5 ms·
"The location bar has to go. It has many problems. For one, it’s always visible and constantly takes up a large amount of space. Secondly, it’s hard to read, si
by coffeedrinker 15y ago
"The location bar has to go. It has many problems. For one, it’s always visible and constantly takes up a large amount of space. Secondly, it’s hard to read, since people don’t really understand URLs. Moreover, it’s modal: it has a mode for displaying the current page’s location and a mode for entering your next destination.”
1. What is the panic with space on monitors? Stop making everything at 1080 widescreen TV.
2. If you cannot read an URL then I guess sending links to others in email, IM, or Facebook is too hard as well. Heck, how are you even going to share the URL? Some kind of drag and drop that people will have to learn even exists?
3. It has more than one mode? Like old TV sets that had a dial to tell you what channel you were on, yet could be set to another channel by turning it? The bar already as been turned into a search, and URL bar. So we already dropped from two entry points to one.
- MatthewPhillips 15y agoFirefox still has the search box because it's where the majority of their revenue comes from. I suppose now they'll have a search box but no location bar?
- asadotzler 15y agoFirefox has a search box because it's helpful to users. Period. End of story. If it's not helpful to users, it'll go away or be replaced. Mozilla does not build features to generate money. Mozilla builds features to make the Web a better place for users and developers.
- ohashi 15y agoBut that particular feature generates them millions of dollars and is their primary source of funding. It's not far fetched to imagine if it came down to it, issues surrounding it might be more complex than other UI issues.
- Qz 15y agoDefaulting to google generates millions, but it's there in the first place because it's useful.
- mixmastamyk 15y agoIt's a much bigger waste of space than the location bar, especially when keyword searches are much more flexible.
- VMG 15y ago> 2. If you cannot read an URL then I guess sending links to others in email, IM, or Facebook is too hard as well. Heck, how are you even going to share the URL? Some kind of drag and drop that people will have to learn even exists? First part: Non sequitur. Second part: A "copy link" function either as a button or a context menu action lets people do exactly what you described. Still no need to see the url all the time.
- chadgeidel 15y agoI think "the panic with space on monitors" is driven by the proliferation of smart phones and tablets. You (I assume, from your comment) and I don't have space problems on our desktop screens, but lots of folks (me included) are more frequently using small, portable devices where every pixel counts.
- jbk 15y agoSure, but portable devices have totally different UI, or different programs altogether (like Firefox for Android). Why would this impact the main desktop application?
- chadgeidel 15y agoI'm not sure. Fundamentally I agree with you, but I'm a "computer guy" so I always have a lot of screen real-estate. However, when I'm on my netbook I do appreciate measures to reduce vertical clutter.
- seanalltogether 15y ago"1. What is the panic with space on monitors? Stop making everything at 1080 widescreen TV." Seriously, we've been doing ourselves a disservice by optimizing monitors for displaying films when 90% of the time we use them to read text.
- Lennie 15y agoDidn't know ? They are not film optimized, they are cost optimized. It turns out if you slide the screen material in the way they do they can slide more screens from the same material. You can still get other monitors but they are more expensive. Atleast that is what I heared.
- seabee 15y agoA significant problem with this argument is that the majority of LCD panels are actually used to watch film and video, and the majority of people want cheap monitors. The death of 4:3 is a natural consequence of these facts. (Now, you could turn it on its side and optimise for reading portrait text, but given the harsh viewing angles of your typical TN panel this needs either an IPS screen or retooling your factory to build portrait panels - which butts against the 'wants cheap monitors' criteria. Technology progresses but not always in the direction you'd like...)
- nfriedly 15y agoManufactures like it because they get to put a bigger number (measured by inches diagonally) on widescreen monitors compared to a 4:3 monitor with the same area (measured by width*height). But we're doing the disservice to ourselves when we buy it, so your point still stands.
- wahnfrieden 15y agoRemoval of UI elements is not necessarily to save space. It may be done to reduce visual noise, which in turn may reduce cognitive load.