The "Instant-Replay" (View->Go back in time) can be a handy little feature if you've ever wanted to look up something that turns out not to be in the scrollback because it was a full-screen app running on the alternate screen buffer, or whatever. It's also good for checking out /when/ something happened, after the fact.

I've not used it much, but when I've needed to, it's been a lifesaver.

For the curious, from what I've seen Terminal in Lion has 256 color support and (kind of shitty) full-screen support.

I'd actually disagree - I think the fullscreen support is really good. What didn't you like about it?

I'm used to either Visor or iTerm providing "instant" full-screen terminal access, but taking apps full-screen in Lion seems to involve a nearly tedious animation.

Granted, now that I think about it, I have seen a bug that makes Spaces-switching slow, so it's possible I'm just seeing the same thing in the full-screen animation.

To put it another way, the result is fine, I just don't like the transition.

I wish there were a way to turn off most transitions in OSX. Anyone know some hack?

So tmux with a shiny 200x200 icon?

One of the features slated for v1.1 or thereabouts is deep integration with tmux.

http://code.google.com/p/iterm2/wiki/TmuxIntegration and https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ABI0kqUUxoAjxhWW3AsWFis6... have some details on how it might work.

(Also, learn the difference between a terminal multiplexer, and a terminal emulator :p)

> (Also, learn the difference between a terminal multiplexer, and a terminal emulator :p)

What difference the name makes? If this shiny new terminal emulator is touting something which a terminal multiplexer already does, from a user perspective, his reply is legit.

A terminal multiplexer is a way to create and access multiple ttys from a single terminal (-emulator). Both of the most widely known (GNU Screen and tmux) are terminal-only apps - They require a terminal or terminal emulator to act as their user interface.

Terminal emulators, as the name suggest, emulate terminals. Since most people don't tend to use dedicated VT100s any more, we use emulators like xterm, rxvt, Terminal.app, etc instead.

A mux without an emulator to access it is pretty useless, whereas an emulator with some mux features can provide benefits not easily achievable with a standalone multiplexer.

One example would be mouse-based text selection. Using vertical splits in tmux, and triple-clicking to select a full line will select the contents of both split regions, whereas a GUI app can limit it to one region. I'm sure there are plenty of other features.

> A terminal multiplexer is a way to create and access multiple ttys from a single terminal (-emulator).

Thanks. I know that and use screen, and the post we are discussing mentions tmux, so he knows it as well.

> whereas an emulator with some mux features can provide benefits not easily achievable with a standalone multiplexer.

The op was being snarky but that was the whole point. iterm2 doesn't seem to be giving something which we(in a generic sense; I use linux and have nothing to do with iterm) want and aren't already doing in the current emulator/multiplexer setup.

> One example would be mouse-based text selection. Using vertical splits in tmux, and triple-clicking to select a full line will select the contents of both split regions, whereas a GUI app can limit it to one region. I'm sure there are plenty of other features.

I don't use tmux but that's the behavior in gnu screen vertical split as well.

>> A terminal multiplexer is a way to create and access multiple ttys from a single terminal (-emulator).

> Thanks. I know that and use screen, and the post we are discussing mentions tmux, so he knows it as well.

You asked what the difference was. I told you.

>> whereas an emulator with some mux features can provide benefits not easily achievable with a standalone multiplexer.

> The op was being snarky but that was the whole point. iterm2 doesn't seem to be giving something which we(in a generic sense; I use linux and have nothing to do with iterm) want and aren't already doing in the current emulator/multiplexer setup.

Yes, I got that as well. My point is that it is in fact nothing at all like "tmux with an icon"; It's a terminal emulator, which happens to:

a) be better in various ways than hte Terminal.app that ships with OSX (256-color support, for a start. See upthread for many more).

b) have some features which overlap with dedicated terminal muxes, like tmux. If you look at the links I mentioned, the idea is to make iTerm recognise you're using tmux (even on a remote host), and translate its split panels into GUI split panels, amongst other things.

So yes, it does (or will) provide additional features.

>> One example would be mouse-based text selection. Using vertical splits in tmux, and triple-clicking to select a full line will select the contents of both split regions, whereas a GUI app can limit it to one region. I'm sure there are plenty of other features.

>I don't use tmux but that's the behavior in gnu screen vertical split as well.

Precisely. But iTerm2, being a GUI terminal emulator, can do that. That is a feature.

> You asked what the difference was. I told you.

I didn't ask what the difference was. I asked what difference it makes what difference the name makes in context of knowing the difference between tmux and iterm2 - what is terminal emulator and what is terminal mux and what is a combo, as long as it gives me what I want.

I believe the discussion was centered around why would someone switch to iterm2.

So you don't think a term emulator on MacOS X is useful to you because you use Linux.

And the insight of your comment was exactly what?

> So you don't think a term emulator on MacOS X is useful to you

Where did I say that? The discussion was about if iterm2 has needed features which an existing emulator/mux combination doesn't have.

I use it with tmux. The main reason I use it is because of its full screen support and the unixy behavior for focus follows mouse, copy on select, middle button paste.

Different behavior for left/right alt is a must for me:

- Left-Alt = Meta/+Esc

- Right-Alt = OS X Alt

I built an .inputrc/.zshrc so that text/word/line movements behave the same as in Cocoa text fields, like Ctrl+Left/Right and Alt+Left/Right.

Had I done that under Terminal.app, I would have given up on being able to type characters like | (Alt+Shift+L) or ~ (Alt+N) on my French keyboard, which would make a terminal much, much less useless.

funny i've been using iTerm2 for a while now and didn't knew it had split windows built in, main reason i used it was the speed, and it allowed me to have different scheme of colors.