Slashdot Mirror


Safari Should Display Favicons in Its Tabs (daringfireball.net)

Favicon -- or its lack thereof, to be precise -- has remained one of the longest running issues Safari users have complained about. For those of you who don't use Safari, just have a look at this mess I had earlier today when I was using Safari on a MacBook. There's no way I can just have a look at the tabs and make any sense of them. John Gruber, writing for DaringFireball: The gist of it is two-fold: (1) there are some people who strongly prefer to see favicons in tabs even when they don't have a ton of tabs open, simply because they prefer identifying tabs graphically rather than by the text of the page title; and (2) for people who do have a ton of tabs open, favicons are the only way to identify tabs. With many tabs open, there's really nothing subjective about it: Chrome's tabs are more usable because they show favicons. [...] Once Safari gets to a dozen or so tabs in a window, the left-most tabs are literally unidentifiable because they don't even show a single character of the tab title. They're just blank. I, as a decade-plus-long dedicated Safari user, am jealous of the usability and visual clarity of Chrome with a dozen or more tabs open. And I can see why dedicated Chrome users would consider Safari's tab design a non-starter to switching. I don't know what the argument is against showing favicons in Safari's tabs, but I can only presume that it's because some contingent within Apple thinks it would spoil the monochromatic aesthetic of Safari's toolbar area. [...] And it's highly debatable whether Safari's existing no-favicon tabs actually do look better. The feedback I've heard from Chrome users who won't even try Safari because it doesn't show favicons isn't just from developers -- it's from designers too. To me, the argument that Safari's tab bar should remain text-only is like arguing that MacOS should change its Command-Tab switcher and Dock from showing icons to showing only the names of applications. The Mac has been famous ever since 1984 for placing more visual significance on icons than on names. The Mac attracts visual thinkers and its design encourages visual thinking. So I think Safari's text-only tab bar isn't just wrong in general, it's particularly wrong on the Mac.

189 comments

  1. Also.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Show me the whole URL! Believe it or not Apple, it is useful. It's almost like they purposely turning off power users.

    1. Re:Also.... by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 2

      Show me the whole URL! Believe it or not Apple, it is useful. It's almost like they purposely turning off power users.

      You may find this useful, Mr. Power User...

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    2. Re:Also.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Preferences, Advanced, check Show full website address.

      Also same place check Show Develop menu if you want more control.

      Not much of a power user, are you?

    3. Re:Also.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You realise you're full of shit, right? Walk into pretty much any major tech company and you'll find huge numbers of people using Apple's laptops, because they're pretty awesome development machines.

    4. Re:Also.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not much of a power user, are you?

      Don't be such a dick especially when you're wrong.
      That setting toggles whether or not the full path is shown together with the domain name. The parent post wants a way to show the full url which includes "http://" or 'https://". So how do you make current versions of Safari do that?

    5. Re: Also.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason they do that is to prevent phishing.

      Or they could just grey out the remaining parts like some other browsers... but just showing Domain is much clearer imho

    6. Re:Also.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not much of a power user, are you?

      Don't be such a dick especially when you're wrong. That setting toggles whether or not the full path is shown together with the domain name. The parent post wants a way to show the full url which includes "http://" or 'https://". So how do you make current versions of Safari do that?

      Click on the URL.

    7. Re:Also.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not show it all the time?

    8. Re:Also.... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Or walk into any top computer science university department, or into any of the top-tier computer science conferences. Same deal. But I guess none of those people are power users according to the GP either.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    9. Re:Also.... by Cederic · · Score: 0

      Computer scientists? Power Users??

      Shit, you made me laugh there. Until I stopped to ponder whether you're serious.

    10. Re:Also.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why not show it all the time?

      What fucking for? That it's either http:// or https:// is pretty much a given, and the (lack of) lock icon tells you which one it is and more. Next you'll insist they spell out "HyperText Transfer Protocol",

    11. Re:Also.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last few times I walked into various universities, all the university owned computers were running either Linux or Windows. Both of them have much stronger Enterprise controls and software support...

      There were one or two workstations that you describe (usually located in the library for noobs to use), but it's by far the exception and not the rule.

    12. Re:Also.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Computer scientists? Power Users??

      Shit, you made me laugh there. Until I stopped to ponder whether you're serious.

      Yeah, exactly, I bet they never even played WoW, let alone Dota 2!

    13. Re:Also.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We play Starcraft, you insensitive clod!

    14. Re: Also.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And on an Ipad?

  2. Re:Boo hoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Quite - if Apple thinks Favicons make things look a mess, and aren't terribly useful (they're mostly the same for a lot of pages on the same site, or for many sites that just don't have one), then let them come up with an alternative way of quickly seeing what tabs are. Oh wait - they did - pinch to zoom out, to see all the tabs arrayed in front of you, which is way easier than looking at favicons.

  3. Apple design by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But it looks so flat & clean. - Jony

  4. Illusion of usablility by swm · · Score: 1, Troll

    The Macintosh was always sold on its superior usability. In the early days, it lived up to that promise. Today, the Macintosh sacrifices actual usability for an illusion of usability; this charade is sustained on Apple's side by hype and glitz, and on their users' side by ignorance and blindness. I can not tell you how sad this makes me.

    1. Re:Illusion of usablility by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Well I can see the argument against it is that having so many tabs open that you can't see the name has already defeated the purpose of usability.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:Illusion of usablility by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Can we please not say this too loudly, otherwise Mozilla will realize there's an aspect of Chrome they're not copying, and copy it.

      Firefox has a minimum size for all tabs. If there are too many tabs open, it'll just change the tab bar so it scrolls. This works perfectly. Combined with using Favicons, it means it's very easy to find open tabs.

      Chrome... doesn't. I've seen it get to the point that it doesn't even have room to show the Favicons yet.

      Both Apple and Google need to look at Firefox here. Tabs are not perfect, but Firefox is doing it the right way.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    3. Re:Illusion of usablility by LQ · · Score: 0

      The Macintosh was always sold on its superior usability. In the early days, it lived up to that promise. Today, the Macintosh sacrifices actual usability for an illusion of usability; this charade is sustained on Apple's side by hype and glitz, and on their users' side by ignorance and blindness. I can not tell you how sad this makes me.

      I've come a bit late to the party having been a happy Windows and Linux user now forced to use Apple kit at work for the first time. It really does seem to be a world of hype where things go wrong just as much as with cheaper equipment.

    4. Re:Illusion of usablility by Whatsisname · · Score: 1

      If by perfectly, you mean works like garbage. Shrinking to the size of the favicons is much more preferable than having to scroll back and forth.

      That that isn't something they'd copy from chrome, I believe that's how it used to behave, and I've been using extensions to return to that behavior since before chrome existed.

    5. Re:Illusion of usablility by Chriscypher · · Score: 4, Interesting

      At some point late in Steve Job's reign, Apple seemed to have purged all the UX expertise, instead allowing graphic designers and developers to do what thy will. In the past, actual usability testing had been used to defined documented user interface standards, and Apple's user interface group was top notch. I've been a Mac user since 1984, an UX designer in the '90-'00's , and have disappointedly watched this roller coaster going from "insanely great" to the "one sheet of glass" designer bullshit of late.

      Safari started going downhill as iOS became dominant. Favicons are just part of the problem. In Safari, the Window tab, which lists all open browser windows, used to be sorted spatially. Frontmost browser windows were listed first. This placed windows you were currently using at the top of the list. Several years ago, some idiot decided to change this list to sort order to alphabetical, probably without realizing the original utility. How the %#$@ am I supposed to know what some web page is titled? Page title often changes within a site as the user navigates between pages, so with alpha title sort, the site position on the windows list arbitrarily changes.

