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.