or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Safari - tabs - done!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Safari - tabs - done! - Page 4

post #121 of 358
You are suggesting that the tab should extend across the entire window, and each tab gradually gets smaller once a new tab is added?

As for removing the close widgets in inactive tabs, I would prefer to keep them. I like how I can click the close button in an inactive window in the finder. I would want to be able to close a tab without having to switch to the tab. The close widget is such a tiny target compared to the rest of the tab, it shouldn't be that big of a deal.

I think the distinction between inactive tabs is not enough, and there should be an onMouseOver effect when the cursor goes over inactive tabs. Supporting FavIcons in tabs would also help... especially when the tab sizes get so small it's hard to really read the title of the tab.
post #122 of 358
[quote]Originally posted by Xidius:
<strong>Here is a really good modification for pin stripe tabs:

<a href="http://66.27.93.239/~xidius/modification.jpg" target="_blank">http://66.27.93.239/~xidius/modification.jpg</a>

- Xidius</strong><hr></blockquote>

If I click on the green tab widget, what happens?

[image too wide - Brad]

[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: Brad ]</p>
a flirt with mediocrity comes with heavy penalty
Reply
a flirt with mediocrity comes with heavy penalty
Reply
post #123 of 358
[quote]Originally posted by M3D Jack:
<strong>You are suggesting that the tab should extend across the entire window, and each tab gradually gets smaller once a new tab is added?</strong><hr></blockquote>

No...you see how the tab is inverted? It's to give a sense that the website you're looking at now is going to be modified by the action your perform using the back, forward, reload buttons and URL field. But it looks silly right now because there's a little dark brushed metal gap that seperates it from the content itself. It should be extended to touch it and ideally a border should be put around the content (like any true brushed-metal app) to make it feel even more attached.

[quote]<strong>
As for removing the close widgets in inactive tabs, I would prefer to keep them. I like how I can click the close button in an inactive window in the finder. I would want to be able to close a tab without having to switch to the tab. The close widget is such a tiny target compared to the rest of the tab, it shouldn't be that big of a deal.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes, yes, it's all fun. But destructive commands should NOT be easily accessible especially if they're not in the foreground. Maybe a key combo could override this as it would be a conscious thought and a safeguard against accidental closing a window or a tab.

The close widget is a small target...but it's still clickable and accidents do happen. And when the tabs get smaller...that close widget becomes bigger in a sense.
post #124 of 358
Normally I'm all for options, but in this case I'm with Eugene and kks... tabs are a so-so solution to a window management problem that *doesn't exist* on MacOS X.

Ask anyone who is addicted to tabs on any other platform why they like them, and 99% of the time you will receive an answer along the lines of: "Because it lets me select a window quickly."

Well, why can't they select a window quickly otherwise? **Because every other GUI out there mixes all your windows into one big stack.** Windows, KDE, Gnome, twm, etcetc all have a keystroke that flips between windows, sure, but it acts as if all the windows in *all* applications are one big list to cycle through.

There is no way to *JUST* cycle through the browser windows. Therefore, they had to come up with a kludge to let you see the windows of your browser at once, and select easily between them.

Repeat: this is a kludge to get around a fundamental problem in window management.

On MacOS X, however, Cmd-Tab cycles through apps, and Cmd-~ cycles through the windows of the current app. In any browser, just hit Cmd-~ a couple of times, and voila, you're there. Overshoot, as one person said, and adding a Shift takes you back. Cripes, I frequently have a dozen windows open, and this is quick, easy, and efficient. No loss of screen space to a silly tab bar, (hey, I even keep the bookmark bar and address bar off by default - just a title bar and sweet, sweet content,) no need for the mouse.

Repeat: MacOS X does not have this problem.

If you like tabs, great. Go for it.

But realize and understand that tabs in a browser window are a lousy solution to a problem that doesn't even exist under MacOS X. They're a hack, they're a kludge, they're clunky, they bring a whole mess of UI problems of their own to the table... and none of it is even necessary, because we have a windowing environment with a little intelligence built in from the beginning.

