Live data from Hacker News

Forcing links to open in new windows: an argument that should have ended

marco.org

71–80 of 85 posts

Re: Forcing links to open in new windows: an argument that should have ended

#71
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure do! This has been an issue in web design since 1999. Usability studies back this up. Open New Windows for PDF and other Non-Web Documents (Jakob Nielsen, 2005) [0] The Top 10 Web Design Mistakes of 1999 (Jakob Nielsen, 1999) [1] Top 10 Mistakes in Web Design (Jakob Neilsen, 2011) [2] We gain nothing by "keeping the user on our site." The user doesn't care, to them it's all just content they want to look at. If t…

Are there any more recent studies with actual numbers and not just some vague talk about increased cognitive load (whatever this means)? Most I found seem to refer to the same 15 year old NN/g research report. Since then a lot has changed, including the spread of multi-tabbed browsing (which one could imagine would have a huge impact on this issue) and drastic changes in the way web applications are designed. Is the…

Not sure what the point would be… Besides the offender's unwarranted sense of entitlement (by keeping you around against your will), the main issue is that it breaks the back button. 15 years later, it's still an unwarranted sense of entitlement, and it's still breaking the back button. End of story, no?

If anything, we can an extra issue and suggest it's even worse nowadays. Per parent, it gobbles RAM on mobile devices, and this leads other tabs to close prematurely. It also turns older devices into helicopters when the fan kicks in.

But if you really need one, here's a study:

Date: just now. Author: yours truly. Methodology: browse random news websites every now and then on an old laptop and on an old mobile device. Sample: yours truly. Results: far too much cursing to publish as a HN comment, and frequent rage against the punk designers who ship huge JS payloads. Conclusion: it still sucks. :-)

Re: Forcing links to open in new windows: an argument that should have ended

#72
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure do! This has been an issue in web design since 1999. Usability studies back this up. Open New Windows for PDF and other Non-Web Documents (Jakob Nielsen, 2005) [0] The Top 10 Web Design Mistakes of 1999 (Jakob Nielsen, 1999) [1] Top 10 Mistakes in Web Design (Jakob Neilsen, 2011) [2] We gain nothing by "keeping the user on our site." The user doesn't care, to them it's all just content they want to look at. If t…

Are there any more recent studies with actual numbers and not just some vague talk about increased cognitive load (whatever this means)? Most I found seem to refer to the same 15 year old NN/g research report. Since then a lot has changed, including the spread of multi-tabbed browsing (which one could imagine would have a huge impact on this issue) and drastic changes in the way web applications are designed. Is the…

[deleted]

Re: Forcing links to open in new windows: an argument that should have ended

#74
Marco is right that the argument should have ended long ago. But he's 180 degress wrong about how it should have ended, at least based on the usability testing I have done or overseen.

A link in the middle of a sentence interrupts any mental session in progress. The 7th word in his post is a link...does he really think that anyone intends to click that click and never return to his site? To at least finish the sentence?

I guarantee that if he sat and watched 100 of his readers click that link, all 100 would use a contextual menu (e.g. right click) or chord (Ctrl-click) to open that link in a new window.

I could understand the argument against target=_blank back in the good ol' days of IE6 on XP, when browsers were not tabbed and OS's were not good at managing tons of windows. Back then creating new windows all over the place was annoying.

Those days are gone. With tabs and window management UI (like Expose), it is now no trouble at all for anyone to manage dozens of open web sessions at once. Adding one more is far more lightweight than whisking your readers away suddenly in the middle of a sentence.

Re: Forcing links to open in new windows: an argument that should have ended

#75
post #59
post #2

Tapping and holding for 2 seconds and then choosing "Open in a new tab" every time you want to open a link in a new tab in iOS gets tiring fast. I wish Apple would introduce a better UI for this.

Fighting a silly virtual keyboard on a phone gets really old fast too (physical keyboards are vastly better). IMO phones and tablets have a long ways to go in the usability department, hold for new window just being one of their many problems.

I had no idea that Blackberries ship with a dedicated "open link in new tab" physical button.

