or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Road to Mac OS X Leopard: Spaces
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Road to Mac OS X Leopard: Spaces - Page 3

post #81 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy Brown View Post

Good old computers.

This was my first computer: an Amiga. I always thought it was called an Amiga 64, but apparently that is not the case.



Acorn computers were also mentioned in the last road to leopard, which we used in primary school.

Are you thinking of the Commodore 64 which came out before the Amiga? I had, as a child, a Commodore 64. Then my dad went all crazy and purchased a tape drive for it! Those were the days!! Mom would not allow an Amiga as she said computers were a fad! She can't live without her games now
[CENTER]Diana Rein
Putting the Soul back into Rock 'n Roll
[/CENTER]

[CENTER]"The Back Room"

Diana Rein Available on iTunes for $8[/CENTER]
Reply
[CENTER]Diana Rein
Putting the Soul back into Rock 'n Roll
[/CENTER]

[CENTER]"The Back Room"

Diana Rein Available on iTunes for $8[/CENTER]
Reply
post #82 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy Brown View Post

Then again, maybe i'm just jealous because my ATI graphics card in my macbook pro is not supported for beryl/what ever it's become now (not last time i checked), and thus cannot enjoy it when running ubuntu.

compiz-fusion works out of the box on my Macbook.
post #83 of 139
Spaces sure sounds good and will probably change the way I work.

At the same time I would like the option to put a menu bar on a secondary display. I find I have to perform actions in multiple applications more or less at the same time. Consider writing a user guide for an application. In order to do it well one has to flip back and forth constantly: perform action, write description of action, perform action, write description, take screenshot, paste into instructions, etc. This is more efficient with two physical screens than one, but there's always the problem of which one to put the menubar on. If you need a function that either doesn't have a keyboard shortcut or is one you haven't memorized, there may be a trip to the other display needed. It's one area where Windows is actually more efficient because there's a menubar at the top of every window.
post #84 of 139
These are really stupid questions (and they are most likely in the text as well):
  • Can a space have a full screen application in it, for example a full screen game or movie.
  • Can a users specify the contents of each space to run on a differt core, or will it do this on its own?
  • Can spaces be a differnt resolutions and still appear full screen when you switch between them. For example can one space be a 800x600 while another is 1024×768.
post #85 of 139
Windows XP supports multiple monitors, but it won't remember where those monitors are relative to each other. My Macs never had this problem.

For example, I have a laptop. At one office, my second monitor sits to the right of my laptop (due to lighting glare). At my other office, my second monitor sits to the left of my laptop. When I go from one to the other, Windows insists on putting the second monitor wherever it wants.

Also, when I switch from extended to mirroring and back, Windows forgets where the extended desktop was. Dumb.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #86 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by hugodrax View Post

Trust me you will not be doing that. Crtl arrows are so much more faster than moving a mouse to the edge of a screen to switch.

Forget what you think about virtual desktops as you are accustomed to in Unix etc.. Spaces is way better.

I have the best of both worlds on my mac book. If I hit the bottom or right edge and click then I rotate to the next screen, if I hit Alt and up or left then I rotate that way. I have VirtueDesktop setup as 4x4 and this works great.

It will be interesting to see what happens to Spaces when you unplug the monitor (think laptop and external monitor, not mirrored).
post #87 of 139
Nice article. Although not really in the same league, QNX had a desktop that allowed you to drag applications between machines.

So if you have an editor open on machine A you can drag it to machine B and the app would run there.

a brief overview of this is at: http://www.qnx.com/developers/docs/6...ch/photon.html

I really like the stuff that they did/do (I've been away from QNX for a couple years).


-- sorry for the interruption --
post #88 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpiddly View Post

These are really stupid questions (and they are most likely in the text as well):
  • Can a space have a full screen application in it, for example a full screen game or movie.

