×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

528 comments

Simply put (0)

nitio (825314) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346068)

No.

Re:Simply put (5, Funny)

biryokumaru (822262) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346144)

Dude, yes! We could put all our applications there as we're using them, possibly even group like ones together!

Only it wouldn't be tabs anymore, it'd be tasks, so we could call it... not the tab bar... I know! Let's call it the "Taskbar!"

Oh, wait...

Re:Simply put (5, Informative)

Shin-LaC (1333529) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346396)

The point is that we want to group windows by task, not by application. Let's say I'm working on a web application, so I have a window showing the contents of the project folder, a text editor, and a browser to test the application. At the same time (where "same time" doesn't mean that I do two things at once, but that I share my time between several activities over a range of many days), I'm writing a C program, so I have another editor window (or maybe an IDE), another project folder, a terminal with man pages, more browser windows for documentation, and so on.

The Windows taskbar, in spite of its name, doesn't understand human tasks at all: instead, it would group all browsers together, all editors together, all terminals together, and so on. This is stupid and useless. With tabbed heterogeneous windows, instead, I would be able to group webpage-related windows together, and C-related windows together. It sounds like a very useful feature to me.

Re:Simply put (3, Insightful)

crispytwo (1144275) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346456)

I use 'spaces' on the mac or multiple desktops on linux (windows has nothing useful) for the same thing now. Why would tabs be any different?

Re:Simply put (4, Funny)

RicktheBrick (588466) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346504)

Yes1 I can just see it now. Porn staring Jo, Porn staring Ella, Porn with both Jo and Ella. It would greatly help my effeceintcy in watching porn.

Re:Simply put (4, Insightful)

Interoperable (1651953) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346232)

It's an option. You can choose not to use it. It could be handy in some situations or appeal to particular users in which case you can use it. As long as it's stable and doesn't consume resources unduly, why wouldn't you want the option?

Re:Simply put (5, Insightful)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346370)

As long as it's stable and doesn't consume resources unduly, why wouldn't you want the option?

Because to a lot of people on /. (and everywhere else, to be sure) the way they do things is the One True Way, and anyone who disagrees with their way of doing things is clearly evil, insane, or a moron (possibly all three.) "My workflow is Good And Right; yours is Inferior And Must Be Destroyed. Users must not even have the option to follow your unclean way, lest they be tempted from the path of righteousness!" That kind of thing.

Re:Simply put (1)

chetbox (1335617) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346236)

On one hand, I agree: The average desktop user doesn't want to spend there time organising how they are going to achieve the task at hand. They just want to get on with it.

On the other hand, users such as many of those in the open source desktop world are likely to spend a little more time thinking about how they can improve their productivity through streamlining their interactions with the desktop manager and will at least give it a go.

Personally I think it will be an effective way to context switch ones interface between tasks.

So what? (5, Informative)

drijen (919269) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346072)

Why is this a big deal?
Fluxbox (and probably something else before *box) had tab grouping windows long time ago.

Re:So what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346086)

So has compiz. The only problem is that it doesn't remember which ones you've tabbed between sessions.

Re:So what? (4, Insightful)

ultrabot (200914) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346100)

Why is this a big deal?

Fluxbox (and probably something else before *box) had tab grouping windows long time ago.

It's a big deal because a mainstream WM is finally adding it; and people don't need to lose all the KDE goodness just to get this feature.

Re:So what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346132)

The tiling window manager Ion also had tabs since ages:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_%28window_manager%29

Re:So what? (2)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346500)

The tiling window manager Ion also had tabs since ages

Yes, I used ion3 for years before recently switching to xmonad. There's also dwm, awesome, scrotwm, and several others [wikipedia.org] . A tiling wm is a no-brainer for anyone who wants to maximize productivity and screen real estate. I'm kind of surprised they're not de rigeur for coders and IT people in general. All the auto-everything features in KDE and Gnome are easy enough to script for anyone who wants them, without the DE bloat/sluggishness. Then again, some guy named Linus Torvalds uses a full-bloat DE so I guess one doesn't have to be a n00b to prefer them.

