These days it's very common for more than half your work to take place in a browser, with many browser windows, each having many tabs
Every window of the browser almost is like its own application for the user, yet they're all from the same application with the same name for the OS
How does an application switching interface, rather than window switching interface, work out for that, if a lot of what you want to switch between is different windows of the same browser?
(and what if in addition there would be also many terminal emulator windows, each also with many tabs, and maybe some code editors, spread across multiple virtual desktops)
What's being described as "full screen" windows on macOS is not exactly that, and it's very different than full screen windows on Windows or the standard Linux window managers.
On macOS, when we click on the little green button on top of a window, that window becomes full screen *and* becomes a new single-window workspace.
https://support.apple.com/guide/mac-help/use-apps-in-full-sc...
Except for that annoying quirk, I actually find the interface better (though it definitely took time to get used to it).
It's not the same as fullscreen, because it still has the top mac bar, but that's fine, and it gives me the ability to cmd+tab / cmd+tilde through my windows.
cmd-tab switches to the last used application (assuming you don't hold down), right now for me that switches from Firefox to Slack.
Pressing cmd-tab again switches from Slack back to Firefox.
However for window switches
cmd-` switches from my HN window to a jira window. cmd-` again switches to a webmail window. To switch from jira back to HN I have to press cmd-shift-`
If you press Cmd-Tab, hold Cmd, and keep hitting Tab, you cycle through the available applications.
If you press Cmd-`, get the window you want, and do something in it, then press Cmd-` again, you get back to the first window you were in.
If you press Cmd-` repeatedly, you cycle through the available windows of the active application.
There is a slight difference in how you trigger the two behaviours—and the behaviour of Cmd-` can sometimes be a little opaque, I grant, since "do something in the window" is not always 100% clear, either to the user or the computer—but they do have analogous behaviours.
You've swapped from window 1 to window 2
Press Cmd, Press `, Release `, Release Cmd
You swap from window 2 to window 3
Press Cmd, Press tab, Release tab, Release Cmd
You've swapped from application 1 to application 2
Press Cmd, Press tab, Release tab, Release tab
You swap from application 2 to application 1
That if you type something after swapping window and the behaviour changes is even worse!
For cycling
Press Cmd, Press Tab, release Tab, Press Tab, Release Tab, you can move from application 1 to application 3, although it doesn't switch immediately, just shows you a menu while you hold down Cmd
Do this with windows and the actual window changes as you move, not a menu
It's poor behaviour and one reason I prefer my linux desktop to my anicent macbook. (Another reason, I've got about 15 opwn terminals, but I can't just raise 1 terminal window above my browser, I have to raise them all. Of course there's no focus-follows-mouse either, it's all very user-unfriendly, at least by default. I'm sure there's some software that might fix this, but back in the 90s when I was using Windows I remember that sort of software was just terrible. The easier option is to finally fix my linux laptop, which died around the time covid started, and thus wasn't a critical path fix)
Edit: it didn’t behave this way before 2009
If you’re talking about cmd-tab, personally I’ll take big recognizable icons than thumbnails with minuscule text and such any day.
And mission control will give you windows previews if you want them.
The Portuguese layout sucks horribly for programming, especially on the Mac (brackets in horrible places), and the U.K. layout (where I’m based) sucks horribly for writing Portuguese in. The US international just works for all my purposes (including writing tiny amounts of other languages besides Portuguese and English)
Because I never went back to the Portuguese layout after finding those key combinations.
My choice is "US International with AltGr deadkeys". The deadkey behaviour in simple "US International" is very annoying for programming: you have to double-tap every key that could be an accent, such as single quotes or backquotes.
Uh, did you not even bother to click on the link or something ??
The easy access to all Greek characters (and more math symbols) alone is great if you work in a math-related field !
Look, I think it's great that this thing exists and grateful that you mentioned it. I may even suggest it to some of the French-speaking juniors I work with.
It does not, however, address the issues of the person you were replying to. And I know because I'm in a similar position to them.
Also, windows are in a stack from least to most recently put in front, so if I know something is toward the back I start with command-~.
I also happen to believe that there is such a thing as having too many browser windows open, so when these strategies start to become unmanageable, I will close some. The Expose for browser windows takes up to twelve before it needs to make the icons really small, that's a reasonable limit for me, especially given both tabs and tab groups (which I'm increasingly making good use of).
To be clear, this is a workflow, not a workaround: unlike focus follows mouse being impossible, I'm content and productive handling the browser this way.