Well, full screen mode (where both the menubar and dock are hidden) is pretty undefined about what the expected behavior is for context switches (cmd-tab) even under Tiger. Spaces won't suddenly define that since there are different "right" answers. All these behaviors are possible (among others I'm sure):
  • Move back to windowed mode to save resources or to re-orient users.
  • Stay in full-screen mode.
  • Stay full screen but pop up a window explaining how to get out.
  • Lock into kiosk mode and try to stop all menubar, dock, and context switches.
All of these have their place but I'd say the first one is the most common today and will be what happens with most apps. Spaces does open up new user situations developers may not have expected so be understanding "What do you mean you want two different slideshows playing full screen at the same time? How can you watch both? Oh, right... Spaces." It's new interface territory; it's going to take time to evolve.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpiddly View Post

  • Can a users specify the contents of each space to run on a differt core, or will it do this on its own?

Spaces just manages virtual desktops. Something may happen under the hood, and OS X may juggle priorities if a space is swapped in or out, but there aren't direct settings to control processor or scheduling.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpiddly View Post

  • Can spaces be a differnt resolutions and still appear full screen when you switch between them. For example can one space be a 800x600 while another is 1024×768.

Leopard opens a whole new can of worms with the push toward resolution independence. Such preparations aren't clearly evident, but telling certain spaces to run in different resolutions doesn't seem to fit with that push.
post #89 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fawkes View Post

I must say that I am really enjoying these little history lessons along with the feature previews.

Thanks for putting the time into these interesting articles!

Yeh man, awesome
post #90 of 139
I'm looking forwards to spaces, because multiple desktop are imo the most efficient way of swapping between a lot of open applications. All the third party solutions like VirtueDesktops are riddled with problems maintaining the z-order and focusing of windows as you swap out, and then back to a desktop. Even the *nix multi desktop managers don't do this very well. I think there's a lot of room for this to "implemented better", hopefully Apple's version is that.
post #91 of 139
First off, I love the "Road to Leopard" Articles. I remember using Mac OS 6 and growing up with OS 8/9 and then fully converting once OS X came out. Its great to look back and see the difference between OS 6-9 and OS X, even to see the vast difference in 10.0 to 10.4 and now 10.5!

Secondly, Spaces is great. I've been muddling in the Leopard builds for a while now, and I absolutely adore Spaces. I've shown it to quite a few of my Windows-Biased friends and they have started looking at Macs as a viable option for their next computer.

Now saying that, I believe that Apple has a very potential gold mind on here. If they want to really stick the Windows users and get them directly on it, what they need to do is incorperate a Windows space into the operating system. I know Parallels has a similar feature, where you can flip flop between Mac and Windows, but this could be amazing.

A quick example before I hit the sack; Say you are working in, oh say photoshop in OS X. When suddenly your boss sends you a reference in the email, a small free-ware game. He wants you to design the magazine cover (or whatever it is) like the user interface of the game. Instead of having to boot up into Parallels (can't multitask, it sucks up majority of CPU and RAM, at least not enough to multitask Photoshop and Paralllels) or switch over to boot camp (closing down your PSD and making you reboot... timely)... you can just flip over to your Windows Space, navigate to the folder and run your little game and get what you need.


Its just a thought. I think it sounded better in my head, but then again Its about 3 am and I'm reading through appleinsider archives... Then again, maybe you'll see this implemented in 10.5.5
Powerbook G4 17" 1.0 GHz, 60 GB HD, 1GB RAM
Macbook Pro 17" 2.16 GHz, 100 GB 7200 RPM, 2 GB RAM
Soon: 30" Apple Cinema Display
Soon: Macbook Pro 17" Merom Full Specs.
Reply
Powerbook G4 17" 1.0 GHz, 60 GB HD, 1GB RAM
Macbook Pro 17" 2.16 GHz, 100 GB 7200 RPM, 2 GB RAM
Soon: 30" Apple Cinema Display
Soon: Macbook Pro 17" Merom Full Specs.
Reply
post #92 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabon View Post

With Windows, up until Windows XP you HAD to install the video drivers that came with your second video card that you installed. Without that multiple monitors didn't work.

With Mac OS (don't remember which version, all you had to do was install the second video card, no drivers, and connect it to the second monitor and ... it worked.

System 6.0, I believe, added multiple monitor support when the Mac ][ came out in 1989. The Mac ][ had 6 NuBus slots, all the same speed and all very fast slots for their day. Thus, you could easily stick 6 video cards in the machine and have it all "just work". At MacWorld Expos, the MacroMind VideoWorks booth always had a huge bank of monitors being driven off a Mac ][ (VideoWorks later became Macromedia Director and was then bought out by Adobe).