Re:So what? (2, Informative)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346334)

To my knowledge PWM had tabs before both Fluxbox and Ion (although I've heard scores of Fluxbox users who have claimed that Fluxbox was the first WM with tabs even though Fluxbox didn't even exist until some time after PWM was released (the other popular lightweight WM at the time was Blackbox and Fluxbox was, to many PWM users, basically just Blackbox with PWM's tabs)).

/Mikael

Will Goatse trolling be the next big thing? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346080)

Netcraft confirms it, Goatse is here. [goatse.fr]

Yes (5, Insightful)

Ark42 (522144) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346094)

Really, what's the point of having windows not Maximized. As far as I can tell, you'd be better off with the taskbar in windows being like tabs, and being able to drag tabs together to form split pane views for side-by-side work. I hate having to manually drag the edges of windows, and I hate when they are not fullscreen (or minimized). Yes I know about "Tile Windows Horizontally" but it just makes extra fluff for the borders of each window compared to a tabbed/paned view. Pretty much a big failure on OS X that their Maximize doesn't even always make a window full screen.

Not sure (4, Insightful)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346152)

I was under the impression that in OS X maximize sized the window to the content. For instance if the thing is small it will not expand the window and fill it up with whitespace. Seems a bit smarter to me than having an overly large window. Of course if the content spans past the dimensions of the monitor then it will go full screen to try and fit as much possible in.

Re:Not sure (4, Insightful)

Firehed (942385) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346270)

Indeed - and for this reason, it's a "zoom" button rather than "maximize" (which is just being pedantic, but I figured it's worth pointing out). Anyways, when I first switched over to the Mac platform that drove me insane. After a couple of weeks I got used to the change, and after a couple more weeks found it far more useful than having a single window fill the screen. Since windows aren't taking more space than they need, it allows me to either have more windows visible (on a large monitor, anyways) or have at least some of the other apps I'm working with partly exposed so I can click to them more easily.

Of course, there are some situations where I want maximized windows for distraction-free work, but that's pretty limited in nature (reading or writing, in the English not code sense) and many of the apps that are very text-heavy have the zoom button do a typical maximize for that precise reason.

And still, if it bothers you that tremendously, you can always drag the window to the full screen size.

Re:Yes (4, Insightful)

ZERO1ZERO (948669) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346168)

The point of the windows is that you can drag stuff between them, you can't do this efficiently if they are maximised. And view two or more thing at once together. Manually dragging the edges of windows can suck, but in 'traditional' setups, you use the lower right corner (which is a big target) to adjust the size and the title bar (which is a big target) to adjust the position. Most Linux WMs also have ALT shortcut which makes large percentages of the windows 'hot' for adjustment.

Taking it a step further, (or back depending on POV) the original Mac WIMP implementation has a metphor of 'the desktop' and each window represents a _document_ or a physical _thing_. Desks are generally large enough to handle more than one bit of paper for example, and usually once document doesn't take up the whole desk.

Re:Yes (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346400)

Furthermore, you can click a taskbar button, ctrl-right-click another taskbar button and select for example the menuitem that displays the windows side-by-side. Very handy, if you want to compare two documents, or if you want to display SDK info on the left and your code on the right, and so on. You can show multiple code windows on screen. Or a graph and a database table. Or dragging files from A to B. Or keeping half-an-eye on something while doing something else. GP would start to miss non-maximised windows pretty quickly, I'd wager.
Back on topic, I switched to Chrome (actually, to a clone, but whatever) a while ago and even though it is in many ways the best browser I've ever had, I wish I could turn off the tabs. Almost nothing works right. I see why it is practical to have buttons for other browser windows on the largely unused titlebar of a maximised window, okay. But the browser windows don't appear on the taskbar, nor in the alt-tab order. On the whole, it was a lot more user friendly when I didn't have tabs. Of course, Chrome's good points make me stay, but I still wish I could turn off tabs. Which means that at least for me, the KDE functionality wouldn't be particularly useful. And, judging by the screenshot, it shares at least one flaw with Chrome: you can't use the "deep" top-right corner to close just one window, without closing all of the windows in a tab-group. A feature which may not be useful to everyone shouldn't get in the way when you don't use it.
B.t.w., site is unreachable, coral cache still works: http://digitizor.com.nyud.net/2009/12/07/is-tabbed-windows-going-to-be-the-next-big-thing/

Re:Yes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346428)

No, the point of windows is that you can show more than one thing on the screen at once. In the event that this is not immediately necessary, unmaximized windows are just a waste of space.

