Yeah, but atleast when some one sits in the back seat of your car they dont have to stick their knees through their neck.. Anywyas back on topic, I have shyed away from tabs and now just command shift click the links I want to read at the time and where ever they show up I leave them and then just command tilde through them.. Simple fast NOT MDI
Ok Eugene, I'll byte. Let's look into this UI theory.
[quote]<strong> The way I see it, a tabbed pane is just like a window, except: </strong><hr></blockquote>
Haaaa, but it isn't. A TAB is part of the browser's window. It therefore belongs inside the window. It's a temporary bookmark. This pretty much makes your 3 points irrelevant.
[quote]<strong>1) To get back to a tab you either have to click on a very specific (yet dynamic) location or use a key combo. A whole separate window allows for sloppier focus most of the time, or a similar key combo...or in the case of OS X, a unified location for a list of open windows. </strong><hr></blockquote>
You are clicking on specific locations no matter what... Menu, Doc, wherever, you are still clicking something. As for the rest of what you said.. I don't speech Greek.
[quote]<strong>2) You have no freedom to position a tab to be partially visible, unless somebody adds a split pane type feature to the tab interface...and it's still more limited than having an actual separate window. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Not sure why that is important.
[quote]<strong>3) They have a more permanent presence in your browser since they cannot be hidden without removing them. We are conditioned to vertical separation rather than horizontal. Compare a list of items lined up in a row or a column. Which is easier to read through? Now take your browser and open 5, 10, and 15 tabs. That's what I call clutter. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Remember that a TAB is a temporary bookmark, not a history bar. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> I've never had more than 5 TABS open. "Cannot be hidden without removing"... More Greek?
What if you had like "Spring loaded tabs," sort of like the spring loaded folders released in Jaguar. You highlight some text from one page, bring it up to a tab, after a second or too it would switch to that tab, then you can drag it into a text box. Would that make some of you tab haters happier?
<hr></blockquote> That's move mouse - click - find menu item - click. Compared to tabs: move mouse short distance, click.
[quote]
Or
Dock
Icon</strong><hr></blockquote>Move mouse to Dock..... Press... wait...hear hard drive spin up ... see window menu appear.. choose window name... sling mouse back to document...
<strong>What if you had like "Spring loaded tabs," sort of like the spring loaded folders released in Jaguar. You highlight some text from one page, bring it up to a tab, after a second or too it would switch to that tab, then you can drag it into a text box. Would that make some of you tab haters happier?</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>There *should* be ten tabs here. Where are the rest? Where is the CURRENT tab? As the window gets narrower, tabs just disappear. BAD UI. BAD!</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think that it will be the behaviour in the final version.
<strong>Could some one do me a favor and take a screen shot of the tabs with out the brushed metal? I just wanna see if they look all funny...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just a quick comment in the hopes that cooler heads prevail...
We are looking at code that Apple has NOT released to the public (not that much of the public doesn't have it now or will find it soon) and until Apple says different I'm going to assume the tabs we see right now are a work in progress...
For all we know... this could just be a 'quick hack' by the developers just to see how tab behave/work/whatever.
Many things about these tabs just scream "unfinished". The behavior I noted before is the first of a few bad quirks I've started to notice in v62. The current implementation just has to be a temporary hack.
I'll be happy if the tabs option stays in the debug menu.
I don't know if that makes me a UI Nazi, but I don't want the tabs affecting the rest of the UI and it gives the signal that if the power-user and basic browser features conflict, simplicity will win.
And just to say something nasty to keep up the tone of the thread:
Sounds like most tab users are so brainwashed by Windows that they've not taken the time to learn how to use OS X properly.
It reminds me of how people complained that the Zoom widget didn't cause the app to take up the whole screen, as seeing other applications leering through from the background puts some switchers off.
<strong>One of the many UI problems with tabs has already reared its ugly head:
There *should* be ten tabs here. Where are the rest? Where is the CURRENT tab? As the window gets narrower, tabs just disappear. BAD UI. BAD!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmm, Brad: you should know better. This is a beta that hasn't even been released publicly and you're commenting on a feature which may change in the public release! I can't imagine Apple are unware of this issue and imagine that they'll solve this with the >> symbol as they do with the bookmarks bar and finder windows!
Sounds like most tab users are so brainwashed by Windows that they've not taken the time to learn how to use OS X properly.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Maybe it's the other way around-- some people are so brainwashed to be anti-Windows that they wouldn't know a good, new idea (from Windows) if it came up and bit their nose off, peed on their leg and took a dump on their terminal.
Two things that would improve the current tabs in Safari though:
1. The tab should extend to touch the contents of the window at least. This will give a connected look between the top 'navigation' portion and the 'content' portion.
Does that make any sense? It's nothing major but it would give a better sense of attachment between the navigation buttons and the page.
2. The 'close' widgets on the tabs shouldn't be clickable if the tab doesn't have focus. Destructive commands should not be clickable when it's not in the foreground. It pisses me off to no end when I accidently click a background window's close widget and it probably would if I accidently closed a background tab.
[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: kim kap sol ]</p>
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.
