Safari Beta Updated 174
LenE writes "Safari has been updated to Beta 6, and is available via Software Update. New in this version is XML support, more speed, and many bug fixes. The download is 2.4 MB and doesn't require a restart." From the notes: "The Safari Update 2-12-03 improves the compatibility with popular web sites based on Safari user feedback, further improves the performance of loading web pages and Flash content, adds support for XML, increases standards conformance and delivers improved application stability. The update also enables access to web sites that offer self-signed security certificates."
We're Still Here (Score:1)
Many bugs were fixed, and CSS improved *a lot* (Score:5, Informative)
As far as styling XML goes, your XML apparently does have to have the DOCTYPE stuff set up correctly. This means you get no joy with the stuff on the w3c Styling XML [w3.org] site; safari won't display the xml files there at all.
Oh yeah: it's a bit faster...not that you're likely to notice.
Re:Many bugs were fixed, and CSS improved *a lot* (Score:3, Informative)
Sadly there still is spotty support for context menus, especially in the bookmark panes.
This beta (Score:2)
File size decreases (Score:5, Interesting)
I haven't seen file size increase with upgrades. The Safari developers should be proud.
Mostly good, some bad (Score:2, Informative)
I would hold off on this download.
Tabbed Browsing (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure if anyone realizes this, but Apple typically does NOT like Multiple Document Interfaces -- essentially what tabbed browsing is. For this reason I do NOT see them adopting tabs, ever. Even if every other KHTML browser has them. I may be wrong, but I believe using tabs would be a design flaw to Apple.
I'm still reading through their HIG to see if they warn against it.
tabs good (Score:5, Interesting)
Safari will have tabs...sooner or later, and Cupertino will not slide into the Pacific as a result.
Re:tabs good (Score:5, Insightful)
Excel was NOT created by Apple, it was created by MICROSOFT.
The Airport Admin software CANNOT be document-oriented it contains NO documents
Apple's website is a SINGLE document. Every tab is not a NEW window it is a LINK to another page. Web Design and UI's are not equal.
Also, I wasn't being a sensationalist. I didn't call tabs evil, and I didn't say Apple's beloved home at Infinite Loop would slide into the Pacific Ocean. I simply said they don't implement MDIs, and ya know what, they don't.
Re:tabs good (Score:3, Funny)
Apple's website is a SINGLE document.
That's one long document.
~jeff
Re:ouch...touchy aren't we...take a breath (Score:2)
Re:tabs good (Score:2)
There's tabs and then there's tabs. Tabs as a UI control are okay; there's a section of the HIG describing how to use them. But tabbed browsing is simply one implementation of a multiple-document interface (MDI). The HIG does specifically call out MDI as being evil.
See, the Mac got where it is today by establishing a fairly simple desktop metaphor and sticking with it. The metaphor says one document, one window. Windows on the screen are like pieces of paper on the desktop.
we can look to Excel for tabbed worksheets as a long standing example
A long-standing bad example, you mean. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anybody who would be willing to go on record as saying that tabbed worksheets are a good UI.
and to Airport Admin for a more recent usage [also the Apple web site]
I don't mean to be rude, but if we're going to have a constructive conversation about tabbed browsing you're going to have to wrap your head around the fact that tabs qua tabs and tabs as an MDI implementation are two completely different things.
Safari will have tabs...sooner or later
Safari will not have tabs. Not as the default, not as an option for power users, not at all. If somebody else wants to construct a browser that implements some kind of MDI interface, they're free to do so. Hell, they can even use WebKit to do it, once it's released. But Apple will not release a browser that so flagrantly violates the standards that got them where they are today.
(Sorry, I guess that got a little strident. I'm watching The West Wing as I write this, and Sorkin always pushes my prose over toward the purple end of the spectrum.)
browser tabs good (Score:2)
I'll give in, just cause it's you. I'd like to know whence your authority on Safari comes, tho, but only to satisfy my own curiousity. I don't doubt your feedback, thanks.
