Not GP, but ~15 years ago tmux offered a lot better screen splitting options and a few other features that screen did not. That's why I switched. I did continue to use screen at work because it was ubiquitous, but then sysads started installing tmux as well and that was no longer an issue.

screen has improved a lot since then, but it lagged behind substantially for years.

I was a very long time screen user and tried tmux early on in its existence. It was slow and different so I bailed back to screen. Last year I tried tmux again and have switched to it full time.

One of the things I like most about it is how easy it is to extend. In the role I was in last year, I'd have several long-lasting SSH sessions to various hosts. With a very simple bash script I was able to create a prompt in tmux that I could trigger to ask me where I wanted to ssh to. If I already had a connection to that host, it would switch me to that window, if not, it would create a new one and ssh to the host.

I wanted to do that in screen for years, but it just didn't have the features to facilitate it. On top of that I was able to easily re-map all of the keybindings to be just like screen for my muscle memory.

Ubuntu, and probably other distros, have screen as a hard dependency for doing upgrades to new release versions on the command line (do-release-upgrade command). I encountered it again just the other day while updating to an LTS version. It's a fantastic feature to have by default, in case your ssh connection gets dropped during the upgrade or something.

People say tmux is more powerful. Whatever that means?

Screen seems to cover all my needs and it learning it is easy. I came for the tabs (windows), sessions, copy and paste - but the must have for everyone is the scrollback buffer. You need it! Especially since we can scroll one the plain terminal.

> Having a modem is a pretty handy thing built into it.

in what way?