My entire comment is sarcastic hyperbole addressing the silly comments about Mac OS being "dumbed down" and that real users will clamor for Snow Leopard.
I need to find a more effective way to express sarcasm.
Sorry, it's that tiny mark you use, it simply isn't visible under normal conditions maybe a space before it would help. I thought your handle had been hijacked! Lol
I have my Macbook Pro 15" directly connected to a 28" monitor and a second 19" via USB. I use SecondBar to add a menubar to the 28" which is my working monitor.
In addition, I use Quickeys to switch and set application windows from one monitor to the other two up to their respective maximum screen sizes. Thus, unlike OS X's Full Screen mode, I can view the application's menu bars in at least the Macbook Pro's 15" and the 28" screens while I work on the active document.
Right now, I am seriously considering Multimon, which according to their promo offers:
Quote:
Multimon by Delve Systems
? Multiple menu bars on any number of screens.
? Advanced window management for quickly dealing with multiple windows.
? Automatic window resizing for monitors of different sizes.
? Customizable hotkeys for quick management of your monitors.
Obviously, having a menubar on the third monitor would be a great feature.
And if it works as well as they profess in Mountain Lion, I won't hesitate to get it.
Sorry, it's that tiny mark you use, it simply isn't visible under normal conditions maybe a space before it would help. I thought your handle had been hijacked! Lol
I could use ¡ but that would just be obnoxious. I prefer to be helpful, insightful, and/or entertaining, but not obnoxious.
Primarily, why I miss this is that I would run a video podcast (from twit.tv mostly) in fullscreen on my secondary monitor while continuing to work on my primary monitor.
Am I reading that correctly? The second screen will always go blank, and you [U]can't[/U] stop that?
I use two monitors all the time, and I often full screen one app on one monitor while working normally on the other. If one of the screens really will go black, I seriously can't use the OS. It's starting to be a broken record, but it's infuriating that Apple always insists on removing an important feature to make way for one that's mostly useless but looks cool.
Am I reading that correctly? The second screen will always go blank, and you can't stop that?
I use two monitors all the time, and I often full screen one app on one monitor while working normally on the other. If one of the screens really will go black, I seriously can't use the OS. It's starting to be a broken record, but it's infuriating that Apple always insists on removing an important feature to make way for one that's mostly useless but looks cool.
Am I reading that correctly? The second screen will always go blank, and you can't stop that?
I use two monitors all the time, and I often full screen one app on one monitor while working normally on the other. If one of the screens really will go black, I seriously can't use the OS. It's starting to be a broken record, but it's infuriating that Apple always insists on removing an important feature to make way for one that's mostly useless but looks cool.
In the apps that implement fullscreen mode in the way that is the default set by the OS. But those apps either did not have fullscreen mode before Lion or they did behave already like this before Lion.
Thus, almost by definition, if you use applications in fullscreen mode that don't blank the second monitor now, they won't do so in Mountain Lion. Therefore, there is nothing to worry about.
almost by definition, if you use applications in fullscreen mode that don't blank the second monitor now, they won't do so in Mountain Lion. Therefore, there is nothing to worry about.
That's not so bad. There are only certain apps I'd ever use in fullscreen anyway.
I prefer using a combination of MegaZoomer and Cinch versus Apple's implementation of full screen mode. Both are a lot more flexible and work on multiple displays.
I prefer using a combination of MegaZoomer and Cinch versus Apple's implementation of full screen mode. Both are a lot more flexible and work on multiple displays.
Not sure why Apple didn't just go this route.
I hesitate to use SIMBL-based bundle apps, Cinch is too limited and both problematic and/or complicating in our multi-monitor based environment. One set of three, but with four clusters it is just to too daunting to control comfortably and one I don't have time to babysit.
P.S. Tried them both out a couple of year(s?) ago. Issues arose every time I upgraded the OS, especially with Leopard and Snow Leopard. Not sure how well they work in Lion or now Mountain Lion and am not willing to step back.