I'm now wondering how long it will be before we see HTML that opens a new tab... [target=_tab_new]
Re:browser tabs good (Score:2)
That's specious reasoning at best. One example of a bad user interface-- two if you count Mozilla/Opera/Chimera tab-based MDI-- does not a trend make.
If anything, the overall trend is away from MDI toward SDI. Microsoft Word for Windows used to be an MDI application; as of Office 2000, it wasn't. The same is true of lots of Windows applications. MDI doesn't work, so it's being abandoned.
There are no real examples of MDI on the Mac, of course, because the Mac HIG always proscribed MDI in favor of SDI.
I'd like to know whence your authority on Safari comes, tho, but only to satisfy my own curiousity.
A three-way combination of inside info, extensive knowledge of Apple's UI guidelines over the years, and a level of confidence bordering on hubris.
I'm now wondering how long it will be before we see HTML that opens a new tab
Oh, sure, let's go right back to the bad old days of browser-specific HTML. "I'm sorry, but you must use a browser with a shitty multiple-document interface implementation in order to view this site." That'd be great...
bad old days (Score:2)
As for bad html. I thought we agreed that since IE allows sloppy html, we were going to blame the singer, not the song. joke...
Re:browser tabs good (Score:2)
I think a better way to argue about this is to decide what problem it is that needs to be solved, figure out to what extent current tabbed browsing solutions do or do not solve them, and then do the *right* thing. :-)
Personally (and surprisingly to me) I find that I miss tabs less in Safari than I would have expected. It turns out that *one* problem that tabs solve in Mozilla is the problem that raising and repainting browser windows takes just enough time to be irritating. Safari gets around this by being much faster.
That said, speed alone does not solve every problem. A general problem with any application that includes multiple windows is simply managing all of the windows, making it clear which is which, and allowing you to navigate between them conveniently. Here, the biggest problems with just using multiple windows are that when you have a non-trivial number open, they overlap so you can't immediately see all of the relevant content to raise the one you want (or even all of the titlebars). Further, while there are "nice" ways to cycle through multiple windows (cmd-~, best read here as "I command you to twiddle" :-)), you can get to scenes like that in Toy Story II where our porcine hero must go "around the horn" on the remote to locate the right channel (here window).
Now, there is a method to do this already in the interface, namely the list of open windows in the pull-down "Window" menu. This solution has its own set of problems. The "Window" menu now exposes a much wider pull-down menu surface, but it will never be wide enough to show the full title. (This is a major problem with the Mozilla tabbed browsing interface, made worse by the fact that the list is presented horizontally rather than vertically.) Another problem with the Window menu solution is that, especially for fast typists, pull-down menus are too slow.
Ironically, Apple sort of/kind of recognized some of these issues more completely when it came to the (surprisingly similar) issue of bookmarks. So I now have a dozen or so bookmarks on my "bookmark bar", and they are arranged horizontally and scroll off the screen. Not great. But then there's "Bookmark View" (option-cmd-B) which provides me with the obvious solution: a scrollable list of essentially full-width bookmark entries! And even some keyboard navigation! But then it craps out: you can use the arrow keys to highlight a bookmark entry, but then there is no way to go to that bookmark without using a mouse. The obvious answer would be "hit return", but somebody at Apple has apparently assumed that what I would usually want to do in that case is *edit* the bookmark name rather than *use* the bookmark itself. Bleah. Keyboard navigation for "bookmark view" really needs to be fixed. Then it will be heaven on earth.
And when "Bookmark Heaven" has been achieved, all that Apple has to do is give us "Windowlist Heaven" arranged along exactly the same principles. Hit (say) option-cmd-W and go to "Open Window View". Navigate to your open window, and you're there. This simultaneously solves the visibility problem, the "title space" problem, and the "fast navigation" problem.