Often I need to quickly switch between a particular terminal window to a particular browser window. But it's always a gamble. I don't know what I'm gonna get when I press cmd+tab. It may show the correct window, or it may show all terminal windows, or it may even do absolutely nothing.
When you press Cmd-Tab, first of all, if you hold it down for longer than about a second, it shows you the icons of the currently-open applications, letting you select which application you switch to.
Whenever you use Cmd-Tab to switch to an open application, it will always foreground all the open windows of that application that are on the active desktop/space.
When I'm doing something like you describe, where I know I'll be switching back and forth between a specific pair of windows of different applications (and I have a bunch of other windows of those applications open), my usual practice is either to size and position them where I can just see both at the same time (large screens ftw), or I'll pull them off into a separate space where Cmd-Tabbing between the two applications will be guaranteed to switch between just those two windows.
The problem with switching is that you quickly get too many windows / apps.
I tried to have a user per group, but that does T work fast enough.
The best setup for me is 2 or 3 machines, linked with synergykvm
Even if, with time, you have become comfortable with it, it is still a more convoluted way to manage tasks.
I actually find the macOS model to be more convenient (even though I didn't like it when I first tried it). It makes it very easy to switch away from an app that has multiple windows.
To be honest, I'm not sure there's an objectively better solution. I think it all comes down to the workflow and habits you've built around the model you use most often.
It's also pretty convenient to be able to switch between browser windows using cmd+`. I don't need to worry about getting other apps in between my browser windows.
Application switching makes sense in a world where the application is the locus of interest and you tend to spend a long time in each app, only rarely switching to another. We haven't lived in that world for a very long time.
Yes, Mac also supports switching between Windows in the same application but that is rarely what I want either since I am a heavy user of virtual desktops
Or maybe after a couple more years of macOS and I would get used to it.
Let's say I have just two monitors. That box being checked means I have spaces A1 A2 .. An and B1 B2 .. Bn, and monitor A can display any of the "A" spaces and monitor B can display any of the "B" spaces. But if I want everything from B2 to get displayed on monitor A, I have to create a new space An+1 and drag everything over one window at a time, like a cave man.
Unchecked means I have spaces AB1 AB2 .. ABn, and switching spaces switches both monitors at the same time! So if I want to see the A side of AB1 and the B side of AB2 at the same time, I'm out of luck.
Xmonad workspaces allow me to do any of the above behaviors (oh, and it switches workspaces instantaneously, instead of this left/right spatial thing macos insists on, I guess because of the trackpad swipe gestures). One of these days I need to try to make Hammerspoon fake workspaces in a way that works for me, because (like the OP) this is by far the least comfortable thing about working in macos for me.
If your state is A1/B2 (two monitors A and B displaying spaces 1 and 2 respectively), and you're working in A1 and want to switch B2 to B3, how do you "focus" on display B before moving spaces to B3? If you just press mod-3 I assume you'd get A3/B2. Do you have to alt-tab until you focus a window that is currently in B and then mod-3?
True about indexed access; some other window managers have natively built in "tagged workspaces" where windows have tags and the "chat workspace" is just "all windows that have the chat tag". You can (probably? I've never used them) bind numbers to tags permanently or temporarily but you wouldn't be limited to 0-9. I never bothered trying to copy that setup in xmonad because I never used more than 5 or 7 workspaces.
That's...not true, though? Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're after...
When you activate Mission Control (not sure offhand what the default shortcut is; I have mine set to Ctrl-Up, but I might have customized it), you can drag entire spaces between monitors. I do this regularly.
For me it's a two-finger double tap on the mouse (I think--not at my computer at the moment.)
The former of those two can also get rid of redundant menubars (as seen in e.g. Figma) which is a nice bonus.
* Hold down Command and press Tab until the application icon representing the minimised window is highlighted.
* Release Tab but DONT let go of Command.
* Now press Option too so you are holding down Command + Option
* Now release Command so you are just holding down Option
* Finally release Option
Amazingly this will then maximise the window whose application icon you selected in the first place.
Sounds crazy but it works. Try it!
In fact, my command-tab workflow is: command-tab to open the Switcher and then arrows to switch application/window
It put me off so much that I really can't be bothered to work out why it works, what the underlying switching philosophy is, or if there are any other commands to use.
I learned a few things from idly perusing them when I had nothing better to do.
Not once have I had to sit there mashing alt-tab and guessing then.