Maybe someone already said this and I missed it but I do have VMWare full screen in Mountain Lion without my other screen blanking and remaining totally usable. Mountain Lion Server is running full screen on my MBP's 15" in a VM while I have Mountain Lion full screen on my LED Apple external monitor. So there may be other apps that can do this and perhaps all will soon or at least have the option..
No… he is… hence the remark about FUD in the first place…
Nothing is being stripped out. They've added functionality, some would say partial, that had never been in OS X previously at all.
No. I don't think I'm wrong. Feel free to show me I am, though, if you can.
Right now (under Snow Leopard) full screen on Aperture works fine. All the various things going on within the other displays keep going on, and I can continue to work. Under the new OS, full screen blanks five of the six displays. I'd say that qualifies as something "taken away", such as 5/6ths of my working area. Right now, I can start any app, and I don't have to worry about the OS mothering me about it -- no sandbox, no certificates -- although at this point (again, Snow Leopard) it's annoying about downloaded content. Yeah, I want to start the app, that's why I downloaded it, you idiots. Under the new OS, it will begin making starting new apps more annoying, in a very hand-holdy, yet highly inappropriate way -- trusting apps from the app store, but not from Joe Developer. I'd say that counts as both "dumbing down" and "needless classism." Instead of letting the user manage the machine and fixing the actual vulnerabilities in the OS, Apple has elected to begin erecting a wall between apps in its store and apps from independent developers. Which I suspect is going to get higher and harder to cross as the OS continues to degrade, but that's a different subject, and not my problem anyway as I'm not planning on going there.
And of course, as per usual, Apple is marching off into the sunset, leaving the broken parts of OSX they never got right -- like UDP sockets and the buggy color matching system under Snow Leopard, the spewing of console messages from cron under Leopard -- unfixed in those versions (even though they are on record as having promised to fix them.) It'd be fine if they fixed them in the new OS, if the new OS was as usable as the old OS, but it appears that it isn't. Heck, it's to the point where we have to depend on third parties to find the bugs and patch them (cron fix, for instance, was done outside Apple -- by me.)
So, where's the FUD? You telling me that the new OS will NOT be annoying about new apps? You telling me that full screen mode works just like it used to and I can continue working on all my monitors? You telling me they are going to fix those things in Leopard and Snow Leopard?
Right now (under Snow Leopard) full screen on Aperture works fine.
You don't have .7/.8's full screen in Snow Leopard. You have individual applications with their own interpretation thereof. Full Screen in Mountain/Lion isn't the same thing. It's new, partial, functionality.
You don't have .7/.8's full screen in Snow Leopard. You have individual applications with their own interpretation thereof. Full Screen in Mountain/Lion isn't the same thing. It's new, partial, functionality.
You can label this a new feature, but it just happens to be one that reduces functionality and usability of the system for use cases that include multiple monitors. Had Apple implemented full-screen mode such that apps stayed on the same virtual desktop as they were in windowed mode and made it user-definable on a per-app basis whether to blank secondary displays, it would have been quite okay. Moving an app onto a new virtual desktop is iOS methodology that, IMO, has no place on a desktop operating system. Forced blanking of secondary displays? User-definable would be a feature, but forced? That's horrifyingly bad design.
The guy in this thread who has 6 displays should be able to run 6 simultaneous full-screen apps, one on each display. As it is, the guy who thinks, "Shiny! I can string a bunch of Thunderbolt displays on my MacBook Pro", will be mighty disappointed to find himself the owner of 2 grand worth of dark linen the first time he puts Safari into full-screen mode on his laptop display. Users shouldn't be forced to find 3rd-party apps to enjoy sensible full-screen implementations.
Apple would have done well to advertise this new feature as a cool, retro return to 1990. Back then, task switching between full-screen apps was all the rage. DOS and DESQview did a great job of it. Alas, it's 2012 and I expect better from Apple. Hiding complexity is always a good thing. Taking choice/power away from the user ... not so much.
Comments
Sorry, it's that tiny mark you use, it simply isn't visible under normal conditions maybe a space before it would help. I thought your handle had been hijacked! Lol
I have my Macbook Pro 15" directly connected to a 28" monitor and a second 19" via USB. I use SecondBar to add a menubar to the 28" which is my working monitor.