The only problem it does not solve that Tabs could solve is the "Hierarchical Organization" problem. When I am running BLAST searches on ncbi.nlm.nih.gov, ideally I want all of that stuff separated from my more "usual" browsing. With tabs, I just have a "Blast Window" filled with tabs related to that stuff, and a "Regular window" filled with tabs related to the usual stuff. The window list solution alone does not solve this one. What could help is what amounts to making the list of windows hierarchical (I guess like bookmark folders).
In short, we need a (potentially hierarchical) "Window list" view that allows robust keyboard navigation. Everybody can benefit, nobody needs to use, and the interface is within UI guidelines and common sense.
Ooh--I know; we could call it "frames". Wait a minute; that's taken. Uh...let's call it "framelets" and make it twice as confusing as frames, and provide a <noframelets> tag that allows us to handle people with pathetically out-of-date browsers. :-) (Man, that *was* a pretty scary idea...)
Re:tabs good (Score:2)
> of a multiple-document interface (MDI). The HIG
> does specifically call out MDI as being evil.
> See, the Mac got where it is today by
> establishing a fairly simple desktop metaphor
> and sticking with it.
Where the Mac is today? You mean with ~3% market share for sales?
When you say that tabbed browsing is a form of MDI, and MDI is evil, you run the risk of sounding pedantic. People don't buy computers or software because it matches some Ivory Tower's idea of what is a good interface. They buy because it fits their needs the best.
I have been a Mac user for a while, and when I first heard about tabs in Chimera, I had no idea why anyone would want them. However, once I tried them, I learned that tabs work best for me. I like to load different sites into different browser windows, and then load sub pages for a particular site in tabs in the same window. It keeps things neater and allows me to quickly go back to my place without having to sit through a painful page reload. To me, three windows with three tabs is more organized that nine windows spanning three different web sites.
Maybe tabs aren't the only solution for this, but I'd like to see something that effectively replaces the functionality and still meets with the HIG-nazis' idea of what is good design.
Perhaps the case is in general MDI is not a good idea, but there are specific cases where it is a good idea -- like when you're browsing the web.
Safari's product managers need to realize that there are a significant number of people who will never switch to Safari full time until it has two things:
1. Tabbed browsing (or something that substitutes the functionality)
2. Support for the Mac OS keychain
Re:tabs good (Score:2)
Re:Tabbed Browsing (Score:2)
I do wish Apple would improve Project Builder. Why the most essential application for the system - its development environment - is as weak as it is remains a mystery to me.
Re:Tabbed Browsing (Score:2)
Re:Tabbed Browsing (Score:2)
Compare this to Visual Studio where you have tabbed persistent watch/expression panes. You have a nice toolbar with a search field that can search either the current document or all files in your document.
There really is no comparison between Visual Studio and Project Builder. I suppose a lot of this depends upon what kind of code you are using. Still I honestly wonder how people can stand tracking bugs down with Project Builder. I wanted to go full time with OSX for my development but ended up sticking with XP just because of this.
Codewarrior is better in some ways - its debugger is better for instance. But it still doesn't hold a candle to Visual Studio. It is also amazingly slow unless you can use precompiled headers extensively.
I'd made numerous suggestions to Apple and was excited when the last version of Project Builder came out. Sadly the actual debugging IDE had few changes. Perhaps some don't mind. Undoubtedly these folks don't mind printfs or using gdb. But it just isn't worth the hassle.
This is a rant slightly off topic though. So my apologies for conflating the MDI issue with Project Builder's other flaws. My original point was just that Project Builder does use MDI so the original person's point was demonstrably wrong. You are right though that Apple has made it so many aspects of the MDI are optional.
OT: Debugging under PB (Score:2)
The GUI debugger for PB is just a layer over gdb. It is unfortunate that it does the worst of both worlds: keeps you from having to learn gdb while hiding it's amazingly powerful features. As is the case with many GUI-less tools, gdb may be one of the most powerful debuggers there are - but the learning curve is damn steep.
