Ask Slashdot: Which Multiple Desktop Tool For Windows 7?

First time accepted submitter asadsalm writes "MacOS has spaces. Windows had no out-of-the-box utility for multiple virtual desktops. Which Multiple Desktop Tool should one use on Windows 7? Sysinternals Desktops, mdesktop, Dexpot, Virtual Dimension, VirtuaWin, Finestra are the few options that I have shortlisted." So, if you use both Windows and multiple desktops, what's your favorite method?

Comments

I'm happy with VirtuaWin + two extensions

[emurphy42]

...those extensions being KvasdoPager (preview widget in taskbar, supports drag+drop) and SwitchDesk (separate wallpaper per virtual desktop).

Sysinternals Desktops mentions some limitations up front. I don't remember whether I've tried any of the others.

Re:I'm happy with VirtuaWin + two extensions

[cbhacking]

Finestra is my preferred option - it has most of the features you mention (not sure about #3), plus a few:
  * Sticky windows
  * The ability to automatically put spawned windows onto a specific desktop
  * A "switcher" view that shows all virtual desktops by shrinking them to fit on one desktop, and allows you to reorganize windows there
  * Numerous ways to represent (and switch) virtual desktops from he taskbar

Additionally, it's free/open source (not sure how many of the others are too; I haven't used VirtuaWin for example): http://vdm.codeplex.com/

Re:Linux

[TheSpoom]

Yeah, people like that make the rest of us look bad. I'm a Linux user and if Windows works well for you, I wish you the best.

The problem with assholes is that they're fucking loud, and they drown out the rest of us. I simply use Linux most of the time and thus don't really know the best answer to this question, so I keep my mouth shut.

Always remember that there's usually a silent majority that just doesn't have time for the bullshit.

Because...

[IBitOBear]

Because there is no company "behind linux" pushing it into "marketing". This creates a catch-22 where people don't develop the "popularist crap" for linux because there is no market share, and "average" people don't buy the linux systems because there is no "crapware" for it.

Also, of course, since the big makers (Dell, Gateway, etc) are enjoined from selling linux-equipped desktop machines under penalty of losing their Microsoft OEM licenses, there are no "sales figures" for Linux Desktop Systems period. Microsoft "owns" the channels from which Linux Desktop Systems would emerge into actual conciousness.

Finally, -every- topic, user community, position, and theory has its share of insufferable sanctimonious assholes. Your use of the "Or" in your missive established a false dichotomy. You don't have to be -wrong- to be an I.S.A. 8-)

Re:Because...

[realityimpaired]

Also, of course, since the big makers (Dell, Gateway, etc) are enjoined from selling linux-equipped desktop machines under penalty of losing their Microsoft OEM licenses, there are no "sales figures" for Linux Desktop Systems period. Microsoft "owns" the channels from which Linux Desktop Systems would emerge into actual conciousness.

You may wanna back up a bit and do your research there, friend... I'm typing this on a Dell laptop that's about 6 months old, and which came with Ubuntu LTS preinstalled (Vostro V130n). They don't actively market it, because they don't want customers calling them to complain that their Windows-only software doesn't work on it, but they do sell it on consumer-class devices, on both desktop and laptop form factors, and they go out of their way to make sure that as much of their hardware as possible is supported by Linux, even if they don't provide the OS with it.

Marketing is a large part of why Linux isn't taking off as much as people may like. But it's not the only reason... I know several people who have switched back to Windows, because application X doesn't work right in Linux. Application support is the reason Linux isn't winning on the market, not pure sales figures. Hence why Linux is winning in server space: it has the application support.

Re:Because...

[firefrei]

What I've come to realize (speaking as a Linux fan but not a full-time user) is that a lot of Linux supporters like to blame everyone else for the lack of Linux's success on the desktop, EXCEPT Linux itself. They don't seem to acknowledge the fact that perhaps, just perhaps, it's the kernel developer's insistence on the lack of a stable ABI/API, the lack of support for commercial developers and the often hostile attitude of the community to said developers who write proprietary software, that might make Linux distros undesirable for the developers, and so the lack of software/hardware support and indeed, polish, ends up pushing people away.

But no, it's everyone else's fault. The Linux ecosystem is surely not at fault right? As long as people keep believing this, nothing will get better (and since it's such a pervasive idea that it's everyone ELSE who's at fault, no wonder uptake of Linux desktops is not only at a standstill, but in some reports is regressing.) It's fucking disturbing how many people think Linux is good enough for mainstream users, and ignore the legitimate complains people have about it. Personally I'm prepared to work with its deficiencies but at least I'm not blind to them!

Re:Linux

[amicusNYCL]

How is it the right answer to tell someone who develops and maintains C#.net applications built for Windows and compiled with VS2010 to use Linux?

Re:Linux

[PopeRatzo]

That's my answer. Give up the WIndows.

Of course, it's not an answer you likely want to hear. Unfortunately, I don't have any answers you'd want to hear.

Will someone please tell me that using Linux doesn't necessarily mean you have to act like an asshole? Or maybe there something about gnome or kde that requires it or something?

It's like the 15 year old boy who is getting ready to go to his first prom and pick up his date and asks his mom if he looks OK and his mom says, "You should have gotten a haircut. I know that's not the answer you likely wanted to hear, but unfortunately, I don't have any answers you want to hear. Plus, you're too young to be dating."

He learns very quickly never to ask his mom anything serious again.

I really don't want people to learn that you really shouldn't ask Linux users for any computer advice because it's more likely you're going to hear about their ideological stance than anything actually useful. Not that changing from Windows to Linux couldn't be useful, but maybe we shouldn't assume that the person asking the question is completely clueless about the relative merits of Linux vs Windows and has other reasons that he needs to use Windows and if he is completely clueless about the relative merits of Linux vs Windows than maybe it means the Linux community has work to do besides belittling someone who comes to you with an honest question.

"I'm having trouble playing this Black Keys CD on my new Linux system, do you think you could help me set up audio on this system? I think I may have done something wrong."

"No, I won't help you, because you shouldn't listen to retro, derivative crap like the Black Keys, you should be listening to Zed Bias or Datsik. If you want my help, first get a clue about good music."

"Gee, what an asshole. I might as well go back to Windows Vista so I don't have to deal with jackoffs like him."