[Guy Incognito]

It's come to my attention that tabbed-interfaces are very popular with the computer-geeks. Yes, we forum-types are computer-geeks. Deny it all you want, but, you're a geek and I'm a geek. We both know it.

Anyways. As computer-geeks, we're much more skilled than 'the average human being' at tasks such as using a com-pu-tar!

As result...we want efficiency. We want windows to take the minimum amount of space, but still retain all the functionality we need.

We skilled enough to juggle many different tasks such as 'browsing multiple webpages at once'. That's when some of us want 'tabs'. Is it the best solution? I don't think so.

There have been many discussions. Some in which I participated and made a total @ss of myself in the process. But I do believe I've provided some excellent arguments and ideas...whether some of you liked it or not.

But I'm here to discuss the 'in-OS-tabbing method'...

Yes, not many really fully understand what I just said...yet, you all know it exists...but everyone seems to forget about it. And here's what everyone forgets.

All launched apps in the dock have a context menu that displays all open windows.

I know...you'll all tell me "Gaawd, you call that a tab system? You're lame, Guy!"

Yeah...it does require a right-click before you can even see the windows...but it acts exactly like tabs and it's built-in right into the OS. You can see the full name. And the windows are alphabetically sorted (giving a certain convenience).

It's certainly not the most elegant solution to 'tabbing an interface'...but the whole tabbing idea is pretty lame in the first place (yes, flame away )

I'd suggest minimizing to the dock as another solution but I've always though minimizing to the dock as the worst idea Apple has ever come up with. Not only does it shift dock icons...it reduces icon sizes so that everything is still visible. So...No, minimizing to the dock sux.

Minimize-in-place on the other hand would be a rockin' solution. The windows are big enough to be recognizable. And they float so you don't have to shuffle and dig through windows to find the window you want (or cycle through them using cmd-`).

I have my own ideas about how Apple could build an excellent window management via the Dock (extending the idea that you can find all the windows related to one app via the context menu)...but I'll keep these ideas to myself until I can build a mockup that doesn't suck.

[Guy Incognito]

Here's a few other points to reinforce my statement that tabs aren't particularly useful.

If you browse and you only have 3-4 tabs, then cycling through them visually really quickly via cmd-` is just as fast if not faster than thinking what the site name you're looking for was, dragging your mouse to the correct tab and clicking it.

If you're a lazy or trying to be an efficient person...and you probably are if you're using tabs (am I right, or am I right)...you'd benefit more from cycling through the windows visually if you have less than 5 tabs.

If you have more than 5 tabs...like I sometimes have when I painfully use the tabbed Chimera interface (and accused of having too many tabs and it's a big no-no to have this many tabs, blah blah blah), then, unless you're running a large screen with a large resolution, and your browser window fullscreen wide, you're going to start running into name truncation problems.

Between 5-9, tabs in Chimera can be manageable even if they're not sorted a particular way...names are truncated but still recognizable. Tabs could be ok at this point.

Beyond 9 however...unless you're the very lucky people that can afford a Cinema display, tabs are completely useless...names are truncated down to a couple letters. At this point, the Dock app context menu is perfect...all your sites are sorted. And the time spent using brain power to decipher the truncated names or the time spent clicking a few tabs to find the tab you want, is pretty much equal or great than sending the cursor to the Dock app, right-clicking, and selecting through full site names sorted alphabetically.

The 5-9 tabs is the grey area I guess.

For less than 5 tabs, it's definitely much easier and faster to cycle through the via cmd-`.

[Group51]

Look, for goodness sake, let not have more flames!

How about this:

1. Make a pretty icon that suggests expansion, action, pop-up, anything.

2. Put it into the bookmarks bar

3. When you hover your mouse over it the dock menu listing open windows appears in place, and you click the one you want. Or if that breaks a UI guideline, make it one hell of a tooltip.

4. Once you have clicked the page you want, the content of the front window is replaced by that of the window you selected. That is, the content of the window you just manipulated is replaced with the content from the window in the background.

5. The source window (behind) closes, and Safari keeps in its cache the original window content so that...

6. If you hit the back button, it returns to the previous window, and the window behind is restored.

Perhaps you can have an option in the menu to hide other windows, then you would have one window tabbed browsing, without tabs.

7. You can make the dock menu appear 'in place' by control-clicking. You would get all the open windows, listed below the usual contectual stuff, when not control-clicking on a link or picture. This is because another nice thing about tabs is being able to see how many tabs you have instantly.

[Group51]

Originally posted by Group51:
Look, for goodness sake, let not have more flames!

How about this:

1. Make a pretty icon that suggests expansion, action, pop-up, anything.

2. Put it into the bookmarks bar

3. When you hover your mouse over it the dock menu listing open windows appears in place, and you click the one you want. Or if that breaks a UI guideline, make it one hell of a tooltip.

4. Once you have clicked the page you want, the content of the front window is replaced by that of the window you selected. That is, the content of the window you just manipulated is replaced with the content from the window in the background.

5. The source window (behind) closes, and Safari keeps in its cache the original window content so that...

6. If you hit the back button, it returns to the previous window, and the window behind is restored.

Perhaps you can have an option in the menu to hide other windows, then you would have one window tabbed browsing, without tabs.

7. You can make the dock menu appear 'in place' by control-clicking. You would get all the open windows, listed below the usual contectual stuff, when not control-clicking on a link or picture. This is because another nice thing about tabs is being able to see how many tabs you have instantly.

Hang on, now I think of it, you could just do it all from a contextual menu that mirrors the dock menu without having to click on the dock. No need for tabs then. You could do everything within one window (cmd-n would just clear the window and store the previous contents to be recovered by control-clicking).

[Group51]

Originally posted by Group51:
Hang on, now I think of it, you could just do it all from a contextual menu that mirrors the dock menu without having to click on the dock. No need for tabs then. You could do everything within one window (cmd-n would just clear the window and store the previous contents to be recovered by control-clicking).

It occured that this behaviour might be a bit strange, one window replacing another, but this is exaclty how full-screen Windows applications work (e.g Word, Excel), except you have to make a trip to the Windows menu to select different documents.

Hmm, working like Windows apps.

[Xeo]

I just wanted to input how and when I use tabs. I am not tied to tabs, but I do find them useful every now and then. I use them when I come to web sites with multiple pages that I want to look at and possibly check back and forth. I find it extremely helpful to have all related pages bundled in one window rather than a dozen or more separate windows. I don't want every page I view in the same window, so multi-windows still has some value to me as well.

I don't think this type of work environment fits into your idea, does it Guy?

[Silky Voice of The Gorn]

Guy, yur deludid agin!

Sifari = teh suck, no Tabs! How dair Aaple releese this buggy pos witout TABS!! And bookmarks doant wrap! udder shyte!