9 years later, Windows 98 did add rudimentary multiple monitor support. The problem was that while Apple handled all their video drivers, Windows depended on the video card suppliers working it out for themselves. To make matters worse, Intel-compatible hardware at the time had major problems with IRQ conflicts and slow expansion card standards (it wasn't uncommon even in the late 90's to have most of the slots being old ISA slots). This meant that despite any OS support, it was EXTREMELY hit-or-miss as to whether any two given video cards-- whether from the same manufacturer or not-- would work together. Even if they did, they almost never did hardware accelerated graphics correctly.

By 2000, though, video card makers started making video cards that had two video-out ports. Driving two monitors from a single card simplified the process enormously. Adding to that was the proliferation of autoconfiguring and and speedy of PCI expansion slots. Thus, within a relatively short time period after 2000, Windows started shaping up substantially on the multi-monitor support. I'd say XP is the first OS where Microsoft got it more or less "right".

At the same time, Apple has significantly reduced the Mac's capability for handling many video cards. Most PCI video cards don't work at all or don't work well on a Mac. Long gone are the Mac ][ days when you could fill a machine's slots with video cards. And while a Windows machine that supports SLI communication between multiple video cards is fairly commonplace, Apple has yet to release a machine with such support. So, alas, at this point the Mac has nothing to brag about in this area except to say "we did it first".
post #93 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy Brown View Post

Is this currently the case with spaces? Or is it a wish? If it is currently the case (which i imagine it is), can you also switch spaces by pinning your mouse alone to the edge of the screen?

Works now - its a great tip.
post #94 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Can you configure each space with a different desktop picture?

It doesn't really work that way. There's one desktop, one menu bar, and one Dock. Switching spaces just slides all the windows off and replaces them with another set. You don't really move from one desktop to another.
post #95 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianus View Post

No, it would not be chaotic. And what are the perils?



Tiger wasn't. We are not discussing "the OS" that's currently in production, we're discussing an OS that hasn't even been released yet, and which the vast majority of us have access to only through rumor and screenshots. It has not been clear how Leopard would deal with this issue except to those lucky enough to have Developer builds.



Multiple inputs are a whole 'nother thing. I'm only talking about having Spaces assigned to different displays. They already have mirroring and extended desktop; Spaces support would have been the third option. I'd point out that some form of integration between Spaces and multiple monitors was promised early on -- and this is far from that. This is more like Parallels' "support" for multiple monitors, which is really nothing more than tricking Windows into thinking its display is extra wide.



Wow..so many unnecessary, obnoxious and presumptuous comments in a single paragraph! Firstly -- I did not buy a second display; I have considered buying an MBP and Cinema Display, but will now have to change my plans because Leopard evidently won't live up to the hype. At work, I have a Mac Pro with multiple displays, and I'm disappointed to hear the "primary"/"secondary" distinction is still mandatory. Less reason to upgrade. Though there, my only real beef is the menubar issue.

Secondly: "you should have known how OS X handled.." Uh, again, I know how TIGER handled them, not Leopard, and it was suggested early on that this would change with Spaces.

Thirdly: who are you to say how virtual desktops and multiple monitors 'should' be used? Having two desktop monitors side by side is one particular type of multi-monitor setup, but it's not the only one. When you have a laptop that sometimes is connected to an external monitor and sometimes isn't, it would be useful to be able to customize what's going on in either screen and have that be automatically remembered when the configuration changes, just as you can customize how a computer connects to the internet at different locations or in different networks, or customize energy saving settings depending on whether you're on battery power or not.. Virtual Desktops do not "perform the exact same thing". Spaces gets it half right by letting you decide which apps and app windows go where, but it doesn't follow through with displays.

I musta hit a sore spot, eh? What part of "but even Space only displays a single instance of the Dock and menubar " did you not understand? Why would Apple make an exception for people like you that want to use a second monitor to make it do something it's not intended to do? My advice, switch to Windows.
post #96 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

There's one desktop, one menu bar, and one Dock. Switching spaces just slides all the windows off and replaces them with another set. You don't really move from one desktop to another.