Comments
<strong>Hey I wouldnt mind cup holders either... Or any space for that matter.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't even have a muffler! I wish my car had tabs.. er.. cup holders.
[quote]<strong> The way I see it, a tabbed pane is just like a window, except: </strong><hr></blockquote>
Haaaa, but it isn't. A TAB is part of the browser's window. It therefore belongs inside the window. It's a temporary bookmark. This pretty much makes your 3 points irrelevant.
[quote]<strong>1) To get back to a tab you either have to click on a very specific (yet dynamic) location or use a key combo. A whole separate window allows for sloppier focus most of the time, or a similar key combo...or in the case of OS X, a unified location for a list of open windows. </strong><hr></blockquote>
You are clicking on specific locations no matter what... Menu, Doc, wherever, you are still clicking something. As for the rest of what you said.. I don't speech Greek.
[quote]<strong>2) You have no freedom to position a tab to be partially visible, unless somebody adds a split pane type feature to the tab interface...and it's still more limited than having an actual separate window. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Not sure why that is important.
[quote]<strong>3) They have a more permanent presence in your browser since they cannot be hidden without removing them. We are conditioned to vertical separation rather than horizontal. Compare a list of items lined up in a row or a column. Which is easier to read through? Now take your browser and open 5, 10, and 15 tabs. That's what I call clutter. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Remember that a TAB is a temporary bookmark, not a history bar. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> I've never had more than 5 TABS open. "Cannot be hidden without removing"... More Greek?
[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: PooPooDoctor ]</p>
<strong>
Use
The
Window
Menu
<hr></blockquote> That's move mouse - click - find menu item - click. Compared to tabs: move mouse short distance, click.
[quote]
Or
Dock
Icon</strong><hr></blockquote>Move mouse to Dock..... Press... wait...hear hard drive spin up ... see window menu appear.. choose window name... sling mouse back to document...
<strong>What if you had like "Spring loaded tabs," sort of like the spring loaded folders released in Jaguar. You highlight some text from one page, bring it up to a tab, after a second or too it would switch to that tab, then you can drag it into a text box. Would that make some of you tab haters happier?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Now I think that's a cool idea
Long Live Tabbed Browsing!
<strong>There *should* be ten tabs here. Where are the rest? Where is the CURRENT tab? As the window gets narrower, tabs just disappear. BAD UI. BAD!</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think that it will be the behaviour in the final version.
<strong>Could some one do me a favor and take a screen shot of the tabs with out the brushed metal? I just wanna see if they look all funny...</strong><hr></blockquote>
We are looking at code that Apple has NOT released to the public (not that much of the public doesn't have it now or will find it soon) and until Apple says different I'm going to assume the tabs we see right now are a work in progress...
For all we know... this could just be a 'quick hack' by the developers just to see how tab behave/work/whatever.
Dave
Many things about these tabs just scream "unfinished". The behavior I noted before is the first of a few bad quirks I've started to notice in v62. The current implementation just has to be a temporary hack.
I don't know if that makes me a UI Nazi, but I don't want the tabs affecting the rest of the UI and it gives the signal that if the power-user and basic browser features conflict, simplicity will win.
And just to say something nasty to keep up the tone of the thread:
Sounds like most tab users are so brainwashed by Windows that they've not taken the time to learn how to use OS X properly.
It reminds me of how people complained that the Zoom widget didn't cause the app to take up the whole screen, as seeing other applications leering through from the background puts some switchers off.
[M3D Jack - Link removed. Discussion is fine, promoting the distribution of it is not.]
[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: M3D Jack ]</p>
<strong>
that is really ugly...so is the brushed metal tabbed browsing, i hope apple makes this look better some how
<strong>One of the many UI problems with tabs has already reared its ugly head:
There *should* be ten tabs here. Where are the rest? Where is the CURRENT tab? As the window gets narrower, tabs just disappear. BAD UI. BAD!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hmmm, Brad: you should know better. This is a beta that hasn't even been released publicly and you're commenting on a feature which may change in the public release! I can't imagine Apple are unware of this issue and imagine that they'll solve this with the >> symbol as they do with the bookmarks bar and finder windows!
<strong>
Sounds like most tab users are so brainwashed by Windows that they've not taken the time to learn how to use OS X properly.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Maybe it's the other way around-- some people are so brainwashed to be anti-Windows that they wouldn't know a good, new idea (from Windows) if it came up and bit their nose off, peed on their leg and took a dump on their terminal.
Of course, I'm speaking metaphorically.
<strong>...that they wouldn't know a good, new idea (from Windows) ...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Except it's neither a good or new idea.
[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: kim kap sol ]</p>
1. The tab should extend to touch the contents of the window at least. This will give a connected look between the top 'navigation' portion and the 'content' portion.
Does that make any sense? It's nothing major but it would give a better sense of attachment between the navigation buttons and the page.
2. The 'close' widgets on the tabs shouldn't be clickable if the tab doesn't have focus. Destructive commands should not be clickable when it's not in the foreground. It pisses me off to no end when I accidently click a background window's close widget and it probably would if I accidently closed a background tab.
[ 02-24-2003: Message edited by: kim kap sol ]</p>
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.
<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>