Seriously though, good points. Some people act like Safari being tabless is a violation of their civil rights. It would take a press release from Apple saying "we're NOT doing bloody Chimera tabs, get over it" to shut some tabists up.

[Guy Incognito]

Originally posted by Xeo:
I just wanted to input how and when I use tabs. I am not tied to tabs, but I do find them useful every now and then. I use them when I come to web sites with multiple pages that I want to look at and possibly check back and forth. I find it extremely helpful to have all related pages bundled in one window rather than a dozen or more separate windows. I don't want every page I view in the same window, so multi-windows still has some value to me as well.

I don't think this type of work environment fits into your idea, does it Guy?

Well...I was a big fan of 'single-window-mode' back in the Public Beta (or was it DP3/DP4) days?)...I thought that was a very good solution to window clutter. It gave people the chance to use multiple windows...and then when things got slightly out of control, a way to clean up the clutter via one-click. The only problem is that it was a global single-window solution. Only one app was allowed to be present on the screen.





Remember that!? It was great...but I'll explain how it could have been better!

Hang on, now I think of it, you could just do it all from a contextual menu that mirrors the dock menu without having to click on the dock. No need for tabs then. You could do everything within one window (cmd-n would just clear the window and store the previous contents to be recovered by control-clicking).

Hmmm...that's a very interesting idea...a right-click anywhere inside the html-viewing part of the window could bring up a context-menu with all the pages that are 'tabbed'.

..but I'd only like this idea in conjunction with some sort of per-app single-window-mode that groups only all document-based windows into one.

This would extend to all apps that make use of document windows...browsers, word-processors, spreadsheets, etc...all document windows would have the little clear/purple button. A click of this button wouldn't minimize all the other app document windows to the dock (like this button used to do in the DP days.) It would rather just hide (or have a special effects to show that the other windows are being grouped into one document window.)

This single-window-mode wouldn't affect windows that aren't documents...palettes, apps that rely on multiple windows (such as Carracho), preference windows, etc.

Apple...bring back single-window-mode...but make it a per-app feature that groups all app documents into one. Navigating through them would be a context click on the dock away (and if one chose, programmed into a context click inside the app)...and give use an alternate interface to navigate graphically through the grouped-windows. Heck...you don't even need to add another widget to the titlebar (as it might clutter the titlebar more than it should) since this option is really for powerusers...a simple key-combo and an item in the 'Window' menu would be just fine.

[undotwa]

Problem with more than one window open: It uses tonnes of memory.

Each window uses like 5 megs of memory. You don't want 10 windows open using 50 megs of precious memory which will severely slow down your computer do you?

That's why tabs are good. Caching each page under 1 window uses much less memory than having more than one window open.

I think they should abolish 'new windows' and force tabs for every new window. That'll be cool. Popups load in background (I don't like disabling popups because some popups are very important).

In fact I think that'll be a cool interface for the Finder.

�_Only one window (no matter what, reduce clutter), with tabs for each new window.

� Dragging a file over a tab or folder and keeping it there for 1-5 seconds (configurable) opens up all the directory's below it in a menu (like command clicking title bar) and you can navigate the folders below in the same way as Dock folder menus (unlimited levels deep). Spring loaded folders always opens up a dock like folder menu.

�_Hold command+double click reverses tab behaviour (double click folder opens in new tab).

� Hold option, click on tab and all directories below the current directory in the tab show up in a menu and all the directories.

�_Finder window has one title "Finder".

�_Search window and results open in same tab unless command is held.

�_Toolbar buttons open in same tab unless command is held.

Spring loaded folder delay is configurable in preferences, double clicking (or single clicking on toolbar buttons) defaults on whether to open a new tabs or not are configurable in preferences. Desktop files are configurable in preferences.

All view settings currently there plus grid spacing and font able to be set on an individual folder basis (and on global). Also an ability to clear all .DS Store files you own and revert to default view.

[Guy Incognito]

Originally posted by undotwa:
Problem with more than one window open: It uses tonnes of memory.

Each window uses like 5 megs of memory. You don't want 10 windows open using 50 megs of precious memory which will severely slow down your computer do you?

That's why tabs are good. Caching each page under 1 window uses much less memory than having more than one window open.

I think they should abolish 'new windows' and force tabs for every new window. That'll be cool. Popups load in background (I don't like disabling popups because some popups are very important).

In fact I think that'll be a cool interface for the Finder.

Those are very short-sighted view...

What about people that live off dragging and dropping between windows? Or compare two documents, side-by-side? They wouldn't be able to do this anymore. That's why I hate column view (normally used in conjunction with the single-window Finder mode.

What about people that do have enough memory for having multiple windows open.

Forcing tabs onto people would probably the worst thing ever.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by undotwa:
Problem with more than one window open: It uses tonnes of memory.

Each window uses like 5 megs of memory. You don't want 10 windows open using 50 megs of precious memory which will severely slow down your computer do you?

The situation's not quite that bad; each window uses one meg of memory just by existing, not five. However, you're right that this is an issue.

This bit about tabs being "forced" onto the user isn't really accurate, though. Look at Chimera for an example. If there is only one page on the screen, the tab bar vanishes. It takes up no space at all; the HTML view actually resizes to take up the space left by the tab bar's disappearance.

However, I don't agree with the idea of a drawer with icons, a la preview. Once a window has multiple pages, the element to switch between then -whatever form that ends up taking- should be constantly onscreen, not just as a means of switching between multiple pages but as a reminder that there are multiple pages. I also have a very strong disagreement with the assertion that the Web is a fundamentally-visual medium. While it is possible to embed visual media, the fundamental medium of the Web is text. It is possible to present this media visually, but that isn't the only way, and it's not even the best way sometimes. That's what is wrong with the field of Web "design" today; they only take one possible presentation of their pages into account.

Tabs really do work well as a means for switching between multiple pages. Is there a better way to do it? Maybe. But I have yet to see it. Keep in mind, the ideal would have to have at least the following qualities:

• It must allow switching between any of the pages in a given window to any other page, with no more than one click and one keystroke.
• It -or some other easily-understood reminder that it's active- must constantly be onscreen when multiple pages are present. Conversely, when only one page is present, it must not be in the user's way.
• It must take up a minimum of screen real-estate. It must take into account that particularly on widescreen monitors (which Apple now favors), vertical space is at a premium.
• It should make an effort to make pages easily distinguishable from one another. However, it must not try to get too clever about this, or it'll inevitably only confuse the user more. In the end, some responsibility must fall on the page designer.

If those principles are kept in mind, then perhaps a better idea than tabs can be found. But I have yet to see such an idea.

[absmiths]

Originally posted by undotwa:
Problem with more than one window open: It uses tonnes of memory.