      Without spatial organization finding one of the dozen pages open in Safari is as difficult as finding an app somewhere on the many app pages in iOS, or trying to find an app to launch on the Watch cluster of similar round icons. It's a cognitive disaster, which reduces usefulness and place form far above function.

      This is the decline which has brought us a "professional" laptop whose primary design criteria seem to have been "thinner" and "lighter", instead of the dozen other criteria which actual heavy-daily-users desire.

      Ugh. Bring back "insanely great".
      Now get off my lawn. Argh.

      --
      "You have liberated me from thought."
    6. Re:Illusion of usablility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact it's often a case that the more high end you go, the more things you have that can go wrong.
      For Macs, maybe a macbook air will be better than a macbook pro on this front : less heat, no touch bar and no issue with the super turbo USB-C multi-ports (which are useless most times anyway since people want to use a USB 1 mouse, a USB 2 flash drive or try to use HDMI and would be happy if basic 1080p60 non HDR worked)

    7. Re:Illusion of usablility by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Really? You won't concede that, at the point the tabs become so small that they no longer show any information at all, that there is a usability problem?

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    8. Re:Illusion of usablility by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Chrome shrinks to below the size of the favicons, meaning you just see tab outlines. It can't restrict it to the size of the favicons without introducing scrolling.

      I think, as the sibling post points out, there's a massive usability problem when you can no longer distinguish one tab from another (and would be even if the favicons are visible.) No solution is perfect, but Firefox's default behavior makes sense and means that having a lot of tabs open is viable.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    9. Re:Illusion of usablility by Imazalil · · Score: 1

      There is also a handy dropdown that lists all your tabs. if you remember your tab is just out of view, scroll ove to it. If you know its eay back, or just have no idea, open the dropdown.

      IMHO much better to deal with than a half dozen tabs with the same icon, but no idea what the page title is.

    10. Re:Illusion of usablility by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Both Apple and Google need to look at Firefox here. Tabs are not perfect, but Firefox is doing it the right way.

      No, they really *don't* need to look at Firefox here.

      If you like the way Firefox does things, then you should just use Firefox. Safari is for people who don't like favicons and don't want to see them, and Chrome is for people who like the tabs shrunk so small that you only see tab outlines. If you think Firefox is so much better, then just use that and stop trying to push these giant companies with expert UX designers to change.

      Personally, I like Firefox's UI well enough, esp. compared to Chrome, so I use Firefox. I don't use Safari because I'm not an idiot who'd spend thousands on a laptop that has no ports, or buy a phone that doesn't work at all with my laptop OS or any of my music and requires special non-standard charging cables.

    11. Re:Illusion of usablility by Grishnakh · · Score: 1, Funny

      No, don't bring back "insanely great". Apple design is what it is now. If you don't think a "professional" laptop should focus solely on "thinner" and "lighter", and you think it should focus on some other metrics instead, then maybe you aren't cut out to be an Apple customer any more.

      Lots of people prefer "professional" laptops that achieve thinness and lightness over all else, and don't care one whit about other features like "ruggedness", "serviceability", number of expansion/USB ports, etc., and as a result Apple is the most valuable company on the planet.

      If you don't agree with this, then you need to find a vendor that agrees more with your values, instead of sticking with one that is basically the polar opposite of what you want.

    12. Re:Illusion of usablility by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Shrinking to the size of the favicons is much more preferable than having to scroll back and forth.

      Which of the 17 wiki pages I have open is the one I want? They all have the same favicon.

      Oh, wait.. I use a browser that tells me the tab's page title too. Thank fuck you didn't have a hand in designing it.

    13. Re:Illusion of usablility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah honestly, as a old ass Mac user myself, from windows 7 it really hasn't been better, just different. Prior to that it was much easier to have every day things that were just way better. I hate what apple is becoming. I was really considering switching our whole media dept to Windows until they started phoning home every damn thing we do. Now it's like a decision between dating the ok looking guy who would make me move out to Cali and wear light hoodies, eat vegan and tel me how I'm oppressed by "the patriarchy" and shit or the ok looking guy who promises to be a gentleman but I don't put he's been telling his buds that he wants to ass rape me and my family and when I ask about it he tells me it's for my own good and not to worry my silly little head about it and that big girls don't use lube and he knows because he is ass raping everyone.

      What a shitty time to be computing, aside from the insane amounts of processing potential everywhere:

    14. Re:Illusion of usablility by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Chrome... doesn't. I've seen it get to the point that it doesn't even have room to show the Favicons yet.

      Both Apple and Google need to look at Firefox here. Tabs are not perfect, but Firefox is doing it the right way.

      That's a matter of opinion. Firefox will degrade to the state where you don't know what you have open or how many tabs are open due to scrolling long before Chrome becomes unusable. I don't see that as any kind of improvement. As for having so many Chrome tabs open that you can't even see the favicon, have you considered opening a new window or using the bookmarks feature sometime? I mean it's not like you will get to all those tabs and have current content anyway, and heck half of them probably don't even have loaded content.

      Firefox could learn from Chrome. Chrome is doing it the right way /my_opinion

    15. Re:Illusion of usablility by mjwx · · Score: 1

      At some point late in Steve Job's reign, Apple seemed to have purged all the UX expertise, instead allowing graphic designers and developers to do what thy will. In the past, actual usability testing had been used to defined documented user interface standards, and Apple's user interface group was top notch. I've been a Mac user since 1984, an UX designer in the '90-'00's , and have disappointedly watched this roller coaster going from "insanely great" to the "one sheet of glass" designer bullshit of late.

      UX is a bollocks field developed by Apple. They did this to hide the fact that they didn't abide by well proven and tested HCI philosophies.

      This is going to upset the fanboys, but Apple has never had a good user interface because it was designed to please one person and one person only, the designer (Steve Jobs/Jony Ives), obviously as the person they're trying to please changes, the design changes. This is an issue because people are different, what works for someone may not necessarily work for another. Apple's inflexibility doomed them to have a poor user interface, to counter this they developed a very powerful marketing machine. Despite what fancy words Apple comes up with, every time I have to use an iDevice, I feel like I've gone back in time. This is not an issue I experience with Linux (Mint 18), Windows or Windows phone (great keyboard... crap everything else).

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    16. Re:Illusion of usablility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This makes me think of those cramped keyboards that are similar to a laptop keyboard. This is the definition of sacrificing function to form.

    17. Re:Illusion of usablility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just do what I do and have 5 Linux VMs on your computer.

  5. My God, the humanity by redmid17 · · Score: 2

    As a Mac user, I could not care less about FavIcons in Safari, partly because I don't use them and mostly because other, better options exist for web browsing on OSX (Chrome, Opera, FF, et al). Icons make the tabs easier to identify, but to me the title typically does too.

    One thing I will never understand is the people who open 50+ tabs in a single window and then complain about legibility. I don't understand leaving that many tabs open, but if you're going to come back hours later to do so you might as well stash them in a new window and minimize it.

    1. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 0

      If you think 50+ tabs in a web browser is bad, try 50+ windows in Windows XP. I used to make the engineers at Google cry when I was on the IT help desk (2007-08). Whenever they requested a software install that I have to remote into their system with my admin credentials, I told them to take another lunch break. Its going take 15 minutes to shut down their session, 15 minutes for me to remote in and install their software, and 15 minutes to open their session.

    2. Re:My God, the humanity by Malc · · Score: 1

      I couldn't agree more. I didn't even realise they were missing despite Safari being my primary browser on the Mac. On my iPhone I assume they would be extra clutter using valuable space. Shift-Cmd-\, or zoom out if you want a useful way to see and browse through open tabs. What exactly am I missing?

      Is this story just a childish anti-Apple rant?

    3. Re:My God, the humanity by Pascal+Sartoretti · · Score: 1

      As a Mac user, I could not care less about FavIcons in Safari, partly because I don't use them and mostly because other, better options exist for web browsing on OSX (Chrome, Opera, FF, et al).

      I guess you use a desktop and not laptop ? Safari's energy efficiency is the reason I use it on my MacBook (although I prefer FireFox).

    4. Re:My God, the humanity by redmid17 · · Score: 1

      You would be wrong

    5. Re:My God, the humanity by redmid17 · · Score: 1

      It would seem like it to me.

    6. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow creimer has a new story today for a change and apparently he was underpaid at Google as well even.

    7. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Wow creimer has a new story today for a change [...]

      You must be new around here.

      [...] apparently he was underpaid at Google as well even.

      Help desk techs got paid $20/hr.

    8. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You must be new around here."

      How was that a logical response, creimer?

    9. Re: My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      xkcd: 1095

    10. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      How was that a logical response, creimer?

      I previously told that help desk story on a half dozen occasions over the years. If someone is claiming that it's a new story, they must be new around here.

    11. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be new around here.

      I can't wait until January, when you start telling us about your revolutionary new 1500 calorie a day diet, which has allowed you to lose 8 pounds in 8 weeks - down to 392 from 400 pounds! - and which you totally didn't start in July of 2016, then claim to have just started again in June of 2017, when you lost 13 pounds in 13 weeks, and somehow still managed to be heavier than you reported in July of 2016!

      Weight loss: you're doing it wrong.

      Help desk techs got paid $20/hr

      So your wages have remained more or less stagnant for the last 10 years. Good to know. Good thing you've got those 30+ super effective revenue streams bringing in that hush money, creimer!

    12. Re:My God, the humanity by hackel · · Score: 1

      Just because *you* don't understand it doesn't mean the behaviour doesn't exist and nee to be accommodated. I currently have 693 tabs open in this Firefox profile. I've only got 50 open in Chromium. Do I use them all all the time? No, of course not, but decent browsers like Firefox ensure that only the tabs you're actually using are loaded at any one time. Sure, it would be great if I was magically organized and efficient with maintaining my tabs, but typically I just don't have time for that. I could never imagine using such a garbage, proprietary browser without icons to identify tabs. Reading the text titles takes much longer, particularly when you operate entirely from the keyboard with a VIM-extension instead of dragging your mouse around and clicking on everything like a typical Apple fanboy.

    13. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      So your wages have remained more or less stagnant for the last 10 years.

      Like all Americans for the last 40+ years. Thanks, Reagan!

      https://www.usw.org/blog/2015/wages-have-been-stagnant-for-40-years-but-its-not-the-fault-of-american-workers

    14. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like all Americans for the last 40+ years. Thanks, Reagan!

      No, like AVERAGE and BELOW-AVERAGE americans for the last 40+ years.

      I guess you're happy staying in the "barely competent" demographic.

    15. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      I guess you're happy staying in the "barely competent" demographic.

      I'm quite satisfied with my career. Pissing on me isn't going to change that.

    16. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On some non-qwerty keyboard you use the Alt Gr key to use "\", does the shortcut with shit and cmd work there as well?

    17. Re:My God, the humanity by Known+Nutter · · Score: 1

      I currently have 693 tabs open in this Firefox profile

      But... why? Can someone please articulate a reasonable explanation of why anyone would do this? Serious question.

      ...imagine using such a garbage, proprietary browser without icons to identify tabs.

      Again, I have trouble picturing how favicons are of any help with 693 of them on the screen or in a scroll bar, a list or whatever. 693 of anything is just a heap. Please help me understand.

      --
      Beware of the Leopard.
    18. Re:My God, the humanity by CrashNBrn · · Score: 2

      Desktop Chrome wont allow you to have a title bar, unlike every other program, and every other browser prior to Chrome|Blink.

      Fuck that, even Mobile Chrome is allowed to have a title bar.

    19. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm quite satisfied with my career. Pissing on me isn't going to change that.

      "When small men attempt great enterprises, they always end by reducing them to the level of their mediocrity."
      -- Napoleon Bonaparte

    20. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that retard was quite satisfied with his pudding cup. Jiggle some more, creimtard.

    21. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      "When small men attempt great enterprises, they always end by reducing them to the level of their mediocrity."
      -- Napoleon Bonaparte

      Napoleon should know. He lost the Battle of Waterloo, ending his rule as the French Emperor and dying in exile.

    22. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Napoleon should know. He lost the Battle of Waterloo, ending his rule as the French Emperor and dying in exile.

      Indeed, but at least he was not proudly satisfied with remaining a mediocre joke. Keep on setting your sights low, creimer, you're a walking demotivational poster.

    23. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He wasn't an Emperor during the Battle of Waterloo.

    24. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    25. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Indeed, but at least he was not proudly satisfied with remaining a mediocre joke.

      I don't mind being a running joke on Slashdot.

      Keep on setting your sights low, creimer, you're a walking demotivational poster.

      Which is why I have this demovivational poster in my home office:

      "It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others."
      https://despair.com/collections/demotivators/products/mistakes

    26. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't mind being a running joke on Slashdot.

      Yes, that's the only time you'll be doing some running!

      in my home office

      Your home office!!!!! Oh you're too precious! The closet in my home office is bigger than your entire studio! Home office! Wow!

      You reach for your power bar and your arm is already in your living room!

    27. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Your home office!!!!!

      This is what my home office looked like eight years ago.

      https://blog.cdreimer.com/2009/03/06/dedicated-office-space/

      The closet in my home office is bigger than your entire studio!

      My brother's in-laws had a five-bedroom $1M home that has a kitchen larger than my studio apartment. They sold that place because keeping it clean was a monumental task for a couple in their 50's. They're living in a converted barn in Pennsylvania to be near their grandchildren.

    28. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This is what my home office looked like eight years ago."

      So? What you call a "home office", people with a normal brain call a "desk", you fat self-aggrandizing auto-fellating human failure.

      "They sold that place because keeping it clean was a monumental task for a couple in their 50's"

      Well, after a normal life raising kids, sure.

    29. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 0

      What you call a "home office", people with a normal brain call a "desk" [...]

      Today it's two desks, a table, filing cabinet, storage cabinet, and several bookshelves. I'm trying to rearrange the space to do YouTube videos in the near future.

      Well, after a normal life raising kids, sure.

      Not sure what kids have to do with this. A 5,000-sqft house was too much space for two people. They only got it because they had five bedrooms of family heirlooms that they couldn't let go.

    30. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly, it's a heap. Search for something online and open new 4 tabs instead of clicking on one results and then hitting back if it wasn't good enough. 1st tab has poor result so close it. 2nd tab is ok and has two other interesting links so open two more tabs. 3rd tab is best, so go back and close tab 2. Do whatever you were going to do with the thing you were search and then time's up or get distracted by something else. Now you've got 3 other tabs still open. One you'll quickly close the next time you scroll through it and two others you may take the time to read when you're not doing something else. Repeat for everything you do online and your tab pool of pending interesting things keeps growing and growing until the browser crashes and wipes them all out.

      Since I don't have a Slashdot account, I open all my posts in their own tabs so I can go back and see if anyone responds. These tabs generally get closed within a week, but until then they stay in my tab bar. They aren't worth it to spend time bookmarking, categorizing, and then remembering to reopening them at a later date. It's far simpler to leave them open and close the tab later. I've opened a couple tabs to the primary articles surrounding the Google stuff going on right now. If I don't get to them within a month they'll eventually be closed as no longer relevant as I scan through the tabs. Something worth reading, yet not worth hauling my current tasks to read now.

