Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 3rd Jun 2014 12:25 UTC
Mac OS X

Close, minimize, and maximize are now close, minimize, and full screen, eliminating the extra full-screen control and consolidating the window controls in one place. Streamlining these and other elements of the interface means you can navigate the desktop more efficiently.

OS X' idea of "maximise" was "some random window resizing nobody really used anyway", so I'm glad Apple finally replaced it with something else. Too bad OS X' fullscreen view is way too disruptive for my tastes to be of any practical use.

Thread beginning with comment 590086
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Zoom not as bad as Fullscreen
by jburnett on Tue 3rd Jun 2014 13:36 UTC
jburnett
Member since:
2012-03-29

Zoom is interesting, though I'm in the habit of holding down shift when clicking the green button. 99% of the time Shift+Zoom works like Windows/Linux maximize.

Full screen on the other hand is less than worthless. I'm a developer with multiple monitors. Full screen turns those extra monitors into useless gray screens.

Why is it so difficult to full screen a YouTube video or movie on the large monitor for my daughter to watch while I'm working on an app on the other two? Ironically, that "just works" on Linux and Windows.

Reply Score: 5

daedalus Member since:
2011-01-14

Yes, there you go. I like it like that, since I use AmigaOS as well, and that also has the shift-click-to-maximise thing... Not to mention most of the same keyboard shortcuts. Having the shift-click feature there means you can get the best of both worlds... If you know it exists (which I guess most people don't).

Reply Parent Score: 2

brion Member since:
2010-11-04

The worthless gray screens issue was fixed in 10.9. Now when an app is in fullscreen mode it only takes over one display, and the others are still available for use by other desktops or fullscreen apps.

Reply Parent Score: 2

_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

The worthless gray screens issue was fixed in 10.9. Now when an app is in fullscreen mode it only takes over one display, and the others are still available for use by other desktops or fullscreen apps.


but the workspaces are still linked, making it still fairly broken. It pretty much breaks the entire reason for having two screens. One for fullscreen work and another for reference.

If workspaces did not exist, then nobody would be spreading apps across them, so this issue does not exist in windows.

Reply Parent Score: 4

IgnitusBoyone Member since:
2007-02-07

The original full screen in lion did indeed make two monitors useless, but this isn't the case anymore. 10.9 allows you to treat monitors as there own desktops and full screen apps one one with out regard of what is on the other.

I personally, use this with remote desktop apps where my secondary monitor is a full screen VM or remote desktop session and I work on my primary in OS X.

Regarding Zoom, I feel it is one of those things you either like or you don't. I'll be honest and admit that I keep TotalSapces and SizeUp installed so I mostly move and re-size windows with my keyboard, but this is true when I use win 7/8 as well.

Monitors are larger now we run them at 1080P to 4k your wasting your realistate to maximize things and I believe zoom was intended to help people realize that. It wasn't intuitive coming from windows, but once I read about the feature I grew to like it and the fact that applications could overwrite the behavior was a feature I liked.

My Email clients and Browsers maximize along with SQL Browsers and large apps, these are normally detailed enough that the interface justifies taking up most of my screen, but text editors, file browsers and other small apps only get large enough to show all the relevant information then I move them in to place.

I have since come to realize this is more efficient then windows and actually helped teach you to multitask. OS X isn't perfect, but what desktop is.

Reply Parent Score: 1