So if you have files on your desktop, do they show up in every space, or can you move their icons to the space associated with that task?

For instance, if I have a set of text documents I'm editing and they're currently sitting on my desktop, can I move them to the desktop space where my text editor is active, and get them off of my other desktop spaces, or do they stay on the desktop no matter which space I move to?
post #97 of 139
Ok - now for my 2 cents about the reference to the Amiga Story since this is really halve of the whole thing!

Back in the original days of the Amiga - before it was purchased by Commodore, Amiga approached Microsoft to write its operating system - Yes Microsoft (youll find references to MetaComCo and BCPL and TripOS) - the story goes that Amiga didnt have much money left after designing the system and needed a cut down OS to make the system work prior to the sale to Commodore. Commodore originally purchased the hardware plus the rights to Amiga for a poultry sum. The offshute was AmigaOS and was and still is one of the first original true multi-tasking environments ever created. Microsoft would later attempt to buy back AmigaOS and fail - it is viewed that the AmigaOS (which uses the MagicID for Dos 1.0) was Microsofts first attempts at immitating UNIX. The basic kernel known as Kickstart has undergone numerous updates however there is still a faithful set of Amiga'ns out there!

Workbench is the name given the the GUI environment originally conceived and created from GEOS originating from the Commodore 64. GEOS was one of the first WIMP environments for the home user founded under XEROX - in those days alot of litigation was taking place regarding who created WIMP - it was finally awarded to XEROX (circa 1991). The GEOS system was supplied on a number of disks and in effect gave the workbench environment to the Commodore 64. Not many people used GEOS and as a result, it was more of a gimmic at the time that anything valuable in terms of functionality. It however laid the foundation to Workbench.

It was the Commodore 64 that first saw dedicated hardware for specific operations - one specific component was SID which was responsible for the sound ADSR (attack decay sustain release). Later on the Amiga enhanced the single channel sound processor to allow for 4 simulatanous channels. The 6502 processor is viewed as one of the first RISC processors in history with commercial success and still is found in numerous devices even to this day - some variants still live on such as the 6504 and the 6502e. The Motorola 68000 processor from which Apple and Amiga both were born would later take very different paths.

Most notable with regard to the Amiga is the separate portion of the processor known as BLITTER. Blitter is a block transfer and multiplication vector engine viewed as being the core behind the Amiga's success. BLITTERs capability allowed a block of memory to be copied and a simple operation to be applied to all elements in the segment. This was one of the first commercial uses of a vector processing engine within home computer architectures and would later form one of the basic building blocks for the PS3's Cell processing architecture. For those not aware, at the time, the only vector processors were found in Cray Supercomputers - later on however the DEC ALPHA would incorporate similar technology however would eventually get killed by COMPAQ (after COMPAQ acquired DEC) as direct competition with Intel would damage its position and so sacrificed the lamb. The team found itself sold onto INTEL, and would eventually be the ones to incorporate the DEC ALPHA technology into the XEON chipset. For those who remember the builds of Windows NT3.51 for DEC ALPHA those were very very fun days of re-install hell.

Back to the AMIGA, Commodore died because it basically started releasing computers which superceeded the previous systems every 3 months - PLEASE READ THIS STEVE - I was a trusty Amiga lover with the A500 and then the A1200 and A4000. During the 3 year period Amiga release the A500, A600, A1200 and various models of each - the A1200 had a buildin HD which at the time was amazing. Boy didnt we all love soundtracker!

Amiga is one of those computers like the Atari ST, Acorn Archemedies which will be remembered for us 30 somthing's as the great days on ground-shaking gaming. I for one turn 34 tomorrow and really am proud to look back on the last 20 years with very fond memories. Sitting here infront of a MacPro quad-core, im looking forward to Leopard in some respects, and in others dread of re-installing my system and then the chore of reinstalling software and patches.

Steve - two thumbs up for making us part of History - looking forward to the future as a loyal mac-fan. Regarding spaces - sorry but even with two 30'inch screens - screen realestate is still not enough
post #98 of 139
By the way - if you see references to MetaComCo - just go hunting and youll find Micro$oft.....
post #99 of 139
post #100 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgkwho View Post

How is "A couple years before Switcher Ellen Feiss was even born" relevant besides the word "switcher?"