Which is why nowadays computers have like tonnes of memory. I mean, really, the life span of a web browser is relatively short - so let it suck up 50 Megs of RAM, then wen I shut it down, *poof!*, the RAM is reclaimed. Besides, I don't think tabs use that much less. I am running on Windows with Mozilla and 9 tabs open and it is using 39 MB of RAM.

In fact I think that'll be a cool interface for the Finder.

�_Only one window (no matter what, reduce clutter), with tabs for each new window.

NO! NO! NO! NO! This would inhibit workflow terribly - especially since Mac users are arguably the most accustomed to being able to handle documents side by side. The main problem with tabs is that they don't provide enough information to be able to keep things straight - so I typically end up just clicking on tabs until I find what I want (especially on sites like MacNN, which prepend each page title with "MacNN Forums - ", which makes the tab names useless (even running fullscreen) after about 6.

I still think some sort of drawer thing with thumbnails would work great.

[Silky Voice of The Gorn]

Originally posted by Millennium:
This bit about tabs being "forced" onto the user isn't really accurate, though. Look at Chimera for an example. If there is only one page on the screen, the tab bar vanishes. It takes up no space at all; the HTML view actually resizes to take up the space left by the tab bar's disappearance.
]

Yes...and thats BAD UI imo. Static fields should *not* dynamically change like that. The Tab region of Chimera appears and disappears causing the html display to jump up and down. Bad, bad, bad. This is the same reason why wrapping bookmarks is bad, too. Yuck.

Apple is thinking the right way; keep the control area small, efficient and unobtrusive.

[nobodybutme]

Originally posted by Guy Incognito:
There have been many discussions. Some in which I participated and made a total @ss of myself in the process.

You're still making an ass of yourself. Why is it a sin that some folks like tabs? I don't get it. Most of the thread that you are referring to (at least what I read) was a joke, except for anyone who enjoys mass, useless pontification. The funnies part is the talk of solutions when, there doesn't seem to be much of a problem to begin with. To have so much discussion over something as trivial as tabs is a howl. They aren't the spawn of satan, but they can be misused like anything else. Thanks for the laugh. Don't hurt yourself creating more odd little musings.

[absmiths]

Originally posted by Millennium:
This bit about tabs being "forced" onto the user isn't really accurate, though. Look at Chimera for an example. If there is only one page on the screen, the tab bar vanishes. It takes up no space at all; the HTML view actually resizes to take up the space left by the tab bar's disappearance.

I think there are some 'oddities' created by tabs. For example, what happens when you close the last tab? The tab bar disappears, and the document resizes up, but keeps displaying - that is very weird, and something that will probably confuse people. Also, having two close widgets on the same window, one for tabs, and one for the entire window, can lead to confusion and frustration. I myself cursed Mozilla many times when I had a window with many tabs open and I inadvertently closed the window or a JavaScript closed it for me.

However, I don't agree with the idea of a drawer with icons, a la preview. Once a window has multiple pages, the element to switch between then -whatever form that ends up taking- should be constantly onscreen, not just as a means of switching between multiple pages but as a reminder that there are multiple pages. I also have a very strong disagreement with the assertion that the Web is a fundamentally-visual medium. While it is possible to embed visual media, the fundamental medium of the Web is text. It is possible to present this media visually, but that isn't the only way, and it's not even the best way sometimes. That's what is wrong with the field of Web "design" today; they only take one possible presentation of their pages into account.

I don't know how you can assert that the web is not predominantly visual, unless you are including non-visual services like FTP, SMTP, NNTP and all of the web services crowd. Text is by it's very nature visual. Sure, computers can store and act upon text in a non-visual way, but humans don't (with the exception of braille, but accomodations for the blind are the exception and not the norm). Magazines/Books are predominantly visual even though they deal primarily with words.

Not to mention that the dominant force on the Net today is the web browser, displaying 'pages' on a viewer (pda, monitor, phone, etc) for a human to interpret.

The mechanics of how this works might be non-visual, but just like television, the result (to the consumer) is a visual medium, sometimes accompanied by sound or other 'multimedia' crap.

[Guy Incognito]

Originally posted by nobodybutme:
You're still making an ass of yourself. Why is it a sin that some folks like tabs? I don't get it. Most of the thread that you are referring to (at least what I read) was a joke, except for anyone who enjoys mass, useless pontification. The funnies part is the talk of solutions when, there doesn't seem to be much of a problem to begin with. To have so much discussion over something as trivial as tabs is a howl. They aren't the spawn of satan, but they can be misused like anything else. Thanks for the laugh. Don't hurt yourself creating more odd little musings.

Typical answer from another short-sighted person. One with 3 posts no less.

[absmiths]

Originally posted by nobodybutme:
The funnies part is the talk of solutions when, there doesn't seem to be much of a problem to begin with. To have so much discussion over something as trivial as tabs is a howl. They aren't the spawn of satan, but they can be misused like anything else. Thanks for the laugh. Don't hurt yourself creating more odd little musings.

Because he (and others), unlike you (apparently), is interested in the field of UI design, where the placement of a button can either lead to confusion or increased productivity. As a software designer, I am extremely interested in this. Users don't really realize how much thoughtful design can make their workflow so much easier.

But if you are not interested - why bother to post?

[nobodybutme]

Originally posted by absmiths:
Because he (and others), unlike you (apparently), is interested in the field of UI design, where the placement of a button can either lead to confusion or increased productivity. As a software designer, I am extremely interested in this.

I design and code software professionally as well. That doesn't mean anything in terms of you or me. Most of the discussion is whining about a simple tool that IS useful at times. The posted arguments against tabs are sometimes accurate, but mostly obtuse.

Users don't really realize how much thoughtful design can make their workflow so much easier.

Very, very, very, very true.

But if you are not interested - why bother to post?

I'm reading hoping to find a reasonable argument against tabs, because I'm curious about the fervor of the arguers...or maybe it's just like watching a bad movie that you just can't walk away from. I don't know. I post to state my meaningless opinion same as do you.

[diamondsw]

Okay, just to weigh in on this with another great (and immediate use) for multiple-page-in-a-window browsing (by whatever method).

These forums.

Try this out and see what you think: Open the main "Mac OS X" list of topics. Probably several there that interest you. With tabs set to open in the background, just go down the list opening each interesting topic in a new tab (which with middle clicking on my scroll wheel is damn easy). By the time I've chosen the topics I want to read, the first one is done loading, and now I can read all of them at my leisure.

Also, I have a tab group saved as a bookmark, so in one click I can open all of my Mac-related sites for daily perusal, or all of my favorite comic strips. It's just a great way to organize related information into a compact space.

