News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Terminal and shell performance by masklinn on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @05:28PM (#14800207)
That's ecosystem inertia: in the days of yore Terminal was pretty damn terrible, it only got tabs in 10.10 (Sierra) and xterm-256 in Mountain Lion (10.8), so people got into the habit of recommending iTerm 2 and then kept doing that even as Terminal became usable (though not necessarily great).

And iTerm still has feature edges e.g. truecolor, or better multiplexer support (Terminal only supports vertical pane splitting).

Re:Terminal and shell performance by cweagans on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @06:10PM (#14800447)
> it only got tabs in 10.10 (Sierra)

I'm 90% sure that's not accurate. It's had tabs for quite a while.

Re:Terminal and shell performance by 0942v8653 on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @09:02PM (#14801334)
Yes I distinctly remember using Terminal's tabs on snow leopard (10.6), confirmed by [0]. Also, I believe 256color was available in that release, though I'm less sure.

[0]: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6736602/how-do-i-set-mac...

Re:Terminal and shell performance by wodenokoto on Wednesday July 19, 2017 @02:19AM (#14802304)
Tabs is way older than Sierra. I started using the terminal about 5 years ago and have always used tabs.
Re:Terminal and shell performance by Analemma_ on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @06:51PM (#14800682)
> it only got tabs in 10.10 (Sierra)

I don't think that's true. I definitely had tabs in Lion (10.7) and I'm pretty sure they're at least as old as Leopard (10.5) and maybe older.

Re:Terminal and shell performance by Tenobrus on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @06:42PM (#14800627)
iTerm2 also has Tmux integration: treat and control Tmux windows (and thus tabs) and panes as if they were native iTerm elements, and do so using the same keyboard shortcuts. Very very few other emulators do this (on any OS).
Re:Terminal and shell performance by Volt on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @11:09PM (#14801799)
It got tabs in Leopard (10.5).