Using that kind of clause in the wrong context is something gradeschool kids are taught not to do, when sorting sentences within a paragraph and removing extraneous information.

-=|Mgkwho

Agreed. Completely irrelevant. What a lame excuse to mention that poor girl. All you Feiss-worshipping perverts should be ashamed of yourselves.

-Clive
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
My Mod: G4 Cube + Atom 330 CPU + Wiimote = Ultimate HTPC!
(Might I recommend the Libertarian Party as a good compromise between the equally terrible "DnR"?)
Reply
post #101 of 139
OOps - mistake - Microsoft made AmigaBasic - AmigaOS is completely created by MetaComCo - apologies for incorrect statement
post #102 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

I musta hit a sore spot, eh?

No, you're just being an ass for no apparent reason.

Quote:
What part of "but even Space only displays a single instance of the Dock and menubar " did you not understand? Why would Apple make an exception for people like you that want to use a second monitor to make it do something it's not intended to do? My advice, switch to Windows.

Well, for one thing, the incorrect grammar ("but even Space only.."). It's impossible to tell what you're trying to say there, except perhaps to suggest we should all be clairvoyant and have already known precisely what Apple planned to do. Space[s] on a single monitor only displays one dock and menu bar (and why wouldn't it? It's just one monitor!). What on earth does that have to do with multiple monitors, a topic which until now has not been directly addressed by Apple in press releases or any of the other publically available info on Leopard? We have all been left wondering what Spaces was "intended to do" with multiple monitors, and it was therefore perfectly reasonable to expect that their claim that a program intended to provide multiple virtual desktops would "support" multiple monitors meant that multiple desktops would be visible on these multiple monitors. Only now do we find out that's not so, but there was absolutely nothing in the information Apple has provided regarding this feature in the last 14 months that would allow us to know this.

And Windows does not provide anything like this functionality, what are you talking about? Stop being an apologist.
post #103 of 139
Looks like Spaces may be subject to the same legal issues that this news story describes about Red Hat and Novell

Quote:
Linux vendors Red Hat Inc. and Novell Inc. are being sued for patent infringement by IP Innovation LLC and Technology Licensing Corp.

The plaintiffs claim they own U.S. Patent No. 5,072,412 for a "User Interface with Multiple Workspaces for Sharing Display System Objects" issued Dec. 10, 1991, as well as two other similar patents. It is believed to be the first patent infringement lawsuit involving Linux.

Computerworld article

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #104 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by macnoid View Post

To be clear, this is off-topic. I do hear some confusion when some of my Ubuntu friends start mistaking features in a virtual machine manager for the features in Spaces (a virtual desktop manager) and saying it comes up short, when in fact these are different issues. What follows are off-topic fantasy thinking that should in no way be construed as shortcomings of Spaces.

I'd love to launch a set of applications in their own Virtual Machine on OS X. When setting up a Filemaker driven website, it'd be nice to have a VM with Filemaker, Safari, and a text editor and the reference documentation setup. Instead of launching and quitting all those each day, I just freeze the virtual machine and restart it the next (without the launching and window arranging). Let's say I have a bunch of these VM's: a Photoshop/Illustrator one, and an XCode & Interface Builder one, and a bunch of others. When I launch one it takes over the screen and I can mix things within the VM, but I won't ever see an XCode window in my Photoshop area. Some extra enforced isolation when I want it. And now that we have an interface for managing the machines, we can also tack on an interface for scheduling and resource allocation. Let's say I had a Photoshop filter going that will take 4.3 hours (and has already been going for 2.5). I start to compile something in Xcode in my other VM and see it'll take and hour and a half. Since these are whole environments, I'd like to be able to freeze Photoshop for a while exactly as it stands and give Xcode the CPU so that it takes only half that time as when it's competing with the Photoshop VM. Then I can let Photoshop go again and have the CPU to itself. I have no idea what sort of interface would work well for this, all I can think of is a big 3x3 grid like the Brady Bunch intro except with VMs instead of Brady heads. Maybe something more "remote control" like since you are switching between channels yet the channels keep going in your absence. I don't know. As nice as all this is, it's kind of limited because each of these VM's is so isolated. Sometimes that isolation is good, but it might be more useful being able to selectively break down that isolation. Moving clipboard data. Moving windows in and out of other VM areas. InterVM communication as if the processes were talking over a network. These would be cool, but they'd be an incredible engineering effort to intelligently break down the isolation securely and with a user interface that could be intuitively grasped by users.