Re:Yes (1)

Colonel Korn (1258968) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346220)

Really, what's the point of having windows not Maximized. As far as I can tell, you'd be better off with the taskbar in windows being like tabs, and being able to drag tabs together to form split pane views for side-by-side work. I hate having to manually drag the edges of windows, and I hate when they are not fullscreen (or minimized). Yes I know about "Tile Windows Horizontally" but it just makes extra fluff for the borders of each window compared to a tabbed/paned view. Pretty much a big failure on OS X that their Maximize doesn't even always make a window full screen.

It sounds like you just want Windows 7.

Re:Yes (1)

Awptimus Prime (695459) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346412)

I went to the trouble of logging in to say this and saw your post. I agree. Windows already allows a side-by-side window dragging that is very useful on a widescreen display and two documents.

The root of the window 'tabbing' issue is already addressed in Win7, too, but with a more visual versions of tabs on the new task bar. hover/click the icon and get a list of windows a particular application has spawned. You can make it look a little different, but the idea has already been done.

Honestly, I think it is time for KDE to do what they did long ago when they copied the Win95 interface. That made Linux feel better for noobs, thus a redesign with Aero in mind would do the same for a newer generation of noobs. I know, it's not fun for the fanbois, but it makes less 'leet' interface that would allow business users to have an easier time adapting.

 

Re:Yes (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346222)

Just because you are too fucking stupid to be able to deal with more than one thing at a time shouldn't mean everyone else has to endure computers designed for the dumbest of the dumb.

So I guess maximized only, no alternative mode, with be coming soon to a future GNOME desktop.

Re:Yes (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346268)

Hurrr.

Wake up, moron. If you only have one application visible, you can only do one thing. If you have a bunch visible, you can use (though not interact) with all of them at the same time. Plus, how small is your screen? I've been using a 24" display for two years now, and the thought of maximising ANYTHING other than video or perhaps a heavy IDE strikes me as sheer insanity.

Re:Yes (1)

pyster (670298) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346296)

It's safe to assume you are not a power user. Afew terminal sessions, a ticketing system, some chat windows, some proprietary device software, misc documentation, a browser (with dozens of tabs)... It's nice to tab together windows into groups that compliment other groups so you have open the windows you need for a single task (say two terminal sessions, a dacs, and maybe a text area for your mop...

Re:Yes (5, Insightful)

Shin-LaC (1333529) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346326)

You might as well ask what's the point of having windows. The concept never really caught on in Windows, in spite of its name, but it's very useful to be able to have many things on screen at once, especially when none of them requires a full screen anyway.

Take this web page: if you have a large widescreen monitor and you maximize the browser, you get a silly layout, with very long text lines that make reading harder. Many websites work around this problem by using a fixed width layout, but then you just end up with two large empty areas on the sides of the actual webpages; or, worse yet, they may be filled with animated advertisements. A better solution is to make the browser window only as wide as it needs to be, so you can use the leftover space to keep an eye on other things, such as your email or an IM conversation. If you have a large monitor, you can even open two web pages side by side.

Re:Yes (1)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346380)

I've always regarded the popularity of the whole "all windows maximised all the time" way of using a computer as a relic from the days when those using MS Windows normally ran it at 640x480 or 800x600, meanwhile the UNIX and Mac users generally drove their monitors at much higher resolutions (1280x1024 @ 72Hz was a pretty common *nix setup in the days of 640x480 @ 60Hz with Windows) and thus became used to running their windows as windows as opposed to "walls" (yes, that's meant to be a bit of mockery).

