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

Well, regarding charging people for updates, got to pay the piper. Don't have a problem with that. Cheap at the price.

I do have a problem with what Adobe just announced... though! Now you will have to *rent* photoshop, illustrator premiere dreamweaver...

... for more per year than a straight CS license cost?!

Disgusting. They should be taken down for monopoly abuse of the market.

_____

Regarding the "power users" base of Apple, that's been the lifeblood of the company, and it makes sense to make that aspect of the company a strong priority. It's similar to Formula One racing, making high performance vehicles in small numbers might not make a lot of money in and of itself, and working at that level isn't easy or cheap, but it steers the company in the right direction, and if you can keep a racing driver happy, you can build a domestic vehicle with ease, the technology can be repackaged and coarsened without a problem. There's no hiding behind marketing or shiny icons when it comes to serious computer users, the product has to deliver the goods.

That's always been the problem with Microsoft, a "that'll do" or "they'll never know the difference" attitude. Microsoft Word's PDF generation is a classic example, it's absolutely diabolically kludged, starts slicing images up into little pieces because the graphics handler can't handle more than a few MBs, shoddiness and amateurishness has a knock on effect. It's easy to dumb smart stuff down, it's much harder to supercharge stuff that's full of holes.

john lewis wrote:

 

Can't confirm what CT?

CT doesn't even think that Apple's implementation of fullscreen mode over dual-monitors is a bug, so you may as well give up on the conversation. He/she/it has been questioned on his/her/its stance and no intelligible answer has ever been forthcoming on this topic.

misfeature is probably the correct term

da bishop wrote:

 

misfeature is probably the correct term

I'll agree on the technicality of "specifics of the English language". LOL

Otherwise, it's a farkin' bug for anybody who needs dual-screen support and full-screen apps simultaneously on Lion or Mountain Lion. After watching the Mavericks demo, I find myself being excited about OS X for the first time since Snow Leopard. Honestly, I think it's finally a Big Deal worthy of my consideration. Very nice.

Unfortunately, given my current hardware is an Early 2008 MacBook, getting excited about Mavericks will cost me a lot more than $29.

I see what you mean. I think getting off on a technicality is akin to politics, rather than a real-world scenario. A bit like renaming 'laptops' 'notebooks' so people don't sue for burning their legs or becoming impotent.

Personally I think 'Full Screen' implies to 'fill a single screen'. Nothing more, nothing less. Possibly the most pointless 'feature' I've ever seen. I'd like to hear of a real world example where this proves useful. I can think of thousands of reasons why it's useless.

Yet more of my life I won't get back with no actual soution, awesome, way to go.

If you can run ML then it is likely that you will be able to run Mavericks

Well, thing is that by taking out the the menu bar and a few bits of window header chrome, you gain screen space. It is more "full" than windowed mode.

However, if all but one of your multiple screens goes black, that's hardly "full", it's less than half. So full screen is hardly fulfilling fullness in that case, especially considering that those people who use multiple screens clearly care the most about screen real estate.

True, doesn't change the fact Full Screenis currently borked though.

My friend has a Xeon Mac Pro that he needed to forcefully hack the device ID of to run ML. It runs great, but Apple didn't want it to. It's not looking good for him or his £2500 investment when Mavericks comes out. Funnily enough, he runs Microsoft RDC in Full Screen on ONE of his 3 Apple displays whilst using the other two for FileMaker Pro. As it should be. Two of these would be useless on a Mac VNC connection...and they are Apple screens. Go figure - RDC crashes every time on the way out, but it STILL works better than the Mac's built in alternative

Apple.com/feedback

http://support.apple.com/kb/PH11359

"In many apps, including Calendar, Mail, and Safari, you can expand the window to fill your entire SCREEN."

Poor show Apple...blatantly forgetting about multiplie monitor users. I'd get fired for programming with neglect like that.

john lewis wrote:

 

http://support.apple.com/kb/PH11359

 

"In many apps, including Calendar, Mail, and Safari, you can expand the window to fill your entire SCREEN."

 

 

Poor show Apple...blatantly forgetting about multiplie monitor users. I'd get fired for programming with neglect like that.

Those apps mentioned do expand to full screen exactly as described, I fail to see the relevance of your last paragraph.

Complain to Apple, we are just users like you, what do you expect us to do? (assuming that we agree with you)

here's a good analogy. The window frames on your house obstruct some light/view, so a special invention can make the window an unobstructed frameless portal. However, if you do that, then all your other windows develop blackout curtains?

I don't know about firing people, but somebody definitely needs a slap for that sort of thinking. Throw a Newton MessagePad at them I've heard is the traditional protocol for such blunders.

Maybe they ran out of back-stock of MessagePads.

Csound1 wrote:

... we are just users like you, what do you expect us to do?

There's only two groups of people in the world that call their customers "users":  the IT industry and drugs pushers.

I've not been at the Kool Aid so for me the pathetic waste of space that is full screen is beyond contempt.  I resent having to pay for an Apple fix to something they broke.

Glennny2Lappies wrote:

 

Csound1 wrote:

... we are just users like you, what do you expect us to do?

 

There's only two groups of people in the world that call their customers "users":  the IT industry and drugs pushers.

I'll ignore your insulting comments and mark you down as Futzak.

Csound1 wrote:

 

Futzak.

Quoi?