      Putting things into bookmarks and keeping them organized takes too much effort.

    31. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 0

      Yeah, given that it probably takes up 1/4 of your 440 sq ft apartment, where do you keep the rest of your furniture?

      It's 475-sqft. After my father passed away and 99% of his worldly possessions got tossed into the trash five years ago, I got rid of all the clutter in my life. I could probably move into a smaller apartment — or a trailer if I ditched the home office.

      you & your extra tents - errr, clothes

      I wear 2XL t-shirts. Those are not tents. It might help if you think football player instead of butter ball.

    32. Re:My God, the humanity by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      But... why? Can someone please articulate a reasonable explanation of why anyone would do this? Serious question.

      Mainly because it's not stuff so important you want to bookmark, and also because bookmarking stuff, and then organizing the bookmarks, is more effort and overhead than just leaving the tabs open and getting back to them later.

      However, I do agree that 693 tabs is a bit excessive. I have tons of tabs too, but not that many. I eventually go through them and clean many up (close them). With bookmarks, I'd end up never going back and looking at them, and having a bookmark list that grows completely out of control.

      As an analogy, think of a physical desktop back in the days of paper, before computers. You have stuff stacked up, in various places on your desk, waiting for you to get to it and deal with it. If you were to take all these papers, and instead stick them in a box and seal it shut, would you ever get around to dealing with them? No. At the root, the problem is a bit of a lack of discipline, and also the tools not really being that great at helping us organize information (there's only two ways of storing links: keep a tab open, or bookmark it).

    33. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 0

      Not sure what youtube has to do with this.

      I'm planning to turn my home office into a YouTube studio in the near future.

      That's too much stuff for one kissless loser.

      The home office is in support of my side business as a content creator. The only thing that is missing is a 30-gallon frag tank I'm planning to put in the corner.

    34. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    35. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are not tents. It might help if you think football player instead of butter ball.

      Nope, that's not helpful at all. A 2XL shirt is enough fabric to create a small tent. Even if I think about football players, they're still massive, and wearing shirts big enough to be tents, as well.

      Stop kidding yourself, creimer. You're big and getting bigger, and soon enough you'll be wearing enough cloth to make tents for the entire 101st Airborne Division.

    36. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not too sure how The Grove would feel about that aquarium.

      Where would it fit, anyways?

    37. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Not too sure how The Grove would feel about that aquarium.

      Wrong floor plan. Pet policy only applies to cats and dogs.

    38. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's weird you want to lose weight considering you're 375 pounds of lean muscle.

    39. Re:My God, the humanity by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      better options exist for web browsing on OSX (Chrome, Opera, FF, et al).

      Ever wonder why better options exist? Could it be death by a thousand usability inconveniences?

    40. Re:My God, the humanity by ls671 · · Score: 1

      Think of the fishes! My smallest tank is 72 gallons, by biggest 200.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    41. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and? Do they ban waterbeds? What do you think they'll say to a giant tank of water?

    42. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Do they ban waterbeds?

      Yes.

      What do you think they'll say to a giant tank of water?

      The corporate owners would probably insist on the $1,500 pet deposit.

    43. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One day ago: "Pet policy only applies to cats and dogs."
      Today: "The corporate owners would probably insist on the $1,500 pet deposit."

      Do you see why you need us? Your mind isn't clear.

    44. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Do you see why you need us?

      Slashdot exists to keep me amused at work while a script is running. Thank you for your participation.

      Your mind isn't clear.

      The pet policy currently applies to cats and dogs. Note that it's called a "pet policy" and not a "cats and dogs" policy. When I discusses having an aquarium with the leasing office, they indicated that the $1,500 pet deposit would apply. They recently that sent out a notice that ALL PETS (not just cats and dogs) must be registered with the leasing office. The three or four corporate owners that this 50-year-old apartment complex had in the last five years keep finding new ways to nickel and dime residents.

    45. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before : "Pet policy only applies to cats and dogs."
      After : " Note that it's called a "pet policy" and not a "cats and dogs" policy."

      Note it yourself, you fat fraud.

      "Slashdot exists to keep me amused at work while a script is running. "

      It's Saturday, you lying feces eater.

      "When I discusses having an aquarium with the leasing office"

      "discusses"... Wow, 30 anthologies later and you still can't writer bettererest than a kid with brain problems.

    46. Re:My God, the humanity by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      It's Saturday [...]

      I'm working, asshat. One of the joys of having a side business in addition to a regular job that pays the bills.

      Wow, 30 anthologies later and you still can't writer bettererest than a kid with brain problems.

      That's because I don't have an editorial process for Slashdot. It's like complaining about Trump's tweets when he doesn't have a policy process for making informed announcements.

    47. Re:My God, the humanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " One of the joys of having a side business"

      ...is having no weekends. Got it. You're scrambling for pocket change.

      "That's because I don't have an editorial process for Slashdot."

      I've read your eBooks (for free, don't worry.). You don't have an editorial process, full stop. You're an awful, juvenile, childish writer with nothing worth saying, and you find a way to say it poorly.

      You're the 21st century William Topaz McGonagall.

      " He won notoriety as an extremely bad poet who exhibited no recognition of, or concern for, his peers' opinions of his work."

      "McGonagall has been lampooned as the worst poet in British history."

      "Scholars argue that his inappropriate rhythms, weak vocabulary, and ill-advised imagery combine to make his work amongst the most unintentionally amusing "

      "Throughout his life McGonagall campaigned against excessive drinking,"

      "McGonagall constantly struggled with money and earned money by selling his poems in the streets, or reciting them in halls, theatres and public houses."

      "the crowd was permitted to pelt him with eggs, flour, herrings, potatoes and stale bread. For this, he received fifteen shillings a night. McGonagall seemed happy with this arrangement"

      Throughout his life McGonagall seemed oblivious to the general opinion of his poems, even when his audience were pelting him with eggs and vegetables. Author Norman Watson speculates in his biography of McGonagall that the poetaster may have been on the "autism-Asperger's spectrum". Christopher Hart, writing in The Sunday Times, says that this seems "likely".

  6. Favicons? by chthon · · Score: 0

    What are they?

    1. Re:Favicons? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back in the day, people used to own these things called "lap tops" for browsing the internet. Favicons had something to do with them, I think. Let me get out my iphone and look it up real quick...

    2. Re:Favicons? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are they?

      Found the Safari user.

      The one Safari user. Everyone else uses Chrome or Firefox.

      No, I'm not forgetting Opera. Nobody uses Opera.

    3. Re:Favicons? by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

      Actually, that's a really good point. Apple is simplifying the UI, assuming that everyone is only using (at most) a few tabs, like they would on a phone. It's not unlike the Windows 8 assumption that a single (tablet-style) UI is "good enough" for all environments.

    4. Re:Favicons? by omnichad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      favicon.ico, retrieved by default by Internet Explorer and now most major browsers (short for Favorites Icon) and before tabs was used to put an icon on favorites shortcuts and desktop web shortcuts. Go ahead and use Internet Explorer to retrieve http://domain.com/ and shortly thereafter, check your web server logs to see a request to http://domain.com/favicon.ico - this behavior seems to be default in most browsers now. It also serves as the sole identifier on tabs on browsers with too many tabs open to show title text, which is the point of the story post.

      Since the early days, support has been added to HTML to set its location/format manually with <link rel="shortcut icon" href="">.