A while back I had the Raspberry Pi 400 computer on my desk and a newish M1 Mac. It was interesting how much better the window management was on the Pi. Frankly, for things like file management, that little computer was Snappy as hell.
And it does dual monitors like a champ!
And don't get me wrong here, I've used a lot of systems, and I'm fine with my Mac. I know how to use it, I get things done and the M1 chip is really sweet.
I generally go with the flow figure out what the flow is and I just don't worry about it past that. I just had to comment on this particular topic because I thought it was kind of humorous.
Sometimes the silly shadow around the top window gets too big, but then you can Option-Cmd-H to hide all other apps.
Invoke "Application Windows" and it will show you all the visible windows of the current application tiled so you can see them all, and it will show you all the minimized windows of the current application across the bottom of the screen. (Some applications, such as TextEdit and BBEdit also show recent documents there).
While in the "Application Windows" ctrl-tab cycles between all open apps while remaining in "Applications Windows" view.
Most of the time, though, I don't bother minimizing windows on macOS, whereas I minimize windows often on Windows. Although they're similar actions, they wind up serving different functions, and trying to treat minimized windows on macOS like minimized windows on Windows is just a recipe for frustration.
The Dock shows you any minimized windows on the right.
If for some reason this is no longer default (I don't remember the last time I setup a new Mac and didn't carry over settings) Right Click the dock >> dock preferences >> Uncheck "Minimize windows into application icon"
But I recognize that's more of a personal style than general usage.
I've been a Mac user since before the system even had proper multitasking, and the general answer to your question is that we would keep open the applications and windows that were useful to us, sometimes hiding an application that we're not actively using and don't need to have cluttering up the screen. Once Mac OS X came along, we would also minimize individual windows we weren't using—and if you minimize a window, then hide the application that it belongs to, that also hides its minimized windows in the Dock.
Also note that for every application up until a few years ago, and for some applications even now (and dependent on a System Preference setting), you can keep an application open on the Mac without any windows open.
> But I recognize that's more of a personal style than general usage.
> hiding an application that we're not actively using and don't need to have cluttering up the screen.
So having only used macs very sporadically what is the difference of hiding an application and minimizing a window?
> Also note that for every application up until a few years ago, and for some applications even now (and dependent on a System Preference setting), you can keep an application open on the Mac without any windows open.
So am I understanding correctly that hiding an application is essentially the same as minimizing all windows of that application (into some hidden space), I assumed from the previous posts they would just be moved to some virtual desktop? I guess that would be very nice for some applications but very annoying for others, e.g. do terminals count as the same application?
The difference between this and minimizing is that a) it affects all windows of the application, not just a selected one, and b) a minimized window either goes into the side of the Dock, or into the application icon on the Dock (depending on your set preferences); hidden windows, as I said, are completely invisible.
There is also a "Show All" option under the application menu (the one just to the right of the Apple menu, with the name of the foreground application) that will un-hide all currently hidden applications.
Virtual desktops are a relatively recent addition to the Mac; this hiding behavior has been around and worked consistently since the mid-'90s, well before Mac OS X.
(As a final random tidbit, one of my most common methods of hiding an application—particularly if it's the one I'm using at the time—is to simply option-click on either the desktop or another application's window, as that is a longstanding shortcut for doing so.)
That being said there is an option. The first is if you are in an application you can do control-down or (if you enable it under gestures >> more gestures for your trackpad) you do 3 fingers down you will see the minimized windows for your current application at the bottom. I did also just look it up and apparently if you do cmd-tab and press up on an application it does the same thing.
Not exactly what you are looking for, but you can at least do it on a per application level for anything minimized.
I find macOS alt-tab'ing works better for me with the addition of https://contexts.co/
Alternative: Cmd-Tab to desired app, arrow up (while holding Cmd) to see all windows of that app, then pick the desired one (with arrows or mouse).
I never minimize windows on purpose. I think the only reason the concept exists is because it predates virtual desktop switching.
Also, instead of Alt-Tab, flick four fingers up or down and select the window of interest.
The whole virtual desktop can get quite clunky fast when you have multiple windows opened or ephemeral programs that you temporarily need.
2. Ctrl-down for "Mission Control > Application windows"
3. Down arrow to select minimized
4. Enter
This even works when all windows of application are minimized.
It's a tradeoff: takes more keypresses to access the minimized window, but prevents the minimized window from getting in the way most of the time. Which is what you want if you've minimized it.
