Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!

Where should Safari's tab bar reside?

1/1: Where should Safari's tab bar reside?

Below the bookmarks bar [Safari 3] 2,715 (54.54%)
At the top of the window [Safari 4] 2,263 (45.46%)
Other polls | 4,979 votes | 55 comments

Where should Safari's tab bar reside? | 55 comments | Create New Account
Click here to return to the 'Where should Safari's tab bar reside?' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Believe it or not.....
Authored by: rbenezra on Feb 26, '09 06:53:44AM

The only way I will adopt Safari or any other browser is to have the tabs on the side like in OmniWeb. I hated this at first (as I'm sure most on this board will) but now I find it indispensible. First, you can have many more tabs opened at once and still be able to read what's in them and second, the tabs are easily withdrawn into a drawer with one click if you need the real estate. I know this is probably not a popular view but after using OmniWeb for a few years, this is the one feature I can't do without!



[ Reply to This | # ]
Believe it or not.....
Authored by: Anonymous on Feb 26, '09 08:44:35AM

Try Safari Stand.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Believe it or not.....
Authored by: paulpro on Feb 27, '09 10:44:47AM
SafariStand is great.

download: http://hetima.com/safari/stand-e.html

Haven't tried it with Safari 4 yet, but it brings lots of features to Safari 3, including sidebar tabs with icon previews. (Also click-to-play Flash/Quicktime/etc, session restore, automatic download dated folder creation, all sorts of good stuff)

It's free.

[ Reply to This | # ]
Believe it or not.....
Authored by: simonpie on Feb 26, '09 10:08:57AM

The side thumbnail tab is what attracted me to OmniWeb in the first place. I never used tabs before. There useless at the top where most of the time you dont even know what they stand for since you see only a couple of letters. It's only after using OmniWeb for a while that I discovered OmniWeb was such a wounderfully geeky Browser.

Best browser ever.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Believe it or not.....
Authored by: rbenezra on Feb 26, '09 12:24:01PM

Totally agree. Anywhere on top with a reasonable number of tabs and the tabs are unreadable. The side bar eliminates that with a fixed width which is a major plus. Glad to hear someone else finds the same thing!



[ Reply to This | # ]
Believe it or not.....
Authored by: Skurfer on Mar 03, '09 06:54:33AM

I'm also hooked on OmniWeb. The side tabs are nice, but the one thing I can't live without is the way it restores things exactly as they were when I quit the app (or even if the app crashes) and I don't have to rely on SIMBL or Input Managers for this.

There's also a lot of sentimental value, since OmniWeb was the first browser I ever used back in 1994 - before I'd heard of Mosaic and before Netscape even existed.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Believe it or not.....
Authored by: DaphneDiane on Apr 27, '09 03:47:53PM

Agreed, side tabs are one of the main reasons why I use OmniWeb. Other things Safari would need to get me to considering switching would be workspaces and per-site preferences / security settings.



[ Reply to This | # ]
I like the tab position, but....
Authored by: revision29 on Feb 26, '09 07:18:22AM

Ok, I will admit it, but I really like the new position. I wish they would color the tabs like Stainless does (but with the Safari 4 position). I like for the window to take up as little real estate as possible, so I like the tabs as high as they can be. Safari 4 has the ideal location for me, whereas Stainless does not decrease the toolbar height.



[ Reply to This | # ]
On the top isn't the issue...
Authored by: diamondsw on Feb 26, '09 07:22:40AM

...it's the click-through behavior that makes it unusable. That and the minimum tab width seems to have been reduced, and the font size used for the common case of one "tab" should match the standard system font size. But these are fixable problems (should Apple decide to) - they have little to do with the actual move of tabs to the top, and that move saves both space and makes more conceptual sense.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Leave it ALONE!
Authored by: jmkowalski on Feb 26, '09 07:27:22AM

The window title bar is just wasted space, putting the tabs up in the title bar saves screen real estate. It actually make sense there, and I hope the adopt this in Snow Leopard for ALL applications.

I have to believe it is mostly Windows users that are complaining about this. Many apps on the Mac don't even have a title bar.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Leave it ALONE!
Authored by: S on Feb 26, '09 08:55:24AM

How the heck to you move windows?!