Yes, it is possible to save breakpoints - you just have to edit your
I hope that they do get around to integrating more of the powerful features of gdb with the GUI, but historically, this has been low priority. All the 'old time coders' know how to use the gdb commands and are used to it. It's really too bad.
Re:Tabbed Browsing (Score:3, Informative)
The textured windows where "designed specifically for use by--and is therefore best suited to--applications that provide an interface for a digital peripheral, such as a camera, or an interface for managing data shared with digital peripherals, such as the Address Book application" or "... appropriate for applications that strive to re-create a familiar physical device". I think its the second one that is the most important here, but both uses play a role.
Take a look at iTunes. Its got one main window, an that window is the main focus of the app. In this case, the window is supposed to mimic the features and feel of, say, a CD player or the equivilant. Same with the calculator. Each of these one main windows contains all the controls you need, in one place where they can be easily accessed. In this context, the brushed window is approriate, because you only need one simple window for your interface.
Now, if this is the case, then why is it used in the Address book app or Safari? Well, its pretty simple. While you are not trying to mimic an actual peripheral, you ARE focusing soley on one particular type of data. Be it addresses, or a web page, each single window has a specific single focus.
Basically, each metallic window needs only focus on one thing. That one thing could be a web page, an address card, or a playlist. Putting tabs in safari would break that metaphor, which is something that apple would most likely not do.
Re:Tabbed Browsing (Score:2)
> on one thing.
I think this is correct. Additionally I think the metallic interface is used when the application isn't document-centric. So Word, Excel, and PowerPoint are document-centric and should use the regular pin stripes. Dantz Retrospect and Virex are not document-centric, and should therefore use the metallic appearance.
The only problem I have is I like the pin stripe look better than the metallic interface. So I'd hate to see too many applications using the metallic look.
Tabbed Browsing explicitly allowed in Aqua HIG (Score:2)
I found information in Chapter 5 Section 14 [apple.com] (Windows With Changeable Panes), which leads to the exactly relevant Chapter 7 Section 13 [apple.com] (Tab Controls):
Re:Tabbed Browsing explicitly allowed in Aqua HIG (Score:2)
Tabs, Maybe. (Score:3, Informative)
Some applications are not document-based. Such applications typically still have at least one main window, which can use the standard Aqua document window appearance and features.
Apple HIG [apple.com]
Re:Tabs, Maybe. (Score:2, Interesting)
And before someone else points them out, iTunes is more like an appliance - i.e. your CD player. iPhoto is an electronic photo album. iDVD and iMovie are film editors. Essentially the distinction is they don't work with single documents. Safari, however, deals with would could be called active newspapers or magazines. If you want to read a different article, it's in a different magazine, and either replaces your current document or is another document altogether.
I'm not trying to over-defend their choices. I just wanted to point out they are fairly consistent. Sometimes the distinctions are vague (e.g. what would Mail be?), but in the case of Safari I thinking they are going to stick with the document line of thought, and in this case it makes sense to me.
Re:Tabs, Maybe. (Score:2)
What did you call me?!
Shortcuts (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Shortcuts (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Shortcuts (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Shortcuts (Score:5, Funny)
whoops...banking gone for me (Score:3, Informative)
For online access to secure sessions within wellsfargo.com, you must use an approved operating system and browser.
Time to enlighten WFB's tech dept. once again. I don't feel like forcing a spoof.
banking gone-possible fix (Score:2, Funny)
Re:whoops...banking gone for me (Score:2, Informative)
Re:whoops...banking gone for me (Score:2)
Re:whoops...banking gone for me (Score:2)
you're right (Score:2)
Re:whoops...banking gone for me (Score:2)
Saying NO BETA SOFTWARE is just silly. Just makes me mad when I have to either use Chimera (which is still beta itself) or enable the debug menu and tell the server i'm on MSIE6.0 WinXP =[
Gel (Score:3, Informative)
I've tried everything available through Safari's interface including enabling popup windows, allowing cookies from everyone, and allowing every form of script and plug-in to run. So far I've had big fat zero luck. And yes I've submitted bug reports, including the page's source and any pertinent details of my particular setup.
