It is a thing, but I find that having separate desktops ("spaces" in OSX terminology) for different tasks helps me context switch back to the task quicker. I keep different desktops for different tasks, each with their own terminal running. Each terminal may have several tabs opens. When it's time to switch to that task, I switch to that desktop. When that task is completely done, I just close everything and remove the desktop.
Keeping this all in my head - even remembering how many shells I had open to do what - takes more thinking and effort than I want it to. It is far easier for me to just say, "This is where all the stuff for X goes" and physically isolate it from everything for Y and Z. And when I go back to it, it's all where I left it. I find this a much easier workflow.
That sounds a lot like my workflow actually.
You can still actually use tmux with it, with one session per workflow ('^b $' can name the session from inside it).
I found it useful, especially with Clojure and vim.
The splits are nice everywhere, and it's way better to be in the habit of opening a tmux/screen when sshing.
That workflow is also why I hate OSX updates that force a reboot, which piles all the terminal and Chrome windows in one desktop. And then it's just an update for RAW camera files or something that I don't care about, but it nags me every day. /rant
I still use screen remotely. This workflow is for the Mac in front of me. A lot of the terminals I have locally are associated with a screen session remotely. But keeping the local sessions open, active and logically grouped helps me remember what I was doing, and need to do.
Keeping this all in my head - even remembering how many shells I had open to do what - takes more thinking and effort than I want it to. It is far easier for me to just say, "This is where all the stuff for X goes" and physically isolate it from everything for Y and Z. And when I go back to it, it's all where I left it. I find this a much easier workflow.