[ Reply to This | # ]
Leave it ALONE!
Authored by: Mac Berry on Feb 26, '09 11:07:34AM

Same way you always did - grab the title bar and drag. Have you actually tried it?



[ Reply to This | # ]
Leave it ALONE!
Authored by: frickster on Feb 26, '09 11:16:15AM

Yeah, but it's really da** annoying when you mouse up to select a tab, and you accidentally move the window around the screen. ANNNNNNOYING.

---
-frick



[ Reply to This | # ]
Leave it ALONE!
Authored by: Mac Berry on Feb 26, '09 11:20:24AM

Why would you be holding the mouse button down when doing that? Perhaps you're one of those people who drives with his foot on the brake too? ;)



[ Reply to This | # ]
Leave it ALONE!
Authored by: S on Feb 26, '09 08:57:35AM

Incidentally, I would like to know which Mac apps don't have a title bar.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Leave it ALONE!
Authored by: robogobo on Feb 26, '09 02:06:15PM

...or which other applications have tabs. You mean you want Apple to force other browsers to put tabs on top? That wouldn't be so nice.



[ Reply to This | # ]
tabs
Authored by: paulpro on Feb 27, '09 10:34:02AM

OS X apps other than browsers with tabs:

Terminal
BBEdit
Transmit
Coda
Dreamweaver
Smultron (side or top)
Adium
iTerm
Textmate
NetNewsWire

I'm sure there's more, and tabs above/as part of the title bar would work for most of them.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Have Options, but keep the bottom
Authored by: cycomachead on Feb 26, '09 08:04:35PM

Ok here's the thing about the top: it does save some space, but I believe the difference was calculated to be 22 vertical pixels, or between 2-3% of the vertical display on a 12 - 24" monitor.

Also the thing for me is, I love keyboard shortcuts, which are fast, but I HAVE to reply on the universal access zoom feature which means I generally work with things closest to the center, this is fastest with universal access. So, because of this I do rely on the mouse a lot of visual things and I can switch tabs via the mouse faster and easier, and also can just see the titles of tabs in an easier manner. That's the same reason I'm using the old status bar.

Plus I don't like the way I have to use the triangles to move tabs. This setup might make sense on a small screen, but my MB is the right size.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Missing option
Authored by: hlidotbe on Feb 26, '09 07:41:10AM

I think the pool misses an option. Tabs above but with a title bar (like chrome actually). But having no title bar is nice for the (small) screen estate gain.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Missing option
Authored by: elmimmo on Feb 26, '09 08:45:34AM

Exactly the way I think.

Tabs on top makes more sense, semantically, since all controls below the tab apply only to the page it contains (and window controls above it, if it was as in Chrome, still control the whole window).

I am all for copying good ideas. Google Chrome's tabs on top is a good one. Apple turned it into a not so good one, though.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Missing option
Authored by: robg on Feb 26, '09 10:35:41AM

I left out "better" ideas on purpose -- I just wanted to get a sense for those that prefer 'up' to 'down.'

I must admit, I thought it might be close, but not this close!

-rob.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Missing option
Authored by: Makosuke on Feb 26, '09 12:12:11PM

I agree that the lack of an "in between" option is more than a minor oversight. I refuse to vote for "in place of the title bar", because I really don't like that, and I probably won't use Safari if they keep that. However, at the top (as in, above the URL field, below the title bar) is a much more semantically logical place to put it, and I would vote for that.

As is, I'm just plain not voting.

Also: There IS a legitimate argument to be made that a lot of web browsing takes place at near-fullscreen sizes, and if you're using tabs you're probably not moving the window around much anyway, thus taking over the title bar zone is most efficient. You can even, further, argue that extra tabs basically ARE extra windows, just stacked, therefore it makes sense to put them in place of the title bar.

I happen to disagree with this argument, but it's a legitimate one to make. And yes, you can just move the window by grabbing any tab and dragging, which is a relatively good implementation.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Neither - On the Side
Authored by: bjskelly on Feb 26, '09 08:00:56AM

Things at the top and at the bottom are already taking up too much room. Screens have gotten wider, so let me put the tabs on the side, just like a three ring binder with tabs.

