Hm, if you don’t use Spaces (like me), Mission Control is, at least in my personal experience, just as competent as the old Exposé. I like that OS X no longer enforces a grid and that it proportionally resizes Windows (instead of making them all the same size).
I think I also like that windows of the same app are grouped together. One possible downside are the resulting overlapping windows, I think, though, it’s wroth the tradeoff.
I do not like that single app Exposé still forces apps on a grid and still forces them all to the same size. That said, I rarely use single app Exposé.
The new implementation of Spaces might actually be able to entice me to use them from time to time, so it seems like an improvement for me personally. The problems he is talking about are certainly serious and should be fixed.
No it isn't.
Following up on your post, which is btw, great, I'd add Mission Control also breaks my use of Exposé.
On Snow Leopard, most of the time, I used only one space and, as I've been using it on a 13.3" MBP, my windows were always using most of the screen and I usually have more than one window of a given app open at the same time (Finder or Text Wrangler for example).
To see multiple app windows, my workflow was:
1. Swipe four fingers down (gesture for Exposé);
2. Select any window of any given app.
Now, I must use Mission Control:
1. Gesture for Mission Control;
2. Select the app;
3. Gesture for Exposé;
4. Select my window.
Why do you have to do that? I don’t understand. I invoke Mission Control and select any window of any app, just like before. Two steps, just like before.
Because windows are grouped into app bundles. In each bundle, windows are stacked on top of each other. Thus smaller hitboxes, obscured content, harder to select a particular window.
Exposé hasn't been good since Leopard. In Leopard, there were some simple rules.
- Every window on the screen is fully visible.
- Windows are sized proportionally.
- Movement from the original position was as minimal as possible.
Snow Leopard removed the second two by arranging all of the windows in a grid (iTunes is the same size as a tiny Adium window). Lion removes the first one.
It hasn’t been good for you personally. I was ok with the way it worked in Leopard (worse than Leopard, but ok) and I think Lion is a definite improvement over Leopard. Again, for me personally. Windows are resized proportionally and not on a grid, the overlapping windows haven’t been a problem for me and I actually like that apps are grouped together.
All valid complaints, I think. It sounds like Apple made some very poor decisions when they re-implemented Spaces.
I think their goal was valid (trying to make Spaces a feature everyone is able to use) and they went into the right direction, their attention to detail, though, was seriously lacking.
With the focus on full screen apps I'd say their future is one small laptop/iPad display. Full screen / mission control brings us much closer to iOS style application switching which in fact does work well on the air and MBPs but is less useful on the 27 inch screens and downright worthless with two screens.
I personally only use OS X on my laptop, and here's what I had before Lion:
1. 3x3 Spaces grid
2. Each major application assigned to a space. Primary editors (vim, Textmate, etc.) in space 5 (center), others surrounding it.
3. Each application typically maximized to fill its space.
4. When I need to switch applications, command-tab between them.
This gave me each application with almost a full screen of space, isolated to itself, with little cognitive overhead. I don't need more than command-tab at this point to manage my workflow.
I installed Lion today. Now, I have a linear set of spaces, but some of the applications I was giving full-screen to can actually use the whole screen. Mail is one of them. Chrome's support is a bit buggy so I'm avoiding it for now.
I still command-tab between applications, and that works fine, giving me all the space I had before. It seems to me that Lion's replacement for spaces was designed for me: someone who assigns one space per major application and likes to have those applications full-screened. I can 4-finger swipe left/right between the spaces (I had to set 3-fingers for page swiping so I could keep using the trackpad for Chrome forward/back). That means I can't use 4-finger-swipe to pull up the command-tab switcher, but 3-finger-swipe-up brings up MC, which is close enough, now.
Just food for thought. If I had to deal with the multiple-screen issues OP mentioned, I'd probably go nuts, but I've only used a customized Ubuntu for such situations long-term. As a laptop user, MC seems designed for me almost to the T.
I think I also like that windows of the same app are grouped together. One possible downside are the resulting overlapping windows, I think, though, it’s wroth the tradeoff.
I do not like that single app Exposé still forces apps on a grid and still forces them all to the same size. That said, I rarely use single app Exposé.
The new implementation of Spaces might actually be able to entice me to use them from time to time, so it seems like an improvement for me personally. The problems he is talking about are certainly serious and should be fixed.