Another UI benefit of tabs is motor memory. When you use a bookmark to a group of tabs, the same page will always load in the same tab. So I have VersionTracker, MacNN, MacFixit, ResExcellence, AccelerateYourMac, Deal-Mac, Railhead Design, Think Secret, Mac OS X Hints, and As The Apple Turns as a group. I've since built up motor memory so when I want to jump to one in particular I just know where it is, which can't be easily said for multiple overlapping windows.

Also, to those who were discussing the issues surrounding the appearance and disappearance of the tab bar, it should be noted that in Mozilla there is an option to always show the bar, even with one tab. This has not made it into Chimera because they're not incorporating Mozilla's latest improvements until after 1.0 (and I think this was a 1.1 feature).

Regarding the danger of closing a window with a lot of tabs accidentally, Chimera partially offsets this by closing the current tab with "Command-W", until only one is left, when it closes the window. While it does have the danger of inconsistent meaning, it works very well and accomplishes what the user probably intended - close the current web page. If you want to close the whole window, clicking the close button will do it (but takes more effort and thought than a simple command key).

[Michael Pick]

Because he (and others), unlike you (apparently), is interested in the field of UI design, where the placement of a button can either lead to confusion or increased productivity.

And herein lies the problem - most of the supposed "solutions" just make it worse, either by adding more dynamic objects or moving widgets.

The advantages of tabs are thus: fast, always visible, a standard widget, and small. Text labels are more descriptive in this case than thumbnails (see: dock minimize).

All launched apps in the dock have a context menu that displays all open windows.....it does require a right-click before you can even see the windows...but it acts exactly like tabs and it's built-in right into the OS. You can see the full name. And the windows are alphabetically sorted (giving a certain convenience).

This is an area where tabs could be improved - the tabs should show in the dock menu where now you get just the one window. But again, you're slowing down the operation but mousing to the dock and right clicking for the menu - not to mention that you don't see the list at all times, like tabs.

1. Make a pretty icon that suggests expansion, action, pop-up, anything.

2. Put it into the bookmarks bar

3. When you hover your mouse over it the dock menu listing open windows appears in place, and you click the one you want. Or if that breaks a UI guideline, make it one hell of a tooltip.

Again, you're making the operation much slower, and there's no easily visible list. Mouseover should never be used for critical information IMO - its the one weakness of the dock.

The same obviously goes for contextual windows et al - by hiding it away, you're wrecking what makes it work.

I think people tend to underestimate Joe Sixpack in all this discussion of tabs as well - tabs are a part of the computer interface - and they work very well in the web browser.

What I propose is Apple making tabs off by default, burying the checkbox in the prefs if its so dangerous for ordinary people, and cleaning up some of the issues like tabs not appearing in dock menus.

Throwing more cute animations, sliding drawers, split panes, context menus or whatever at the problem will just create something that is far worse than tabs and next to useless.

[nobodybutme]

Originally posted by Michael Pick:
And herein lies the problem - most of the supposed "solutions" just make it worse, either by adding more dynamic objects or moving widgets.

Exactly.

I think people tend to underestimate Joe Sixpack in all this discussion of tabs as well - tabs are a part of the computer interface - and they work very well in the web browser.

I agree. Actually, a few inexpereinced friends (older and younger) I know picked up on tabs very quickly. They found that losing windows behind each other, as in their previous browser, was a pain. They also have small monitors, so the less window moving the better. They found tabs much more convenient. To each their own I guess.

[lookmark]

Originally posted by Millennium:
This bit about tabs being "forced" onto the user isn't really accurate, though. Look at Chimera for an example. If there is only one page on the screen, the tab bar vanishes. It takes up no space at all; the HTML view actually resizes to take up the space left by the tab bar's disappearance.

I agree this is one of the most elegant things about tabs -- how nicely it adds itself to standard browsing, with minimal fuss.

Still not convinced that tabs are the ideal multipage browsing solution, though. My main two issues with tabs are (1) how poorly they scale, the more tabs that are opened, and (2) the number of additional widgets/paradigms they introduce into a single window, creating a rather Windowish MDI interface.

However, I don't agree with the idea of a drawer with icons, a la preview. Once a window has multiple pages, the element to switch between then -whatever form that ends up taking- should be constantly onscreen, not just as a means of switching between multiple pages but as a reminder that there are multiple pages.

Wow, perfectly put. I knew in my bones that a drawer was wrong for such a solution, but couldn�t quite put my finger on just why.

Tabs really do work well as a means for switching between multiple pages. Is there a better way to do it? Maybe. But I have yet to see it. Keep in mind, the ideal would have to have at least the following qualities:

• It must allow switching between any of the pages in a given window to any other page, with no more than one click and one keystroke.
• It -or some other easily-understood reminder that it's active- must constantly be onscreen when multiple pages are present. Conversely, when only one page is present, it must not be in the user's way.
• It must take up a minimum of screen real-estate. It must take into account that particularly on widescreen monitors (which Apple now favors), vertical space is at a premium.
• It should make an effort to make pages easily distinguishable from one another. However, it must not try to get too clever about this, or it'll inevitably only confuse the user more. In the end, some responsibility must fall on the page designer.

If those principles are kept in mind, then perhaps a better idea than tabs can be found. But I have yet to see such an idea.

Not to push this thread, but I�m working on a pane that slides in and displays pages that attempts to address most of these very good rules. I do think web browsing is primarily visual for the majority of users, and have taken some aspects of the Dock as my guide.

So far:

- easy switching
Check. This is really important.

- reminder that it�s active
Check.

- one page present, goes away
This unfortunately isn�t possible with the pane. The only solution I can think of is for a preference that says �Close pane with only one page is present�

- minimum of screen real estate
Biggest criticism I�ve received is that some feel that the pane uses too much. My defense (and experience) is that there's often a good deal to vertical space to spare. In any case, the pane is user-adjustable. I�m working on making it bit tighter.

- uses vertical screen real estate
Check.

- pages distinguishable
Check. Uses thumbnails or favicons (dynamic, but also user�s choice).

Love to hear what you think.

edit: cleaned up list.

[Guy Incognito]

Originally posted by nobodybutme:
I agree. Actually, a few inexpereinced friends (older and younger) I know picked up on tabs very quickly. They found that losing windows behind each other, as in their previous browser, was a pain. They also have small monitors, so the less window moving the better. They found tabs much more convenient.

Ok well here's where my hatred for tabs originates:

A good UI is one that can satisfy everyone (or almost). If an UI only satisfies a specific group of people, it's not the best solution that exists.

Creating a good UI isn't a piece of cake. Many of you seem to think that tabbing everything will make the world a better place. You've got the "Well, it works for me, and I love it...let's tab everything!!!"-syndrom. Not so fast. What works for you doesn't necessarly work for others.

Here's an example where tabs work for a specific group and not for another:

If you regularly only have 3 to 4 tabs open in your browser...tabs are great. You don't really get any name truncations. All tabs are displayed and easily recognizable. Good.