/Mikael (Who has never been able to stand dealing with a setup where all apps are maximised, guess which camp I'm in)

Why maximize? (1)

ThrowAwaySociety (1351793) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346530)

Maximizing made sense when we were all using 640x480 screens. Every pixel was precious and had to be dedicated to the task at hand.

Today, with huge, HD-resolution widescreens becoming standard, it really doesn't make much sense. I'd much rather use the extra space to display two files side-by-side than one file with lots of extra blank space. Even if I don't have enough space to show both of them completely, I'd rather have one of them peeking out to the side than covered up completely.

Re:Yes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346548)

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=11hxdgl&s=4&hid=2&tag=ubuntu+maximus

Thank you.

This is just the dumbest thing I have ever heard. (2, Insightful)

RocketRabbit (830691) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346104)

Tabbed browsing makes sense. You have one application, a web browser, with multiple pages, taking up less screen space. It's tabbed so you don't have to click on a bunch of minimized windows or use Expose or whatever shiny workalike the Gnome / KDE bunch has now to find what you want, and so you aren't cluttering up the desktop with a hundred web browser windows.

However, there is something to be said for separating out the different applications and simply clicking the icon or what have you, to switch between them. In fact, isn't that what Windows has had for about 15 years now? Sure, the application tab bar goes on the bottom the screen by default, and is called the "Start Menu" but it is essentially, exactly what is proposed here.

The problem is that you end up filling up the bar, and then having to collapse the bar in one of several ways, all of which are annoying.

Expose, or whatever the Gnome / KDE equivalent is, is so much handier.

Slashdot: News for nerds, stuff that doesn't matter!

Re:This is just the dumbest thing I have ever hear (4, Informative)

Colonel Korn (1258968) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346258)

Tabbed browsing makes sense. You have one application, a web browser, with multiple pages, taking up less screen space. It's tabbed so you don't have to click on a bunch of minimized windows or use Expose or whatever shiny workalike the Gnome / KDE bunch has now to find what you want, and so you aren't cluttering up the desktop with a hundred web browser windows.

However, there is something to be said for separating out the different applications and simply clicking the icon or what have you, to switch between them. In fact, isn't that what Windows has had for about 15 years now? Sure, the application tab bar goes on the bottom the screen by default, and is called the "Start Menu" but it is essentially, exactly what is proposed here.

The problem is that you end up filling up the bar, and then having to collapse the bar in one of several ways, all of which are annoying.

Expose, or whatever the Gnome / KDE equivalent is, is so much handier.

Slashdot: News for nerds, stuff that doesn't matter!

Switcher [insentient.net] is a Windows version of Expose which offers great customization. If you want to combine the best of OSX and Windows, you absolutely need Switcher. I find myself using the taskbar 2/3 of the time, but there are definitely times when the wonderful Expose-like behavior is the most efficient way to switch between windows. Map it to a 4th or 5th mouse button.

Re: tab versus minimize (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346342)

Yes, because clicking on a tiny little tab with truncated text in it is SOOOoooo much better than clicking on a tiny little minimized button with truncated text.

Fluxbox grouped windows? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346106)

Fluxbox lets you do something that looks similar (screenshot with weird theme here [fluxbox.org] ... some programs I use run both an xterm and a separate GUI, so I can use the feature to keep the two windows together.

Re:Fluxbox grouped windows? (1)

onefriedrice (1171917) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346452)

Fluxbox lets you do something that looks similar (screenshot with weird theme here [fluxbox.org] ... some programs I use run both an xterm and a separate GUI, so I can use the feature to keep the two windows together.

Yeah, it's nice. I've been doing it so long in flux that I forgot that more commonplace window managers don't have it, and that it might be considered an interesting idea worthy of a front-page Slashdot article. Well, we don't really have to wonder about the usefulness of such a feature since it's been available so long: it is useful. I don't think it's "the next big thing" since I doubt casual computer users would take advantage of it, but it's a godsend for power users who never restart their machines and always have a gazillion windows open. After workspaces, it's the most important feature for effective window management IMO--even better than Expose-style task-switching.

