Apple has finally dropped the ultrawide virtual display for Vision Pro in beta, giving the existing virtual display feature the ability to stretch to wide and ultrawide widths for extra screen real-estate. Out of the box it’s impressive, but default MacOS window management makes it kind of a pain to use. But with the right third-party window manager, it’s even better than I hoped for.

I’ll be honest, I didn’t know just how useful the new ultrawide feature would be. I’ve used Vision Pro’s virtual desktop feature many times before. It’s a great way to get some extra screen real-estate out of my MacBook Air (M2). But it was limited in that it could only really act like a single, large 16:9 monitor.

My productivity workhorse is my desktop PC on which I’ve used two side-by-side monitors for years. For a power-user like me, having the extra width to have multiple things on screen at once is great; constantly minimizing and maximizing apps is a pain. I also combine my dual monitors with additional virtual workspaces, meaning I can group applications together on a specific workspace for a specific task.

I’ve yet to make the leap to a single ultrawide monitor over dual monitors. They’re pretty damn expensive and physically take up a lot of space.

But with a little software update, Apple just gave me an ultrawide monitor that I can take with me wherever I take my Vision Pro. The ultrawide setting essentially gives you two 16:9 monitors side-by-side, but without the seam in the middle if you were using dual monitors.

So not only is my little MacBook Air now able to replicate all the screen real estate that I have with the big setup that takes up my whole office desk, it also has the benefit of no seam in the middle of the monitors. I didn’t fully appreciate how much this would increase the flexibility I have with setting up my workspaces. Now it’s easy to span an app seamlessly in the ‘middle’ of the workspace, while less important apps can be on the flanks. It’s great! But…

MacOS window management is simply not ready to handle ultrawide monitors. Even though Apple just added improved window tiling in the latest version of MacOS, it really isn’t very helpful on an ultrawide monitor.

SEE ALSO
iPhone 16 Adds Spatial Photos and Spatial Audio Capture for Vision Pro

At best you can ask the system to put an app into any quarter of the monitor, but this results in super-wide apps that aren’t useful in that particular shape. You can make a window go to just one half of the screen, but that gives you a maximum of only two apps on the screen at once.

Without window management that’s actually made for ultrawide monitors, you’re stuck doing a lot of resizing of windows to get them into useful arrangements to really take advantage of all the space you have. Or you do the seemingly insane thing Apple always shows in their marketing: just use randomly sized windows that overlap with other windows while also wasting a bunch of screen space. I mean look, this is literally what they showed when promoting this feature:

Image courtesy Apple

Being able to quickly get apps into useful size and position is essential to really benefiting from an ultrawide monitor. The more time it takes to size and position apps, the less often you’re going to actually use the extra space to your benefit.

Luckily there’s many third-party window managers out there for MacOS. And I would argue that having one is essential if you’re using the Vision Pro ultrawide virtual display.

Here is a look at MacOS’s built in quadrant window tiling which is not remotely useful for an ultrawide monitor. Then you see a third-party tool that makes things much better.

For now I’ve landed on a window manager called Rectangle. With it I can easily set up a ‘main’ app in the center 2/4 of the monitor, then stick apps in the remaining 1/4 on the left or 1/4 on the right. Or I can even stack two apps on the sides, taking up 1/8 of the monitor each.

This works great and makes me feel like I have even more room than I did when using two physical 16:9 monitors (again, the lack of gap in the middle is a surprising benefit because you can put your most important app directly in front of you).

Screenshot by Road to VR

Although Rectangle has the features that make this work well, the app itself is overcomplicated; like using a sledgehammer when all you really need is a regular hammer. There still might be a more streamlined solution out there.

There’s really no reason why MacOS itself shouldn’t have similar window-arranging capabilities that actually make sense for ultrawide monitors, especially now that Vision Pro doubles as one.

Anyway… with the window management issue taken care of, I’m finding the ultrawide virtual display feature even more useful than I expected. When combined with MacOS’s built-in Spaces feature—which allows me to slide easily between multiple ultrawide workspaces—my little MacBook Air feels like an absolute productivity powerhouse. It’s wild to me that it can run five ultrawide workspaces worth of apps and still feel nice and smooth.

For me, the ultrawide option (with some third-party help) has changed Vision Pro’s virtual display feature from something that’s nice to have here and there, into an essential capability of the headset.

Now listen, some of you who have made it this far might be thinking to yourself: “to some extent you’re just praising ultrawide monitors in general.”