Tabs are for people who can't handle Cmd-~.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #125 of 358
yes, but clicking my mouse is so "sexy" compared to touching my keyboard....

some people are mouse people
some are keyboard people

keyboard people are more technical
mouse people are more "simple"

i is simple

i hate keyboard shortcuts mostly because i can never remember the wiley little bastards....


g
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
post #126 of 358
[quote]Originally posted by kim kap sol:
<strong>

Yes, yes, it's all fun. But destructive commands should NOT be easily accessible especially if they're not in the foreground. Maybe a key combo could override this as it would be a conscious thought and a safeguard against accidental closing a window or a tab.

The close widget is a small target...but it's still clickable and accidents do happen. And when the tabs get smaller...that close widget becomes bigger in a sense.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Er, I take it you dislike the ability to close a background window without bringing it forward?

Personally, I love this.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #127 of 358
[quote]Originally posted by thegelding:
<strong>yes, but clicking my mouse is so "sexy" compared to touching my keyboard....

some people are mouse people
some are keyboard people

keyboard people are more technical
mouse people are more "simple"

i is simple

i hate keyboard shortcuts mostly because i can never remember the wiley little bastards....</strong><hr></blockquote>

Okay, fair enough.

For me, when I'm developing and need to review a documentation web page I have open in Safari, I can just Cmd-Tab (to Safari), Cmd-~ (to the window I want), read, Cmd-Tab (only once to get back to Project Builder). Never once do I have to take my hands off the keyboard.

I'll definitely be leaving tabs off.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #128 of 358
Personally, I love tabs. I find myself opening multiple websites and desiring to easily switch between them. I agree that it perhaps "breaks" some UI rules. However, they seem to work. I know that my wife happens to love them too. She is not a UI expert (or purist). She just wants stuff to work for her. That says it all for me.
post #129 of 358
a green button should never close a window or tab...i like how it looks, but not how it functions...confusing.....g
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
post #130 of 358
[quote]Originally posted by Xidius:
<strong>

Oh no! We'd better get rid of the close button on all the finder windows in which are not in the foreground!!! That's... DESTRUCTIVE!!

<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

- Xidius</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'm not saying we should get rid of them. I'm saying their should be a safeguard against accidental clicking of a background close widget.
post #131 of 358
I really think all the arguments against tabs are pretty weak. As long as they aren't stacked and swap underneath your cursor as you click (as in windows pref panes) then i dont see the big hairy problem with tabs. I personally prefer multiple sites in tabs over a big clutter of windows. In the same sense that I was so happy to get away from the clutterness of OS 9 finder windows.

Apple has also started to do a good job with addressing some subtles of control with tabs by "attaching" them to the toolbar and adding the "close x". Simple thing, but visually makes much more sense than Chimera's tabs.

One other incrediblly useful thing about tabs that chimera implements is those tab groups. Thats awesome for doing my daily mac site and mac rumor checks. 1-click and I get ALL the sites loaded that I need. Ahhhh organization.

Also from a "newbie" standpoint. Which do you anti-tab people think is more confusing? A row of labeled tabs or a big stack of windows with some hiding behind your main window? Windows that aren't visually shown confuse the heck out of inexperienced users from what I've seen (mother, wife etc).

People need to remember two things...

1) Its is hidden feature in a unreleased beta... therefore not AT ALL what you can call finished Im sure.

2) You wanna clutter up your screen with a bazillion browser windows you still can. Ignore tab feature and go on with your lives.
bah!
Reply
bah!
Reply
post #132 of 358
[quote]Originally posted by thegelding:
<strong>a green button should never close a window or tab...i like how it looks, but not how it functions...confusing.....g</strong><hr></blockquote>

This is my biggest problem with the mockup Xidius posted. Green already means zoom. Red means close, and there are three shades of clear for inactive window buttons (basically, the three colors desaturated). If you're going to use the stoplight gumdrops (nothing to start your day like a mixed metaphor!) they should look and act like the ones on the titlebar, or confusion will ensue.

My other problem is that Apple is already establishing the grey-circle-with-white-x widget as "clear this item," eg. in the Google field, and the search field in Finder. That removes any possibility that the tabs will look like windows, because they aren't windows. Dammit.