Some times I feel like I'm looking through a little horizontal slit at the webpage.




[ Reply to This | # ]
Neither - On the Side
Authored by: RobLewis on Feb 26, '09 01:30:19PM

Good points. I'll have to go back to using OmniWeb for a while and see how I like it.

Actually I don't care so much where the tabs are as that they work. And in the Safari 4 beta, Cmd-clicking on a link is a NOP. How'd they let THAT out of the cage?



[ Reply to This | # ]
erm.. kowalski?
Authored by: geoffliang on Feb 26, '09 08:03:04AM

name me one app in Mac that doesn't have a title bar. Well there's Stickies but the darker shade bar on top arguably is one.

and are you working on a 2 inch screen? how much space can you save with by combining the title and tab bar? 24px, that's how many. think about the inconveniences caused, and the pixels saved. consider if that's a worthy trade.



[ Reply to This | # ]
erm.. kowalski?
Authored by: Mac Berry on Feb 26, '09 11:17:33AM

Skitch.

What inconveniences? I've been playing with it for a while now, and it works a treat - I can't find a single inconvenience other than "it's not what I'm used to". Given that, 24 pixels is well worth having on my 15 inch screen.

Can't wait for Firefox to adopt this method.

Mark



[ Reply to This | # ]
erm.. kowalski?
Authored by: robg on Feb 26, '09 12:23:39PM

Try activating Safari when it's in the background without accidentally switching tabs. You'll need to first make sure you're not clicking on a non-active tab; you can no longer just click anywhere in the "title bar."

I consider that -- and the loss of the navigable site pop-up menu in the title bar -- to be two of the biggest issues with the current solution.

-rob.



[ Reply to This | # ]
erm.. kowalski?
Authored by: ottonomy on Mar 08, '09 11:09:39PM

I'd much rather activate Safari when it's in the background by command-tabbing to it, or clicking on it in the dock. Besides, when Safari's in the background, I can't see it's title bar anyway. Sheesh. All you guys with gigantic screens must never maximize your windows. But I still think this should be an option. Configurability is the key to making everyone happy, and I can't understand what it would cost Apple to put a few more radio buttons in the Appearance pane of Safari prefs.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Safari can't open the page .. because the page's address isn't valid.
Authored by: palahala on Feb 26, '09 08:38:08AM

Wow, the feed URL doesn't open in the new Safari... Luckily there is the "report a bug" button:

Safari can't open the page http://feeds.macosxhints.com/click.phdo?i=4f5c7eef014fceaf2a806c3e72c26c1b because the page's address isn't valid.


[ Reply to This | # ]
at the top, but
Authored by: ether on Feb 26, '09 09:29:19AM

There are two problems with the top placement. First of all, the fact that tabs expand all the way across means that you might (or I do) fail to notice that you have tabs open--especially during the learning curve. Second, the tabs blend in too well, so it's not obvious that they're there. The Safari 3 tabs have more contrast.



[ Reply to This | # ]
at the top, but
Authored by: tim1724 on Feb 26, '09 11:40:20AM

I agree.. I like the placement, but they need to work on the appearance.

---
Tim Buchheim



[ Reply to This | # ]
I submit to on top
Authored by: dj_feare on Feb 26, '09 09:35:23AM

At first I hated tabs-on-top out of UI principle, and if I ever actually used the mouse to switch tabs or windows, I'd probably have actual problems with it.

With widescreen displays become the standard, vertical space is at a premium. So, after living with it a couple days, the functionality for me is identical, and the reclaimed vertical space wins.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Undecided, but sticking to it
Authored by: Black on Feb 26, '09 11:45:46AM

For me, the jury is still out, but I'm mostly in the below camp. The saved space is nice, but it isn't enough to make a huge difference to me (it is what, maybe two lines of text?). I never had a conceptual problem with dragging tabs, and frankly I find the restriction of having to drag just the corners now, rather than anywhere on the tab to be a little annoying. I'm also finding that I frequently forget how many tabs I have open.