Re:Gel (Score:2)
I don't whats up with Safari and UBB, but maybe this new version will fix it.
*downloading*..
Sweet! Ok, I can log in, logout, and post with the new beta.
Click the logout link in UBB, then delete your cookies from that site. You should be able to log in and out as you please then.
I turned off software update (Score:5, Funny)
Incidentally the apple
Re:I turned off software update (Score:2)
Tabbed Windows solution (Score:5, Interesting)
http://home.quicknet.nl/mw/prive/dennis.scp/s/safa ri [quicknet.nl]
The idea is NOT to add tabs inside a window. But to place a new window at the exact same place as your previous window and let any obscured windows pop up a tab.
So instead of indenting that new window to the lower right to reveal a clickable border as used today, I say let the windows behind the current window pop up a tab to show their name and icon. The windows stay independent and the screen has less clutter than with today's jumpy stacking system. Power-users can cycle the windows in a tab-like fashion using the [option] key.
Re:Tabbed Windows solution (Score:2)
Bravo (Score:2)
Re:Tabbed Windows solution (Score:2)
Re:Tabbed Windows solution (Score:2)
For an example of how Safari might use a drawer, check out Apple's Preview application. If you open up multiple images in Preview at the same time, you get the first image displayed with the other images shown as thumbnails in a drawer.
In Preview's preferences a user can decide whether the thumbnails should show just the image, just the name of the file, or an image/name combination. A theoretical Safari implementation could have similar preferences, i.e. show URL/page name, show preview image of page (like you'd get by minimizing the page to the dock), or both.
Other OS X web browsers such as Chimera and OmniWeb use drawers for bookmark management, but as Safari has a different way of doing that, a drawer could be useful for window management.
Re:Tabbed Windows solution (Score:2)
I appreciate the effort and thought you have put into this idea, but I see at least two problems with it:
I am not sure how this is any improvement over cycling through windows using cmd-~. Am I missing something?
Re:Tabbed Windows solution (Score:2)
OK, so I should have phrased that more simply. I notice that in Mozilla, I frequently can't get full titles on even *4* open tabs, let alone 8 or 20. I really do think that full visibility is a possible design goal here.
OK, I think the problem here is that I don't want to explicitly navigate to the left or the right or anywhere spatially, I want to go to the window with the slashdot article (say) in it. The virtue of Safari's being fast is that if you have only a moderate number (less than say 7) of open windows, you can cmd-~ around all of them in a couple of seconds, tops, random or not. But what I *really* want to do is just type text that matches the window I want to go to. That way I read the "tab", i type the "tab", and I'm there; just like type-ahead highlight links in Mozilla (now there's a feature I miss a *lot* more than tabs.) I think this is actually easily achievable: just have an "open windows mode" (opt-cmd-w or something) that displays all of the open windows) and make typing at that mode highlight (if possible) one of the open windows; hit return, and you're there). No muss, no fuss, no additional widgets, and the partial precedent of "bookmark view" which we now have to solve the similar-in-spirit problem of how do you navigate between scads of bookmarks. You could put them all on the bookmark bar, or hit opt-cmd-B and browse around. Bookmark view, alas, still lacks anything like real keyboard navigation control, which is too bad.
In any case, I thought the idea was interesting (certainly novel). I'm just not sure it's the right idea for this purpose, and this is an idea that really has to be done right for a lot of reasons.
Re:Tabbed Windows solution (Score:2)
Why, no I didn't, and I'd *love* to see a cite for this since this is pretty closely related to what I do for a living.