In addition, I use Quickeys to switch and set application windows from one monitor to the other two up to their respective maximum screen sizes. Thus, unlike OS X's Full Screen mode, I can view the application's menu bars in at least the Macbook Pro's 15" and the 28" screens while I work on the active document.
Right now, I am seriously considering Multimon, which according to their promo offers:
Quote:
Multimon by Delve Systems
? Multiple menu bars on any number of screens.
? Advanced window management for quickly dealing with multiple windows.
? Automatic window resizing for monitors of different sizes.
? Customizable hotkeys for quick management of your monitors.
Obviously, having a menubar on the third monitor would be a great feature.
And if it works as well as they profess in Mountain Lion, I won't hesitate to get it.
I could use ¡ but that would just be obnoxious. I prefer to be helpful, insightful, and/or entertaining, but not obnoxious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I could use ¡ but that would just be obnoxious. I prefer to be helpful, insightful, and/or entertaining, but not obnoxious.
Ah! What about… no, that won't work. I was going to say pick an emoji, since everyone's moving to Mountain/Lion, but you want a standard character…
???? ????
????
????
????
I'll stick with /s for now ... But I thought your big one was a vast improvement /smile
A brilliant strategy. If you've got the right people implementing it.
Primarily, why I miss this is that I would run a video podcast (from twit.tv mostly) in fullscreen on my secondary monitor while continuing to work on my primary monitor.
I use two monitors all the time, and I often full screen one app on one monitor while working normally on the other. If one of the screens really will go black, I seriously can't use the OS. It's starting to be a broken record, but it's infuriating that Apple always insists on removing an important feature to make way for one that's mostly useless but looks cool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka
Am I reading that correctly? The second screen will always go blank, and you can't stop that?
I use two monitors all the time, and I often full screen one app on one monitor while working normally on the other. If one of the screens really will go black, I seriously can't use the OS. It's starting to be a broken record, but it's infuriating that Apple always insists on removing an important feature to make way for one that's mostly useless but looks cool.
Except no features are being removed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka
Am I reading that correctly? The second screen will always go blank, and you can't stop that?
I use two monitors all the time, and I often full screen one app on one monitor while working normally on the other. If one of the screens really will go black, I seriously can't use the OS. It's starting to be a broken record, but it's infuriating that Apple always insists on removing an important feature to make way for one that's mostly useless but looks cool.
In the apps that implement fullscreen mode in the way that is the default set by the OS. But those apps either did not have fullscreen mode before Lion or they did behave already like this before Lion.
Thus, almost by definition, if you use applications in fullscreen mode that don't blank the second monitor now, they won't do so in Mountain Lion. Therefore, there is nothing to worry about.
That's not so bad. There are only certain apps I'd ever use in fullscreen anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
No… he is… hence the remark about FUD in the first place…
Sigh, I wish people would actually start using the term FUD correctly...
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius
Sigh, I wish people would actually start using the term FUD correctly...
Sorry, I'll try to remember that.
????
Found a couple of Apps that offer full screen without losing the menubar.
Optimal Layout
Moom
Both have trial versions available.
Optimal Layout is quite comprehensive, while Moom is much simpler, it is cheaper as well.
Neither provides additional menu bars which I understand Multimon does. Unfortunatel Multimon does not provide a trial version.
In any event, I can use Quickeys to even further automate my programme settings, e.g., move the application's windows to a particular monitor.
I prefer using a combination of MegaZoomer and Cinch versus Apple's implementation of full screen mode. Both are a lot more flexible and work on multiple displays.
Not sure why Apple didn't just go this route.
Quote:
Originally Posted by z3r0
I prefer using a combination of MegaZoomer and Cinch versus Apple's implementation of full screen mode. Both are a lot more flexible and work on multiple displays.
Not sure why Apple didn't just go this route.