If you regularly have over 10 tabs open in your browser...tabs are terrible. You get name truncations. Tabs are unrecognizable. Bad.

Does this sound like the perfect UI solution to you? You might say "Yes" because it works for you, and "Damn the rest that can't adapt or work the way I do." The answer, however, is "No!" A good UI solution is one that satisfies everyone. That's why it's no small task to come up with a good solution. You can't just sit down, think 3 seconds about it, and come up with a solution that fits *you* best. That's easy and wrong. You don't become a millionaire by sitting on your ass and not working hard (some exceptions may apply). The same goes for a good GUI. A lot of thought has to go into making a GUI usable for *everyone* and not just a specific group.

To each their own I guess.

Exactly...this is why tabs aren't the be-all-end-all solution.

Your friend that has a small monitor can't possibly have more than a few tabs in his browser before name truncation begins to occur.

Some people say that tabs are the perfect solution to those that have small monitors. This is true and false at the same time. The person will benefit from having everything accesible from one window. But the person will also lose from having a screen so small that there's not enough space to display all the tabbed windows in a recognizable manner.

This is why another solution has to be thought up. lookmark and OAW have come up with some pretty good ideas...ideas that are certainly much better than the way Chimera has it implemented.

[Northwind]

I am not a geek, thank you very much. I am a Mac Zealot, and proud of it, so there.

[Michael Pick]

Creating a good UI isn't a piece of cake. Many of you seem to think that tabbing everything will make the world a better place. You've got the "Well, it works for me, and I love it...let's tab everything!!!"-syndrom. Not so fast. What works for you doesn't necessarly work for others.

What do you feel the need to patronize everyone who might prefer tabs? Just get to the reasons. One of the most irritating things about the mac community is how everyone is suddenly a de-facto HI guru.

Here's an example where tabs work for a specific group and not for another:

If you regularly only have 3 to 4 tabs open in your browser...tabs are great. You don't really get any name truncations. All tabs are displayed and easily recognizable. Good.

If you regularly have over 10 tabs open in your browser...tabs are terrible. You get name truncations. Tabs are unrecognizable. Bad.

If you have ten windows open, how are you going to search between them all? It's the exact smae problem. Tabs become unweildly when there are a lot open - but it's still an organizational improvement over too many windows, at least in the context of a web browser.

The small monitor argument is a valid one - tabs work much better than multiple windows, and especially better than drawers, in that context.

[nobodybutme]

Originally posted by Guy Incognito:
Ok well here's where my hatred for tabs originates:

A good UI is one that can satisfy everyone (or almost). If an UI only satisfies a specific group of people, it's not the best solution that exists.

That's why there is should only be one view in a Finder window, right? Because everyone should like icon view and that's it?

You've got the "Well, it works for me, and I love it...let's tab everything!!!"-syndrom. Not so fast. What works for you doesn't necessarly work for others.

Did I say tab everything? I also don't recall stating that what I want should be what everyone else wants. You on the other hand...

If you regularly have over 10 tabs open in your browser...tabs are terrible. You get name truncations. Tabs are unrecognizable. Bad.

You know you're right. I wouldn't have any options at that point, like openning another window or anything.

You might say "Yes" because it works for you, and "Damn the rest that can't adapt or work the way I do." The answer, however, is "No!" A good UI solution is one that satisfies everyone.

What's the color of the sky in your world? I never insinuated any of that. A UI solution that satifies everyone is a holy grail (as in unachievable but greatly desired goal). That's why, often times, there is a few different ways to excute a task. I could care less if Apple implements them, but it would be nice. I'd probably use it a little more.

Some people say that tabs are the perfect solution to those that have small monitors.

I just said that one of the reasons that they liked tabs was because of their small monitors, that's all. Does that make it perfect? To them, it seemed handy. I will tell them the error of their ways. What size is your montior by the way?

[KidRed]

Originally posted by Group51:
Hang on, now I think of it, you could just do it all from a contextual menu that mirrors the dock menu without having to click on the dock. No need for tabs then. You could do everything within one window (cmd-n would just clear the window and store the previous contents to be recovered by control-clicking).

The contextual menu idea is something i mentioned in the first tab thread. An icon right next to the bookmark icon in the bookmark bar that has a list of all open windows. Click and choose, almost as easy as tabs and not way up top on the menubar under windows etc.

Or it can also be placed in the bottom status bar to lessen the top clutter. I think this is easier then a full windo with frames on each tabbed site. Why would you want to do all that when you could easily just have all the windows open.

[Xtraz]

I agree with the notion that having 10+ tabs with truncated names is still better than having 10 windows to cycle through.

I constantly walk in and out of internet connection areas, and when I know I'll be losing connection, I open 10+ windows of pages I can read while I'm offline. Now, with 10+ browser windows this makes switching in and out (I use hiding) really slow since it has to redraw so many windows.

Sure not everyone likes tabs... so DON'T USE IT if you don't like it. But it should be in the browser as an option, just like the guy who pointed out why we have multiple Finder view options. One UI may not satisfy everyone, but if you give people options you satisfy more of them.

[Silky Voice of The Gorn]

Um...something just dawned on me, while surfing away in Safari.

I've been using just one window, not opening multiple windows. I have 9 bookmarks in my bookmark bar. I've been bouncing back and forth between all the sites on my BB, as normal. And it occured to me; this is, for all intents and purposes; *exactly the same as hitting a tab*. The websites load up instantly, or pretty damn quick. I can shuffle the order, and easier than with tabs. While I never have more bookmarks than can be read visibly, any extras would just tack on the end ala Finder.

Yes, I'm aware that connection speed is a factor, and that tabs are more "on the fly" as opposed to static bookmarks. But the normal daily behavior is essentially identical.

My point? I'm not really sure But it seems to me that perhaps there's an elegant, middle ground solution to "Tabs" by leveraging what already works well in the Bookmark bar.

[Dale Sorel]

Originally posted by Silky Voice of The Gorn:
I've been using just one window, not opening multiple windows. I have 9 bookmarks in my bookmark bar. I've been bouncing back and forth between all the sites on my BB, as normal. And it occured to me; this is, for all intents and purposes; *exactly the same as hitting a tab*. The websites load up instantly, or pretty damn quick. I can shuffle the order, and easier than with tabs.

You have a point. I find myself having to reload windows to stay current with discussions anyway.

[Michael Pick]

My point? I'm not really sure But it seems to me that perhaps there's an elegant, middle ground solution to "Tabs" by leveraging what already works well in the Bookmark bar.

They are plenty of times when its desirable to have more than window/tab open - and bookmark group are awesome (a feature that tabs allow).

