unified space, though. SO in one swipe you could reset all displays to SPACE 1, then keep swiping through to the next. But don't use the modiffer and once again you can switch just a single display to another SPACE.
Not tragic.
As for stretching apps accross multiple screens. It seems that would only make sense if all the screens were in the same SPACE. So that's something they could bring back specifially for that "mode."
Not tragic.
As for stretching apps accross multiple screens. It seems that would only make sense if all the screens were in the same SPACE. So that's something they could bring back specifially for that "mode."
I can tell you in DP1 safari is twice as snappy when compared to SL on the same hardware.
----------
Unless you go in preferences and turn it on. Turn it on by unchecking the box. Makes it work just like in ML. Screens switch together and windows span monitors. Maybe we can get MR to update their story with the fact that the guy who made the video did not even try very hard.
Last edited: