(Sorry to be shouting) I AGREE 100%!! IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE THAT THEY GOT RID OF THE 'RELOAD' BUTTON FROM THE TOP LEFT!!
I prefer the reload button where it is now, but they didn?t have to remove it as an option from the Customize Toolbar setting. No offense, but you sound a lot like he-who-must-not-be-named in that post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iVlad
It was a Beta for a reason. Plus chrome already had it upwards. I think Apple didn't wanna copy that look and stay original.
That is a good point. Apple is quick to make changes in Beta but usually sticks with their decisions are the Beta is over. If we don?t like surprise changes I guess we shouldn?t jump into Betas so readily. Me, I?m sticking with the Beta since I?ve grown to like the tabs up top even though the plug0in sandboxing would probably come in handy since I?m using SL.
CPU usage will climb to 50%....90% while displaying this site.
Typing inputs for the "Report bugs to Apple" will be nearly one second behind real time.
Scrolling of the map will be delayed nearly one second resulting in a very jerky operation.
This problem has existed within WebKit off and on for over a year. There are other sites adversely affected depending on the current configuration of those sites. This erratic effect on site operations cause this to be a very difficult problem to isolate except for this particular site, which consistently displays the problem and has for about a year of nightly WebKit builds.
Taking away the Safari tabs on top is a huge loss to many consumers. And I completely fail to understand all those gleeful at the loss - I mean, how hard is it to change a preference setting back to the space-wasting bottom tabs, really??
Given the amount of our lives we spend in browser windows, maximizing useful screen space is just as important as maximizing the space in my tiny New York apartment. I have never rejoiced to much in response to software as when Safari 4 beta came out. Like a kid in a candy store. The easy ability to remove the usually-useless address bar with command pipe is great.
But the best improvement: Tabs on top, getting rid of useless title bar grey space!!!
Please bring back the tabs on top option. Please!
Honestly, it can't complicate the software much to default to the old wasteful bottom tabs and include a preference box for the rest of us space-loving tabs-on-top folks.
In the meantime, I'm back to Firefox, and hoping for Chrome soon.
I wonder if the apparent disinterest in ZFS is caused by the increasing popularity and availability of SSDs ? They have a reliability that disk drives don't have and when they fail, they fail : no checksum can help then. Meanwhile, my understanding is that SSDs have a life span limited by the amount of "writes" on each block. Maybe ZFS caused the boot block of SSDs to fail prematurely ?
I'm only wondering...
Hunh? Checksums help if you're using a mirrored or RAIDZ setup - the broken data will be repaired and relocated elsewhere, automatically. Also, the checksumming will point you to which files are affected by the breakage (with or without redundant setups, i.e. mirrors/RAIDZ).
Also, SSDs have wear leveling, so the writing to one spot thing doesn't really work that way at all.
Tabs on top the way Apple implemented them was pure genius. It was not like in Chrome.
Safari's tabs on top split the title bar, as if each tab was a window on its own. It was like having many mini windows side by side. Now with the final release I have all this wasted space on the right side of the tabs and on the title bar. It's a ridiculously inferior design.
Most analysts didn't even wait to see if people would get used to tabs on top, they behaved very amateurishly and selfishly. They helped spoil everything and are proud of it! What a shame.
It's more like out of billion people 900 million prefer cheap things and use what ever is pre-installed on their computer, and because "everyone else does too".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core
Out of the billion people I know, not one of them favors Windows. But you are right on the 75 million for Mac.
... and also because it didn't quite fit in with the overall UI (no other program uses it).
There are other programs that make exceptions to the general UI rules though.
Preview for example is one of the most used programs in the OS but it strongly violates the OS-X document model in that it will load multiple documents into a single window. I think they could easily have just left it.
With regards to the missing "Reload" button; using the 'Command-r' works faster for me.
If I had a complaint, it is that the pages reload so fast that I just about missed the 'Reloading' wheel in the end of the address bar.
As for the progress bar, it doesn't do anything but tell you that the page is still loading. There is no relationship between how much the bar is filled and the amount that the page has completed or left to complete. In addition, just because the progress bar is halfway, does not mean that half the page has already loaded or that the time left to finish is halfway.
For example, if the progress bar has reached halfway in 10 seconds, there is no correlation that the page will be complete in another 10 seconds. It, in fact, could take the 'last half,' so to speak, to finish within a split second or minutes, or more.
Until every web page developer implements a standardized progress bar, accounts for every update, your IPS would have to be constant and a hundred other variables addressed, they are highly inaccurate and basically useless.
DID YOU NOTICE SAFARI 4 beta WENT FROM 13 to 68 Megs in the new S 4.0? Who needs an obese App?
Thats stupid! Everybodies all upset about getting the tabs to be the same as Safari3, which is part of using standards anyway. But to increase the size like its a Windows App is a crime! Shame on Apple. I tried the new version again today-for average news sites, it is the same, if not slower than the beta, so I used Time Machine and without rebooting my machine, I'm back to my modified Safari 4 beta, with everything reconfiged to be like Safari has always been. I have the stop/reload button in my toolbar and the tabs are regulation rectangles-on the bottom, with the close x on the left of each tab!!!.
Apple does great things, but confusing people with nonstandard changes for the seasoned user and corn feeding a app to bloating is more like Ballmers' style than Steve Jobs'.
I liked the tabs on top a lot because it saved screen space.
Tabs on top also BOTHERED me a lot because I was always switching tabs by accident (or closing them!) when I only waned to click the title bar: a simple and common act according to system-wide convention.
So it was a wash--I could take them or leave them. Having the option would be nice, or better yet some third method (Chrome's way seems OK, or something yet to come).
That also annoyed me. The problem wasn't tabs on top but how it was designed. Chrome has a better implementation for it.
Apple just lost a sale of OS X Server with the removal of ZFS. I was going to upgrade my Mac Pro to OS X Server solely so that I would have ZFS to use across the internal drives, mapping the ZFS pool logical drive to my network for use (albeit slower) by my other systems.
Now it looks like I'm better off just buying a Drobo unit. Too bad.
Another vote for tabs on the bottom where they are now. It's more intuitive. I didn't have a problem with them on top, but I was pleased when I installed 4.0 and saw them back where they should be!
As for ZFS, I'm a bit annoyed that I won't be able to use this on my server. I was hoping we would see it in the consumer version of Snow Leopard. Surly all Intel Macs will be able to support it and Snow Leopard is for Intel Macs only anyway.
Count me in with those who liked the tabs on top. I wish Apple would at least give us the option, instead of deciding we don't need/want/like it!
When I opened a new tap this morning in Safari I couldn't help but say ugh and feel really disappointed. It may have taken a little bit of getting used to, but it sure was nice once you did!
Please someone come up with a plugin, or alteration that puts them back on top.
BRING BACK SAFARI 4 TABS ON TOP!!! There is no justification for this! They were extremely helpful for me! At least have the option!
ZFS is a massive loss. I was looking forward to ZFS on my laptop... I like the checksum and the small size of snapshots. Seriously Apple, at least make some sort of announcement...
ZFS is a massive loss. I was looking forward to ZFS on my laptop... I like the checksum and the small size of snapshots. Seriously Apple, at least make some sort of announcement...
I'm sorry that AppleInsider elected to lump together a minor UI issue regarding Safari tabs to the apparent cancellation of ZFS support. I know passions can run high about whether tabs are at the top or bottom, but in the big scope of things, that just does not compare in magnitude to the loss of ZFS.
Apple is doing a disservice to its corporate customers and itself by not making an announcement about ZFS. Data Robotics would love to sell DROBO boxes. Other companies would like to sell NAS boxes or external RAIDs. Corporate customers need to know whether ZFS is officially dead, dormant, or just delayed so that they can plan, budget, and purchase accordingly.
Tabs back to where they rightfully belong, it's more than a UI issue it was a major usability issue. Apple should make it an option for those who "prefer" them on top. Forcing that MAJOR change was SOOOOOO WRONG! It required me to mouse all the way to the top right of the screen, WHAT FOR????
Tabs on top has a couple of inconsistencies. The biggest for me is that when you click the title bar, it selects that tab. This is annoying when pulling the browser forward from the background.
It also places the close icon of the leftmost tab near the close buttons of the window leading to confusion over which you should press to close the last tab.
I did like the space it provided but I won't miss it. You may be able to set a plist option to put it back up top.
ZFS is a shame but I suspect there's just far too much dependent on HFS+ that the scale of the transition would be huge. Heck even Case insensitive vs Case sensitive and UFS cause problems let alone an entirely new system again.
If the benefits actually show up on the user level, it will probably be worked on to make the transition as painless as possible. They may have learned enough from what ZFS does to improve HFS+ to the point where ZFS isn't necessary.
So the beta of Safari 4 was pretty good and stable. This release is terrible. Takes forever to load the home page at start-up. Just tried CNN.com and it took 52 sec to load and at same time Firefox 2.5 sec. No plug-ins here either. I threw away all prefs, un-installed, re-applied the 10.5.7 combo updater, and re-installed, fixed permissions, and still poor performance. Any one know how to get a beta copy again?
Apple needs to fix this. Obviously computer/individual success or error, but when the beta works fine and the final version crashes....hmmmm
Comments
Out of a billion people, 900 million favor Windows vs 75 million Mac and 25 million Linux and other OSes.
Out of the billion people I know, not one of them favors Windows. But you are right on the 75 million for Mac.
(Sorry to be shouting) I AGREE 100%!! IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE THAT THEY GOT RID OF THE 'RELOAD' BUTTON FROM THE TOP LEFT!!
I prefer the reload button where it is now, but they didn?t have to remove it as an option from the Customize Toolbar setting. No offense, but you sound a lot like he-who-must-not-be-named in that post.
It was a Beta for a reason. Plus chrome already had it upwards. I think Apple didn't wanna copy that look and stay original.
That is a good point. Apple is quick to make changes in Beta but usually sticks with their decisions are the Beta is over. If we don?t like surprise changes I guess we shouldn?t jump into Betas so readily. Me, I?m sticking with the Beta since I?ve grown to like the tabs up top even though the plug0in sandboxing would probably come in handy since I?m using SL.
CPU usage will climb to 50%....90% while displaying this site.
Typing inputs for the "Report bugs to Apple" will be nearly one second behind real time.
Scrolling of the map will be delayed nearly one second resulting in a very jerky operation.
This problem has existed within WebKit off and on for over a year. There are other sites adversely affected depending on the current configuration of those sites. This erratic effect on site operations cause this to be a very difficult problem to isolate except for this particular site, which consistently displays the problem and has for about a year of nightly WebKit builds.
Given the amount of our lives we spend in browser windows, maximizing useful screen space is just as important as maximizing the space in my tiny New York apartment. I have never rejoiced to much in response to software as when Safari 4 beta came out. Like a kid in a candy store. The easy ability to remove the usually-useless address bar with command pipe is great.
But the best improvement: Tabs on top, getting rid of useless title bar grey space!!!
Please bring back the tabs on top option. Please!
Honestly, it can't complicate the software much to default to the old wasteful bottom tabs and include a preference box for the rest of us space-loving tabs-on-top folks.
In the meantime, I'm back to Firefox, and hoping for Chrome soon.
I wonder if the apparent disinterest in ZFS is caused by the increasing popularity and availability of SSDs ? They have a reliability that disk drives don't have and when they fail, they fail : no checksum can help then. Meanwhile, my understanding is that SSDs have a life span limited by the amount of "writes" on each block. Maybe ZFS caused the boot block of SSDs to fail prematurely ?
I'm only wondering...
Hunh? Checksums help if you're using a mirrored or RAIDZ setup - the broken data will be repaired and relocated elsewhere, automatically. Also, the checksumming will point you to which files are affected by the breakage (with or without redundant setups, i.e. mirrors/RAIDZ).
Also, SSDs have wear leveling, so the writing to one spot thing doesn't really work that way at all.
Safari's tabs on top split the title bar, as if each tab was a window on its own. It was like having many mini windows side by side. Now with the final release I have all this wasted space on the right side of the tabs and on the title bar. It's a ridiculously inferior design.
Most analysts didn't even wait to see if people would get used to tabs on top, they behaved very amateurishly and selfishly. They helped spoil everything and are proud of it! What a shame.
It's more like out of billion people 900 million prefer cheap things and use what ever is pre-installed on their computer, and because "everyone else does too".
Out of the billion people I know, not one of them favors Windows. But you are right on the 75 million for Mac.
HEHE I was thinking the same thing.
... and also because it didn't quite fit in with the overall UI (no other program uses it).
There are other programs that make exceptions to the general UI rules though.
Preview for example is one of the most used programs in the OS but it strongly violates the OS-X document model in that it will load multiple documents into a single window. I think they could easily have just left it.
If I had a complaint, it is that the pages reload so fast that I just about missed the 'Reloading' wheel in the end of the address bar.
As for the progress bar, it doesn't do anything but tell you that the page is still loading. There is no relationship between how much the bar is filled and the amount that the page has completed or left to complete. In addition, just because the progress bar is halfway, does not mean that half the page has already loaded or that the time left to finish is halfway.
For example, if the progress bar has reached halfway in 10 seconds, there is no correlation that the page will be complete in another 10 seconds. It, in fact, could take the 'last half,' so to speak, to finish within a split second or minutes, or more.
Until every web page developer implements a standardized progress bar, accounts for every update, your IPS would have to be constant and a hundred other variables addressed, they are highly inaccurate and basically useless.
Thats stupid! Everybodies all upset about getting the tabs to be the same as Safari3, which is part of using standards anyway. But to increase the size like its a Windows App is a crime! Shame on Apple. I tried the new version again today-for average news sites, it is the same, if not slower than the beta, so I used Time Machine and without rebooting my machine, I'm back to my modified Safari 4 beta, with everything reconfiged to be like Safari has always been. I have the stop/reload button in my toolbar and the tabs are regulation rectangles-on the bottom, with the close x on the left of each tab!!!.
Apple does great things, but confusing people with nonstandard changes for the seasoned user and corn feeding a app to bloating is more like Ballmers' style than Steve Jobs'.
I liked the tabs on top a lot because it saved screen space.
Tabs on top also BOTHERED me a lot because I was always switching tabs by accident (or closing them!) when I only waned to click the title bar: a simple and common act according to system-wide convention.
So it was a wash--I could take them or leave them. Having the option would be nice, or better yet some third method (Chrome's way seems OK, or something yet to come).
That also annoyed me. The problem wasn't tabs on top but how it was designed. Chrome has a better implementation for it.
Now it looks like I'm better off just buying a Drobo unit. Too bad.
As for ZFS, I'm a bit annoyed that I won't be able to use this on my server. I was hoping we would see it in the consumer version of Snow Leopard. Surly all Intel Macs will be able to support it and Snow Leopard is for Intel Macs only anyway.
When I opened a new tap this morning in Safari I couldn't help but say ugh and feel really disappointed.
Please someone come up with a plugin, or alteration that puts them back on top.
-Nathan
ZFS is a massive loss. I was looking forward to ZFS on my laptop... I like the checksum and the small size of snapshots. Seriously Apple, at least make some sort of announcement...
ZFS is a massive loss. I was looking forward to ZFS on my laptop... I like the checksum and the small size of snapshots. Seriously Apple, at least make some sort of announcement...
I'm sorry that AppleInsider elected to lump together a minor UI issue regarding Safari tabs to the apparent cancellation of ZFS support. I know passions can run high about whether tabs are at the top or bottom, but in the big scope of things, that just does not compare in magnitude to the loss of ZFS.
Apple is doing a disservice to its corporate customers and itself by not making an announcement about ZFS. Data Robotics would love to sell DROBO boxes. Other companies would like to sell NAS boxes or external RAIDs. Corporate customers need to know whether ZFS is officially dead, dormant, or just delayed so that they can plan, budget, and purchase accordingly.
As I mentioned in another thread. I vote for having the option to have tabs in the menubar, even if it is not the default.
Also, Safari has already crashed 3 times for me in the last day since I've updated. No-third party plug-ins or anything.
What are you running on? I can't even crash it on my old iBook G4 let alone my Mac Pro or MacBook Pro!
It also places the close icon of the leftmost tab near the close buttons of the window leading to confusion over which you should press to close the last tab.
I did like the space it provided but I won't miss it. You may be able to set a plist option to put it back up top.
ZFS is a shame but I suspect there's just far too much dependent on HFS+ that the scale of the transition would be huge. Heck even Case insensitive vs Case sensitive and UFS cause problems let alone an entirely new system again.
If the benefits actually show up on the user level, it will probably be worked on to make the transition as painless as possible. They may have learned enough from what ZFS does to improve HFS+ to the point where ZFS isn't necessary.
Apple needs to fix this. Obviously computer/individual success or error, but when the beta works fine and the final version crashes....hmmmm