That said, I've not applied yesterday's hint to restore them to the bottom. I don't fully understand all of the folks who rushed to download the beta only to dig up all of the "hidden" preferences to restore it to S3 behavior. What was the point? What kind of informed decision is it if you make it after a couple of minutes? How is it any different from saying 'it is different and strange and I don't like change'? Apple has a long history of not listening to reactionaries who want the status quo (sometimes for the better, sometime not). I say give it a chance. This is a beta after all, not some kind of mandatory upgrade (folks who need to write editorials aside, of course). Give yourself time to loath it it properly - you are more likely to have a convincing opinion afterwards if nothing else....



[ Reply to This | # ]
Interesting
Authored by: asmeurer on Feb 26, '09 12:40:06PM

I was about to comment that if you wanted to, you could create more draggable space by adding spaces in the toolbar, but for some reason, Safari 4 has no space or flexible space options for the toolbar.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Horrible
Authored by: sjmills on Feb 26, '09 12:57:40PM
A pleasant user experience means windows behave the same throughout the entire OS. By totally screwing up Safari in this way, well, it's totally screwed up. And Apple really, really, really needs to stop letting things respond to background clicks. it's annoying, can be destructive, and slows you down as you search for a spot to click that will not cause a background click to happen. It's like they find more things to piss me off every month.

[ Reply to This | # ]
n/ a
Authored by: UberFu on Feb 26, '09 01:11:55PM

I voted for the new positioning_

I have not used Tabs since they were introduced - in their old location_ Several years now_ I am warming up to the new WebKit implementaion of them - Chrome and now Safari_

Those speaking of the way Omniweb implements their Tabbing - this actually goes back to IE 5.x for the Mac when pretty everything but the URL Bar was in a slide in/ slide out panel on the left of the browser_

Even the "new"ish Page Preview that Chrome and Opera and Safari are now incorporating came from IE 5.x for the Mac_ IE5/ Mac used to show a page Thumnail in one of the sidebar Interface Tabs_ Not sure if it recached it regularly but I remember having an icon view option built in - then click on it and go to that particular website_

Nobody's really seeing anything new - we're all just seeing old ideas re-invented_

Adobe's is doing this same thing with Illustrator - many of the "new features" they announce for the past several versions of AI have come from old versions of Aldus/ Macromedia Freehand_ they've simply been updated and enhanced_

Sorry for the history lesson - but my vote goes for the Tabs on Top_

Also - if you really don;t like the new style - you all better start complaining to Apple quick 'cause Sno-Leopard and the final releases are right around the corner - if enough folks speak up between now and then - they're likely to change stuff as it is still a Beta_



[ Reply to This | # ]
it comes down to space.
Authored by: robogobo on Feb 26, '09 02:03:51PM

At first I wasn't going to vote, but just leave a comment saying it doesn't matter, we'll all get used to it either way- it's just a matter of what you're accustomed to. True mostly. But there's also some great logic in these comments, and I see it differently after reading them. The key issue seems to be screen real estate. I have 30" and 23" duals at work, so there's no problem there. But at home, I'm on a 15" Powerbook. Mostly it's no problem, but I'm constantly toggling toolbars lately to get more space. With the titlebar, toolbar, bookmarks, Google toolbar and tabs, active, about 1/6 of the screen is eaten up. So, the solution is to have tabs on top, right. NO WAY. That only solves 1/5 of the problem. Plus, without a titlebar, it's harder to identify cascaded windows. But the main problem is the lack of the little oval at the right of the titlebar in every Finder window, Mail, Pages, Firefox, etc EXCEPT Safari 4 (or 3). That's the quickest, easiest way to regain screen real estate. In Firefox, you could hit command-L and a URL field would come up if you need it. Same thing now in Safari, but to hide toobars, you have to click View and individually turn them off, or use multiple keyboard shortcuts. gross.

I also like the sound of side tabs, or icon preview tabs.

But back to my original point, I'm sure it's just a matter of getting used to the tabs location, wherever they are. But clearing a 1/4 inch of screen isn't such a great thing when top tabs eschews other titlebar features.