Virtual machine management isn't what Spaces is all about. I'd like to see it one day as some future OS feature, but I'm plenty happy with what's already been engineered.

Ah, ok. Quite a bit more than I was asking for (which was basically just changes to the Spaces UI). I'd be surprised if they went for VMs considering their paranoia about anything that could allow OS X to be run on different hardware (someone would surely reverse-engineer it). I could see them enhancing Spaces though -- would it require real virtualization, for instance, to force all the apps in a Space to go into some kind of "suspended" mode (although this admittedly wouldn't be perfect as apps can span multiple Spaces..). There are a lot of interesting possibilities for improvement -- some way to make a space prioritized just like processes can be, password-protected spaces, etc.
post #105 of 139
Question. So lets say I have Adium open. And I have it assigned to desktop 4. What happens when I'm in Desktop 1 and I get an IM? Can you assign apps parts of apps to a desktop? Or am I going to miss the notification. The only possibility I can think of is setting up Growl to permanently leave a new message on all 4 desktops at the same time so I don't miss anything.
post #106 of 139
Growl sends system-wide notifications, so you'll definitely be notified when you get an IM. And Adium will be in the dock, so if you have it set to bounce when you receive a message, you'll get that too.
post #107 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by macnoid View Post

If Photoshop is assigned to Space 2, and you're in Space 1 when you double-click a Photoshop document, the Space switches to space 2 and shows your Document.

Does automatic Space-switching happen when an app in one Space opens a window for another app in a different Space? With VirtueDesktops I'm able to open multiple Safari windows from NNW on the Browser desktop without being automatically switched there, keeping the News desktop uncluttered.

I've always preferred to explicitly switch between virtual desktops instead of it happening automatically (sometimes unexpectedly).

Quote:
There's nothing to stop you from then moving the Photoshop document back to space 1 if you want to.

Moving windows to different virtual desktops is a basic VDM capability, although it doesn't always work correctly in VirtueDesktops.

Quote:
My guess is that in older Carbon apps that don't use standard toolbox routines to draw modal dialogs, this could be a problem. What if you were working with a document in a different space from the one the app was "assigned" and the app brings up a dialog ("Pay your shareware fee!") If it doesn't use sheets or standard toolbox calls, that dialog may be displaying in a different space and the window you're working with just appears to get unresponsive. I bet Cocoa apps and well-behaved Carbon apps will have no problem though.

I'd anticipate dialogs for the active (frontmost) application to open in whatever Space you're currently working in, not in a different Space the app may have been assigned to. What's less obvious is where uninitiated dialogs might appear when the app is inactive with visible windows in the current Space but assigned to a different Space. In some cases you'd like them to show up in the current Space; other times they may be better in the app-assigned Space.

I don't know how much control Spaces gives you over different foreground/background app, initiated/unitiated window scenarios.

Quote:
Unless you really have to, I'd leave the "assigning" feature as a very rare option.

Depends on the implementation. For me CodeTek VirtualDesktop Pro (an unfortunate abandonware victim) did a better job with that than VirtueDesktops.

Quote:
Numbers are the keyboard shortcuts for jumping straight to a particular space, but aren't shown otherwise. Names attached to spaces would be kind of useless since they wouldn't be shown and wouldn't otherwise do anything. Nice sentiment (like comments in code) but not very useful.

I think named Spaces could be quite useful, e.g. in the menubar list or (if supported) a brief bezel display when switching between Spaces (like other OS X VDM's optionally do).

Quote:
I strongly agree with the digs being childish (no matter which side started them); the past is the past.

