[rbdr/blog.unlimited.pizza] / posts / 1 / window-management-and-huge-windows.gmi

# Window management doesn't work because all my windows are huge.

I have two computers at home with very different screens: one has a resolution of 1512 x 982, and the other one has a resolution of 512 x 342. On both screens I multi-task and get to use similar apps: text editors, file managers, image editors, web browsers, etc. And yet my large spacious laptop often feels more constrained than the tiny screen on the older mac.

I'm not saying the windowing experience was better in 1989, because it wasn't. But it wasn't all worse either. One of the things I find most irritating is how large screens are nowadays [1]. For example:

Omnigraffle, a diagramming app can't be resized to less than 57% of the screen width. Transmit, an FTP app needs 58%. Xcode, the official Apple IDE has decided it requires at least 63% of my screen width to operate. Setapp can't let me install apps without taking 72% of my screen width, and Davinci Resolve is generous to give me back a meager 4% of my screen width back.

All of these apps could go way smaller and still provide a great experience, there's plenty of examples: Max 8, Finder (Without sidebars), Blender. Many of the apps I believe they could change that limit and nothing else and it would work great. Some other apps have decided that design = padding and macspread all over the screen. It's just rude to not let me use all that screen space.

Meanwhile on the older mac, I find that most apps tend to be friendlier with screen real-estate. Of course without virtual spaces and smaller resolutions you had to!

Large windows make window management worse, please make your windows smaller.

=> http://www.unlimited.pizza/min_sizes.html [1] A collection of minimum window widths
Commit	Line	Data
f594f895 RBR	1	# Window management doesn't work because all my windows are huge.
	2
	3	I have two computers at home with very different screens: one has a resolution of 1512 x 982, and the other one has a resolution of 512 x 342. On both screens I multi-task and get to use similar apps: text editors, file managers, image editors, web browsers, etc. And yet my large spacious laptop often feels more constrained than the tiny screen on the older mac.
	4
	5	I'm not saying the windowing experience was better in 1989, because it wasn't. But it wasn't all worse either. One of the things I find most irritating is how large screens are nowadays [1]. For example:
	6
	7	Omnigraffle, a diagramming app can't be resized to less than 57% of the screen width. Transmit, an FTP app needs 58%. Xcode, the official Apple IDE has decided it requires at least 63% of my screen width to operate. Setapp can't let me install apps without taking 72% of my screen width, and Davinci Resolve is generous to give me back a meager 4% of my screen width back.
	8
	9	All of these apps could go way smaller and still provide a great experience, there's plenty of examples: Max 8, Finder (Without sidebars), Blender. Many of the apps I believe they could change that limit and nothing else and it would work great. Some other apps have decided that design = padding and macspread all over the screen. It's just rude to not let me use all that screen space.
	10
	11	Meanwhile on the older mac, I find that most apps tend to be friendlier with screen real-estate. Of course without virtual spaces and smaller resolutions you had to!
	12
	13	Large windows make window management worse, please make your windows smaller.
	14
	15	=> http://www.unlimited.pizza/min_sizes.html [1] A collection of minimum window widths