      Apple decided to completely forego the existing HTML, and then defines <link rel="apple-touch-icon"> to define the image that appears when you make a web page a shortcut on your phone/tablet home screen.

    5. Re:Favicons? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      converting favicons to greyscale and snapping the contrast bounds would serve a similar purpose without completely being unusable. In fact, they support a vector icon (in black and white) for pinned tabs.

    6. Re:Favicons? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't know what they were until I read Gruber's post, then opened multiple tabs in both Safari and Chrome to see what he was talking about. I'd never really noticed them before.

    7. Re:Favicons? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WRONG! Apple offers you "apple-touch-icon" so you can have a icon on your iOS homepage the size of all the other icons there, instead of the badly scaled 32x32 favicon. If you choose so.

    8. Re:Favicons? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Nothing about that was wrong. And nothing about rel="shortcut icon" means that you have to make it 32x32. In fact, I include a 16x16, 32x32, and 48x48 when making actual icon format files. The .ico format also allows for 256x256 PNG files now, so it really can serve all purposes - if it wasn't ignored (even in the absence of an apple-touch-icon)

  7. Safari on a Macbook is still a thing? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

    Owned a bunch of Macbooks. Never really used Safari. If you want a better-behaved browser, why not just dump Safari?

    >> The Mac attracts visual thinkers

    So do boxes of crayons, "Murder She Wrote" and traffic accidents.

    To me the appeal of the Mac was and will always be that you can open a bash terminal and get all your work done while ignoring all of Apple's icon-based crap (and the silly iTunes store).

    1. Re:Safari on a Macbook is still a thing? by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 2

      Because Safari is significantly faster and significantly better on the battery. It's not really even close.

  8. Just use Chrome by tmshort · · Score: 2

    I've discovered that Chrome simply works for me better, so I switched. Some sites would not work with Safari (e.g. my bank's bill pay).

    1. Re: Just use Chrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real problem is that every browser for OS X sucks. They just all suck in different ways, so you have to choose the one that sucks the least for what you are trying to do at that particular moment.

      For the record, I mostly use Chrome. But every once in a while I have to break out Safari to get something done because Chrome just eats it and refuses to show / play content, even with the plugin for that content loaded and supposedly happy.

    2. Re: Just use Chrome by hackel · · Score: 2

      If you're using sites that still require fucking *plugins* in 2017 then blame the site, not the browser!

  9. Tree Style Tab by hammeraxe · · Score: 4, Informative

    For those of us who like to keep a lot of tabs open there is Tree Style Tab: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

    Never looked back. Whenever I try to use someone else's browser I cringe at the terrible idea of putting the tabs at the top.

    1. Re:Tree Style Tab by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prepare to look back.

      All addons that alter Firefox's UI will stop working when Firefox 57 releases.

      Pretty soon you're going to have to make a choice: install security fixes, or continue using extensions like Tree Style Tab.

    2. Re:Tree Style Tab by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Third option: Pale moon.

    3. Re:Tree Style Tab by ComputerInsultant · · Score: 3, Informative

      Tree Style Tab is planning on full functionality in FF57. You can track their progress here https://github.com/piroor/tree...

      Check your facts before yelling that the sky is falling.

      --
      engineers are all basically high-functioning autistics who have no idea how normal people do stuff
    4. Re:Tree Style Tab by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any addon that alters that Firefox UI is no longer supported starting with Firefox 57. Period. Which means even if they come up with some way of "working" it won't actually work like it used to and will likely randomly break as the Firefox developers continue to restrict what addons can do.

    5. Re:Tree Style Tab by ls671 · · Score: 1

      My understanding is that what you say is valid for "plugins". Addons will continue to be supported since they use a different architecture.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    6. Re:Tree Style Tab by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But perhaps they provide some "sidebar API" the TST add-on can use. Perhaps another very specific API can be used to request the normal tab bar not be shown anymore.

      I don't care enough, as I wait for FF 55 to be pushed to my distro.

      What I believe though, is new style add-on are restricted in what they do already, insomuch that they won't restrict them further, since the add-ons can't do anything in the first place and so you're shackled from the get go. But they will likely add or expand APIs so they can do more things, even if slowly over the months and years.

      This isn't like the first time we lose an older more permissive computing platform. If you were using firefox extensions for your desktop software needs, that sucks (no kidding, there are IRC clients, ftp clients, clocks, likely tetris games and stuff). I'm okay with that - I tried Classic Theme Restorer and couldn't make sense of the control panel.

      I mean, people lament the loss of the Amiga and tried to keep it alive adding dozens of megs of RAM and the Internet etc. but pre-emptive multitasking with no memory protection was a 80s hack job.
      When we moved from Windows 98 to XP/2000, we lost direct access to hardware and DOS games were a shell of their former self. I never could finish the additional level in Xwing's CD-ROM version. Maybe I'll get back to it some day when I get a 4GHz CPU so as to comfortably emulate a 120MHz PC with its entire hardware and a win9x running on top.

    7. Re: Tree Style Tab by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nonsense, they also have their own semi official tab tree https://testpilot.firefox.com/experiments/tab-center/

  10. Different solution for different people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Adding favicons doesn't really fix the problem when there are many tabs open, especially if you have multiple open on the same domain (same favicon) or sites without any favicon.

    Apple just went a different route and said we'll just give small thumbnails of the website for people to switch if they are hunting for a specific tab. Just click the little button in the upper right corner and find the tab you want.

    1. Re:Different solution for different people by ls671 · · Score: 1

      Adding favicons doesn't really fix the problem when there are many tabs open, especially if you have multiple open on the same domain (same favicon)

      I design my web sites with a different favicon for every page you insensitive clod.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  11. Re:It's Apple by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    Er um, you do realize we are talking about browsers specifically on desktop? You can get a different browser.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  12. Steve Jobs's comments on Aesthetics by puddingebola · · Score: 5, Funny

    *Channeling Steve Jobs* A web browser is an experience. It needs clarity. It needs consistency. It needs to be beautiful. The toolbar area of Safari is beautiful. Notice the clean monochromatic appearance. Notice the lines, the pristine appearance, the unblemished look. It's perfect. It's sterling. It's absolute perfection. To introduce favicons would smear it with excrement. It would disturb its Zen tranquility. It would besmirch its purity. Yes, the Safari web browser, a thing of beauty is a joy forever.

    1. Re:Steve Jobs's comments on Aesthetics by raftpeople · · Score: 2

      "...if only we could get rid of the ugly and distracting web page content"

    2. Re:Steve Jobs's comments on Aesthetics by mfearby · · Score: 1

      That's why I don't use Safari - I can't quickly distinguish all my tabs and bookmark links. Colours are useful things to give clues quicker than having to read, but apparently this is news to Apple.

  13. Minor problems compared to Mozilla's MITI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Problems with the favicons in Safari do seem really really minor when compared to something like the Mozilla Information Trust Initiative.

    In their words:

    Mozilla is developing products, research, and communities to battle information pollution and so-called ‘fake news’ online.

    It scares the hell out of me to think that a browser developer is getting involved with what sounds to me like an attempt to control, and maybe even censor, content online. It's even worst that this is apparently being done in the name of "openness".

    1. Re:Minor problems compared to Mozilla's MITI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed I have issues with the first newspaper they cite :

      Imagine this: Two news articles are shared simultaneously online.

      The first is a deeply reported and thoroughly fact checked story from a credible news-gathering organization. Perhaps Le Monde, the Wall Street Journal, or Süddeutsche Zeitung.

