141–150 of 201 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I recommend you take another look. Actually, I recommend you take another look. Chrome's tabs are significantly more rounded than in your illustration.
There's a bit of an optical illusion. Next to a curvy tab, Chrome's tab looks angular. Here's an actual side-by-side snapshot: " rel="nofollow">http://i.imgur.com/sUGCX5I.png>
How about we get a Firefox that doesn't use a gig of RAM for 10 tabs? Or perhaps isn't slower than IE9 in jscript?
People still seem to make the statement that Firefox uses more RAM, when in fact, since Firefox 20, it has consistently used LESS ram than all the other browsers. I have 40 tabs open now, and it's using 1.16 GB which is awesome. I actually want it to take up more because I have 6GB of free RAM not being used, which is a waste. Compare that to chrome. Using the same number of tabs and it can easily take up more than 3…
The only thing about using separate processes is that you increase memory usage, since every tab has overhead, and tabs can't share resources (chrome tends to go process per domain).
So nitpickers might point out differences but you cannot deny that the basic tab looks just like Chrome's. When Chrome came out with this it was new and innovative. Now it looks like a copy. When this blatant copying happens (and it happens in many places; it's no wonder all phones look like a variation of the original iphone) I always wonder if the designers really did convince themselves that their design is differ…
> it's no wonder all phones look like a variation of the original iphone There is only so many way you can make a phone that consists of a big screen with a few buttons along the bottom look. Since the big screen is the main feature, and big screens look like big screens, this is a limit of the function of the phone.
Looks pretty wasteful. I prefer how it currently looks on my machine: http://i.imgur.com/PvlTZ3k.png My tabs can get as small as the pinned ones on the left (which is the default behavior of every other browser). There used to be a about:config setting for minimum tab width, but one(!) Firefox developer decided to remove it, because: "Users can override this using userChrome.css if they absolutely want it. I don't th…
Australis displays at least 17 tabs before expanding into the tab-scroll view when full screen, which is more than I'd typically have open at a time anyway. http://i.imgur.com/8JIwdgh.jpg Tab-scoll, to me, makes a lot of sense as it prevents any confusion over the content of the tabs, especially when those tabs lack favicons: in Chrome, you simply get a blank page icon when the scroll bar overflows. The only downside…
Oh, man. :/
And still no mention of shrinking tab headers...Jesus christ.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3696/8994445994_c0939b83ca_o.p... I recommend you take another look. They're not really the same at all. Firefox's designers were not going for the angular and mechanical chrome look at all. They were designing something softer, rounder and more human.
Personally, I like the rounded edges but just adding a corner radius isn't exactly falling far from the Chrome tree.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My problem with conflating search and URL is 1) 1-word searches/domains or searches involving a domain-looking piece of text throw it off. 2) cluttering my typed-URL history with search keywords.
> 1) 1-word searches/domains or searches involving a domain-looking piece of text throw it off. Example I always run into: site:news.ycombinator.com foo bar baz "site" is an unknown protocol now, because it looks like a URL. I have to remember to put the search terms first.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The look of it, certainly.
The look _and_ the performance. I used to be a die-hard Firefox fan. Then I moved to Opera because it was faster. Then I moved to Chrome because Opera was buggy. I tried using Firefox again a while ago and I went right back to Chrome. Overall, Firefox feels more sluggish than Chrome. In part, whenever pages are loading in Firefox, it seems to make the whole browser feel sluggish -- something which doesn't happen in C…
And believe me I have LOTS of tabs (sometimes > 50) open. Firefox handles them much more nicely than Chrome, uses less memory and doesn't crash, EVER.
Chrome is just too happy to show me the sad face randomly during page loads.
So nitpickers might point out differences but you cannot deny that the basic tab looks just like Chrome's. When Chrome came out with this it was new and innovative. Now it looks like a copy. When this blatant copying happens (and it happens in many places; it's no wonder all phones look like a variation of the original iphone) I always wonder if the designers really did convince themselves that their design is differ…