Nothing New (1)

suricatta (617778) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346108)

We've already got the task bar, which pretty much works like tabs. Plus with the task bar you get the novel thing of being able to place multiple windows side by side, whereas with tabs and mdi interfaces in general this ability seems to be generally limited and/or removed lately (unless you open a new window of course, but this renders tabs useless)

How is this a novel step forward?

Re:Nothing New (1)

Dumnezeu (1673634) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346402)

How is this a novel step forward?

But it's so cool! When someone calls in for support, I could say "let me go to the other computer; now let me switch to my work tab; now let me switch to my browsers tab; now let me switch to the customer support tab; oops, sorry, i accidentally opened my porn tab."

Re:Nothing New (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346534)

You already said browser tab, you're being redundant.

task bar (1)

shird (566377) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346116)

How's this any different to the existing task bar, which shows a button/tab for each application? Move it up to the top if you want to.

If every app becomes tabbed by the OS, then they are basically re-writing the taskbar.

I think the key feature they are omitting in this article is the ability to *group* apps into different tabbed windows. So that the task bar is used to select the group of apps, then the tab to select the individual app.

Window tabs are already here (1)

Mystery00 (1100379) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346122)

Window tabs are already here!

They're in the taskbar.

Re:Window tabs are already here (5, Funny)

bmo (77928) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346212)

That's what Windows users always said about Opera and Mozilla tabs.

The Microsoft put tabs in IE7 and 8.

WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW?

--
BMO

alternative window managers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346124)

AFAIK this feature already exists in some weird-ass window managers like ion or ratpoison.

Fluxbox (1, Redundant)

eratosthene (605331) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346126)

Um, hasn't Fluxbox had this for years? It's one of the reasons I love Fluxbox so much.

Re:Fluxbox (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346266)

Yeah I was about to say this. Fluxbox is amazing and natively has supported tabs long before firefox.

I hope that's is not the case (0)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346136)

It seems these days it's cool and hip to support tabs. I mean, in the 90s, a MDI application was the big thing. Everyone and their cats supported MDI until people began to realize that MDI was , after all not a so brigh idea. Then came the tabs... Tabs everywhere, Notepad++, opera, Mozilla, and hell, when IE came with tab I was wondering where the hell i was going to do whene every big browser was using the damned tabs... Thankfully I found a relativelly obcure extension to disable tabs (Untab) which works with some bugs and problems, but hey, it works...

It seems it will take a couple of years for people to understand once more that simplicity is always best, and cluttering more and more things under an interface is juts... well.. so 2000s...

Re:I hope that's is not the case (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346310)

well for some thins tabs work great. i wish word, excel, and abi word had tabs to switch between active documents. Tabs in browsers makes lots of sense if you have more than 2 windows open at the same time.

a task bar to switch between tasks, a tab bar to switch between documents with the tasks.

Re:I hope that's is not the case (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346362)

You do realize that firefox has an option to open links and the like in a new window or a new tab, right? So if you don't like tabs in browsing, don't use them.

Personally, I couldn't go back to untabbed browsing- I typically have 4 or 5 links open, and its nice to be able to quickly see what I have and click on a new one without having to go through the taskbar which probably has 3 or 4 more apps open at the moment.

I can already tab between my various programs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346146)

Alt+Tab

Re:I can already tab between my various programs (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346562)

I can already tab between my various programs

Ah, so you don't use tabs in FireFox then?

Um, this is very last year. (2, Interesting)

pyster (670298) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346150)

Idk man, I've been using wintabber for well over a year. It's great for poorly written apps that want to open hundreds of windows. (ATT's OOS ticketing system for example). Tabbing has some nice advantages.

Close... (1)

DeadDecoy (877617) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346158)

Actually, what I think would be interesting would be to have the option to consolidate a number of open windows/applications into one tabbed collection or not. I find when I'm working with many open documents applications with many open windows get consolidated into a single list item in the task bar. This can be annoying if I need to toggle through multiple text files.