      Le Monde (now at least) is a major outlet for war propaganda, far from the only one though.
      Let's take any random article or opinion essay which contains "Al-Assad uses chemical weapons to gas his own people", should we flag that as fake news? Or only if it says "Beyond doubt, Al-Assad used chemical weapons to gas its own people".
      Conversely, what to do about a web news story that says "Al-Assad never used chemical weapons"?

      Perhaps it's more easy that not in that the issue can be flagged as a real/actual controversy and so not flagged as fake news for either side, but some people may/will insist either way.

  14. Internet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is it?

  15. Safari is the new IE6 by michaelcole · · Score: 0

    All that overseas cash and they can't make a standards compliant browser. WebRTC, PWAs, etc, etc.

    If Apple doesn't get their 30% internet tax, why should they?

  16. Drop-down menus, too. by KurtW.Wanfried · · Score: 1

    Safari (at least on my computers) only shows fewer than half of the favicons in my bookmarks, both the Favorites bar and the main Bookmarks drop-down menu. This isn't a big deal, but it is mildly annoying.

    1. Re:Drop-down menus, too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That code's been buggy since since it was in Konqueror.

    2. Re:Drop-down menus, too. by ls671 · · Score: 1

      A poster above wrote that you have to include a special icon link just for apple in your html in order for the icons to show, maybe this is related:

      Since the early days, support has been added to HTML to set its location/format manually with .

      Apple decided to completely forego the existing HTML, and then defines to define the image that appears when you make a web page a shortcut on your phone/tablet home screen.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  17. FavIcon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a better solution. stop using that POS browser. its the mac equivalent of IE.

  18. New web standards aren't worth supporting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish that the major browsers didn't support many of the newest web standards. They aren't worth supporting, as they don't actually improve the web experience for users, and often just make it worse.

    There's no need for WebRTC in the browser, and worse than that there were security concerns involving it.

    WebGL is just a shitty imitation of OpenGL, and it really has no reason to exist in a web browser.

    Geolocation support is a privacy concern.

    JavaScript just results in slow and bloated pages riddled with stupid effects.

    These new web technologies are why disasters like the Slashdot Beta site can happen.

    It's even worse when you realize that most of these are easily exploited by advertisers and others who want to track the activities of web users. If they aren't used to display ads in some way, then they're used to fingerprint or track web users.

    It's bad enough that we have to go through and disable these sorts of things manually. They really shouldn't even be supported in the first place.

    1. Re:New web standards aren't worth supporting. by hackel · · Score: 1

      Thanks, grandpa. Tell us the story of what the web was like back in your day again, pretty please?

    2. Re:New web standards aren't worth supporting. by nbvb · · Score: 1

      The days when Mirsky ruled the web, and a googol was still a number.

    3. Re:New web standards aren't worth supporting. by ls671 · · Score: 1

      It looks just like this:

                                                                Safari Should Display Favicons in Its Tabs - Slashdot (p6 of 8)
                              exist in a web browser.
                              Geolocation support is a privacy concern.
                              JavaScript just results in slow and bloated pages riddled with stupi
                                    o
                                    o

      Re:New web standards aren't worth supporting. (Score:2)
                                        by hackel ( 10452 ) writes: on Friday August 11, 2017 @11:41AM
                                        (#54991339) Journal
                                        Thanks, grandpa. Tell us the story of what the web was like back in your
                                        day again, pretty please?
                                        Reply to This Parent Share
                                        twitter facebook linkedin Share on Google+
                                        Flag as Inappropriate
                                              #
                                              #

      Re: (Score:2)
                                                  by nbvb ( 32836 ) writes:
                                                  The days when Mirsky ruled the web, and a googol was still a number.
                                                        @
      -- press space for next page --
          Arrow keys: Up and Down to move. Right to follow a link; Left to go back.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    4. Re:New web standards aren't worth supporting. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      I actually have no problem with many things in a "JavaScript application", as long as the user is notified. If someone wants to share their network card, or bluetooth phone, or camera with a web browser, sure, go ahead, give me a checkbox of everything this site 'needs' and allow me to allow/disallow what it needs.

      WebRTC, WebDB, WebGL etc. I agree have no use because you can actually implement them (and most 'apps' include shims ANYWAY) in pure JS. Just allow JS to use your hardware/software as the user sees fit. There should be no need to include 100s of libraries in a browser just so idiot developers don't have to find a good library.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    5. Re:New web standards aren't worth supporting. by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Technically it didn't look like that at all. You'd have stopped the download at
                  twitter facebook linkedin Share on Google+

      and gone to another page/website instead. Why waste bandwidth on the rest.

    6. Re:New web standards aren't worth supporting. by mfearby · · Score: 1

      The days of horizontal rules, animated gifs, blink and marquee tags, tables with border=5.... I remember them well :-) Things were so much simpler back then.

  19. WTF is this on my Slashdot? News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF is this on my Slashdot? News?

  20. It's not just Apple by ErichTheRed · · Score: 1

    Microsoft, Apple and Google are all about controlling the user experience in their operating systems these days. I think that they're responding to a market where the non-power users have mostly migrated over to tablets and phones for daily use, and the idea of one strictly enforced UI standard actually makes sense in this case.

    The problem is that power users aren't dead, but there's fewer of us and it makes less sense to cater to power users' needs in the minds of the hardware/software vendors. Windows 10 users, myself included, have been asking Microsoft for ages to bring back more customization features, and especially now that Windows Phone is dead. I'm not talking anything crazy -- just bringing back the ability to reskin things without having to resort to third party tools. But the trend has been to include fewer knobs and buttons to customize things, not more. I'm actually surprised about the favicon thing though -- most web developers I know, at least on the front end, are Mac users and you would think they'd have some pull with Apple.

    In my opinion, the fight for the ability to customize commercial OSes died when everyone started using phones. People expect an iPhone or stock Android device to work the exact same way, appliance-style, and you can only customize a very narrow band of settings.

    1. Re: It's not just Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about custom roms like RemixRevolution or tech like substratum?

  21. More people use Safari than use Firefox ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but the latest browser usage stats show that more people use Safari than use Firefox.

    iOS Safari has just over 10% of the market. macOS Safari has about 2% of the market. So 12% of web users are using Safari.

    Firefox for Android has 0.04% (yes, that is much less than 1%!) of the market. Firefox for iOS doesn't even register, and probably shouldn't even be considered because it uses WebKit instead of Gecko. Firefox for desktop, despite supporting far more OSes than Safari, only has about 5% of the market. Since Firefox has essentially no mobile presence, its total market share is only about 5%.

    As we can see, Safari has about 2.5 times as many users as Firefox has!

    You joke about Opera, but it's actually very close to Firefox's usage. Opera Mini has about 3.2% of the market, and desktop Opera has about 0.8%. So Opera has about 4% of the browser market.

    Rumor has it that Firefox 57's switch to the WebExtensions extension model will likely break a lot of existing extensions. This could be disastrous for Firefox's already-dwindling market share. If this breakage drives away more users, as it very well could, it's very possible that Firefox's 5% will drop below Opera's 4%. If some of these former Firefox users switch to Opera, it will be even worse for Firefox.

    When you factor in how UC Browser for Android has about 9% of the market, and IE and Edge have about 5%, Firefox may soon be behind Chrome, Safari, UC Browser for Android, IE/Edge, and Opera in terms of market share.

    Yes, Firefox could easily become the 6th place browser in the very near future! If that happens, I think it's safe to consider it to be "dead". It wouldn't be as irrelevant as Servo, mind you, but it would still be quite irrelevant.

    1. Re:More people use Safari than use Firefox ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Conversely, Firefox beats OSX Safari and Edge combined. Might be somewhat behind the sum of IE, Edge and OSX Safari.
      Opera Mini is not Opera, it might mean there are large swaths of 3rd-world users actually browsing the web on advanced 2G feature phones or things like Nokia Asha.

