Firefox Tab Candy Alpha 189
Nunavut writes in with a note from TechCrunch on Aza Raskin's latest Mozilla goodie, Tab Candy. "Be sure to watch the video for a full overview — from the looks of it, it seems as if Tab Candy is sort of like Apple's Expose feature mixed with their Spaces feature, both of which are baked into OS X. For those who don't use a Mac, basically these features allow you to zoom out and get a bird's-eye-view of all your windows (or tabs, in this case) that are open — and you can also arrange open windows (or again, tabs, in this case) in certain spaces so they're clumped together. This allows you to more easily find what you're looking for with so many tabs open." Here's Raskin's blog post, the download link, and the FAQ.
Open? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Open? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
that's what I thought. I use tabs to keep multiple sites open while I'm at the computer. Otherwise, bookmarks and history.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Same here. In fact, I have long ago given up on organising my bookmarks. There was a time when I used to spend some time categorising them into a hierarchy that made sense to me, but it was quite a big job. But now that Firefox automatically searches bookmarks by whatever keywords I set, there's no longer any point.
Truth is, I could probably ditch my bookmarks file with little pain - there's a big chunk of it that dates back to the mid '90s (when I was using Nutscrape a
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Mix it in with the awesome bar, and bookmarks are almost useless.
Re: (Score:2)
I have probably around 7k bookmarks.
I prefer tabsbookmarks (Score:4, Informative)
I've never used bookmarks properly. I just type in the topmost URL and then navigate to the page I want. Terrible, I know. There are many different ways to use the web, I've personally seen a lot of the following with friends and family:
One problem I have with bookmarks is that it's so 'open' and available to people to browse. I wouldn't want my bookmarks to be seen by everyone. What I want is a 'super lightweight tab' architecture where a tab actually represents the bookmark and only loads if I click it, which definitely beats loading 100s of tabs on startup...
I switch between browsers and computers so much that keeping my bookmarks sycned would be too hard to be worth it. A few years ago I was more of a explorative surfer, now I tend to limit myself to very few daily websites and go from there.
Re: (Score:2)
I read about what you want in a recent ghacks post, try this: https://addons.mozilla.org/z/en-US/firefox/addon/67651/ [mozilla.org]
I just installed it and seems to be what you ask for, and I am liking it a lot so far.
Re: (Score:2)
One problem I have with bookmarks is that it's so 'open' and available to people to browse. I wouldn't want my bookmarks to be seen by everyone. What I want is a 'super lightweight tab' architecture where a tab actually represents the bookmark and only loads if I click it [...]
Wait, what? Bookmarks lack a certain amount of privacy which makes you uncomfortable using them, but you're OK with a feature that is nothing more than a bookmark-as-a-tab? I can't follow this logic...
Re: (Score:2)
One is there until I close it. (a tab is just like any other tab but only loads when you click it)
One persists until I delete it. (it's in a easy to find file on your hard disk)
At least the thing about tabs is that someone could see that *anyway* if they were behind me. ...so If I'm on a website and I want to browse it later, I just make a tab for it but it only loads if I click it.
I see that the way it was worded isn't very clear, I had a double take myeslf just now. I suppose the same applies to session f
Re: (Score:2)
Chrome currently has "phantom tabs". They are pinned tabs that have been closed. They show up in the tab bar just like all other pinned tabs, but they are slightly translucent, to distinguish them from other pinned tabs. They have no attached rendering engine, so the only resources they consume are those needed to display the favicon. But click on it, and a rendering engine is spawned, and the tab acts just like any other.
Thus when made phantom they would qualify as super-lightweight. Granted that currently
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly do I take a tab from pinned to "phantom", using the latest dev version?
Damn on the sly upgrades, and the lack of quickly available patch notes!
Re: (Score:2)
And have you considered Firefox Sync / Firefox Home for the iPhone. :-)
So you can not only sync bookmarks, but also history and preferences, it's password-protected and encrypted and normally sent over https so you don't have to worry someone taking a look at your bookmarks.
You don't have to use the Mozilla server, but you can also use your own.
How I would use it (Score:2, Interesting)
To me, tabs are a part of my reading workflow - somewhere between bookmarks and speed dial. Tab Candy, if implemented, would be somewhere between bookmarks and normal tabs: permanent storage, but for task-specific purposes.
The reason why I use piles of tabs (50+ per window if necessary) is that I prefer not to do mental task switching between searching for something and looking for a solution/an idea/reading.
