61–70 of 270 posts
It's strange to me how a key selling point of these vertical tabs is "save on vertical space", but they almost always still include a header bar. You can see in the video they posted that it saves almost no vertical space, while now taking up a massive amount of horizontal space.
Perhaps we should just make monitors in 4:3 like we used to instead of 16:9 which is ridiculous since we typically don't watch movies in the office.
I see the name “Brave Browser” and my brain just refuses to engage. Their marketing team ruined the product for me before I ever got the chance to try it.
Not sure I follow.
I used Firefox for 20 years but had to switch to a Chromium browser due to performance. Went with Brave, seemed to be the best of the bunch.
I've been happy with it. What's the problem with the name?
Brave gives a very bad vibe (mostly due to the affiliate links scandal), I prefer to just use my favorite browsers (ff/edge) + uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger which give good privacy/adblock experience, are open source and customizable to my liking.
Meanwhile Mozilla is showing signs of serious, systemic internal org issues, and no problem? [2]
It's pretty clear a user / privacy-first model is central to Brave's mission, so these drive-by comments griping loudly about minor, historical issues never feel intellectually compelling.
[1] https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1269317625915400192
I've been using Firefox with Tab Center Reborn, and a config which collapses the tabs so only the favicons are visible. Using Shift-Tab, Ctrl-Shift-Tab and Ctrl-T, Ctrl-W to go around and open/close is so logical for me. First time I heard about Tree style tabs I was so against them because they occupied significant amount of space and I didn't know you could collapse them. I don't see myself ever going back horizont…
Tree Style Tabs work well, because screen estate is not wasted on 16:9 and 16:10 style displays. Web browsing is mostly reading task and because of usability, line length cannot exceed a certain width. Thus, there is more screen estate horizontally around the page than vertically on top and bottom of the page you are reading.
It's strange to me how a key selling point of these vertical tabs is "save on vertical space", but they almost always still include a header bar. You can see in the video they posted that it saves almost no vertical space, while now taking up a massive amount of horizontal space.
Arc moves the header bar stuff (URL) to the left pane, so the entire right pane is site content.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Perhaps we should just make monitors in 4:3 like we used to instead of 16:9 which is ridiculous since we don't typically watch movies in the office. That's on the right track, but going too far. 16:10 or 3:2 is much more reasonable. The idea of using 16:9 screens for work needs to die in a fire.
IMO the closer the ratio gets to 1 the better but the only fact I have for this is 1280x1024 (5:4) being better than 1024x768 (4:3)
It's strange to me how a key selling point of these vertical tabs is "save on vertical space", but they almost always still include a header bar. You can see in the video they posted that it saves almost no vertical space, while now taking up a massive amount of horizontal space.
OmniWeb (from Omnigroup, developers of OmniGraffle, OmniPlan, OmniOutliner et al) was their web browser offering in a particularly fecund period of browser development in the early 2000s, which had vertical tabs. The tabs themselves were little thumbnails of the contents of the web page in question. I used OmniWeb as my main browser for many years, right up until Firebug and Firefox became the preferred development e…
I moved on to Safari after it died, but I missed vertical tabs dearly and still do. Hopefully this idea catches on well enough for the Safari team to finally steal it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't leave us hanging...
I believe they mean shift-cmd-c and it copies the current URL to the clipboard. Comparable to cmd-L + cmd-C in one keystroke.
(Not a user of the browser in question)
But Cmd+L+C is exactly the same number of sequential keypresses as Cmd+Shift+C. So I guess Firefox has this desirable behaviour covered!