For example, I do a bit of programming using python and idle (when I'm too lazy to open up a full-blown ide). I'll usually have 2-5 code windows up and a console window or two. Along with these python windows, I'll have a browser for navigating code apis open along with two or three file navigators. At this point, the code windows will collapse and I'll have to go through two clicks, instead of one to navigate between them. I tend to switch through code files more often, so the amount of extra navigation adds up.

It would be kinda cool and unique if they explored this. Currently, *nix's workspace framework helps manage this situation very well. But alternative tools for organization would be nice. One suggestion would be to add a right-click feature to group and ungroup applications into a tabbed interface.

I can't see the point of this whatsoever (2, Insightful)

minderaser (28934) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346160)

Not when *nix for eons has had multiple desktops to divide up your work projects et al. For me, I keep my browser on one (albeit in tabs), comm on another (email, IM, etc), terms on another, and have another just for random programs I don't use all that often (GIMP, PDF Viewer, etc).

How can tabbing windows of different apps be any better than just alt-tab switching them?

Gimmick (1, Interesting)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346176)

Sounds like a gimmick to me.

That being said, I think in the end we're going to have tabbed windows because the future is more likely to be running in a light-weight web-browser interface to the Cloud on any device you can imagine, rather than a resource-heavy hardware-dependent Windows or OS-X environment. How long it will take to get there is the only question.

The improvement we need in this area (are you listening Firefox people) is a way to group tabs the way I can group layers in Photoshop so that I can deal with the whole group (collapse, expand, move) together.

Re:Gimmick (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346302)

Your prayers to the frogs of Mozilla are answered thusly: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/5890

Re:Gimmick (1)

turing_m (1030530) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346406)

in the end we're going to have tabbed windows because the future is more likely to be running in a light-weight web-browser interface to the Cloud on any device you can imagine, rather than a resource-heavy hardware-dependent Windows or OS-X environment.

In the future how many operating systems or applications are going to be considered resources-heavy compared to the hardware of the day? These days the browser is probably the most resource intensive app I run regularly. As hardware improves, the apps should become less resouce intensive in general.

And also, it is oft repeated but still true that people like to own their applications and data, even if their backup practices aren't usually as routine as those of a data center.

Re:Gimmick (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346448)

don't mind him he is just another 'cloud computing' fanboi. After the yahoo spying story from earlier on I can't understand how anyone would buy into this browser-based nonsense

Re:Gimmick (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346518)

That being said, I think in the end we're going to have tabbed windows because

GUI designers need to justify their existence, so the GUI must expand. Of course this means the "content" shrinks.

The good news, is we'll all have 40 inch ultra high res monitors.

The bad news, is just like cable tv news channels or "modern" desktop environments, those displays will be framed to death until "your content" is about the size of a postcard and "their content" fills the rest of the 40 inch screen.

More useless stuff from the KDE team (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346214)

The KDE team seems to be adamant about shooting themselves in the foot. Thank goodness there is choice in Linux - were KDE the only choice, one (almost) might just as well get back to Windows.

Re:More useless stuff from the KDE team (1)

HBoar (1642149) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346578)

Oh really? Like pretty much everything else in KDE, I'm sure one will be able to disable this feature if it isn't wanted. How is adding new features 'shooting themselves in the foot'? If no one likes the feature, no one will use it, and it will probably die. However, there is a good chance that some will find it useful. Software would never improve if they listened to people like you.

Re:More useless stuff from the KDE team (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346580)

I thought that Linux users were supposed to react to the absence of choice by coding their own.

/. running out of topics... (1)

metageek (466836) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346238)

OTOH I whish the KDE guys stopped "innovating" so much and put some stability on this thing. I'm close to migrating to XFCE

thunderbird 3.0 rc2 (-1, Offtopic)

Sanat (702) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346248)

Release Candidate 2 has many new exciting features avbailable for Linux, Windows, and Macs

from website:

http://www.mozillamessaging.com/en-US/thunderbird/3.0rc2/releasenotes/ [mozillamessaging.com]

Thunderbird 3 is based on the Gecko 1.9.1.5 platform including some major re-architecting to provide improved performance, stability, web compatibility, and code simplification and sustainability.