There is a rare case that I minimize a window, but it's generally because I don't want to work with that window any time soon, but I don't want to close it either, and I have multiple windows open in the app. Since I'm not frequently switching to the window in this situation, its fine if the easiest way to get back to it is to use my mouse.
So you alt + tab to select the application and switch to the right window. I personally think it's more reliable than Windows especially if I have a lot of Windows open (I used Windows for the last 10 years). On Windows I regularly switched to the wrong windows because of my fat fingers...
What also helps though is that an under-appreciated aspect of a typical set of Macintosh apps is how good the context menu has gotten. Typically I’m using the context menu and hotkeys much more than the menu bar because it is rare there is an option I want that is unavailable in the context menu.
The alternative is what? Apple changes something millions of people are already used to, their existing customer base, to satisfy switchers specifically when most can easily adapt? Or you just don’t use a Macintosh. Now what Apple does need to do is bring proper contrast back and stop wasting everyone’s time with this minimalist nonsense; even the option in the Accessibility options is utter garbage.
It's possible for an interface to be widely used and still have sharp edges. I consider this one of macOS's. It doesn't need to change, it may well not be worth it. But at least some people will end up in the menu of the wrong application.
There’s no secret, I just don’t lose track of which window I’m focused on in software because that’s the one I’m immediately focused on.
Exactly. The global menu and the top bar have been the main reasons I never bought a Mac.
Personally, I think it goes back to early Windows originally supporting very low resolution graphics cards where you simply couldn't display more than a single widow's worth of content at once.
Remember that EGA was only 640×350. You had to have a user interaction method that worked at such a low resolution.
Having things optimised for drag and drop between multiple windows is the reason for Classic Mac OS to only maximize a window enough so that the entire contents of the window is visible, instead of taking up the whole screen.
[1] https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_classic/specs/mac_128...
It was also supported in Windows, and given that Windows also kept a separate copy of the menubar as part of every window's chrome, they could have really called it Microsoft Window.
The need for a user interaction method that works at such a low resolution is the origin of Windows users expecting a UI that keeps every Window maximized.
File management in the classic Mac UI was always to open a window for the source directory and another window for the destination directory and use drag and drop to move or copy the files.
File management in Windows was to navigate to the source directory, cut or copy the files, navigate to the destination directory and paste.
Just as the classic Mac OS only maximizes a window enough to show all the contents of the window, but no larger than that to facilitate interacting between multiple windows instead of having every window take up the whole screen.
[0] https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Switcher.txt
and that is a perfectly sensible way of looking at this (and many other) fanboi discussions over the decades.
But then again, if such sensibility ever took hold in the majority of humans, it would be the end of social media as we know it :-)
You're both being silly, but the author is being especially silly to evaluate an operating system mostly based on how he feels about the user interface.
macOS is more than just a user interface, more on that in a bit. That being said, there is no Universe where any Linux user interface nor any user interface developed by Microsoft is superior to Apple's Aqua. Sure, Aqua sucks, but nothing, anywhere, approaches its ease of use (developed for everyone, not just the nitpicky self-proclaimed power users with weird tastes), and the feeling of solidity, like windows, menus and icons have some gravity and aren't just weightless and flat sprites ready to fly off the screen or fail to interact with other graphic elements properly. Frankly, every gui ever has been chasing Apple's guis since 1984. Truth hurts, I'm sure, but those are the facts. NT4 and 2K, very similar, were collectively the best guis Microsoft ever released, and gui-wise, everything since has been an absolute disaster, visually and with interaction, XP and 7 included, just absolute crappy junk of guis, and 10 and 11 are no better. In Linux, I always liked every gui I saw, Gnome and KDE, and really it can be tailored to whatever the user's desire is, can even run WindowMaker for the NeXT feel. But therein lies the problem, no consistency whatsoever and it's not for everyone; it is only for the tinkerers, coders, and Linux admins.
Back to the operating system. macOS is rarely given the credit it deserves for being such a solid stable gui running on top of SUS UNIX. Come' on, the author merely mentions this and says nothing about it, but right there is nearly everything that matters: more software available than any other platform ever plus all the best professional apps (printing, photography, audio, video, etc.) run better on macOS, and massive security benefits right out of the box, default config, but of course it can also be hardened, trivially, and then pretty much forgotten. You can never forget to attend to the security of your Windows machines, update, upgrade, constant, ceaseless, never ending scans, but that is in addition to its catastrophe of a user interface, so there's that.
[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-switch-between-window...