I understand how easy that is to do. But when do you have the time to read them? Part of the fun of the web, is getting a little lost in it. But I totally loose focus. Have you ever tried limiting yourself to one window and the judicious use of the back button?
> I understand how easy that is to do. But when do you have the time to read them?
I am a very fast reader. :)
> Have you ever tried limiting yourself to one window and the judicious use of the back button?
Well yes, but then Tabs were invented!
My browsing is like a tree, pages branch off every which way. I used to have to keep track of that entire tree structure in my head, now the browser does it for me!
> My browsing is like a tree, pages branch off every which way. I used to have to keep track of that entire tree structure in my head, now the browser does it for me!
And how does it do that? Have you got some pictorial representation of the paths? Do you use a plugin? When you have opened a link in a new tab, how do you then find out where that tab originated from, or rather where you spawned it from? How do you organize them? A tab is just a cheap window isn't it?
> And how does it do that? Have you got some pictorial representation of the paths?
IE actually attempts to kinda sorta organize tabs properly. FF is odd because if you left click a tab and have Open In New Tab set, the tab is opened at the end of your tab bar. If you middle click, it is opened adjacent to your current tab.
I forget which browser attempted auto tab groups by color. Never worked out that well for me.
When I say the browser keeps the tree structure for me, I meant that I no longer have to remember how many pages back I need to go to click the next relevant link. If I am 10 pages deep into Wikipedia, remembering which originating article has another link on it I want to explore is difficult. If I just open each link I want to read in a new tab (instead of immediately following it) I can finish the current page I am on.
Really I was just suggesting trying the one tab approach as an experiment. You can't read in parallel, but I do understand the idea of backgrounding links to visit later - so you don't necessarily break the flow of the page you are currently on.
Back in the day of dial up, I'd use Opera and disable images - to make page loads quicker. I would connect the modem, go online, open as many links as possible in different tabs, and then disconnect. And read at my leisure.
It would force me to think upfront at what I wanted to look at, and in the main it was a pretty good system.
Pages back then would take a long time to load, especially with images - so background loading your next link, was a habit that you just got into.
I forget which browser has which behaviour with new tabs. Some place the tab on the end. Which makes sense in terms of using a stack. Your last link being opened being on the end. Firefox as it does tab scrolling, makes it hard to see what you have open. So I think now the default is to open the new tab next to the current tab. Which highlights another inconsistency in between application tab behaviour.
I used to have loads of tabs open of stuff, that I'd get around to reading at some point - but I'd basically never read, or it would become overwhelming - and I'd just periodically shut all the tabs and start again. Later I thought I'd bookmark anything that grabbed my attention, and go back to it later. Recent bookmarks can help there.
I don't see much difference between a bookmark and a tab, a tab though just feels a little more accessible but it's more expensive. Better bookmarking tools could make tabs easily redundant.
The 'group your tabs' feature of Firefox, just doesn't work for me, and other tab plugins haven't worked for me either. Opera has tab stacks, but I can't say I'm that fond of them either. I'd rather something a little more automated.
I've been championing the same issues, or rather bemoaning them on HN repeatedly.
I never see much innovation with the actual browser UIs. The rendering engines get plenty of love, while something like the UI for Firefox has barely changed at all.
I used to have an aging powerpc, and Firefox would bring it to it's knees. But I think I was abusing it. Firebug, Flash, JS and too many tabs were the main culprits. And I have sinced tried to change my habits.
I think tabs are heavily used and abused! I personally believe that they are so popular because the bookmark UIs are so sucky. Most tabs could be replaced by a bookmark.
Tabs bring other problems, resizing the browser window in one tab, effects all the others. Tabs have inconsistant behaviour between different applications. Windows should be left to a window manager IMHO.
Now I try and keep my tabs to a minimum. Two or three. Any page I think I might want to read later I once bookmarked (to one day sort through...), but now I send to readability to read later at my leisure.
My main browser I have configured to make reading on it more pleasurable. I've throw away the page author's styles, and instead opt to use my own font, font size and colour scheme. I block adverts. And block flash. Layouts can suffer, but if I have to, I resort to using another browser. I did have JS turned off completely, but I am finding that increasingly difficult.
In terms of design trends - responsive web pages are quite welcome in my world. I think people will soon hunger for simpler pages and simpler sites. Something that's far easier to use. And I welcome the day that I can actually surf web pages comfortably on my TV when sitting on my arse.
Some sites are still very difficult to use, and the browser UIs could really lend a hand here.
Problem I've found is that there aren't any simple GUIs for creating/tweaking GTK3 themes. You could configure the colour scheme slightly (5 colours) with Gnome 2 and the older GTK engine. The other thing, is that you still have a mix of GTK3, GTK2 and non GTK apps, well at least I think that's true. OpenOffice being an example. It's an annoying problem for any distro, but the end result is that you end up with loads of inconsistency.
In short it's more of a pig for a user to configure their desktop style than it was in Windows 98.
So yes you could swap your theme, but I have yet to find many professional themes, and even the better ones like Bluebird, have issues.
Yeah it's fugly by half (Ubuntu that is). And I once even liked the browns! I prefer the subdued themes. I'm almost happy with Bluebird and Xfce, but I still have theme/colour scheme issues. I'm forever hoping for a pretty and consistent interface throughout Ubuntu.
I would take a punt and suggest that the average punter couldn't describe what a desktop is. I'd struggle to define it. But think it includes: application launching, application management, window management, file management and a couple of helper applications: clipboard, network manager, notifications, workspaces and probably some input device management! It's no wonder why people give incoherent responses!
My brother is a novice computer user, he ripped all his CDs into his music library through windows media player as WMA files. I tried explaining that he'd be better off with a 'free' format, but he didn't care, or rather hadn't the need to care.
Later he acquired an iPod. Then he was totally baffled as to why he couldn't play his WMA files on his iPod. Anyway he went on to transcode using iTunes all his WMA files to probably M4a files. And has no idea that he has potentially thrown some data down the drain in the process.
I'd like to see his face if he then bought a device that couldn't play M4a, but WMA files!
Oh for the glory days of picking up a CD and your ghetto blaster and moving it from room to room.
An aside... If W3m was as fast as Firefox - I'd most likely use it. Bizarre really as you wouldn't expect it to be slower.