  22. Possible reason: phishing by bostonidealist · · Score: 1

    Without taking sides on whether this justifies the design decision (there are many factors to consider), I have heard some point to phishing as a rationale for hiding the icon. If a phishing site had a convincing lock icon or copied a logo (e.g., Facebook's) as its favicon, some users could mistakenly believe the site had TLS or was associated with a different company. Hiding the icon and defaulting to the base URL helps users know that if they see a lock in the browser UI (not in the page), it's encrypted and encourages them to check the domain to ensure they're on the correct site.

  23. Re:Boo hoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You want people to pinch their non-touch laptop display?

  24. Re:Boo hoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want them to pinch on their multi-touch track pad or their multi-touch mouse. Or, if they happen to be using some other input device push cmnd-shift-\.

  25. Collapsible Tabs Show Favicon by daviddancy1 · · Score: 1

    If you collapse your tabs to the left hand side you get favicon to identify each tab. I think you are just not using tabs correctly. Grab the edge of the tab on the right hand side and push it to the left, it will collapse to a small square tab. Like this

    1. Re:Collapsible Tabs Show Favicon by hackel · · Score: 2

      Oh, using tabs "correctly" requires using the mouse to drag the drag the right edge of the tab to the left? You're right, I guess I've been wrong this entire time, since that makes no fucking sense at all, and would be a huge pain to do for ever single tab. And who needs to be able to actually see the title, am I right?

  26. 640x169 image by aglider · · Score: 1

    That's be your screenshot of the favicon mess?
    It's a mess on its own, unless it's about the flying dog!
    Meh!

    --
    Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
  27. I thought Apple was Pictures oinstead of Text by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    From the earliest days of Apple, I had always thought that Apple was more about Icons than Text. What has changed?

  28. Re:Boo hoo by MachineShedFred · · Score: 0

    If this is the biggest complaint that they have about Safari, then they are one of the happiest Safari users out there.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  29. FWP by Shotgun · · Score: 1, Funny

    I've heard of First World Problems before, but for the love of all that is holy, would you people please go outside occasionally?

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    1. Re:FWP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried that, but there was this spider, and I tried hovering near it from several different angles, but I could never get the tooltip to come up. I wanted to reset the "choice of web placement" property, but eventually I gave up and resumed browsing.

    2. Re:FWP by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      First world problems are precisely what keeps humans from advancing. Combined with the continual degradation of the user experience and software getting worse to use efficiently, maybe it's time we actually focused on some of these "first world problems".

      After all, my computer not working here in the first world is the reason our new construction project in the 3rd world may get delayed.

  30. Re:Boo hoo by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

    Now only if Apple had been shipping a trackpad that can use multitouch gestures for like 6 years now. Oh wait, they have. Basically any Mac model still in use in any quantity can "pinch to zoom."

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  31. The bigger question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The bigger question is why the OP is still using Safari while he/she is clearly aware there are better browsers available. It's like the patient telling the doctor that it hurts when they push here.. doctor says then don't push there. Duh?

  32. Show All Tabs... by LeonPierre · · Score: 2

    If only there was a button in Safari you could click, and it would show you a thumbnail of all your open tabs that would be extremely helpful.

    Extra points if it even lets you click a little "X" to close certain tabs!

    That would be a lot more helpful than a tiny favicon....

    But nah, having a ton of favicons that give you no context as to the content of the page is way more useful....

    --
    "If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet"
  33. Pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple is no longer capable of maintaining its own software under Cook.

  34. Really? by hackel · · Score: 2

    So, let me get this straight. A user of a proprietary browser is unhappy about a basic feature that has been missing for the past 15 years, yet he CONTINUES to use said piece of shit proprietary browser all this time? Really? If you're not happy with the product, STOP using it. It couldn't get any simpler. The fact that their is not one, but TWO vastly superior, open-source browsers out there should be a clue that you're on the losing team. John Gruber is an idiot.

    1. Re:Really? by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      yet he CONTINUES to use said piece of shit proprietary browser all this time? Really? If you're not happy with the product, STOP using it.

      Some people are interested in software beyond a single infuriating feature and would like to see it fixed rather than using an alternative that has far more infuriating features.

      If I stopped doing something everytime I found one thing I didn't like I'd be living on a farm somewhere without electricity.

  35. Re:Boo hoo by berj · · Score: 2, Informative

    Agreed completely.

    There are even three ways to get to this tab overview:

    1) pinch to zoom out, as you've mentioned
    2) the little button in the top right of the default toolbar
    3) cmd-shift-\

    How much easier can it get? I get the info I need when I need it.. and when I don't need it there's no clutter.

    Even if these favicons (which seem like silly noise to me.. but to each their own) were important to me.. they wouldn't be important enough to switch to Chrome. Good god. I can't even set all new tabs to show a blank page in chrome without an extension. No thanks.

  36. Never noticed ... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

    I actually hate this icon mania, especially in IDEs.
    Most icons are random coloured bollocks which I don't care to memorize.
    OTOH I'm a 'whole word / half sentence' reader. Scanning a bunch of tabs takes no time.
    Then again I also use AppleScript(s), just google for FindTab AppleScript.

    And finally, stop implying that your usage of a computer is in any way professional when you can not adapt to its features. Hint: more windows (e.g. one per search) and less tabs, e.g. one per search result.

    What really is anoying in all browsers that the windows menu display the title of the window with the URL added to the right. I want At least the domain first. It takes ages to find the single window that is displaying slashdot.org (but well that is why I got a FindTab-script :P )

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    1. Re:Never noticed ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha, that was pretty good.

      Telling the user to deal with his issue while saying that your issue is one that should be addressed.

    2. Re:Never noticed ... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Fortunately sane browsers use both, but the reality is both convey different information. You don't need to memorise every icon, but for those you do instinctively know it makes it far more efficient than scanning for a word.

      You're a reader? Good for you. The vast majority of people are not. The vast majority of websites don't even have meaningful text. Look up right now, if it weren't for the icon could you tell the difference between 3 open Slashdot tabs and 3 open CNN tabs? Didn't think so. Hell right now I have 3 tabs with "Military" in the title. Reading across my tab list would do crap all even if I was inclined to search like that.

    3. Re:Never noticed ... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I'm on my iPad right now.
      There is no icon :)

      However the text on the tabs is the 'title' of the page ...
      Luckily Slashdot is prefixing each story with 'Slashdot:'

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:Never noticed ... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Luckily Slashdot is prefixing each story with 'Slashdot:'

      What a waste of space. So you get a few tabs across and then all you see is "Slashd" "Slashd" "Slashd" "Slashd" "Slashd" "Slashd" to help differentiate your tabs.

      Say what you want, text is worthless for high-density information.

    5. Re:Never noticed ... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Just start to decide when you open a window and when a tab ...
      I never have more than about 5-10 /. tabs ... why would I?

      However I noticed today for the first time that Chrome on Mac OS X indeed had flavicons in the tabs, never noticed before.

      Which is pretty pointless if all the tabs in my /. window are /. tabs and all my tabs in my youtube window are youtube tabs :)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    6. Re:Never noticed ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Luckily Slashdot is prefixing each story with 'Slashdot:'

      What a waste of space. So you get a few tabs across and then all you see is "Slashd" "Slashd" "Slashd" "Slashd" "Slashd" "Slashd" to help differentiate your tabs.

      Say what you want, text is worthless for high-density information.

      Yeah, having a lot of tabs with the Slashdot favicon each followed by "Slash" is clearly superior.