As for tabs, it is an established fact, and a UI rule, that tabs exist as a static means to organize related content within a window. They aren't supposed to move, change, appear or disappear, and as anyone who's ever tried loading a lot of pages into a tabbed window quickly discovers, they simply aren't designed to handle dynamism gracefully. Using them inconsistently is no better than using radio buttons as checkboxes, for example. All it does is muddy the meaning of the interface for the user. That's a lost cause on Windows, but the Mac UI is founded on consistency, and while I will concede that sometimes you do have to break those rules (in fact, there are some Mac UI guidelines where following one breaks another, in acknowledgement that there is more than one way to do things) this should not be undertaken lightly. Not even if there is a voluble group of people demanding the "good enough" solution. Windows is good enough.

I won't comment on Safari's implementation, simply because it is an experimental feature in a beta, except that the tabs-as-bookmarks idea is a clever hack, and it will be interesting to see how they develop that. The bookmarks bar, at least, looks like a bookmarks bar. If it resembles anything, it's a toolbar, which (e.g. in Finder) behaves similarly. Shortcuts to favorite places aren't bad, or un OS X-like, by any means. Breaking UI consistency is.

[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #133 of 358
i am still pissed that everyone at ai has .62 to play with but freakin me..... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />

no love for thegelding....
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
post #134 of 358
near the bottom of page 3 of this thread, there is a sneaky link to the .dmg file. grab it while you can...

<img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
Trying hard to think of a new signature...
Reply
Trying hard to think of a new signature...
Reply
post #135 of 358
[quote]Originally posted by Eugene:
<strong>The problem isn't really the existence of tabs, but the fact that people are using them the wrong way.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Wow, I guess I should get some notes from you on how I should work then. Talk about arrogance. This is a FEATURE folks, you don't have to use it. And I am not an idiot to not want to use the window menu or dock to change windows views. What possible difference does it make if an application has a feature you don't use. Not everyone thinks and works the same way Eugene. And I don't care how long you've been around or how many post counts you have, you are wrong to tell me how I should prefer to intereface with my Mac.
"I'm learning how to meditate, so far so good."
Donald Fagen and Walter Becker
Reply
"I'm learning how to meditate, so far so good."
Donald Fagen and Walter Becker
Reply
post #136 of 358
The difference is that features that make the UE more difficult aren't useful, and features that are exceptional and inconsistent are difficult in other contexts. This is a bad precedent, and that's why it's aproblem because it's either very exceptional or else encourages poor and difficult solutions like it in other applications and contexts.

If we were happy with this exceptional treatment, and leaving every mistake optional, we would just use Windows. Call it elitist if you like. I guess using Macs is elitst too.
post #137 of 358
Bingo, Buon.

Some people prefer the Windows taskbar. Some people like having a menu bar in every window. Some people prefer MDI.

Just because some people like a particular feature doesn't mean that it's worth adding to a product.

Personally I'm sad that Apple added tabs. If you want tabs, there are plenty of options out there.

I mean fer chrissakes, they could have at least re-thought them and done something a little more innovative that takes care of some of the problems tabs bring to the table. (Yeah, yeah, beta-blahblah... chances are they're pretty much as they'll end up, but with some minor tweaking. Whee.)
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #138 of 358
I can understand the desire to keep tabs out of OS X, because once one app does it, it sets an example that other apps may begin to follow, and it could lead to the OS X interface being very inconsistent from one app to another.

My biggest observation after reading this whole thread was this:

The people who don't want tabs have rather elegant and technical explanations of why they don't want tabs.

The people who do want tabs simply say, "I like them."


Personally, I find the anti-tabs commentary to be more convincing, but you can't slam Apple if they add a feature that users are begging for, since listening to customer feedback is a good thing.

However, listening to customer feedback when it may be bad advice is not necessarily good. I mean, if users were asking for MDI, would Apple start using that too? I think not. Part of the problem is that these habits are developed from using other products and people want their habits to be carried over into OS X. If a solution better than tabs existed, I'm sure Apple would prefer to use that. Unfortunately, no other solution exists aside from cycling through windows (which I think I prefer anyway), so Apple has to implement browser tabs, a potentially flawed interface element, to make the customers happy.