They seem an unnecessary unprofessional distraction, though not atypical considering AI's oft-tabloid mentality.
post #108 of 139
Even if the Switcher reference is totally irrelevant, the Arthur Dent reference is fantastic and more than makes up for it. Way to know your back half of the trilogy (and/or tertiary, quandry, and quintessential phases).
post #109 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by benjimouse View Post

I'm looking forwards to spaces, because multiple desktop are imo the most efficient way of swapping between a lot of open applications.

Multiple desktops can make it easier to manage different contexts than excessive app/window hiding/showing/switching.

Quote:
All the third party solutions like VirtueDesktops are riddled with problems maintaining the z-order and focusing of windows as you swap out, and then back to a desktop.

Not sure I understand the z-order issue (got an example?) but window focusing has been a nuisance for me with VirtueDesktops, especially when Finder is involved.

I'm not fond of the term "virtual desktop" because it often implies characteristics that aren't "virtually" supported, e.g. a unique menubar, Dock, and/or set of Desktop icons on OS X. Giving it a fresh "Space" name in Spaces leaves it open to be more accurately defined for what it really is, including not necessarily being tied to the traditional desktop metaphor (which Dashboard and certain full-screen modes already offer some escape from).
post #110 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by AjayBot View Post

A quick example before I hit the sack; Say you are working in, oh say photoshop in OS X. When suddenly your boss sends you a reference in the email, a small free-ware game. He wants you to design the magazine cover (or whatever it is) like the user interface of the game. Instead of having to boot up into Parallels (can't multitask, it sucks up majority of CPU and RAM, at least not enough to multitask Photoshop and Paralllels) or switch over to boot camp (closing down your PSD and making you reboot... timely)... you can just flip over to your Windows Space, navigate to the folder and run your little game and get what you need.

Its just a thought. I think it sounded better in my head, but then again Its about 3 am and I'm reading through appleinsider archives... Then again, maybe you'll see this implemented in 10.5.5

Not sure I understand what's technically preventing you from already assigning a dedicated Space to Parallels and/or Fusion (having never used either). In general, why can't a Space have a unique personality that gives it the illusion of being independent from the traditional Desktop? Surely some people will leave certain apps running full-screen, each in their own Space that never (or rarely) exposes the underlying Desktop. And Conjure lets you create unique desktop-like layers, which works without Spaces though it could be interesting to see how it integrates with it.

The desktop metaphor really isn't as sacred as some people treat it and I think it's becoming increasingly easier to live without it if you want to. For better and worse, it still just happens to be one of the most stubbornly persistent of many possible virtual environments.
post #111 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by YakkoW View Post

So if you have files on your desktop, do they show up in every space

Yep, if the Desktop layer is visible in the current Space.

Quote:
or can you move their icons to the space associated with that task?

Nope. Still need a third-party app like Conjure for that, which probably won't be the most elegant solution because of OS X restrictions that make certain things frustratingly difficult for developers. For instance, it's a hassle to completely eliminate the Dock or to use Path Finder as a complete Finder replacement.
post #112 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by SiliconAddict View Post

So lets say I have Adium open. And I have it assigned to desktop 4. What happens when I'm in Desktop 1 and I get an IM? Can you assign apps parts of apps to a desktop?

I don't know how it works with Adium and Spaces, but

When iChat is assigned to a desktop in VirtueDesktops the Messages popup window appears on the current desktop, then jumps back to the assigned desktop when clicked and I manually switch there to interact with it. I often make that Messages window sticky after its first opened (either automatically or manually) so it floats on every desktop, and it'll remain sticky if closed and reopened in the same iChat and VirtueDesktops session. It's a bit awkward though I didn't find any better way of handling it after fussing with different configuration options.

In VirtueDesktops I assign apps to specific desktops mostly so I won't have to move their windows around immediately after launching. I wish there were some type of differentiation between "app not running" and "app already running" states to make that kind of configuration possible. And it's tricky to control where further windows will appear and stay if they're moved.

Based on Apple's Spaces demo videos it looks like windows can be easily moved around, and hopefully remain in whatever Space they're in independently of any assigned Space settings. That would resolve the long-frustrating "window jumps back to assigned desktop" problem with VirtueDesktops, probably a worthwhile tradeoff for other features Spaces may lack.
post #113 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by YakkoW View Post

So if you have files on your desktop, do they show up in every space, or can you move their icons to the space associated with that task?

