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

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.

The discussion is more and more off-topic. The big question was whether or not there is a workaround for the full-screen fiasco. Well, there is a partial workaround for some applications, which consists of using those versions that come with their own full-screen support, i.e. not using OSX' full-desktop feature. For instance, I have solved most of these issues by installing:

Quicktime 7 (the old player has its own fullscreen mode, just like VLC)

DVD player from Snow Leopard (just copy and paste, the old DVD player has also its own fullscreen mode)

Parallels 8 (make sure to switch it to its own fullscreen mode, not using the one provided by OSX)

Keynote (knows how to use many displays properly)

Adobe Acrobat (does it properly using its own fullscreen mode)

This all does not really solve the issue as such, but makes life a lot easier. Any other application, the only way of dealing with it is to maximise the application window.

Sorry I do not have a great workaround even after just talking to an Apple Care supervisor. Their solution, after testing in their lab, is to maximize whatever you are trying to display on a second monitor, because using the full-desktop mode (by design) will cause the other monitor(s) to display the background image. The only suggestion to permanently fix this is to write Apple Feedback at http://www.apple.com/feedback/ so it may possibly be changed in the future.

According to the Apple Care supervisor, there is no functional reason for this flaw other than an explanation that the OS, including Mountain Lion, is not really meant for multiple displays.

The funtional reson behind it in 10.8 is due to airplay mirroring (according to blogosphere anyway).

After complaning about this for so long -- if you look at what airplay does and how it works, it actually does make sense -- however, there should still be an option for power users to unlink displays.

NiqueXyZ wrote:

The funtional reson behind it in 10.8 is due to airplay mirroring (according to blogosphere anyway).

After complaning about this for so long -- if you look at what airplay does and how it works, it actually does make sense -- however, there should still be an option for power users to unlink displays.

For mirroring, I can see the benefit of (optionally) blanking out secondary displays. That said, that paradigm is nonsensical with regard to extending the desktop. And when you add Apple's insistence that Lion and Mountain Lion users expect to see fullscreen apps move to their own desktop, well, it just becomes something out of Monty Python or SNL.

I'd prefer a return to Spaces (good luck with that) rather than any so-called unlinking.

Apple devs probably use Linux, coding and testing OS X on different desktops as VMs under Parallels. ROTFL

I just ran into this myself. I was giving a presentation at a film festival from my laptop. The second display being a projector in a theater which the audience can see and the primary display being my laptop on the podium which only I can see. They are NOT equivalent by any means.

I wanted to show an HD res (1920x1080) short film via quicktime, then talk about it with some Keynote slides. Mirroring displays is not an option because my laptop screen goes 1440, not 1920. Quicktime gives me no way to put the movie full screen on the MOVIE SCREEN. And I don't want to show the film with MacOS window decorations all over it. I want to show the film like a film, on the big screen, unadorned.

The only solution I could find was to drop the quicktime into a Keynote project and show it through Keynote, because Keynote gives you control over which screen to use for presentation. That works fine, but it seems really lame to have to go through Keynote just to get full-screen mode on the second display.

It's hard for me to imagine that many scenarios where the second display wouldn't be the preferred full-screen presentation display. Why bother to plug in a second display unless it's bigger and better than the primary?