You’re not wrong. But the thing is, this one fits in my headset, which means I can bring a highly productive workspace with me anywhere that I would take my laptop.

Vision Pro is still too heavy to want to use this setup all day (and it’s still more expensive than an ultrawide monitor itself!). But mark my words: once Apple has an equivalent headset that’s half the size and half the price, people are going to see huge value from this kind of work setup.

Newsletter graphic

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. More information.


Ben Lang
Ben is the world's most senior professional analyst solely dedicated to the XR industry, having founded Road to VR in 2011—a year before the Oculus Kickstarter sparked a resurgence that led to the modern XR landscape. He has authored more than 3,000 articles chronicling the evolution of the XR industry over more than a decade. With that unique perspective, Ben has been consistently recognized as one of the most influential voices in XR, giving keynotes and joining panel and podcast discussions at key industry events. He is a self-described "journalist and analyst, not evangelist."

  • Interesting opinion. I have a few friends with wide monitors like those and they are indeed damn expensive. If headsets could replace those, that would be amazing

  • ViRGiN

    But the thing is, this one fits in my headset, which means I can bring a highly productive workspace with me anywhere that I would take my laptop.

    What does that even mean? Why is everyone so bent on tying productivity to screen size? What are you doing that really makes use of this outside of your primary workspace? This sounds great for web surfing, but real productivity would be measured in number of actions per minute, similar to how RTS at the highest levels are measured.

    Given the size, weight and always-discomfort of the headset as well as limited resolution, these are just glimpses into maybe-future. Until then, I think you all need to learn how to actually be productive, cause you certainly aren't with that tiny keyboard and touchpad in far from ergonomic setup.

    • rabs

      Depends on what you do.

      And yeah, current HMDs are not really up to the task yet, especially standalone headsets.

      Though even Meta is building split computing prototypes now, between Orion AR glasses + compute module, and their project of VR HMD + compute module. Hope it will have high density displays instead of 2k².

    • William Calderini

      In my job, I have to have Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, MS Teams, My office e-Mail, and 2 web browsers open to function at a minimum. (Usually an FTP client as well). Working in Automotive Advertising, doing (usually) about 20 jobs simultaneously, flitting between them each every 5-10 minutes or so to make updates on the fly. (Along with 10 other artists handling the same workload). Dual 27 inch real monitors barely cut it. This will be a gamechanger for me. (Trying to get it set up to give it a test run today-but hate putting "beta" software on my Primary work computer). Granted, as I have said here before, me, and my co-workers, are a VERY limited work case scenario. BUT, given that, this could be a game-changer. We work very high volume, same day turn-around (Get info, produce, post multiple graphics to websites, code eblasts and web pages, plus traditional print and POP items). The biggest problem is ALWAYS keeping track of the work flow. Something like this won't solve the issue, but could alleviate a lot of the issues we face.
      Of course, I am the only idiot guinea pig, going out on a limb and trying this on my own. But that's what I do. The weight/discomfort issue has already been solved by many inexpensive 3rd party alternatives. (Globular Cluster CMA1 comfort mod for AVP is the one I'm currently using) This makes it no more or less discomforting than nay other VR headset in general. And it's not "everyone" bent on tying productivity to screen size, but for some people, it is EXACTLY that. I did not choose my workflow. My industry and how we approach it evolved out of necessity and we maintain our edge by being as multi-tasking as we are. ANY HELP. Helps. Niche solutions for niche problems? I'll take it. It's not for everyone though. But broad brush statements tend to paint over some very important details. Be well.

      • Michael Speth

        You should really consider the usage of Virtual Desktops. If you have 10 or so Virtual Monitors always visable, you will need to move your head which is ergnomically bad. Or if you can easily move the virtual monitors around, what is the point of that in VR when you could be a lot more efficient by using Virtual Desktops.

        Linux OS is king of the Virtual Desktops but Windows and Mac all have implemented them as well.

        VR is not the answer to productivity when Virtual Desktops simply are superior to VR Desktops.

  • kraeuterbutter

    hmm.. as someone who works for years now with immersed: Apples solution shown here: it seems pretty limited, to this slim "Band"
    you see that the user has to make windows smaller in height because its only a band
    results in way to much head-turning

    • Ben Lang

      Yeah ideally they eventually make each app its own 'window' in space, but they absolutely shouldn't do this until they get better window management on VisionOS. I would actually prefer to use the current desktop modalities of window organization and virtual desktops then to use the same number of apps but floating around me in Vision Pro, purely because moving them around into useful configurations is cumbersome.