Not to push this thread, but I�m working on a pane that slides in and displays pages that attempts to address most of these very good rules. I do think web browsing is primarily visual for the majority of users, and have taken some aspects of the Dock as my guide.

It seems to me that your mockup suffers from the same limitations as people accuse tabs of suffering - as you add more thumbnails, the thumbnails shrink? and move around and finally go to a list, with truncated titles? You've thus got moving targets, not to mention the fact that thumbnails are not IMO as informative as words in the browsing context. Either that or you introduce scrolling, which sorts of wrecks the easy-access aspect of the plan.

It's a nice looking idea (keep working on it) but I suspect it would be more cumbersome than tabs - seems similar to Mozilla's sidebar in a way which is a cool idea that is unfortunately clumsy to use in practice.

Again, the beauty of tabs is that they are so damned simple - I get the feeling that people don't like them because they aren't "cute" enough - like drawers (yech.)

I'm wondering if some sort of shelf like in System Preferences might be an idea - but then it's probably too much as well. Ditto an MS style toolbar under the menubar which keeps track of windows.

[dfiler]

I've contributed a lot to the discussion of tabs in various threads here, on appleinsider, and on apple's discussion boards. I've found that the people whining about whining are far more aggrevating than either the pro-tabbists or the anti-tabites. The reason why we're here discussing this is because most of us are interested in UI design or the tools which we use on a daily basis. Interface design is a worthy topic for discussion. Why are the whining, anti-whiners here?

Back on topic:

Our discussion about the pros and cons of tabs should not be limited to Safari or to just web-browsers in general. If a suitable single-windowed document-switching interface can be found, it will likely work its way into every document based app on OS X. Thus, what is important, is that if a document switching interface is built, that it be generalizable to other apps. It should be implemented at the window server level, not the application level.

I would also like to call attention to what I view as two distinct issues here. One is the discussion of whether multiple documents should be encapsulated in one window. It is important to realize that this this is only partially related to which document switching interface is used by the single window. If someone is undecided between the trade-offs involed with tabbed windows, than the second issue becomes paramount.

[Guy Incognito]

Originally posted by Michael Pick:
If you have ten windows open, how are you going to search between them all? It's the exact smae problem. Tabs become unweildly when there are a lot open - but it's still an organizational improvement over too many windows, at least in the context of a web browser.

The small monitor argument is a valid one - tabs work much better than multiple windows, and especially better than drawers, in that context.

What you fail to understand, and I'm not sure why since I've said it a billion times before but it flies right by your head, is that tabs *are* a solution, but it's a poor solution that could be improved dramtically via another method of document switching. I don't care if tabs if it's 'organizational improvement over too many windows'...the point is that it's not the best 'organizational improvement' solution for the reasons I've explained.

Do you understand? No? Forget it then. You're not worthy of being in this discussion.

[nobodybutme]

Originally posted by dfiler:
I've found that the people whining about whining are far more aggrevating than either the pro-tabbists or the anti-tabites.

I assume this was directed towards me. Fair enough, I guess. Although 1 comment != a whine. Oh, well.

The reason why we're here discussing this is because most of us are interested in UI design or the tools which we use on a daily basis. Interface design is a worthy topic for discussion. Why are the whining, anti-whiners here?

To annoy you apparently. It wasn't intentional, but it's quite an honor none the less.

Back on topic:

Our discussion about the pros and cons of tabs should not be limited to Safari or to just web-browsers in general. If a suitable single-windowed document-switching interface can be found, it will likely work its way into every document based app on OS X.

This flawed reasoning. Some documents are related, let's say a cpp and header file that are part of a project. Some, like web pages, are context independent from site to site. Using the same mechanism for different relationships in data can be confusing, which is what some of you where arguing about to begin with. When the context of an action is known, it's not an issue. People believe web pages are independent, so there doesn't seem to be much confusion in tabbed browsing. Consider a different control, when files are listed on the left in Project Builder, I assume that they are associated with the project. If that listing is used in a generic text editor, particularly if the editor has grouping functionality like TextPad (Windows) that allows one to make psuedo projects. Are the files grouped in the list, or was it openned seperately? Same mechanism for visualization, but one is useful and the other is ambiguous. It's about how a control is used.

[Guy Incognito]

Originally posted by nobodybutme:

Some, like web pages, are context independent from site to site.

No!

You couldn't be more wrong. You sicken me. Stop polluting my thread with your nonsense. Go away before you get hurt.

[nobodybutme]

Originally posted by Guy Incognito:
No!

You couldn't be more wrong. You sicken me. Stop polluting my thread with your nonsense.

Actually, I could probably be more wrong. I'll see if I can do it later. Make sure you have a paper bag by you, since you have a weak stomach.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by absmiths:
I think there are some 'oddities' created by tabs. For example, what happens when you close the last tab? The tab bar disappears, and the document resizes up, but keeps displaying - that is very weird, and something that will probably confuse people.

Actually, that's not really what happens.

You never close the last tab. What you describe is what happens when the second-to-last tab closes. As with closing any other tab, this shifts the display to that of another tab... but since there is now only one tab left, there's no need for the tab bar.

Also, having two close widgets on the same window, one for tabs, and one for the entire window, can lead to confusion and frustration. I myself cursed Mozilla many times when I had a window with many tabs open and I inadvertently closed the window or a JavaScript closed it for me.

When a JavaScript closes the window from a tabbed page, that's a flaw in the way the browser does JavaScript. It should just close the tab.

I don't know how you can assert that the web is not predominantly visual, unless you are including non-visual services like FTP, SMTP, NNTP and all of the web services crowd.

See below.

Text is by it's very nature visual.

Incorrect. Text is nothing more than a string of words. This can be presented in many different ways. We commonly think of this as being visual -because that's what we most commonly encounter in the modern world- but that's not the only way. When I speak, I am conveying text in an entirely nonvisual manner. I could write down text in Braille, which is a tactile means of conveying text. I could send it over a telegraph in Morse code; I don't even know what you'd classify that as, but it's clearly not visual, aural, or tactile.

Web browsers on personal computers present text visually. And in the context of a Web browser, it might be all right to show thumbnails for that reason. The problem is, it's conveying this idea that text is strictly visual, and it's breaking the Web by making pages device-dependent.

Sure, computers can store and act upon text in a non-visual way, but humans don't (with the exception of braille, but accomodations for the blind are the exception and not the norm).

You've forgotten the oldest way of conveying text, and still the one humans learn before even visual means: sound.

Magazines/Books are predominantly visual even though they deal primarily with words.

Barring books on tape, yes. But the Web is not -and should not be- a piece of paper.