Tabbed Email Messages

Double-clicking or hitting enter on a mail message will now open that message in a New Tab window. Middle-clicking on messages or folders will open them in a Tab in the background. When quitting Thunderbird, visible tabs will be saved and will be restored when you open Thunderbird the next time. There is also a new Tab menu on the Tab toolbar to help you switch between Tabs.

Correct level (3, Interesting)

bvankuik (203077) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346262)

Giving up modpoints for this: this is an awesome feature. Basically this will do what the Google Chrome browser does, except now at the correct level.Like managing window size and position, it seems to me the tabbing of windows should be done at the Window Manager level. Currently, each app tries to solve this separately. That is a waste of resources.

Re:Correct level (1)

Barny (103770) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346422)

Agree, they could take it a step further by having a limited set of functions a window tabbed with another could share/use, for instance:

Recently opened document.
"Insert into ...." effectively a one click copy and past directly to the curser/field on the other app

An interesting thing is the Eve-Online game interface has had this for a long long time, you can dock multiple windows together and then tab between them, even pull them apart again.

Ew, no (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346272)

I was vehemently opposed to tabbed-browsing back in the day, because back then the don't-open-a-window-features weren't as strongly implemented, so you would inevitably end up with multiple browser windows open and not know where your tab was. That got better as webmasters got smarter and browsers became configurable to never open a new window no matter what. However, an application window? We already have a way to manage that -- the taskbar (funny because the same argument I used against tabbed-browsing ...). All that will happen is that end up with a few windows open, each with a couple of tabs and next thing you don't know where your program is (I also said that about tabbed browsing...). So in the end it isn't more convenient or efficient because you'll be spending half your time looking for the window you left the program you want in (I said that about tabbed browsing too).

Hmm, maybe I'm wrong...

Oh, FFS ... (5, Interesting)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346276)

When I clicked on this story, I knew there would countless comments saying, "We've already got this, it's called the taskbar" or words to that effect.

It's not the same thing. With windows containing tabs for multiple applications and/or documents, you don't have one taskbar; you have as many "taskbars" as you have windows open. This isn't necessarily something you'd want to do all the time, but I can certainly see how it would be useful in some situations. If I'm working on multiple code files, and for each of those files I have two or three browser windows open containing references for the specific file (a common enough occurrence in my field, which is bioinformatics; it's considered good form to put references to the appropriate journal articles in the code comments) then it would be very nice to be able to group the code and the browser windows in this way -- i.e., instead of a few code tabs in one window and a bunch of reference tabs in another window, for each chunk of code there would be associated references. If I could save those multi-tabbed windows and open them back up the same way the next time I got back to work on the project, so much the better.

Re:Oh, FFS ... (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346572)

It's not the same thing. With windows containing tabs for multiple applications and/or documents, you don't have one taskbar; you have as many "taskbars" as you have windows open. This isn't necessarily something you'd want to do all the time, but I can certainly see how it would be useful in some situations. If I'm working on multiple code files, and for each of those files I have two or three browser windows open containing references for the specific file

KDE "kpager" the desktop switcher and right click configure KDE panel - uncheck "Show windows from all desktops"

Or it sounds like you're describing emacs?

Or it sounds like you're describing a development IDE?

You have no idea how GOOD this is (1)

morphles (1257124) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346280)

Ok let me say this, i have been using fluxbox for a long time, and it has this feature, some time ago i switched to kde for more "modern" feel, but i have always missed window tabbing.
People that say it shit, let me tell you this you have no clue how great this is.

Let me say this, there are people that are all gimp , blender UI sucks (hold on i know this seems out of the blue), and mac this mac that, or best *Windows* users who have not seen *Window* manager.
And all these people have no idea how life changing such thing as tabbed windows can be, and also focus follows mouse.

Now probably here pops a lot of people that goes something like this: "oh i tried this and it suck" or something like that. Well then i bet you haven't tried it enough. Cause if you get used to focus follows mouse, click to focus becomes super retarded. And id Say even more with window tabbing. Of course you should have multiple desktops to fully utilize this feature. And there is a lot of people who don even understand how good that is.

