[rfunduk]

> i run full width.

Really!? Can I ask why? Why not just make the browser about 1050px or so wide, you can view every website out there and you can have other things in the extra space (twitter, client, terminal, downloads, whatever).

[abstractbill]

I do this too. My screen is pretty much always taken up either by a full-width Emacs, or a full-width Firefox.

I can't speak for diN0bot of course, but the reason I work this way is to minimize distractions. I don't want all that stuff in my peripheral vision when I'm busy trying to get stuff done.

[rfunduk]

Assuming you're using a Mac, opt-cmd-h will hide all windows but the one you're using...

Personally, what I find worse than 'distractions' is being blinded by whitespace caused by Firefox (/whatever) being way too huge.

And, full-width emacs!? On my monitor (with a rather large font size) that's almost 250 columns, I hope you don't have any code over there! If you're vertically splitting emacs, then, I think we're on the same page. It's not about windows themselves being any specific size, it's about making them an appropriate size for their content.

[jrockway]

Probably because managing windows is a big pain, but everyone still thinks it's 1980 and overlapping windows are really cool.

[rfunduk]

Managing windows is a big pain? Is it 1980? :)