So I will do a search on something, open new tabs until I am satisfied that I have opened all the pr
Re: (Score:2)
So when I search for something, I open up one or two tabs at a time. Then go from there and browse through the results until I find what I'm looking for. Of course, some searches are safer than others, but still it pays off to be safe than sorry!
Re:Open? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes.
(If that's all we wanted to do we'd have stuck with the 'back' button).
Re: (Score:2)
That would be true if the back button restored the state of all pages properly.
Sites that make use of collapsible sections do not always maintain their previous state when you back up to them. For example, I do this with Wikipedia and the collapsible section after the external links. As I check out the various links it saves me having to reopen the collapsible section every time which can quickly become rather tedious.
Also, a search results page is often problematic backing up to.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a collapsible section at the end of a Wikipedia page. Hmm, new thing learned for today. Check.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Thus speaks a man who has never experienced the addictive tab-craziness of TV Tropes [tvtropes.org] ;)
Not only TV Tropes but other wikis as well (Score:4, Interesting)
Thus speaks a man who has never experienced the addictive tab-craziness of TV Tropes [tvtropes.org] ;)
Or Wikipedia. Or Encyclopedia Dramatica. Or Ward's Wiki and Everything2, which were probably the originators of this densely hyperlinked style that encourages hyperbrowsing [everything2.com].
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Am I the only one that opens up tabs to read the content and then closes the tab after doing so? I don't really see why someone would have like 20+ tabs constantly just sitting open.
You're just lacking good examples of things to keep "permanently open".
"tabs" that I never close on my ipod touch, my ipad, or firefox:
Local NWS weather radar direct link (radar.weather.gov/Thumbs/???.png where ??? is your local three letter code that has nothing to do with IACO airport codes)
Local NWS 7 day forecast for my home, a rather complicated (bookmarked) URL.
A vhfdx.net ham radio "activity map" for the 6 meter band on my continent, at least during Es season (which probably makes zero sense to non-a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The point I was making was why would you leave those 20 tabs open AFTER you've read the contents of them?
They change. I agree, useless for a static or semi-static page, but my local radar updates every few minutes.
I don't really see the point in leaving the page open using any resources for something that changes once a day
The resources used round down to zero. The cost of my time is not so cheap.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You are off by two orders of magnitude in your time estimate - and that's assuming no WiFi/phone data crapouts or whatever leaving pages unloaded anyways.
Opening tabs in the background is a way to avoid having to watch pages load - particularly if you're browsing for images that are multiple megabytes in size, or sites that are too popular for their bandwidth, or sites Japan, or just when your connection is busy with torrents.
Compared to the time used viewing such pages or files the loading time can be
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
somewhere between 6 and 12.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
AMEN to that. I watched this guy wantonly open tabs to things he probably would only glance at, and then complain there's too many tabs.
Hey, instead of Tab Candy(which seems like a hell of a lot of work to organize tabs while browsing) how about you just learn to properly use a tabbed browser?
Most people can manage information well enough in their head that they don't need 15-25 tabs open at once.
On top of that, it's actually faster to just open a second copy of the browser with a different group of tabs th
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, instead of Tab Candy(which seems like a hell of a lot of work to organize tabs while browsing) how about you just learn to properly use a tabbed browser?
So the only proper way of doing things is your way? When I'm trying to research something (currently Windows 7 terrible wireless transfer rates to samba), I will open a TON of links in new tabs, then browse through them, quickly deleting the ones that don't work, or look dumb, moving the ones that might need more time over to the far left, and reading
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've built my Firefox tab bar with the sites I use the most, so most of them are only two clicks away (one for the folder, one for the site). Those I use more are the easiest to get to, those that I rarely use take a little more effort. S
Re: (Score:2)
Next I open up all my Google tools, gmail/wave/docs/newsgroups/etc... That's about 10 tabs. Then I pop all the unread stories of Slashdot into slashdot (that's about 10 to 15 tabs, depends on what kind of news day it is). Do t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, I do the same. Clean desktop, clean browser, I hate screen clutter.
I have a hunch that many of those who open tons of tabs are resource intensive in other parts of their lives.
Re: (Score:2)
That's my style too. (I also make sure my C++ objects are always free-ed up too.)
Re: (Score:2)
No, you're not. I do that too.
I feel the same way, not only about tabs but about programs on the computer. When I am done with a program, I close it. For example, once I finish reading Slashdot today, I'll close my browser and not open it again until I need to go to another web page later, even if "later" is only five or ten minu
Re: (Score:2)
While I work I actually do have several pages of things open. In fact, I could easily group several things and still have a section for screwing around.