  37. Who needs tabs? by nbvb · · Score: 1

    Who needs tabs? Still rocking stacked windows Netscape 1.1N style ... OpenApple-N for new window, OpenApple-` to cycle through them.

    Been browsing this way for 20+ years, since my TCP/IP gateway ran Banyan VINES ... not changing now.

    (and let's not talk about the fact that I don't use bookmarks either ...)

    1. Re:Who needs tabs? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Who needs tabs? Still rocking stacked windows Netscape 1.1N style ... OpenApple-N for new window, OpenApple-` to cycle through them.

      Been browsing this way for 20+ years, since my TCP/IP gateway ran Banyan VINES ... not changing now.

      (and let's not talk about the fact that I don't use bookmarks either ...)

      Who need to Cycle through Open Windows? How Windows-Like! This is macOS!!!

      Use the Feature-Formerly-Known-As-Expose to show all of Safari's Windows arrayed on the Desktop, then just click the one you want!

    2. Re:Who needs tabs? by nbvb · · Score: 1

      That didn't exist in 1994, when I established my current surfing habits. Now get that new fangled "expose" stuff off my lawn.

      (ps - if I had my way, I'd have focus-follows-mouse Ala OpenWindows....)

    3. Re:Who needs tabs? by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      That didn't exist in 1994, when I established my current surfing habits. Now get that new fangled "expose" stuff off my lawn.

      (ps - if I had my way, I'd have focus-follows-mouse Ala OpenWindows....)

      There are a few haxies that do that in OS X/macOS; but I personally hate that. It's like constant "focus-stealing", which I HATE with the heat of a thousand suns!

  38. Simple by NotFamous · · Score: 2

    Apple knows what you need. Shut up!

    --
    Some settling may occur during posting.
  39. I have an idea... by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    Howabout two separate Safari Preferences to:

    1. Allow Favicons (which I personally hate)

    2. Change the Tabs to a Pull-out Side-Tab list, so longer names can be displayed in a Vertical Tab-List (didn't someone do this at one point? FireFox?). And/Or have a button/Keyboard Shortcut to temporarily display a vertical Tab-List.

    There. Done. Ship it!

  40. ha ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    safari lol...
    or do you mean a real african safari?

  41. But that would be anti-competetive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gruber's article also says most Chrome users on Macs would switch to Safari if they showed favicons in tabs.

  42. Because; morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple no longer has anyone who understands what a good UI is, that's the problem. Every damn thing that company has done post 10.6 and IOS 6 has been to the detriment of usability, visibility, and consistency. Both Mac OS and iOS have simply turn into a bunch of random crap you have to memorize. Basically, at this point, using a Mac or iThing is basically the same continuous struggle that using Windows has always been.

    There is room for someone else to move in and create the next great thing(s); things that actually function the way normal people need and expect them to. Apple no longer shows any ability to do so, Microsoft never has, and Linux (etc.) no matter how pretty the wrapper is still far, far, far too technical for the majority of the human race to use it.

    1. Re:Because; morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be nice to have some great all new thing but you'll need Adobe, Autodesk and whatever else to port and publish their software under the great new OS or platform.
      But you'll also need driver support for all PC hardware on Earth - perhaps you can steal printer, scanner, USB drivers from linux and BSD, steal FUSE file systems but that won't be near enough.

      Microsoft never has

      Except for Windows 95, 98, 2000 and XP. Most of that success might come from the MS-DOS monopoly and the death of proprietary hardware (all of it except Apple's) but they was more right than wrong in those GUIs.

  43. Re: Boo hoo hoo hoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I fucking hate favicons

    Which piece of turd thinks it's useful in the first place?

    It's the shittiest idea ever.

  44. If you want features don't use apple products by Tighe_L · · Score: 1

    They like to take features away. Just look at how they killed Final Cut Pro and turned it into basically iMovie Pro. Everyone uses Adobe Premier now. Except for me, I use Sony Vegas (because I'm cheap)

  45. Omniweb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you need that many tabs, use this. It has a vertical tab dock that scrolls when you open more tabs than you have real estate, and each tab is a live tile of the page. I've used it since 10.1, and that feature alone is what keeps me using it.

  46. Re:Boo hoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Or press the top left icon on the window bar (the one with the two overlapping squares),

    BTW, in that mode you can also Cmd-F to search in the tab titles. How do you do that in other browsers again?

  47. Disney's Pla... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...y Things - A porn site.

    News from T...he Porn Factory.

    'msmash' is right - that desktop IS a mess!

  48. Use less tabs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [qs]For those of you who don't use Safari, just have a look at this mess I had earlier today when I was using Safari on a MacBook.[qe]

    How many tabs can you realistically read at a time?

    1. Re:Use less tabs by silverkniveshotmail. · · Score: 1

      Fewer, not less

      The user should be able to open as many tabs as his or her machine can handle, anything else is just shitty design. A desktop completely full of icons looks like a huge mess to me but if there was some arbitrary limit to how many I could have regardless of my screen size that'd be shitty design too.

    2. Re:Use less tabs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many pages can you read in a book at a time?
      How many grains of salt can you use at a time?
      How many bottles of wine can you drink from your cave at a time?
      How many cocks can you suck at a time?
      etc.

  49. Re:Boo hoo by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    Yet an other one sided Apple Rant. However if you don't like safari then don't use it. If you like safari for everything, except the favicons then choose how important favincons are. If you like every thing in safari, then all means use it.
    I use Chrome, mostly due to better HTML 5 support, however if others are using a different browser. All the power to them.

    We are no longer in the Bad old days of IE 4-6 Dominance. We can use different browsers and for the most part the page will render properly and things will work. Plug ins and OS particular features are no so common anymore.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  50. Re:Boo hoo by the_other_chewey · · Score: 1

    Or press the top left icon on the window bar (the one with the two overlapping squares),

    BTW, in that mode you can also Cmd-F to search in the tab titles. How do you do that in other browsers again?

    Firefox: type "% searchterm" in the address bar – there are several other useful operators as well.

  51. They're there... by midifarm · · Score: 1

    If you shrink the tabs the favicon shows up. Safari used to show favicons in the address bar, but that stopped.

  52. Never seen anyone use this browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't see why this merits any headline at all. Safari seems to be some legacy apple browser that is used by only a small number of people, and only on very proprietary and locked down Apple platforms. Outside America, which seems to have a general technology backwardness, there is very little use of this browser. If users are having some problem with it, they will just switch to something that isn't subject to the crazy Kim Jong Un Apple dictatorship. Even the Microsoft controlled world looks like a positively liberal compared the the Apple controlled dictatorship these days.

  53. Favicons can be used as trackers by TheOuterLinux · · Score: 1

    I did a quick search to find this, but I had a suspicion that it was possible. https://stackoverflow.com/ques...

  54. Not a fan of Safari by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As someone who was wholly accustomed to chrome, and then got an iPhone, I hate Safari. In every way the browser reminds me of a re-skinned Internet Explorer in that it is profoundly basic and not user friendly. I admit, I don't have a Mac, so maybe the Mac version of Safari is passable. But from a mobile standpoint, it's a garbage browser; at least in my honest opinion it is.

  55. Re:Boo hoo by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

    Yet an other one sided Apple Rant. However if you don't like safari then don't use it.

    I personally wasn't even sure that there were any remaining safari users, but then I saw this article and realized that there are somewhere around 5 or 6 of them.

  56. AC Says You're Too Ignorant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pinned tabs in Safari use favicons to provide stuck, minimized tabs THAT SHOW THE FAVICON.

    http://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/06/22/pin-safari-tabs-os-x-el-capitan/