The mechanics of how this works might be non-visual, but just like television, the result (to the consumer) is a visual medium, sometimes accompanied by sound or other 'multimedia' crap. [/B]

[/quote]
And by restricting it to that, you are holding back the state of the art. This is not a matter of accessibility, this is a matter of the Web's potential to be a medium completely unlike anything which has come before it. Unfortunately, there are people who don't want to see that happen, because it will be harder for them to control. You're helping them. probably without realizing it.

[AKcrab]

Originally posted by Guy Incognito:
Ok well here's where my hatred for tabs originates:

If you regularly only have 3 to 4 tabs open in your browser...tabs are great. You don't really get any name truncations. All tabs are displayed and easily recognizable. Good.

If you regularly have over 10 tabs open in your browser...tabs are terrible. You get name truncations. Tabs are unrecognizable. Bad.

I just don't see name truncation as a show stopper. The finder does it, and even a very long name on a webpage can truncate with only two tabs. There are many times when the tab name is not relevant, as the reason I've used the tabs is because I know the links are related (like all from the software forum). If there was a 'hover hint' that displayed the full webpage name, that would *almost* solve that issue.

[mrtew]

Guy, why anyone would devote so much effort to convincing people that love something that there is something wrong with what they love is beyond me. No one ever said Tabs were perfect as you keep denying, but they are GREAT! I love them and I don't use Safari at all because it doesn't have them.

You act like a big interface expert because you hate tabs for several hours a day, but they are great and people love them, and if you can't understand that you are no expert at all, just a petty tyrant in your own mind. Sure if something better is invented, maybe even by you, we will all love it even more, but tabs are great and people love them. Try to focus 90% of your effort on coming up with something better, maybe even writing the code, not just dreaming, and 10% on hating tabs, not the other way around. You are so ridiculous! Tabs are great and people love them. Try to understand that and stop thinking that you can convince people that they aren't. So what if the names get a little truncated.... everything in OSX get's a little truncated from time to time. Tabs are great....

[Guy Incognito]

Originally posted by mrtew:
Guy, why anyone would devote so much effort to convincing people that love something that there is something wrong with what they love is beyond me. No one ever said Tabs were perfect as you keep denying, but they are GREAT! I love them and I don't use Safari at all because it doesn't have them.

You act like a big interface expert because you hate tabs for several hours a day, but they are great and people love them, and if you can't understand that you are no expert at all, just a petty tyrant in your own mind. Sure if something better is invented, maybe even by you, we will all love it even more, but tabs are great and people love them. Try to focus 90% of your effort on coming up with something better, maybe even writing the code, not just dreaming, and 10% on hating tabs, not the other way around. You are so ridiculous! Tabs are great and people love them. Try to understand that and stop thinking that you can convince people that they aren't. So what if the names get a little truncated.... everything in OSX get's a little truncated from time to time. Tabs are great....

I'm no expert...but I'm no novice like you are.

If you use something and automatically think it's the best solution (like so many seem to think...yes, people say it's 'perfect' unlike what you believe), you show some how little you know about anything.

I'm not a programmer...I'm a GUI-Artist! Someone will undoubtedly pick up on my ideas one day and blow you all away.

"So what if the names get a little truncated...", that's the exact stupid mentality I'm seeing all the time. Stop being so ridiculous.

[sideus]

I have an idea. Don't like tabs, don't use them. Like'em, use them. It is that simple.

[DaedalusDX]

Originally posted by Guy Incognito:
Those are very short-sighted view...

What about people that live off dragging and dropping between windows? Or compare two documents, side-by-side? They wouldn't be able to do this anymore. That's why I hate column view (normally used in conjunction with the single-window Finder mode.

What about people that do have enough memory for having multiple windows open.

Forcing tabs onto people would probably the worst thing ever.

But Guy... you're forgetting one very important thing... no one is forcing you to use tabs. In Chimera and Mozilla, creating a new browser in a tab or spawning a link as a tab is something that the user must actively call for. Its perfectly possible for someone who uses chimera to compeletely ignore the tab feature.

To drag and drop between windows, just make sure the browser is in a separate window and it functions the same way.... oh... and an important feature that Chimera's tabs have... they have a "Move Tab to New Window " option. In the case where you want to drag and drop, you could easily tell a tab to become its own window and bingo. problem solved.

I don't really like the idea of looking through a window list like the dock context menu or the Window menu in every application to find the browser that i'm looknig for... here's why... you mention that its convienient because its sorted by name... alphabetically... that is not always so convienient. I want to be able to group pages myself instead of by arbitary alphabetical listing.


You talk about how its completely not useable to use tabs past 9 tabs and more convienient to use tabs less than 5...

I beg to differ... because i think you aren't considering how i use tabs ...

I use multiple windows AND tabs at the same time. right now, this message is being typed in the 4th tab in the 3rd window i have open... the other tabs in this window each contain other topics i am browsing in the Mac OS X MacNN forum. Another window contains 3 tabs each with other topics i have open in Powerbook. The last window is the Macnn Forum main page...

So you see... i can group things quite nicely by using multiple windows AND tabs at the same time. I don't try to run ALL my browsers in tabs in one window... you're right... past 9 tabs it becomes a pain...

I agree with you that the optimal number of tabs is around 5 or so... but for me, i HATE clutter in terms of number of windows... i can't stand them because they all get layered on top of each other and stuff on the bottom i don't know what's going on with those.... so the optimal number for me is also about 5 windows...

So the result, i can have 5 windows with 5 tabs each open (totally concievable) and still be comfortable... 25 browsers in total... without tabs, that would be a list of 25 windows coming out of the Context menu or the Window menu, and LOTS more clutter on screen than with tabs... and if you tried to minimize 20 of those browsers into the dock, the dock would get teeeny weeny.

So that's why i love tabs.

[DaedalusDX]

Originally posted by KidRed:
The contextual menu idea is something i mentioned in the first tab thread. An icon right next to the bookmark icon in the bookmark bar that has a list of all open windows. Click and choose, almost as easy as tabs and not way up top on the menubar under windows etc.

Or it can also be placed in the bottom status bar to lessen the top clutter. I think this is easier then a full windo with frames on each tabbed site. Why would you want to do all that when you could easily just have all the windows open.

You still would not avoid the problem of on screen clutter though. Sure you could access any particular window quickly... you can do that today with the Window menu or the dock context menu. That doesn't change the fact that you'll have LOTS of windows open.

And like i mentioned in my previous post, the idea of tabs isn't just that you can get to a different browser in one click... its a matter of grouping too.

I like to keep all of the topics in any particular MacNN forum in one window in tabs. I like to keep all my news sites in another window in tabs... all at the same time... If i were browsing 5 news sites and browsing at 5 Mac OS X forum topics, i'd have 2 windows open instead of 10... Not only that, but they'd be grouped in a way that made sense to me... this window for MacNN geek stuff... this window for world news... With the Window menu, it would be sorted Alphabetically, which is not necessarily as nice.