I liked the ability to save groups of those tabs and then re-pop them back open later. I do that now with the "save and quit," but this would ultimately be a more fine grained approach.
Thinking back now... I actually close out a lot of things constantly to simply get back to a clean slate. If I could close one group and re-open it later that wouldn't be too
Re: (Score:2)
Well, just as an example... I often have something like the documentation to three to five Qt objects open at once, as well as some Qt forum or code example, as well as the OpenSceneGraph and Boost documentation for 1-N libraries, Gmail, our internal e-mail, Google Docs, 1-3 of our internal ticket tracking pages (depending on which projects I'm working on/using at the time), probably a few scattered tabs to mailing list archives to try and understand how a specific piece of code I'm using is SUPPOSED to wor
Interesting (Score:2, Interesting)
Now, give me a feature which autosizes the thumbnails on the thumbnail view automatically, weighted by how often I go to the site.
Re: (Score:2)
Reinventing the window? (Score:3, Insightful)
When I want to group tabs, I make new windows. In fact i rarely have more than 5 tabs per window, then 2-3 windows open. It's easy to navigate and organized, and also happens to be the way it's supposed to be done in current operating systems.
Maybe I"m just old school.
Re:Reinventing the window? (Score:5, Funny)
Let's see, I've got multiple workspaces, with multiple instances of firefox running, and each has one or more tab.
But something is missing. It's just not fine grained enough.
If only tabs could have tabs!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Humour aside, this problem of tab groups got solved yonks ago with the TreeStyleTabs extension. Tabs are in a vertical tree, indented to show their relationship to one another, and the position -- and relationships -- between tabs can be adjusted by dragging and dropping tabs.
It basically does all that this Tab Candy thing claims to do, but much more effectively and without needing swanky eye candy. Plus you can see all your tabs all the time; you don't have to zoom out.
Not that Tab Candy doesn't look nea
Re: (Score:3)
I use TreeStyleTabs and it's better than nothing, but it's far from optimal. I don't like giving up a sixth of my width to keep everything in view, and it doesn't play nicely with all websites--sometimes you have to hide the tabs in order to see a whole video frame, other times text goes off the right side of the screen without a horizontal scroll bar to see it, etc. I recently tried the Top view, more like a conventional tab bar, but then the trees expand horizontally which is confusing and not useful.
I
Re: (Score:2)
Yo dawg, I heard you like tabs...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can name workspaces and chose to have their names displayed.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Tab itself are already a reinvention of the window, what this add-on does looks closer to reinventing the bookmark. As the way one can organize the tabs into categories and stuff is much closer to what you get today with bookmarks, then what you can do with tabs. Which raises the question how that is going to work in practice, as in practice I don't consider tabs to be permanent 'links' to webpages, but temporary containers, i.e. does your whole carefully created layout go down the toiled if you decide to u
Re: (Score:2)
I admit I came to this video with the same reservations but there was some stuff in there that got me exited: sharing tabs with other users by drag-n-drop, even better: doing the same with other devices and multiple simultaneous profiles, which for some reason they buried somewhere in the middle.
Re: (Score:2)
A quick poll of the users in the house, and ... yeah, we all do the same thing and it works quite well. Slow news day?
Lots of tabs got you down?
1. Drag a Firefox tab of onto the desktop, you get a new window.
2. Drag related tabs onto that new window.
Look! Grouped! The tabs retain their individual histories as well.
Gnome Desktop (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tree Style Tabs (Score:5, Informative)
The "Tree Style Tabs [mozilla.org]" add on is great for managing your browsing. It gives your tabs context, lets you collapse groups of tabs and move tabs from one group to another. That, and having the tabs vertically arranged lets you have far more on screen at once and make better use of a widescreen monitor. Solving many of the problems addressed by Tab Candy.
I'm really surprised more people don't use it. It's the one thing now preventing me from switching to Chrome.
Re: (Score:2)
I use this addon as well, and it's as good as it gets. It's simple and intuitive and when you have several tabs open, it's much better (specially when reading API docs that have one separate page per function call).
Re: (Score:2)
I use Tree Style Tabs and combined with Vimperator. Never going back.
This guy made ubiquity which I like too, judging from the video, they have a big sense of direction which is nice.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately Ubiquity is...dead? At least I haven't read anything related to it in months (judging from Planet Mozilla and other sources).