      • kraeuterbutter

        That’s another problem: you need profiles that you can organize, locate, and identify. You should set up your windows once and save that profile in a way that makes it easy to recognize later. Arranging windows every time you start up, or at the very least each time you change locations, is way too time-consuming, far to tedious.

  • rabs

    Virtual monitor placement in Apple example is way too high, she'll get neck pain in no time even if headset was weightless.

    VR is interesting ergonomically because it can extend our display surface down through the desk instead of up. Main content should be at eye level and a bit down, then to the sides, then down, then up. Usually I don't use MR, I don't see my keyboard but I'm touch typing anyway. Maybe an outline would be nice, but that's it.

    I'm using tiling window managers since over 20 years, and can pop a window out if it needs a specific size. But mostly I switch between organization patterns and open/close windows, all with shortcuts.

    For now I use VR mostly for gaming, but once Vive Flow, BigScreen Beyond and similar form factor HMD (not standalone, I have many forms of computing already) are good and affordable enough, my laptop screen time is over.

    • William Calderini

      With the AVP you can place the monitor screen anywhere you like.(incredibly easy to adjust as well) Eye level. Below eye level. Through a table. Unless you were talking about neck strain in just using a wide screen monitor in the first place, then that's not an Apple problem.

      • rabs

        Good to know, because Apple marketing picture showed in the article have most of the screen above user's head.

    • Michael Speth

      Virtual Desktops are really the key to performance – no reason to have multiple monitors when you have 6 or 8 virtual desktops. Linux has been doing this right like you said for over 20 years.

      VR tries to reinvent this but moving your head around is terrible for ergnomics when your keyboard is stationary.

      • rabs

        My use case for an HMD is with a 11-13" laptop. Virtual desktops are great, but it's still limited. My FOV is better than that, even without turning my head. If the HMD is not too crappy, I can move my eyes around to check notifications or references.

        Usually I use 2-3 physical screens: laptop on the left, main screen, and usually another one on the right (depending where I am). All have virtual desktops, and inside them terminals with tmux and browsers windows with tabs. I got multiple layers of nesting.

        When I'm not at an equipped desk, it's quite frustrating to use only the laptop screen. But less than having to carry a huge screen all day in case I may need it.

        • Michael Speth

          It would be much easier to carry a portal backup screen (think tablet) than it is to carry a very oddly shaped VR headset. You could already be achieving 2 or even 3 screens if you get the right portable monitor.

          • rabs

            Portable screens are still tiny, most desk I use have 22-24" monitors. Usually when I use my laptop on the go I don't have room around anyway, it's in a server room, a train or something like that.

            I'm thinking Bigscreen Beyond or Vive Flow sized HMD, not a standalone device like the Quest or AVP.

          • Michael Speth

            You might want to checkout MeganeX superlight 8K especially b/c it has a flip top.

          • rabs

            Yeah I hope those kind of HMD will find traction, but it's not really fitting my use case. I'll wait for something cheaper, more compact (soft strap) and with video tracking. I don't want to have to carry a base station around.

  • Christian Schildwaechter

    Or you do the seemingly insane thing Apple always shows in their marketing: just use randomly sized windows that overlap with other windows while also wasting a bunch of screen space.

    That's a feature, not a bug. MacOS and Windows follow different design philosophies, with Apple pushing MDI (Multi-document interface) vs Microsoft SDI (Single-document interface). Early Mac Photoshop opened lots of arrangeable palettes and windows, while Windows started as a glorified Excel launcher, tiling windows to 1/1, 1/2 or 1/4 of the screen, with all tools inside.

    Both have advantages, with SDI winning on small/mobile screens. The idea of MDI's windows "wasting a bunch of screen space" is mostly a sign of being used to Windows though. A tiling split with one center 16:9 and two side 8:9 windows "covers" the background, but simply moves the waste inside the windows. Like the one shown by Apple, my multi-screen Mac desktop is filled with overlapping windows set to individual sizes, web pages only showing the text column instead of surrounding white space, terminals displaying a few lines, or tiny monitoring apps. I look at way more than three windows with a matching workflow.

    This also works better for AVP/XR. The current virtual display is a crutch, the actual goal is showing MacOS windows outside of a 32:9/~40°*10° FoV rectangle, similar to iPad apps already placed and sized however you like. Windows conditioned people to SDI fullscreen, which in 360° XR only makes sense for immersive uses like games. Otherwise you want to place things wherever you need them while not blocking your view.