In the mean time, if you read carefully (I'll admit I was rushing when I typed the original) you will see that what I am arguing for is not trying to remember any command short cut, but just typing the text you see on the title bar. This is the so-called "type ahead on links" that you have in the current Mozilla. To the extent that typing is automatic in some people anyway, this is a big win. Moreover, type ahead on links is pretty obviously a big UI win when the alternative is to use a hockey puck to move your pointer to, e.g., one of the hundreds of links on a page like "yahoo.com".
Absolutely not. The window menu, being a pull-down of limited horizontal extent, has more than just the lack of keyboard commands going against it. This is (I think) exactly why Apple ditched the concept of having a pull-down menu for bookmarks in favor of "book mark view," although that could be improved as well.
Oh, I completely realize this. And, in fact, the whole point was not to make the average person faster or better organized, but to help out strong typists and expert users without confusing the average person. The beauty of most command shortcuts, keyboard navigation aids, and advanced features like "type ahead to links on the page" is precisely that they can be used by those who want them without forcing anybody to use them.
Now I have no idea what you're getting at. What I proposed was more like:
Now, I appreciated (and used) Mozilla's tabs, but I recognized their shortcomings. I *really* appreciated (and used) type ahead to links in Mozilla, and for that there is really no replacement. If you want a UI buzzword to throw at this, what I propose (and prefer, to some extent) is similar to what was called the "anti-mac" interface by Jakob Nielsen. Interestingly, OS X can support to a considerable degree both the Mac and anti-Mac styles of interaction. I'm pretty happy about that, myself. :-)
Rendering engine changes in detail (Score:5, Informative)
One change I've noticed is Safari no longer freezes for a minute when loading certain webpages. Another nice change is that stylesheet change on Dave Hyatt's weblog [mozillazine.org] actually works now. Dave is ironically one of the Safari developers, so it's just as well!!!
Re:Rendering engine changes in detail (Score:2)
But there's still no GUI for choosing a stylesheet, though (which is why Dave Hyatt has to have JavaScript for it). A user-accessible method for choosing which stylesheet to display isrequired by the CSS 2 spec. (section 3.2 [w3.org], point 5)
Give me a View->Use Style menu like Mozilla!!
Re:Rendering engine changes in detail (Score:2)
Only related to CSS issues that he tested. If you're looking for release notes on everything that's changed, this isn't it.
Re:Rendering engine changes in detail (Score:2)
OK, I'll bite: where is the complete changelong? :-)
drag & drop and improved <OBJECT> suppor (Score:3, Interesting)
You can now drag & drop text from browser windows. (It previously only allowed dragging links and images.) Unfortunately it uses the silly Cocoa-style delay before allowing you to drag text. (When will Apple finally fix text dragging in Cocoa?!)
It also now supports embedding HTML with the <OBJECT> tag, although it will stop drawing the embedded content if you use the Back/Forward buttons. Also, if you click in the <OBJECT> and scroll it with the keyboard, then clicking on links outside of the <OBJECT> sometimes doesn't work unless you first click outside of the <OBJECT> area and scroll the main page with they keyboard. (weird, but it happens .. check out the W3 CSS1 test suite pages)
Re:drag & drop and improved suppor (Score:2)
I have to disagree. Apple got it right the first time, back in System 7.x (I don't remember when it was that they first added this feature, but it was a long time ago). The "Mac experience" never included any "wait before dragging" until Cocoa.
I nearly always get my selection right. If not, I shift-click to extend or contract it. Or in an extreme case I click once to deselect the text, and then make my selection again. When using Cocoa apps, I always have trouble because when I try to drag my text, my selection disappears and I have to do it again. Even when I remember to wait, I still end up losing my selection half the time because I either don't wait long enough (there's no indicator of when enough time has passed!) or because my PowerBook's trackpad has decided that I moved my finger even when I don't think I did. (It's not as bad when using a real mouse.)