Re: Forcing links to open in new windows: an argument that should have ended

#76
post #58
post #52

I used to agree with the author, but these days I find myself actually preferring having a link opening in a new tab, so I'm not actually that irritated when a page uses target="_blank" if it's somewhat justified (ie. if there's a reasonable expectation that I'll click the link as a temporary digression, before going back to the original page). The problem is that sadly, closing a tab is often easier in practice than…

Right clicking is a native part of MacOS now and has been for quite a while. Apple's own mice ship with right click enabled out of the box as do the trackpads (I believe you are incorrect that it is disabled by default. Even the demo machines at the Apple store have two fingers to right click enabled.). I agree with the post author. Please let me decide when to open a new window. This is further complicated that link…

> I believe you are incorrect that it is disabled by default

No, it is disabled by default, I go through a few Macs and turning on right click (and inverting that 'natural scroll') is the first thing I do.

Re: Forcing links to open in new windows: an argument that should have ended

#77
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any more recent studies with actual numbers and not just some vague talk about increased cognitive load (whatever this means)? Most I found seem to refer to the same 15 year old NN/g research report. Since then a lot has changed, including the spread of multi-tabbed browsing (which one could imagine would have a huge impact on this issue) and drastic changes in the way web applications are designed. Is the…

Not sure what the point would be… Besides the offender's unwarranted sense of entitlement (by keeping you around against your will), the main issue is that it breaks the back button. 15 years later, it's still an unwarranted sense of entitlement, and it's still breaking the back button. End of story, no? If anything, we can an extra issue and suggest it's even worse nowadays. Per parent, it gobbles RAM on mobile devi…

> Not sure what the point would be…

"In God we trust, all others must bring data." Best practices should be grounded in data rather than opinions whenever possible, especially when they're based on claims about users' cognitive load like in the NN/g recommendations.

> Per parent, it gobbles RAM on mobile devices, and this leads other tabs to close prematurely. It also turns older devices into helicopters when the fan kicks in.

I don't find that to be true with mobile devices. I much prefer having my links on mobile opening in a new tab, because a) mobile internet connection can be unreliable (and often a much bigger problem than lack of RAM), so I may not still have reception when trying to reload the original page, b) slow page loads makes browsing not as enjoyable since transitions take time, so I'd rather have everything in separate tabs and c) being on the move means I often put my phone down to do something else, so I don't necessarily remember every tab's browsing history.

Besides, mobile browsers have gotten a lot better at managing RAM and most have been able to optimize background tabs for a long time, so I think the RAM issue is way overrated.

> Besides the offender's unwarranted sense of entitlement (by keeping you around against your will), the main issue is that it breaks the back button. 15 years later, it's still an unwarranted sense of entitlement, and it's still breaking the back button.

I can see several reasons except for "unwarranted sense of entitlement" for this practice. It's all about reasonable expectations on the users' end: if a user can reasonably expect the website will behave some way, then not doing it this way can be detrimental to him. For example, many people expect "help" links (like the one next to the HN comment box) to not make you leave the page and rely on the "back" function to restore your painfully typed comment once you realize it does. They may be wrong in expecting this, but this seems like a perfectly rational safeguard against accidental data loss, so going against this could very well "increase the user's cognitive load".

As for the breaking the back button, my previous point was that the back button is not as important anymore, in part because a) a lot of things break the back button because dynamic content has made it much easier to do so and b) multi-tabbed browsing is now widespread and users may not be as confused by the fact each window/tab has its own browsing history anymore.

There are plenty of contradicting effects (precisely the reason why you and I can legitimately feel different about this issue) and the point of doing an actual study is to be able to measure them so we can compare them and say which trade-offs are worth it and which aren't.

tl;dr: your snark is unwelcome

Re: Forcing links to open in new windows: an argument that should have ended

#80
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are users really too stupid to know ctrl+click, middle click, or right click->open in new tab? There are people that use their computer day-in and day-out that don't know about alt-tab to switch between windows... The computer doesn't come with a manual, and no one ever showed them. Not everyone that gets plopped in front of a computer explores their new environment once they have a workflow down.

Those same people may not understand how tabs work, either. They might not realize where their previous browsing session went, or how to get back (since the back button no longer functions as expected in the new tab).

I'm not throwing in on either side of the target="_blank" debate. I'm just saying that making assumptions that surely all/most uses know how to X, usually end in disaster.
Post reply on HN