I loved it, except for it not being really portable (had strong issues with multi-OS/portable installs because of using absolute paths). But, alas, some commands grew obsolete with time, it wasn't being updated for recent versions, bugs, etc... A real shame, it was a lovable little tool with a lot of potential. Didn't Ubiquity start to fade (except for its fans) around t
Sidebars need a wider screen (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm really surprised more people don't use it.
Vertical tab lists and other sidebars really need a monitor at least 1280px wide. Some people such as myself have an old 1024x768px monitor or a netbook with a 1024x600px monitor, and more and more web sites are designed to run maximized across the entire width of such a monitor.
Re: (Score:2)
Tree Style Tab is about more than displaying tabs vertically. The hierarchical arrangement of the tabs is even more useful.
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, Tree Style Tabs is very similar to this Tab Candy thing: both are (among other things) hierarchical visualizations of tabs. With Tab Candy it's more of a flat hierarchy, though he does introduce meta groups at a later stage. Anyway, the big difference is that Tab Candy uses an expose mode to manage the tabs, while Tree Style Tabs manages them in the boring favicon + title way. The expose thing looks great, but I'm not sure if it's suited all that way to managing tabs -- tab thumbnails never did any
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
chrome --enable-vertical-tabs
Re: (Score:2)
Did you get the memo? (Score:2)
No preview for me (Score:2)
I ran opera for a while and it had this nice preview feature where it would give you a thumbnail of frequently visited sites. I stopped using it because there are some places I go to which I don't want to appear, even as thumbnails, when there are people around who might take an interest. Some of them have really crappy eyesight, which is a godsend, but I don't like relying on things like that.
What about the Firefox Showcase extension? (Score:3, Interesting)
Saw the video of TFA and it seems Showcase does The Job, and is 'mature' as well; while not requiring so much manual intervention (which others might value as a Good Thing). I've been using it for at least a year and really like Showcase.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1810 [mozilla.org]
There are a lot ot tab extensions... (Score:2)
I use Foxtab - somewhat similar, but really pretty useful on a netbook, since you can get rid of the actual tabs and call up the interface as needed.
Browser for work? (Score:2)
I would definitely like to use that at home.
But something tells me that Fx4 would be as dumb and useless as Chrome is - for work. At work I need something reliable and flexible to accommodate all the silly needs of the intranet web apps. Chrome's lacking bookmarks (no bookmarks menu; no bookmark shortcuts; no keyword search), poor/non-existent keyboard shortcuts and silent updates (which constantly screw up the most visited sites tab; silently break extensions) ruined my experience with it on pretty muc
Re: (Score:2)
But something tells me that Fx4 would be as dumb and useless as Chrome is - for work. At work I need something reliable and flexible to accommodate all the silly needs of the intranet web apps. Chrome's lacking bookmarks (no bookmarks menu; no bookmark shortcuts; no keyword search), poor/non-existent keyboard shortcuts and silent updates (which constantly screw up the most visited sites tab; silently break extensions) ruined my experience with it on pretty much all occasions I have tried to use it. Way too primitive, way too dumb, way too unmanageable.
Whatchoo talkin' bout, Philips? Chrome has Bookmarks. If you hit the little star in the address bar, it bookmarks the current page (And allows you to customise where that bookmark is saved). When you open a new (empty) tab, the bookmark bar is shown by default as part of the "New tab" page. This behaviour can be overridden by right-clicking the bookmark bar on an empty tab and choosing "Always show bookmarks bar", which them promotes it to it's typical place just under the address bar. And Chrome does have
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks a bunch. Really. Google is even better than Mozilla at hiding functionality. (Though Mozilla definitely has better community and documentation: finding tips and tricks is easy, if needed at all. about:config takes care of 90% of issues.)
That leaves though another major hole: silent auto-updates. Year ago there was no option to be prompted on updates. Neither Chrome has yet a semi-decent release notes: even if it's going to suggest an update to me, it is nearly impossible to know what the update m
Re: (Score:2)
That leaves though another major hole: silent auto-updates. Year ago there was no option to be prompted on updates. Neither Chrome has yet a semi-decent release notes: even if it's going to suggest an update to me, it is nearly impossible to know what the update might bring as there are no release notes whatsoever. Here I'd love to be proven wrong again.
I found some here [blogspot.com], though I'm sure Google would recommend that you use the Stable release branch if you don't want things breaking.
Another minor nag: Chrome opens page in a new tab, next to the current tab. Is it possible to make the new tab to be open as last one? I have in office three standard tabs open and for convenience I keep them as first three. From this first three tabs I open other pages/tabs. Now in Chrome the order gets messed up very quickly and one has to rearrange tabs constantly to keep the first three important tabs in the place where I expect to find them. Is there any option to disable that and make tabs behave as in pre-Fx3.5? (Fx has an about:config option for that.)