Maybe that was a bad move on Apple's part. I mean, they went on all this time without bowing down to the "two button mouse" crowd, so why would they give in on tabs so quickly? Maybe Apple actually likes tabs too? Or maybe they realise that people can buy a new mouse, but they can't write their own perfect web browser, so they want to give more options?

What I fear, and why I sort-of side with the no tabs crowd, is that if every user interface element from every operating system and application that somebody likes gets put into OS X, it will become a mess to use and it will confuse new users. Right now, OS X is only confusing to people who want the OS to behave exactly like Microsoft Windows and get frustrated when some behaviors are different. If people spend more time learning the way OS X was designed to work, they may start getting frustrated at how windows works, instead of vice-versa.

I do think Safari has the best implementation of tabbed browsing I've seen yet (ignoring the bugs) but I still think it is more troublesome than cycling through windows which, by the way, is an interface that is consistent almost everywhere in OS X (except BBEdit, sadly).

[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: rogue27 ]</p>
Prosecutors will be violated
Reply
Prosecutors will be violated
Reply
post #139 of 358
okay, having palyed with build 62 for a bit, i can say that those who hate tabs are full of crap... the same crap that those who LOVE tabs are full of.

basically, there are some serious upsides and downsides to this phase of human interface. for example...

each tab essentially represents a "session" that would typically be handled by a window. however, dig deep into one tab, then switch, dig deep into links again, switch tabs again, dig around, then say to yourself "hmmm... now which tab had that site i visited 15 minutes ago?" there's no easy way to tell, because the tab only ever show you the topmost page. at first, i thought they should add a "+" widget next to the "X" close widget, but then the tabs get seriously overcrowded. you should be able to AT LEAST command-click on those tabs to bring up a "tab history," just like you can with the window title just about anywhere else in the system.

i would also like a way to "open up" the tabs a little more, by grabbing the right side of a tab and "pulling them open," so to speak. "tool tips," such as the ones that exist for trunacted names in dialog boxes, are okay, but pop into sight WAY too slowly. as it stands right now, open too many tabs, and they all get truncated to little 7 letter blurbs with ellipses in the middles. yay.

i would suggest these ideas to apple, but methinks they wouldn't take to kindly to suggestions to a beta browser build that hasn't even been fully released yet. but otherwise, tabs make surfing the web feel even faster -- which is pretty scary.

[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: rok ]

[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: rok ]</p>
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
post #140 of 358
Well I've read through all four pages of this interesting discussion. I've never used tabs, since the pre-loaded IE has always been my "browser of choice". <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />

Speaking for the majority of Mac users who use Explorer, I personally found the inclusion of AutoFill in v62 to be the one feature that will cause Safari adoption to spike, and ultimately kill IE for OS X.

It's the only feature I'm waiting for to make the switch.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #141 of 358
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by rok:
<strong>okay, having palyed with build 62 for a bit, i can say that those who hate tabs are full of crap... the same crap that those who LOVE tabs are full of.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Go shoot yourself
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #142 of 358
Cool it, JLL. The same goes for anyone else that gets a little too passionate about this subject.
post #143 of 358
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by rogue27:
<strong>The people who do want tabs simply say, "I like them."</strong><hr></blockquote>

But that's just it - we like them. Do you want a page long post explaining why I like strawberries next?


[quote]Originally posted by rogue27:
<strong>TI do think Safari has the best implementation of tabbed browsing I've seen yet (ignoring the bugs) but I still think it is more troublesome than cycling through windows which,</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think the exact opposite, but I'm not allowed to think that
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #144 of 358
After trying to defend why I like tabs better I found that I just can't really. Separate windows aren't that different. Having tabs is really only like 2% more convenient.
post #145 of 358
[quote]Originally posted by rogue27:
<strong>My biggest observation after reading this whole thread was this:

The people who don't want tabs have rather elegant and technical explanations of why they don't want tabs.

The people who do want tabs simply say, "I like them."