[Guy Incognito]

I'd just like to quote myself here...seems like people skipped over this. In the following quote, I am talking about how Apple should resolve multi-documents-in-one-window browsing using a slightly modified version of 'single-window-mode'. This would make all multi-documents-in-one-window switching uniform across all-apps.

Clicking the purple button (or a key-combo if adding yet-another-widget would make the titlebar too convoluted) would group all open same-app document windows into one window.

Then it's up to Apple to handle what they think would be the best way to show these multiple-windows-in-one-window in a convenient way.

I'd suggest the Safari-style bookmark bar...once filled, a little 'Safari-bookmark-like-icon' would appear and act the same way it does in Safari except it would fill the document window with thumbnail and names of all documents.

All the most recently use documents would be in the bar (bar filled with as many docs as possible without severe name truncation) and everything else would be accessed via the thumbnail view. So the most recent would be 1-click away, and the older, 2 clicks away. This is good because the most recent are fresh in your memory and can be remembered by name...the older documents would be in the thumbnail view which will add a visual image feature to refresh one's memory.

Originally posted by Guy Incognito:
Well...I was a big fan of 'single-window-mode' back in the Public Beta (or was it DP3/DP4) days?)...I thought that was a very good solution to window clutter. It gave people the chance to use multiple windows...and then when things got slightly out of control, a way to clean up the clutter via one-click. The only problem is that it was a global single-window solution. Only one app was allowed to be present on the screen.





Remember that!? It was great...but I'll explain how it could have been better!



Hmmm...that's a very interesting idea...a right-click anywhere inside the html-viewing part of the window could bring up a context-menu with all the pages that are 'tabbed'.

..but I'd only like this idea in conjunction with some sort of per-app single-window-mode that groups only all document-based windows into one.

This would extend to all apps that make use of document windows...browsers, word-processors, spreadsheets, etc...all document windows would have the little clear/purple button. A click of this button wouldn't minimize all the other app document windows to the dock (like this button used to do in the DP days.) It would rather just hide (or have a special effects to show that the other windows are being grouped into one document window.)

This single-window-mode wouldn't affect windows that aren't documents...palettes, apps that rely on multiple windows (such as Carracho), preference windows, etc.

Apple...bring back single-window-mode...but make it a per-app feature that groups all app documents into one. Navigating through them would be a context click on the dock away (and if one chose, programmed into a context click inside the app)...and give use an alternate interface to navigate graphically through the grouped-windows. Heck...you don't even need to add another widget to the titlebar (as it might clutter the titlebar more than it should) since this option is really for powerusers...a simple key-combo and an item in the 'Window' menu would be just fine.

[Spirit_VW]

Originally posted by Silky Voice of The Gorn:
Yes...and thats BAD UI imo. Static fields should *not* dynamically change like that. The Tab region of Chimera appears and disappears causing the html display to jump up and down. Bad, bad, bad. This is the same reason why wrapping bookmarks is bad, too. Yuck.

Apple is thinking the right way; keep the control area small, efficient and unobtrusive.

After using Safari for a good while, I started thinking, "I hope they DON'T put tabs in Safari." Thought I was crazy, but maybe I'm not so alone after all?

Truth be told, I'm loving the SnapBack feature. Come to a page with a lot of links I want to read - do an Option+Command+M ("Mark Page for SnapBack"), click a link, read, clicking even further along the hierarchy if I want, and when I'm ready to read another I just click the SnapBack arrow (or Option+Command+P) and BAM, I'm back to the original page in an instant, ready to go again to another link.

I like this. I kind of don't want tabs cluttering up Safari. It's so elegant, those great bookmark tools and SnapBack. I think Apple needs to keep Safari elegant and tab-less.

[Spirit_VW]

[Dale Sorel]

Just to add fuel to the fire

[undotwa]

Wow... I've meditated over this (j/k), at least thought about it, and have decided that tab browsing is BAD.

However I do not like the idea of a drawer.

So what's the solution?

I think we need another dock which has an icon of all the open windows (can be on right, left, bottom, and if it's on the same side of the appdock, it merges). And then the File/Folder dock has the same feature of being seperate from the main dock if it's on a different side

So you can have"

Left: Documents
Bottom: Apps
Right: Window

or:

Right: Windows/Docs
Bottom: Applications

Etc. Hows that? The thumbnail automatically cuts of the window border to make it easier to see the image. And to see the name you scrub on the icon.

[juanvaldes]

Originally posted by Spirit_VW:
Truth be told, I'm loving the SnapBack feature. Come to a page with a lot of links I want to read - do an Option+Command+M ("Mark Page for SnapBack"), click a link, read, clicking even further along the hierarchy if I want, and when I'm ready to read another I just click the SnapBack arrow (or Option+Command+P) and BAM, I'm back to the original page in an instant, ready to go again to another link.

snap back is indeed interesting but I don't see how it is pertinent to a discussion about tabs?

I keep slashdot, Macnn, OMG, tfp always open in their own tab. And just keep adding and removing tabs if I want to fork from the current page. I fail to see how snap-back would help me to replace tabs?

[Spirit_VW]

Originally posted by juanvaldes:
snap back is indeed interesting but I don't see how it is pertinent to a discussion about tabs?

This discussion isn't only about tabs. People have been bringing up alternatives to tabs. In my view, SnapBack makes a good alternative. Instead of opening ten tabs for every discussion on this forum I want to read (to use these forums as an example), I just mark the forum page for SnapBack, read a discussion, use SnapBack, then read another. Or I go to a page with a number of articles I want to read. Instead of opening a bunch of tabs, just mark the page for SnapBack, then I can read each one, going as far down the hierarchy as I want, then just hit SnapBack and I'm back, ready to pick another article. I stay in once window, and I have the added benefit of not having a bunch of tabs with truncated names. No, I don't have eighty pages open at once, but for that use of tabs (reading a number of articles linked off a single page, which was what I used Chimera's tabs for most often, i.e. reading a bunch of forum threads or articles), IMHO, SnapBack is easily as good as, even better than, tabs. Again, IMHO.

Fast. Elegant. An alternative to tabs. Hence, it seems pretty pertinent to me.

I keep slashdot, Macnn, OMG, tfp always open in their own tab. And just keep adding and removing tabs if I want to fork from the current page. I fail to see how snap-back would help me to replace tabs?

I didn't say it was a 100% replacement for tabs, but in cases like that I keep my absolute most-often visited pages in my Bookmarks bar, where it's just as easy to click between them as with tabs. If I want to dig down into a site, I can do so and always have a quick SnapBack link to wherever I want.

I'm not badmouthing tabs or the people who use them. I'm just saying that for what I used tabs for, Safari has something that does essentially the same thing, perhaps even better.