Chrome opens tabs the way it does to try and keep a rudimentary history going, grouping related tabs together. You will be pleased to know, however, that there is an extension [google.com] made just for people who don't like this, to enable "Firefox-like" tab ordering.
Re: (Score:2)
I found some here [blogspot.com], though I'm sure Google would recommend that you use the Stable release branch if you don't want things breaking.
I have seen those. Yes, they are mostly useless as official releases pushed silently to users are concerned.
Chrome opens tabs the way it does to try and keep a rudimentary history going, grouping related tabs together. You will be pleased to know, however, that there is an extension [google.com] made just for people who don't like this, to enable "Firefox-like" tab ordering.
Well... it kind of ... works: tabs jump around as one opens them. I'm not sure whether it is better than nothing. It spares the menial work of bringing the tabs back in order, but the funky animation side-effect is sure confusing.
N.B. FireFox since 3.5 (or 3.6?) adopted the same tab ordering as the Chrome. But they provided an about:config option to manage it.
Anyway, I see that Chrome is getti
Tab Mix Plus (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm a huge fan of the Tab Mix Plus Firefox add-on. It allows you to have multiple rows of tabs, and even set unread tabs and current tab to a different colors. Very helpful for visually seeing what's been read, where the new tabs are, where the actual tab is for the page you're on, etc. Especially when there's 20+ open tabs on your screeen at once.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1122/ [mozilla.org]
Re:Tab Mix Plus PLUS Tab Groups Manager (Score:2)
I use Tab Mix Plus in combination with TabGroups Manager. [mozilla.org] Typically I am running with 3000+ active tabs in 50ish group tabs, 6 windows (all I can keep track of in my head)-- but only 6 or 7 of those group tabs open and taking memory/processor-- TabGroups Manager suspends the rest.
TabGroups Manager is a "hidden gem." In comparison, Tab Candy seems simply purposeless to me!
Re: (Score:2)
What, pray tell, do you do which you need 3000+ tabs for? If you're working an 8 hour day, that's about 8 seconds per tab for the entire day. That's once you have them up and running. The startup/load time should you accidentally hit "refresh all tabs" must be insane.
hmmm (Score:2)
Shiira (Score:2)
This is a good example... (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a good example of a solution devised by an engineer. Somehow they think that peering at icons, dragging and dropping them, and organizing them into a hierarchy is really something the average user would want to do. The average user will find this solution worse than the problem. A better solution is to simply do what Chrome does and open new tabs next to the originating tab. It doesn't solve all the world's problems, but it's automatic and solves a couple of them.
Stability? (Score:2, Insightful)
(*(^&^$$^ Flash!!!! (Score:2)
It would be great if the videos were available in WebM so I could actually see them. It is supposed to be the new Firefox standard after all.
Here we go again... (Score:2)
*BLOAT*!
I do not WANT more complexity and eye candy built into Firefox. It is getting larger, using more memory, harder to control (and lock down), and using more CPU all the time. Can't they add this kind of stuff with extensions??? Or perhaps split Firefox into two versions- one fat and one small?
If this keeps up, I will have to look for another browser that fills Firefox's original mission- small, fast, efficient, simple, multiplatform, open source, and expandable.
I don't see the point of this (Score:5, Interesting)
The example which is given in the video from TFA to try to demonstrate the need for this tab candy nonsense is how a clumsy user can fill a tab bar with countless unrelated tabs. Yet, from the example which was presented, there is absolutely no need for that sort of crap. Let me explain.
In the example the user starts off with a browser window which already has tons of tabs, which is already in itself a sign that the user doesn't know what he is doing. From there, a case is presented where the user suddenly feels the need to start a new search, which happens to be completely unrelated to anything that he was already doing. Well, in that scenario, the user could very well do the very same thing that any semi-rational user does when he finds himself on that very same situation: open a new browser window dedicated to that search and go crazy with the search results. There, fixed. There is no need for this tab candy crap, searches/online tasks are perfectly compartmentalized, the tab bar is clean and cluttered, the navigation to/from opened pages becomes simpler... Everyone wins.
Now, let's look at what this tab candy crap brings to the table. So a clueless user who is perfectly incapable of organizing his workflow finds himself with a single browser window with dozens of opened tabs. He suddenly feels the need to open another dozen tabs to perform a completely independent task. According to TFA, the solution to his problems comes in the form of this tab candy crap. Yet, the only thing that it is capable of doing is offering yet another needlessly cumbersome step to do nothing more than provide a different, resource-expensive way to present to the user the tabs which he has opened.
