Dual monitors and fullscreen fiasco, is there a work around?

To he|| with that!! ALL DEVELOPERS should implement their own full-screen functionality, the same as before 10.7.

This Apple full screen API is complete horse manure. The same with Mission Control.

And if they don't let it, let they publically do something about it. Push me harder to go back to Linux. Go ahead. I want you to.

NorrinRadd wrote:

To he|| with that!! ALL DEVELOPERS should implement their own full-screen functionality, the same as before 10.7.

This Apple full screen API is complete horse manure. The same with Mission Control.

And if they don't let it, let they publically do something about it. Push me harder to go back to Linux. Go ahead. I want you to.

I'm with ya on the manure, but I'd rather not have Apple push me back to Linux. I've got far too much money invested in an OS X-based work flow to have any desire to try to make this all happen on Linux. I spent some serious time looking at the logistics of it and a move to Linux would be non-trivial for me. As such, the only short-term solution I have available is to stick with Snow Leopard and this MacBook2,1 for as long as both are supported. Once the MacBook reaches "vintage" support status, I'll have to take a hard, hard look at the pain of upgrading to a new MBP versus switching to Linux on different hardware.

Neither choice seems all that appealing.

jonaboff91 wrote:

....

The fact that users actually don't 'expect' their additional screens to become useless when, e.g. watching a movie is apparently beside the point...

I really take exception to this statement as the expectation of enhanced, rather than degraded functionality is the point.

I don't expect 'upgrades' to the operating system to degrade the functionality of that operating system or to render my SIGNIFICANT investment in Apple hardware (and time invested in Apple workflow) to be degraded or made less functional.

I do expect that 'upgraded' features, such as full-screen app mode, will give me more functionality, or enhanced finctionality, without in any way degrading existing functionality.

I expect a company such as Apple to be true to its reputation and to remain innovative and remain 'friendly' to the tech-savvy and to it's established customer base.

In this sense if Apple wants to introduce a full-screen app mode then that's OK with me PROVIDED the user can optionally elect to use it or not and can optionally elect to have other monitors rendered useless with grey linen or have the option to have other monitors remain useful and not be covered with grey linen.

Perhaps a "Full-screen app" preference where you can toggle "Full-screen app covers other monitors with grey linen - On/Off". Would this not satisfy both types of user?

KB from Ontario wrote:

jonaboff91 wrote:

....

The fact that users actually don't 'expect' their additional screens to become useless when, e.g. watching a movie is apparently beside the point...

I really take exception to this statement as the expectation of enhanced, rather than degraded functionality is the point.

...

Firstly, I hope you didn't think I meant it was beside my point; rather I think I should be able to watch my videos or have Mail or what ever full screen on one display while I work on the other. My comment was wholly sarcastic 😉

...

Perhaps a "Full-screen app" preference where you can toggle "Full-screen app covers other monitors with grey linen - On/Off" thus being able to satisfy both types of users?

The problems with this approach are actually non-trivial for Apple, particularly when it claims its software is both intuitive and consistent. This solution would mean the behaviour is totally different with one screen to with multiple screens—not good for Apple. Also, there are unanswered questions such as what should happen to windows already on that screen? What should happen when you change space? What should happen when you three-finger-swipe over a full screen app? What about when there are full screen apps on more than one screen?

If we ever managed to get a suggestion to Apple, for it to have any hope of even being considered it would have to take account of these "problems".

Sarcasm understood... And my point about a preference toggle was somewhat tongue-in-cheek as well.

I think our conjecture about how difficult it might be for Apple to allow full-screen app mode to leave other monitors fully functional (not rendered useless by a grey linen background) is just that - conjecture. It seems to me if the goal of functionality is identified and embraced by Apple, then they can make it happen. I mean, look at all the other amazing things they've made these devices able to do. I'm sure much of that was non-trivial.

I hope Apple acknowledges that full-screen app mode is poorly impllemented and is effectively single-app mode. I hope Apple rectifies this so that we can make an app go "full screen" on one monitor and leave other monitors available for use - even for another app in full-screen mode.

I think the problem is that most people on here seem to see this functionality as a bug that needs to be fixed.

That isn't the case. Full screen apps are working in exactly the way that they were intended to work. Whether you like it or not doesn't make it a bug.

If Apple did decide to change the way it works they would be more than capable of doing that but then what if they made it work in a way that you didn't like 100%, would that still be a "bug"?

There is a big difference between what is a bug and what is something that you don't like.

I'd also like for this to change so that I can use both screens in fullscreen mode. However, I wouldn't go as far to provide a full spec of the way it should be done and what each screen should be do etc... I'm sure the Apple dev teams are more than capable of doing that themselves.

KB from Ontario wrote:

...

It seems to me if the goal of functionality is identified and embraced by Apple, then they can make it happen. I mean, look at all the other amazing things they've made these devices able to do. I'm sure much of that was non-trivial.

Yes, exactly. But there isn't even the chance that they will try to make this happen, unless it is compatible with the current design of opening a new space, allowing navigation between spaces and full screen apps using trackpad gestures, etc. Like it or not, the current behaviour is by design. The grey linen isn't just what the computer happens to display when Apple hasn't got around to coding something, that is what Apple decided to display on those screens. Just suggesting that we don't like this behaviour in this thread won't be enough to make them redesign the whole thing, the only way we'll get the functionality that we want is if there is some way to achieve it without breaking the current design.

I don't disagree with you.

I do, however, believe that if Apple wanted to design full-screen app mode to leave other montiors available for use (eg: not greyed out by design) then the can make this happen.

As oliver234 said above, the current behaviour is a design decision by Apple. I personally think full-screen app mode as implemented is a dumb design decision.