I guess what I'm saying is, I'm typing this on my Powerbook in Firefox, with lots of screen space.



[ Reply to This | # ]
No Safari for me
Authored by: poenn on Feb 26, '09 02:52:56PM

Safari is good, but nothing compares to OmniWeb. I've been saying this for a few years now and again there's another example: Tabs!

The sidebar tabs are so much better than what most browsers do!



[ Reply to This | # ]
Tab-less
Authored by: robleach on Feb 27, '09 10:00:17AM

I never caught on to tabs. I don't like the mechanism of picking the window you want to view via a broken series of snippits of text and favicons. Maybe I'm too much of a visually reliant person, but I find it quicker to see the whole window instead of clicking tabs until I find the one I'm looking for. I just use a hot corner to activate expos and then click on the window I want. Seems quicker & more efficient to me. It does cause a cluttered desktop, I'll admit - just like my desk. ;-) But I guess if you like things neatly organized, then you're a tab advocate.

Rob



[ Reply to This | # ]
Option 6billion2hundred36
Authored by: Urtho on Feb 27, '09 12:53:16PM

I put below the address bar, as that is as close as I can seem to find to my preferred placement anyway on Safari. That said I would love to be able to put the tabs above the status bar, like I can in Firefox and Opera. When I started using tabs, I let the bar auto hide, so things sliding down and changing where you need to click was a huge NO. Putting tabs at the bottom fixed that, now that I just leave the bar open anyway, I am just used to it. That and I like to be able to customize software to work how I use it, not how someone else says it should be used.

Also on the topic of titlebarless apps, Adium can be at least on the Buddy list.



[ Reply to This | # ]
gets ugly quickly on windoze ...
Authored by: bloodnok on Feb 28, '09 10:20:38AM

i've not installed safari4 on my mac, just on windoze - dislike being forced to reboot for a lowly web browser. employed the hidden hack to make safari4 use safari3 tabs placement. if you enable that hack & you have the browser fullscreen, there's a line of garbage about 2-4 pixels wide under the chrome. if you resize the browser, that goes away. this happens on a stinkpad running winxp & on a virtual xp machine running in fusion. given it's beta code, apple may fix it, but also given it's the result of a hack & it's windoze, maybe they won't ..



[ Reply to This | # ]
Why not make it a Preference setting?
Authored by: Bob O on Mar 01, '09 07:48:14AM

It's obvious that Apple has the code to do it either way and I bet it isn't too hard to do it on the side too. Why can't this simply be a preference setting?



[ Reply to This | # ]
Faster is better
Authored by: Pyrrhus on Mar 01, '09 08:24:05AM

I, for one, restored Safari 3's look and feel in Safari 4 and I am delighted, for one reason: it's faster than ever. Keep the tabs below. Ditch Coverflow. Forget top sites, I know what I want and how to get it.

Speed browsing. That is what makes a real difference. Tout le reste n'est que littrature...



[ Reply to This | # ]
Anywhere but the top
Authored by: Panjandrum on Mar 12, '09 09:12:22PM

I think the top is the single worst place for tabs. It is simply too confusing. Is that a title-bar or not? Remember that one key aspect which is suppose to separate the Mac OS from everything else is usability. Tabs in the title-bar simply don't work well. On the left? Sure, the right? OK, where they used to be? no problem. Even the bottom would probably work well. The one place they shouldn't put them is where they put them.

But then Apple's been making a huge number of nasty UI blunders recently. Stacks anyone? anyone? I didn't think so. And iPhoto *still* won't remember when I put the palates!!! ARGH! Sometimes Apple changes things "just to change things" and, at least in recent times, it certainly hasn't always been change for the better, but only for the sake of change.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Old position is better (for me)
Authored by: Mark_Baker on Mar 14, '09 04:20:35AM

I've stuck with the tabs on top for a week but gave in today and used the widely published Terminal command to put them back underneath.

The feature I used a lot in Safari 3 was the ability to drag an address icon from the address bar to an empty part of the tab bar to create a new tab of that address - this can't be done with the tabs on top (dragging an address icon to the "+" sign does nothing).