    • Ben Lang

      Thanks that's good context that I've always wondered about. Still insane : P

      • Christian Schildwaechter

        (Way too) TL;DR: It will be interesting to see how apps designed for menu/mouse or touch interaction can be translated to XR, which lacks the precision and physical properties that allow these interfaces to work. It will take some time to get from XR being a much less ergonomic environment for productivity work to one that may actually be much better by utilizing the vastly larger screen space, depth perception and spatial positioning not available on previous platforms.

        Expect more insanity during the development of usable interfaces for spatial apps. MacOS relies heavily on screen edges to aid with mouse navigation. Going up always gets you to the menu, going down to the dock, no need to aim for a slim menu at the top of one window.. Windows 95 adapted this with the Start button in the top left corner and applications listed at the lower screen border, and often moving to a corner will trigger a special function, all possible due to the physical limits of the screen.

        None of these work anymore in (free "floating") XR apps, nor do a number of gestures adapted for mobile devices like swiping from/to the edge to pull down notifications, show menus etc. Like the Mac menu at the top of the screen the motivation is always that having to hit a small target is both difficult and takes away focus, with the edge removing the need to aim at all, allowing for faster use.

        The current virtual displays can still rely on this when used with a mouse, but future apps with more native integration that might include being usable with hand tracking will have to adapt. Menu/panel based Mac/Windows apps getting ported to iOS/Android usually get dumbed down somewhat because it is very difficult to squeeze the number of options cascading menus can display with only gestures or large icons. And even those dumbed down mobile versions then rely on the hard surface of the phone/tablet to make them easier to use, while tapping in mid air in XR is both tiring and imprecise.

        So we need a new type of menu for XR to keep using complex desktop applications. Compared to mobile, screen space isn't limited, so large/deep menus are actually an option, but those we use today require the precise aim a mouse provides and are hard to use with hand tracking. Maybe pie menus will finally start to gain traction. Some people have advocated for them for decades because they allow learning a gesture as the path to a certain command somewhere down the menu hierarchy, which could translate nicely to waiving a hand through the air in XR.

        1988 NeXTSTEP placed the main menu on the right mouse button, appearing wherever the curser currently was, and allowed to "rip off" submenus that could then be placed anywhere on the screen where they would stay, enabling users to sort of customize the menu on the fly. Apple dropped this when turning NeXTSTEP into MacOS X, going back to the familiar fixed top edge menu from classic MacOS, and later adopting the context menus Windows apps started placing on the right mouse button in the early 90s.

        But a similar (main) menu structure not fixed to a certain position could work well for XR, where one could trigger a pie menu with a gesture at the current hand position, floating slightly before its application, then select options through more consecutive pie menus, each of which could be separated and placed near the current app/window for quick access until no longer needed. This way new types of interfaces could compensate for the lack of mouse precision and physical edges in XR with the vastly larger space available and actual depth. The drop shadows that Windows/MacOS draw for windows and menus and that allow to work with several overlapping, borderless white windows and still being able to distinguish them, already use perceived depth to structure multiple documents. Which would work even better in XR with actual depth, where stacking tabs behind each other like in a Rolodex to scroll through might work better than today's side-by-side tabs on 2D screens.

        All this might be (a little bit) too early/theoretical/far off, considering that right now we are happy to finally get at least ultrawide virtual screens with usable resolutions. But I was always irritated by people wanting their HMD to be usable as a virtual multi-monitor setup with six, nine, twelve or more monitors at no additional cost. Simply because there is no reason to limit the use to a number of 2D rectancles when we could have documents floating in free space, zoomed in/collapsed/grouped with a wave of the hand in a 3D hierarchy much easier to recognize than a 2D tree view. So I'm hoping to see many other insane things on the way to rid XR productivity use of the limits of physical 2D screens. We'll probably have to actively unlearn a number of interface metaphors we've relied on for decades.

        • Ben Lang

          Good points. Have you used Vision Pro yet? It's really surprising how well their gaze+pinch system works. Well enough to navigate pretty much any emulated iPad app (outside of first/third person games) with zero changes to the app.

          • Christian Schildwaechter

            Despite living close to an Apple Store, I still haven't tried the AVP yet. I may have overdosed on living vicariously through articles and video reviews, which apparently dampened my drive to even book a demo after it became available in Europe. Not because I doubt that it works great, more because I had already accepted that it works great.

  • xyzs

    To get interesting large virtual monitors, you need a decent FoV first, so you don’t have to break your neck to find what you where looking for (just a quick eye movement instead).
    With the current VP, it’s not enough.