Do you have to wait for some stupid delay when dragging icons? Or images in the web browser? Or links in the web browser? No. So why have a delay when dragging text? It's inconsistent and annoying. I much prefer the Carbon behavior.
I love Cocoa ... I write all of my Mac OS X software in Cocoa. But this is one of the things which it does wrong. (It also has issues with text selection, but I can deal with those. It's the drag & drop implementation which bugs me.)
Still no command-option-w support (Score:3, Interesting)
yet safari does not do this.
Re:Still no command-option-w support (Score:3, Interesting)
Try it with TextEdit; that's the canonical Mac OS X document-based application. All other document-based application should behave like TextEdit does.
Re:Still no command-option-w support (Score:2)
Let's ignore for the moment the fact that every single change is going to seem silly to somebody. If I had to make a guess, mostly because I'm too lazy to go looking through the documentation, I'd say that Apple maybe wanted to free up some key chords. They had a bit of a problem with Adobe over command-H (hide) and command-option-H (hide others), so I can see their point. Let's keep the key chords to a minimum. It's simply not necessary for every single OS function to be represented by a key chord.
Re:Still no command-option-w support (OT) (Score:2)
All this means that, for instance, in the Finder, closing a window is command-, (comma is where w would be in qwerty, I have it set to use qwerty command keys to make certain apps happier), but closing all windows is command-option-w (w being, ironically, where , is in qwerty!).
If only Apple would support different keyboard layouts at a lower level in the OS, changing the characters before other applications could read them, I wouldn't have all this trouble...
Re:Still no command-option-w support (OT) (Score:2)
Saving RAM: An argument for tabbed browsing (Score:4, Interesting)
On my Mac I opened Chimera and filled up the window with as many tabs as it would allow (16 in a single window). All windows displayed the Slashdot mainpage. My Slashdot prefs are set to show all stories from all sections.
I checked the system usage in the Process Viewer app:
I then closed all the windows and did the same thing, this time opening 16 SEPARATE windows. Again with Slashdot's mainpage loaded in each.
Process Viewer showed:
So, according to this unscientific off-the-cuff test, you cut your RAM requirements in half by using tabs. YMMV.
I noticed this the other day when I opened over 50 different images in different windows. My Mac almost ground to a halt. I then opened the same images in tabs (in only a few windows
So, to all those who think tabbed browsing is purely a matter of personal preference, I suggest that there is at least a reasonable performance based argument for it.
(the productivity arguments are even more compelling IMHO, but I won't get into those)
Re:Saving RAM: An argument for tabbed browsing (Score:2)
I'm running 0.6 (Score:2)
It's running the default config: no special settings on my part, so whatever caching settings that might be I guess.
I am using QE (Score:2)
I can't explain the situation except to say that I've noticed OS X behaves this way: more windows eat more resources.
NationStates (Score:2)
still isn't done (Score:2)
my dating site [fuckedcompany.com]
my mail reporting site [reportez.com]
my domian registration site [aitdomains.com]
Cookie bug is still there (Score:2)
Safari already has SLOW tabs (Score:3, Interesting)
But as far as I can tell any criticism that can be aimed at tabs can also be aimed at Safari's bookmark bar. Across the top of the brower there are a bunch of horizontal text buttons that let me select different documents to view in the same window. Or in other words, tabs.
The big differences are that the bookmark bar doesn't have the "tab look", it doesn't keep the page in memory, and to add one from a link you have to option-click, select "add bookmark" then click "OK". So they are basically a slow and inconvenient tab system. Although they are persistent across browser sessions, which is kinda cool.
Yes, I understand that they can't really be used efficiently that way, but that's not the point. The point is that as a UI concept Safari's current bookmark bar and the proposed (and much maligned) tabs are cousins anyways. So anyone spouting that tabs are an inconceivably bad UI design is just reacting to surface characteristics and religion
Cheers
printing weirdness fixed (Score:2)
Re:Getting repetitive... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Getting repetitive... (Score:2)
Re:Getting repetitive... (Score:2)
Yes, it does. Did on mine, at least, about 20 minutes ago. (It's now 6:00 EST.)