Was this decision driven by the fact that the bulk of Apple revenue is freom elsewhere Macintosh computers and OS X (eg: iOS devices, iTunes)? I don't know, but I am dissappointed that I cannot use full-screen app mode AND multiple monitors. Thankfully I can still maximize an application window. Hopefully Apple will leave this feature/behaviour in place.

Some third parties (eg: VLC) have designed their applicaiont to go full screen using Apple's full-screen mode OR an alternative that leaves other moitors untouched. I'll use those as I find them.

Apple can pretty much make any design decision they deem fit to "bless" become a reality as we see by Apple's product array.

It is absolutely possible that in designing full-screen app mode the way they did Apple made an error and/or miscalculation in predicting the negative effect it would have on workflow and hardware investment for a portion of users.

I cannot conjecture on how difficult/easy it might/might not be for Apple to change/re-design full-screen app behaviour more to the overwhelming preference of contributors to this thread. However, I know that if Apple wanted to they could.

Is really beautiful going to fullscreen mode on an application and having the second display (1920*1080) with a cute linen texture. Not really.

I hope Apple should care about developers and fix this BUG soon, is really annoying. Maybe the way Parallels uses to go in fullscreen mode should work

Ah yes more power users discover the "brillance" of Full Screen. Having used it a while I think it's great for when I want to look at a photo on my Laptop. It allows me to focus 100% on that photo by itself, and it is very good for that.

Unfortunately it's completely un-workable for dual screens which us power users like to employ. I really think that aspect was compleltely off of Apples radar screen, which alludes to a very inexperienced team of developers or else, the consicous transiton of the computer and the Apple Ecosystem, from a productivity tool to a multimedia tool.

So if you use multiple screens and want full scree Apps, use Cinch, or one of the other utilities for that. I fear Apple isn't going to fix it in the OS anytime soon.

I'm just saying...

Jerry Dalton1 wrote:

I fear Apple isn't going to fix it in the OS anytime soon.

Lion and Mountain Lion both suffering almost idential issues in the fullscreen regard, this is now a foregone conclusion. As the developer guidelines state, users now expect fullscreen applications to move to their own desktop. Only in an iOS world, I say.

I suspect that at the end of the day, Apple's intention is to stuff OS X onto their mobile devices in place of iOS, once the hardware has the horsepower to handle it. That's why we're seeing such a strong alignment between the iOS and OS X user experience on the desktop.

As you rightly point out, Apple considers its products to be multimedia tools. We are, by intention and Apple definition, content consumers, not content creators. Sad times.

I suspect that at the end of the day, Apple's intention is to stuff OS X onto their mobile devices in place of iOS, once the hardware has the horsepower to handle it. That's why we're seeing such a strong alignment between the iOS and OS X user experience on the desktop.

iOS is (I'm sure you know) OSX, it's just a different mixture. Yes, iOS and OSX will probably one day be the same environment, but which way the flow of engineers will go, it's hard to say. I hope that iOS becomes more like OSX rather than vice versa, although I can imagine that touchscreens and a complete dekstop OS user interface overhaul are somewhere in the basement. After all, Microsoft's Surface division was poached off Apple from the late 90s.

Certainly, I can imagine that there's a consumer-oriented type of private equity shareholder who would very much like to see the desktop in jail, and 30% tax all software developers by gatekeepering everything into the app store...

Fingers crossed eh!

da bishop wrote:

iOS is (I'm sure you know) OSX, it's just a different mixture. Yes, iOS and OSX will probably one day be the same environment, but which way the flow of engineers will go, it's hard to say. I hope that iOS becomes more like OSX rather than vice versa, although I can imagine that touchscreens and a complete dekstop OS user interface overhaul are somewhere in the basement.

While iOS and OS X likely share a BSD kernel, it's difficult to support a claim that they're just different "mixes" of the same thing. Anybody who has spent a significant time in the Linux world knows well the danger of claiming that Linux distros are "the same, just a bit different". Sharing a kernel does not automatically make for an equal operating system with just a few decorations being different. An OS with the same kernel can have an entirely different file system layout and calling convention. Apple uses "Grand Central Dispatch" threads, but there's no technical reason why POSIX pthreads couldn't be used with the BSD monolithic kernel. It's all a matter of preference.

If you look at the progression from Leopard to Snow Leopard to Lion and, finally, Mountain Lion, it's clear that OS X is adopting iOS UI cues. OS scalability is a complex issue and it's generally easier to let the hardware scale up to the requirements of an OS than try to make the big foot fit into the tiny shoe. Of course I could be wrong, but I strongly believe that iOS features that are deemed to be "big win" items will subsequently be ported to OS X and once the hardware for iPad and iPhones is up to running OS X, you'll see even more parity in the user experience than is possible today.

Microsoft has "seen the light" with regard to making a one shoe fits all approach and I think that Apple is going to follow suit. In the long run, it's cheaper to have a single, fragmented team working on elements of a single project than it is to simultaneously run multiple, separate projects. The potential for ROI is bigger. They might choose to continue calling it iOS and OS X, but you'll know when the convergence has taken place simply by the similarity of the interfaces.

it's difficult to support a claim that they're just different "mixes" of the same thing. Anybody who has spent a significant time in the Linux world knows well the danger of claiming that Linux distros are "the same, just a bit different".

I was thinking of the "Core" libraries, Quartz etc.

Cocoa touch is certainly liable to make the jump over to OSX at some point.

da bishop wrote:

I was thinking of the "Core" libraries, Quartz etc.

Cocoa touch is certainly liable to make the jump over to OSX at some point.

I have to agree with that. In fact, I wouldn't at all be surprised to see a MacBook Air sporting a touch panel within the next 24 months. It's the logical "toe in the water" for Apple to see whether their view of the future will be embraced by their beloved wallets (us). I expect the move to be fruitful, not that I have any desire for fingerprints on my laptop display.