So, in other words, this tab candy crap is nothing more than a window manager built into a browser. I mean, manually group tabs? List the tab groups which are currently opened? Put some tabs on the foreground while putting others on the background? Present the user with small icons representing the opened tab? If you replace "tabs" with "windows" you are describing pretty much any window manager out there. So why exactly is it a good idea to build a window manager into a browser?
Re: (Score:2)
Because, like it or not, the OS of the future is the browser.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see the point of this, either.
If I have temporary research that requires dozens of tabs, it seems a waste of time to manually arrange them into a tab group that you're going close anyway. A few clicks? You can already create a new "tab group" with a quick Ctrl+N. Drag-n-drop? You can already drag tabs between Firefox windows and even drag a tab off and create a new window.
Hell, you can even have Firefox open your previously open windows and tabs when you start it up.
The demo was flashy, but the just
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps the time has come to realize that what's on the web has become the desktop apps and redesign the window manager accordingly.
I know, keep the web in the browser, etc.
Right?
Condescending towards users much? (Score:2)
"clumsy user", "clueless user", "semi-rational user", "a sign that the user doesn't know what he is doing", ...
If you have ever conducted user studies of browsing behavior, you would see that the tasks that Aza describes are exactly the ones users perform in the real world. Why do you think it's unexpected for a user to pause a current browsing session and look for something unrelated, and wish to keep that search session separate from the previous one?
No, simply a new window would not be sufficient, because pretty soon, you end up with several different windows, and not all of us have the luxury of 30" displays to
Re: (Score:2)
"clumsy user", "clueless user", "semi-rational user", "a sign that the user doesn't know what he is doing", ...
If you have ever conducted user studies of browsing behavior, you would see that the tasks that Aza describes are exactly the ones users perform in the real world. Why do you think it's unexpected for a user to pause a current browsing session and look for something unrelated, and wish to keep that search session separate from the previous one?
I don't know if you are purposely trying to put words in my mouth or if you simply failed to understand what has been written. Either way, if you take the time to both read what I've posted and make an effort to understand it, you will realize that nowhere it was said that "it's unexpected for a user to pause a current browsing session and look for something unrelated", nor did I said anything in that sense. In fact, once you've read and understood what I've said you will notice that I've said that "the us
Does it crash with flash like the current 3.6.7+? (Score:2)
I'm willing to wager (Score:2)
Pimped tabs, same old LAME bookmark management? (Score:2)
What about bookmarks? Bleh to tabs, I don't wanna have a hundred of them open anyway... I DO wanna have thousands of bookmarks, and Firefox is just no use in that regard, never has been, and judging from the stuff they get excited about, never will be.
What a joke. It's a browser for the masses alright.... the drooling excitement in the second half made me cringe haha.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know what your set up is, but mine can and does easily handle thousands of bookmarks.
I have XMarks installed and make heavy use of tagging. What really makes it useful though is Gnome-do. Searches are really quite quick.
In fact, Gnome-do has become indispensable to me for many programs, not just Firefox.
multi-row (Score:2)
The Humane Interface (Score:2)
Road to unreliability (Score:2)
I agree with you: the desktop environment should be doing this stuff. I like Windows Fences but it only applies to files and folders. I believe the reason is the difficulty to 'render' graphics, text and arbitrary media in desktop level code. With web layout rendering engines and Javascript and DOM, it's quicker to implement a snazzy interface that it would be in low level code.
It's sad to see that 'drag and drop', window algorithms, redraw algorithms are reimplemented again and again ontop of eachother wit
Re: (Score:2)
"If you pile several tabs into one lump and close that lump w/o thinking, you may realize that you just closed something that you needed--what was it? where is it? how do I get it back? "
Why do you think Firefox has at the bottom of the history-menu a 'recently closed windows'. It's for this situation, it works really well. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Comments like your feel like Slashdot has been overrun by morons, who are trying to prove to everyone that they can think.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Undo closed tab is there: Ctrl-shift-t
Also, in History menu: Recently Closed Tabs submenu.
Re: (Score:2)
Your list contains at least two inaccuracies:
1) "Undo Closed Tab" is present in at least three places (context menu, keyboard shortcut, main menu).
2) "Close Other Tabs" is right there in the tab context menu.
That's just the obvious things I use every day in a "vanilla Firefox" that were on your list...