I hesitate to use SIMBL-based bundle apps, Cinch is too limited and both problematic and/or complicating in our multi-monitor based environment. One set of three, but with four clusters it is just to too daunting to control comfortably and one I don't have time to babysit.
P.S. Tried them both out a couple of year(s?) ago. Issues arose every time I upgraded the OS, especially with Leopard and Snow Leopard. Not sure how well they work in Lion or now Mountain Lion and am not willing to step back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
No… he is… hence the remark about FUD in the first place…
Nothing is being stripped out. They've added functionality, some would say partial, that had never been in OS X previously at all.
No. I don't think I'm wrong. Feel free to show me I am, though, if you can.
Right now (under Snow Leopard) full screen on Aperture works fine. All the various things going on within the other displays keep going on, and I can continue to work. Under the new OS, full screen blanks five of the six displays. I'd say that qualifies as something "taken away", such as 5/6ths of my working area. Right now, I can start any app, and I don't have to worry about the OS mothering me about it -- no sandbox, no certificates -- although at this point (again, Snow Leopard) it's annoying about downloaded content. Yeah, I want to start the app, that's why I downloaded it, you idiots. Under the new OS, it will begin making starting new apps more annoying, in a very hand-holdy, yet highly inappropriate way -- trusting apps from the app store, but not from Joe Developer. I'd say that counts as both "dumbing down" and "needless classism." Instead of letting the user manage the machine and fixing the actual vulnerabilities in the OS, Apple has elected to begin erecting a wall between apps in its store and apps from independent developers. Which I suspect is going to get higher and harder to cross as the OS continues to degrade, but that's a different subject, and not my problem anyway as I'm not planning on going there.
And of course, as per usual, Apple is marching off into the sunset, leaving the broken parts of OSX they never got right -- like UDP sockets and the buggy color matching system under Snow Leopard, the spewing of console messages from cron under Leopard -- unfixed in those versions (even though they are on record as having promised to fix them.) It'd be fine if they fixed them in the new OS, if the new OS was as usable as the old OS, but it appears that it isn't. Heck, it's to the point where we have to depend on third parties to find the bugs and patch them (cron fix, for instance, was done outside Apple -- by me.)
So, where's the FUD? You telling me that the new OS will NOT be annoying about new apps? You telling me that full screen mode works just like it used to and I can continue working on all my monitors? You telling me they are going to fix those things in Leopard and Snow Leopard?
Over to you, Tallest Skil.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fyngyrz
Right now (under Snow Leopard) full screen on Aperture works fine.
You don't have .7/.8's full screen in Snow Leopard. You have individual applications with their own interpretation thereof. Full Screen in Mountain/Lion isn't the same thing. It's new, partial, functionality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You don't have .7/.8's full screen in Snow Leopard. You have individual applications with their own interpretation thereof. Full Screen in Mountain/Lion isn't the same thing. It's new, partial, functionality.
You can label this a new feature, but it just happens to be one that reduces functionality and usability of the system for use cases that include multiple monitors. Had Apple implemented full-screen mode such that apps stayed on the same virtual desktop as they were in windowed mode and made it user-definable on a per-app basis whether to blank secondary displays, it would have been quite okay. Moving an app onto a new virtual desktop is iOS methodology that, IMO, has no place on a desktop operating system. Forced blanking of secondary displays? User-definable would be a feature, but forced? That's horrifyingly bad design.
The guy in this thread who has 6 displays should be able to run 6 simultaneous full-screen apps, one on each display. As it is, the guy who thinks, "Shiny! I can string a bunch of Thunderbolt displays on my MacBook Pro", will be mighty disappointed to find himself the owner of 2 grand worth of dark linen the first time he puts Safari into full-screen mode on his laptop display. Users shouldn't be forced to find 3rd-party apps to enjoy sensible full-screen implementations.
Apple would have done well to advertise this new feature as a cool, retro return to 1990. Back then, task switching between full-screen apps was all the rage. DOS and DESQview did a great job of it. Alas, it's 2012 and I expect better from Apple. Hiding complexity is always a good thing. Taking choice/power away from the user ... not so much.