Personally, I find the anti-tabs commentary to be more convincing, but you can't slam Apple if they add a feature that users are begging for, since listening to customer feedback is a good thing.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You can, however, expect them to add a feature that users are asking for (quick access to multiple pages) in a way that doesn't break the UI consistency. For those calling consistency "elitist," it's the absolute bedrock of the Mac UI, and Apple's most fundamental contribution to the GUI. If you want to call it elitist rather than the conclusion of years of careful research in order to score a quick rhetorical point, fine. Just be aware that that's what you're doing.

[quote]<strong>However, listening to customer feedback when it may be bad advice is not necessarily good.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Listening to customer feedback is always good. The trick is to look past the exact implementations they might come up with to the need or desire that's driving their attempts in the first place, and then implement that well.

At least the Safari developers are using things that don't look a blessed thing like standard Aqua tabs. That's a nod to UI consistency, at least, although their alternative still has almost all the weaknesses of the standard tab.

[quote]<strong>What I fear, and why I sort-of side with the no tabs crowd, is that if every user interface element from every operating system and application that somebody likes gets put into OS X, it will become a mess to use and it will confuse new users. Right now, OS X is only confusing to people who want the OS to behave exactly like Microsoft Windows and get frustrated when some behaviors are different. If people spend more time learning the way OS X was designed to work, they may start getting frustrated at how windows works, instead of vice-versa.</strong><hr></blockquote>

This is exactly the reason to keep the UI consistent. Consistency is 90% of the Mac's user friendliness. Take it away, and you might as well be running Windows, or Motif.

[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #146 of 358
Thread Starter 
And you can't change guidelines made almost 20 years ago?

The world changes and we use computers in a very different way than we did 20 years ago.
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #147 of 358
[quote]Originally posted by JLL:
<strong>And you can't change guidelines made almost 20 years ago?

The world changes and we use computers in a very different way than we did 20 years ago.</strong><hr></blockquote>

So you come up with new ways to react to that, and retire the old ones. In the current case, where much of the world's changing is due to the adoption by various means of a completely bletcherous interface that cumulatively costs US industry alone billions of dollars a year, part of adopting to the changing world can simply involve insisting on consistency. After all, interfaces and use won't change all that much as long as WIMP + keyboard predominates.

Notwithstanding change, tabs are designed and purposed to statically organize related content. If the world changes in a way that requires a different need, you come up with a different solution, so that tabs continue to have a clear meaning and purpose. But if you find yourself tending toward MDI, you should really proceed cautiously. It's one of the very worst aspects of Windows. They are guidelines, in much the same way that science produces mere theories, but that does not mean that a responsible developer should not take them seriously.

Change for the sake of change helps nothing, and adopting solutions just because they're "good enough" helps Microsoft.

[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #148 of 358
[quote]Originally posted by JLL:
<strong>And you can't change guidelines made almost 20 years ago?</strong><hr></blockquote>The guidelines exist and are upheld still today because they *do* still apply, even if some parts may be 20 years old. You can't just throw away years of well-known and accepted behaviors on a whim because something new has been put out on Windows. Just because you like tabs doesn't mean they are good UI elements. Here's a cheap metaphor for you: Fast food is a booming industry in America. So, since people like super-sized cheeseburgers and fries as a quick and convenient meal, that means these greasy foods must be good for us, no?

Seriously, though, as you add more custom widgets like these tabs to the system (and I mean "system" as the whole of the UI between all apps, not just the OS), you add complications and inconsistencies across the board. If you can do something with tabs in Safari, then why doesn't it work the same with tabs in System Preferences or other apps? Questions like this MUST be thought out because these so-called "minor" inconsistencies iterate and add up. These "minor" inconsistencies are the reason that I and so many others here hate Windows and various Linux and Java apps with a passion. The more custom one-time behaviors Apple starts adding, the less "elegant" and intuitive the Mac UI becomes.

The end user shouldn't have to recognize custom UI elements for every single app he uses. It's just common sense in UI design that this is a terible thing. Apple has already started adding some strange custom elements in iChat and now in Safari that have behaviors which exist nowhere else in the system. Bad UI! Bad! I fear that by adding tabs as well, Apple is setting a very dangerous trend in the design on its apps. That, I believe, is why people are so upset about this issue. It's not just that we dislike single-window interfaces; it's also that we hate introducting these wild inconsistencies and setting a precedence for future inconsistencies.

