Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla Preparing To Scrap Tabbed Browsing?

Barence writes "Mozilla Labs has launched a design competition that aims to find an alternative to tabbed browsing. 'Tabs worked well on slow machines on a thin internet, where ten browser sessions were "many browser sessions,"' Mozilla claims on its Design Challenge website. 'Today, 20+ parallel sessions are quite common; the browser is more of an operating system than a data display application; we use it to manage the web as a shared hard drive. However, if you have more than seven or eight tabs open they become pretty much useless.' Aza Raskin, the head of user experience at Mozilla Labs, has already blogged on the possibility of moving tabs down the side of the browser, with tabs grouped by the type of activity involved (i.e. applications, work spaces)."

8 of 554 comments (clear)

  1. Bah by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Mozilla claims on its Design Challenge website. "Today, 20+ parallel sessions are quite common; the browser is more of an operating system than a data display application; we use it to manage the web as a shared hard drive.

    And here we see the next step in FireFox going down the drain. I want a browser not an OS. FireFox is bloated and crash prone, even more so that IE7. If Opera had the plug-in capability of Firefox, I'd move back to it.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  2. Re:I can see it now by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article:

    Mozilla has already given serious thought to the idea of replacing tabbed browsing itself. Aza Raskin, the head of user experience at Mozilla Labs, has already blogged on the possibility of moving tabs down the side of the browser, with tabs grouped by the type of activity involved (i.e. applications, work spaces).

    Oh man. The very, very first thing I ever do on a fresh Windows XP installation is turn off folder grouping. And now Firefox wants to implement this stupidity? NOT a good idea.

    Note to the Mozilla devs: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  3. Re:Scrap is the wrong word here by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Tabbing has taken over the browsing world entirely!
    Except for the fact that only people who are technical seem to use them. All my non technical friends when I watch them browse the Internet it is quite painful. They keep on clicking a new application to open the browser for every page they want open at the same time. Google the URL (which I won't correct them as it is probably safer that way as they don't go to a mistyped URL and get a bunch of junk). When they have a lot of browsers open they Minimize and maximize or move windows around until the find the right one.

    I would say more effort would be to making tab browing easier for the non tech person (Yes it is really easy for the tech person a click of the mouse or a Alt/Ctrl/Command - T) but the non-technical people will not experiment with their computer. When we see a funny little Icon we click on it and see what it does, a non technical person will just leave it alone. And don't even bother trying to get them to go threw the menu.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  4. Is New Window considered harmful? by hal2814 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Tabs and new windows are not mutually exclusive. I group my tabs just fine by having a separate window for each set of tabs. To me it makes a lot of sense since I can ALT-tab between subjects and CTRL-tab between tabs in that subject. I don't see their sidebar solution as being any better.

  5. Re:I can see it now by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Note to the Mozilla devs: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

    More directly: if it ain't broke, don't break it!

    With all the 16:9 and 16:10 wide format screens now, moving the tabs to the side would make more sense. A lot more can be usefully fit in that way (about 30-60, depending on font preference & screen size), even with the current tabbing metaphor. In fact, it would work for me on a regular 4:3 screen as well, since I usually keep the web page displayed in a sort of "portrait" aspect ratio, leaving a lot of spare room beside the browser - enough for tabs to fit easily.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  6. Re:I can see it now by zwei2stein · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Simple fix: Adopt video-only policy for porn.

    --
    -- Technology for the sake of technology is as pathetic as eschewing technology because it's technology.
  7. To me... by argStyopa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...this just shows that they don't know what (some) people use tabs for.

    Personally, when I tend to browse forums or a website, etc, I use tabs like footnotes.

    1) Efficiency: I continue reading the current thread or page, and 'open new tab' on any interesting link. This allows THAT page to load in the background while I continue to read uninterrupted. So while I have "broadband" some pages STILL take a not-irrelevant time to load.

    2) Organization: tabs allow me to reduce clutter and keep things organized. Right now, for instance, I have outlook, 2 emails I should be working on instead of reading/posting to /., 4 different excel worksheets (work), outlook reminders, adobe (work) and firefox. At least with the tabs all residing within firefox I can keep neatly separated between what I'm doing and what I SHOULD be doing....

    3) resources: ok, this was a far bigger issue with previous hardware and OS's, but it's still my preference not to run/exit/run/exit multiple iterations of any program. To open a new browser for a page I might spend 30 seconds reading seems a waste (and is quite a bit slower than ctrl+t) - on a day of heavy web-browsing, I might open 100+ pages. Perhaps I'm just ignorant and the memory load/memory leakage of multiple tabs is essentially the same for tabs as for multiple iterations, but that's my 'sense' of it - tabs seem less likely to run me out of resources.

    And no, having a host of "context" tabs that I could open doesn't sound terribly useful - if I open my "slashdot" tab, I'm after the individual stories, which the browser can't possibly predict which are worth downloading. On the other side of the coin, how could the browser anticipate/understand that (forum post)(4chan)(algore.com)(goatsce.cx) are all contextually tied (but only for as long as I need to make that forum post and insert the image - and then never, ever again).

    For my style of tab-heavy browsing, I wouldn't mind perhaps the tabs running down the side of the page. That seems more logically useful given the lateral nature of text, and easier to pack 20-30 tabs on a page. However, then it becomes a WASTE of space for people who only open a small number of tabs. With tabs on top, you're losing only the thickness of a text line in screen real estate; with tabs to the side, you lose the WIDTH of a text line - substantially more - even if you only have two tabs open. For that matter, I'd simply be happy with the ability to increase the height of the CURRENT tabline, like you can with the Windows bar in XP, so with 20-30 tabs, I can read more of their (currently-abbreviated) headers, at a small cost in screen area.

    In short, I love tabs and use them intensively. Don't see much of a need to change them.

    --
    -Styopa
  8. Re:I can see it now by MindKata · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "If Mozilla really hates the way the default tabs function, they need to start looking at Tree Style Tabs for a replacement."

    I wish they could just *let users choose* which way *they wish to work*.

    For example, I use tabs a lot. I don't want tree tabs on by default, its as bad as grouping on the task bar (which is off on any machine I have to use). I want a minimalist user interface, I don't want any more levels of indirection added. (e.g. Each tree click etc.. forces more interactions). But even if I do want grouping, I can do that now. I hit CTRL-N and I've got a new group of tabs, which I do sometimes already use.

    Keeping it minimalist makes it easier to use, a smaller download and faster to learn. We want more people to move onto Firefox. Adding ever more complexity risks alienating ever more non-technical users. If people want additional extra complex functionality, then let them have the ability to choose to add it in a modular way. (Again that idea of user choice).

    If they want to improve peoples work flow, they would do far better to fix these kinds of bugs:
    (1) drag and drop into sub folders can sometimes fail due to boundaries of sub-folders being outside folders and so windows close and sub folders get lost, before drop operation can complete.

    (2) Creating new bookmark folders sometimes fails to allow drag and drop into them, as if they are not there (work around is CTRL-N and then drag and drop into new version of bookmark folder lists).

    (3) Creating new bookmark folders some times gets duplicated.

    (4) Sometimes fails to hold open selected currently opened main bookmark folder. This has the effect of again droping windows when cursor moves left/right even within opened list window.

    I could go on, but these bugs have been there for a long time and each slow up work flow.

    If they want to improve peoples work flow, they would do better to fix these kinds of bugs rather than find new ways to complicate the design, but then almost all programmers know its so much more fun to writing new functionality than it is to fix existing bugs.

    --
    There are 10 kinds of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.