Re:Getting repetitive... (Score:2)
Re:Getting repetitive... (Score:2)
Yes. Absolutely, totally, no question in my mind, 100% positive.
Re:Getting repetitive... (Score:2)
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:2)
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:2)
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:2)
Gosh, you didn't use the Web until browsers had tabs?! Amazing...
Please to note there is already at least one person/group making a program to extend tab functionality to Safari, so stop yer bitchin'.
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:5, Insightful)
Nobody *needs* tabs. But once I got into the habit of using them I found them invaluable and wouldn't want to return to tab free browsing.
Tabs allow me to group related pages in one window. eg. When I read Slashdot I often open interesting looking linked articles in the background, intending to read them once I'm finished with Slashdot. Sometimes I'd find these windows hours later, minimised or hidden, and wonder why I'd opened them and how I got there. Now they are all tabs in a window whose first tab is Slashdot. This makes the context obvious.
The same applies to use of search engines. Search for the thing that interests you, open each lead in a new tab in the current window. All search results end up opened in the same window and are therefore linked by context.
very useful memory aid. I'm not getting any younger.
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:2)
How on earth do you change to another window with one key then (opera - '1' & '2' / mouse-right+wheel)?
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:2)
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:2)
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:2)
To efficiently manage lots (20+) of different browser windows. OS X's GUI is really not oriented towards concurrently using lots of running applications with numerous open windows (something it has inherited from Classic). Tabs help to alleviate this.
Background loading (Score:2)
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:2)
This is all on my iBook.
I consider tabs to be fundamentally broken from numerous standpoints and they would overcomplicate both the code and the way that things integrate for a web browser such as Safari.
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:2)
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:2)
The things just.... don't... DIE...
Re:You forgot to mention tabs, so I will. (Score:2)
Re:Define "restart" (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Define "restart" (Score:2)
I've been using the new version of Safari for a couple of hours, and haven't noticed much different, though I had very few complaints in the first place. Most site that locked me out at first seemed to change their minds a few days later, either on their own or due to pressure from Apple, I don't know which.
Re:Define "restart" (Score:2)
Re:Hardware dependent speed increase? (Score:2)
Something is very wrong. On my dual GHz G4 (MDD), Chimera always took several seconds to launch the first time, during which I had to stare at that oh-so-1990's splash screen of theirs. Safari launches more-or-less instantly, in a second or less. (Unless my computer is swapping; it's not that hard to fill up 512 MB of RAM these days.)
Re:Hardware dependent speed increase? (Score:2)
Re:Hardware dependent speed increase? (Score:2)
Re:so far so good. (Score:2, Interesting)
Answering your question, tabs allow multiple webpages to be viewed in a single window - a little like how Safari's preferences box works - click on an icon to get a different 'page' of options, but all in the same window.
Mozilla does do tabbed browsing, Command-T opens tabs instead of windows.
In my opinion (and we all have strong opinions- this is Slashdot after all!) I found tabs useful only because there was a 5 pause when switching between windows (not tabs) in Mozilla. But Safari's so damn fast I'm quite happy Command-~ -ing between 10 or so windows, without any noticeable pause - and that's on a 600MHz iBook.
Tabs (Score:2)
You can open a web page in a new tab. You can then switch to another tab and read that page while the one in the tab is loading. When it's done you can switch over to it and read it.
You can flip between pages by flipping between the tabs.
For people with small monitors (say 1024x768 resolution and down), tabs are really useful because repositioning windows on a small screen is a hassle. For people using larger screens, including myself, I normally find it much more convenient to simply view multiple web pages in multiple windows, which can be easily resized and dragged around the screen so I can see more of them at once.
I think that explains why many people are so fanatical about tabs, while they leave me cold.
Hope that helps.
D