For instance, if I have a set of text documents I'm editing and they're currently sitting on my desktop, can I move them to the desktop space where my text editor is active, and get them off of my other desktop spaces, or do they stay on the desktop no matter which space I move to?

Yes, that's right. They show up in every space. It's always the same shortcuts because it's always the same desktop and it never moves. Switching spaces moves the windows.
post #114 of 139
Great article... very enjoyable - thanks!
post #115 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow View Post

I was also doing support for Mac OS System 7 - 9 and Windows machines. It was NOT an OS feature in Windows till XP - it was all the drivers. It was inconsistent in many cases: you could not tell an application to remember it's windows positions on both screens, you could run into problem when trying to calibrate the monitor, some games wil f@#$ it up and bring to mirroring etc. I am not sure it is all clean in Widows now (there were some problems in XP service pack 1 at least, not doing this kind of setups since then).


That's not true. Windows 2000 and previous NT versions have had multi-monitor support since 1996 or so. You didn't have to install drivers for the second video card if the drivers were already in Windows or you were using the same type of card for both the first and second monitors.
post #116 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gzzy View Post

That's not true. Windows 2000 and previous NT versions have had multi-monitor support since 1996 or so. You didn't have to install drivers for the second video card if the drivers were already in Windows or you were using the same type of card for both the first and second monitors.

The one problem Windows had, and still has, is color calibration. It's a reason why doing color work within the OS is a real pain. Calibrating one monitor is a big enough problem, ding two isn't possible. There are supposed workarounds, but they really don't work.

MS has "tried" to fix this in Vista, but hasn't. There are problems with profiles, etc. Sadly enough, nothing useful has bee accomplished.

Not to say that there aren't some proprietary solutions, because there are. But they either only work with the specialized equipment that the manufacturer offers as a turnkey solution, or are just simply too expensive for much other than high end pro applications.

Here is just one article explaining the woes, something I've had to live with for years in my lab., a reason why, dual monitor support or not, Windows is a failure for the graphics arts, video editing, and photo professions.

http://www.outbackphoto.com/tforum/v...p?TopicID=2518
post #117 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Looks like Spaces may be subject to the same legal issues that this news story describes about Red Hat and Novell



Computerworld article

Probably not though.

Spaces doesn't actually provide different workspaces as such. It's a single workspace and triggering the switch to another space only (in reality) slides windows out of the user's view. The special effects such as windows sliding into the workspace and out again is just that...a special effect...it looks very convincing because it really looks like you're switching from one screen to another...but the Dock, the desktop picture, and the menu bar are all fixed.

It's a clever game of hiding specific windows and showing others. And if that kind of behavior is considered switching workspaces then there's plenty evidence of prior art to put this legal entanglement to rest.
post #118 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianus View Post

Stop being an apologist.

I rarely defend Apple...but when I do, I get called an apologist. Am I really an apologist?

Anyways, I shouldn't be talking to someone with the word 'anus' in his name. Later, dude.
post #119 of 139
Does Spaces allow you the option of a desktop pager? I mean icons of your virtual desktops that are always there on your desktop, without having to hit a hotkey. I have become used to Codetek virtual desktops (I know they don't work on intel machines but I'll be upgrading as soon as leopard is released). I don't like the idea of having to hit F8 in order to get a snapshot of my desktops.

P.S. By the way, excellent articles and great forum (I am hooked and just registered).
post #120 of 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by macprof View Post

Does Spaces allow you the option of a desktop pager? I mean icons of your virtual desktops that are always there on your desktop, without having to hit a hotkey. I have become used to Codetek virtual desktops (I know they don't work on intel machines but I'll be upgrading as soon as leopard is released). I don't like the idea of having to hit F8 in order to get a snapshot of my desktops.

P.S. By the way, excellent articles and great forum (I am hooked and just registered).

No...the closest thing you'll get to a key-combo free view of all your spaces would adding a hot-corner to activate Spaces. But there is no way to view your other spaces without activating Spaces. Perhaps someone will have a utility that allows this eventually.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Road to Mac OS X Leopard: Spaces