[kitsunesoba]

macOS window management philosophy is to not tightly manage windows, letting them live where they end up, not unlike papers on a desk. For occasions where windows need to be side by side and both fully visible (which at least for my workflow, isn’t all that often), they’re only loosely manually arranged that way.

It works for me at least. I have Moom installed for the occasions where I temporarily need tiling and that’s more than enough. Full tiling WMs on Linux give me a headache because with most of the programs I use, windows need to take up 70%+ of the screen to be usable which means the remaining space for other programs isn’t particularly useful, which defeats much of the purpose of full tiling.

[maxwell86]

macOS WM philosophy sounds like Outlook email philosophy: it should behave like paper mail.

Worst philosophy ever. Instead of figuring out how new technology enables better solutions to current problems, their philosophy is to emulate current solutions instead.

This is why I prefer gmail over outlook, and Linux over macos.

[Veen]

The mental model of windows having a consistent spatial location is deeply ingrained into MacOS because it's been done that way for decades. There are still old Mac users who complain that the Finder switched from a spatial model to a browser model.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2010/09/macos-x-beta/14/#b6

That's an old article, but Siracusa is still complaining about the "new" non-spatial finder to this day.

[kitsunesoba]

I’m not sure it’s so cut and dry. Workflows are highly personal things, so while something highly automated might work a charm for some while not working at all for others.