To add to what Amorph said (he posted while I was typing), yes, the guidelines are indeed just guidelines. They can be bent and they can from time to time be broken. They still are a crucial part of the Mac experience, though. They must be upheld for the vast majority of apps' UI for users to truly appreciate and easily handle the UI.

[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: Brad ]</p>
post #149 of 358
[quote]Originally posted by JLL:
<strong>And you can't change guidelines made almost 20 years ago?

The world changes and we use computers in a very different way than we did 20 years ago.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Guidelines should not be set in stone, but think how limiting tabs would be if/when we get multiple desktops. I guess you could have multiple windows tabs organized according to what you're working on, but that would kinda defeat the purpose, wouldn't it? I'm gonna go with the "no tabs" crowd because, well, consistency is the best thing about using a Mac. I don't want to lose that.
post #150 of 358
piracy = bad!

[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: Brad ]</p>
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #151 of 358
Thread Starter 
I guess that many of you that don't like tabs would die if you had to use an IDE
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #152 of 358
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Brad:
<strong>If you can do something with tabs in Safari, then why doesn't it work the same with tabs in System Preferences or other apps?</strong><hr></blockquote>

The tabs in Safari don't look like the standard tabs.

Only the guys responsible for Navigator made the tabs look like standard tabs - not Apple's fault.

[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: JLL ]</p>
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #153 of 358
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by torifile:
<strong>
but think how limiting tabs would be if/when we get multiple desktops. I guess you could have multiple windows tabs organized according to what you're working on, but that would kinda defeat the purpose, wouldn't it? </strong><hr></blockquote>

Why?

I don't want to switch windows, I don't want to switch desktops, I want to have my grouped tabs visible in one window.

All other ways require that you use mouse/keyboard to give you something as simple as a status of how many windows you have open (and perhaps not read yet).
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #154 of 358
Depends on the IDE. I've had to use Borland's C++ IDE, which is enough to tell anyone how thoroughly tabs can suck. Project Builder is much cleaner.

Again, the issue is appropriate use of tabs. If there's one row of tabs, they're always the same, and they group related content into named subgroups, I'm all for them.

I've learned this lesson the hard way, as a developer. It's true that one gets accustomed to wobbly applications with slapdash interfaces as a developer (especially on Windows, although MS' suite is at least nicer than Borland's in this regard), but that's hardly an excuse for foisting a shoddy UI on something as ubiquitous as web browsing.

If you feel tempted to violate a guideline, it's probably because following them will involve a great deal more work on your part. Do the work anyway. The fact that most developers don't explains the miserable state of most software.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #155 of 358
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Amorph:
<strong>Notwithstanding change, tabs are designed and purposed to statically organize related content.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Says who?

This is from the Aqua guidelines:

The tab control provides a convenient way to present information in a multipage format.

Where does it say that the content should be static?
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #156 of 358
[quote]Originally posted by lundy:
<strong>piracy = bad!

[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: Brad ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Piracy is stealing. I was offering to buy it.
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #157 of 358
Where did you get this again? How do all these people 'have' it if the apple site only has the 2/12/03 update? Did i miss something here? <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

Sorry if this has been already asked. I don't feel like sorting through 5 pages of thread for it.
OS 9 smiles down upon you.
Reply
OS 9 smiles down upon you.
Reply
post #158 of 358
Thread Starter 
He, I just noticed. I think the tabs will be resizable.

Try placing the cursor between two tabs - and just below them. The resize cursor appears.

I hope that they will be draggable too.
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #159 of 358
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Spiffster:
<strong>Where did you get this again? How do all these people 'have' it if the apple site only has the 2/12/03 update? Did i miss something here? <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

Sorry if this has been already asked. I don't feel like sorting through 5 pages of thread for it.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well I can't tell you, but perhaps you'll find the answer in this thread
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #160 of 358
Man, Five pages in one day?
What have you all been talking about? (I didn't bother to read it all).
I mean, they're just tabs.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Safari - tabs - done!