Also, the little "drag" area on the tabs on top is very fiddly.

Finally, I don't like the very wide tabs you get when you only have one or two.
But as long as there's a way to choose between the two styles in the final release of Safari 4 all will be fine - hopefully in preferences rather than having to type in Terminal commands.



[ Reply to This | # ]
OmniWeb
Authored by: lcpguy on Apr 08, '09 12:31:35AM

I have to agree, OmniWeb is the best browser going. Not only do I love the side-bar tabs (with 2 different views), but I find the site-specific preferences indispensable. Fast, feature full and very stable.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Window-top Tabs
Authored by: lullabud on Apr 13, '09 12:06:57PM

I think window-edge tabs are a great idea. I know they aren't the norm, but thinking in best practices I think it works best...

Consider the ability to tab multiple applications together, so you have one chat window, one safari window, one terminal window. How else would you do it? You'd have to have the window on the border of the window in order to have spatial cues as to the separation between apps.

Also, it makes more sense from a real-world file folder sense, that's how we see folders in drawers. I think it just makes spatial sense to have tabs on the border of the window.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Give user a choice
Authored by: Auricchio on May 08, '09 09:34:41AM

Adding a preference choice isn't rocket science. If someone says it's too difficult, fire him.

Over the past several years, Apple has increasingly shoved their idea of "correct" down users' throats. I'm sick of things like Mail's message retention of day/week/month/never. Are there no other possible choices someone could want?

---
EMOJO: mojo no longer workin'



[ Reply to This | # ]
How long is this poll going to last?
Authored by: benhurt on Jun 04, '09 06:05:08PM

I actually created an account to make this comment... This poll has been up since February 6 it appears... How much longer???



[ Reply to This | # ]
The old-style tabs are back
Authored by: palahala on Jun 08, '09 12:32:42PM
It seems the old-style won: http://www.apple.com/safari/download/ (requires 10.4.11 or 10.5.7).

[ Reply to This | # ]
Yep, The old-style tabs are back
Authored by: morespace54 on Jun 08, '09 03:51:28PM

It's sad they didn't include it in preference 'tho...



[ Reply to This | # ]
Tabs back down under, but...
Authored by: MartiNZ on Jun 08, '09 09:00:39PM

Yeah that seems to be becoming the trend - just keep pushing whacky UI decisions on us, and then just when we're getting used to the changes, pull the rug out from under us, and whatever you do, DON'T give any options!

What we've ended up with is worse than tabs on top, practically speaking, but more defensible, UIly speaking, imo. The new 'loading' bar is rather ugly, and still having refresh as just that not very button-like button on the address bar is kind of annoying.

You can hide the toolbar, and it happily lets you remove the address bar from the toolbar, but then try opening pages! 'Open Location...' just shows the toolbar - didn't it used to open a separate dialog? At least then you could hide the ugly toolbar for real.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Tabs back down under, but... Almost!
Authored by: morespace54 on Jun 10, '09 06:27:10AM
By enabling Safari Tweak menu, it seems that you can revert the Tabs on top (for what it worth)... http://pointum.com/safari-tweaks.html

[ Reply to This | # ]
Tabs back down under, but...
Authored by: palahala on Jun 10, '09 08:18:53AM

If you hide the toolbar (like with Cmd-|, being Cmd-pipe), then hitting Cmd-L will make it pop down to allow for changing the location. Hit Enter and the toolbar disappears again. However, if you don't hit Enter (but, for example hit Cmd-R to refresh, or Tab to get out of there) then indeed it no longer seems hidden... :-(



[ Reply to This | # ]
Tabs back down under, but...
Authored by: vadril2066 on Jun 11, '09 12:09:48PM
It also appears that despite the tabs being back down under the toolbar, the oval to collapse the toolbar at the right corner has not returned. The lack of that standard UI functionality was my issue with the change in the first place. I totally agree with everyone who thinks Apple has a nasty habit of insisting on "their way of the highway" when it comes to UI issues. Preferences for a lot of different things about the OSX and Apple program UIs would make a lot of people happy, but that would "upset the vision," I guess.

[ Reply to This | # ]