My point is there are a lot of people that bitch about fsf/oss software interfaces, while most of them are stuck with stone age interfaces, and don't know better.
Or people think hard to learn = hard to use (never mind that hard to learn most of the time means, i'm very lazy to learn something new, so I'll just say interface i don't know sucks).

I know the part about you haven't tried enough seems harsh or something like that, but its just that i know how easily/quickly people give up.

Re:You have no idea how GOOD this is (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346532)

Focus follows mouse (FFM) is really dumb (I used it for a year and a half, so don't tell me that I haven't used it enough). The really obvious problem with FFM is that you have a mouse pointer over the top of the very window that you're working in. So, you have some of what you're trying to work with obscured.

You also have some of what you're trying to work with obscured if you try to work in a window which is behind the frontmost one, which is possible with FFM. So you can't see what you're doing. You could alleviate this by having widows come forward when focussed, but this looks extraordinarily messy and distracting when you're moving your mouse around.

If you can work without being able to see what you're doing, why do you need a mouse, or a monitor at all. If you actually do need to see what you're interacting with, FFM is a world a failure.

Now on to the real topic. KDE should just sort out their window management. Since the advent of Exposé on Mac OS X, I've essentially stopped using tabbed browsing for all but the instance where I have a whole bunch of links from a main page, and want to look at the sequentially when I'm done. Every other situation where I used to find tabbed browsing beneficial has been replaced by Exposé. I cannot think of an instance where having a heterogenous collection of items in a single window would be of benefit. The only time that I see tabs being useful is when they are used to store a sequence of similar items.

The organisational characteristics of this idea are much better served by multiple desktops. Then you can keep related windows together, and you can flick between them using the taskbar on each of the desktops, or you can look at a few of the windows at the same time, copy work between them, whatever you need to do.

I simply don't see what the problem is that this idea makes any headway toward solving.

This has been around for much longer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346288)

Window managers like fluxbox have been doing this for quite some time [years/ages/aons -ed.] and compiz also offers the option to tab windows together, some people like it but most people don't use it.

My guess is that unless KDE is doing something drastically different to make people see the need/usefulness of the feature you won't see this taking of much....

Tabs are an abomination! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346306)

Really, I despise tabs. I like plain regular windows. I turn off tabs in IE, firefox, and every other application I can.

Why? I like to alt-tab between all of my windows. It's a fast & easy way to cycle between different programs. With tabs I first have to switch to the application, then switch to the right tab with different keyboard shortcuts (and some applications don't have keyboard shortcuts to switch between tabs).

Death to tabs!

There are lots of tabbed WMs out there (2, Interesting)

Rufus211 (221883) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346332)

I've been using the Ion window manager [cs.tut.fi] for years. The principle behind it is keyboard-controlled tabbed and tiled windows. There's an entire wiki list [wikipedia.org] of similar tiling window managers, which are all also tabbed window managers. Ion will also let you create non-tilled windows that are still tabbed, so exactly what KDE is now doing.

WMs that can do this have been around forever, but it's nice that they're finally going more "mainstream". I'm still never going to use KDE or Gnome (way to heavyweight), but it's nice that they might be a more reasonable option in the future.

Re:There are lots of tabbed WMs out there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346414)

Flux box has also had this feature for years... not turned on by default, and I don't use it, but it is there.

Seems like most of the "New features" in any more main street system (kde, gnome, windows, mac os) are rip off's of other less popular systems.

I'm waiting for the slash dot article about this new feature that is going to be included in either windows 7 service pack x or windows 8... then I can post that KDE has had it for years...

Blurring the lines (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346372)

Chrome OS proposes that the apps are in the web, and put each page in a tab (or a separate window). This KDE proposal goes the other way around. All are native apps, and you can put them in a browser-like windows, tabs included. Microsoft should had done that first, as their business is more focused in apps than in web (even worse, they dont have native virtual desktops as alternate app organization/grouping as KDE), and blurring that line putting their apps on a new, web-like environment looks like an approach they should have used a while ago.

Something nice that have Konsole (that could be seen as a tabbed apps interface at least, even if they are console based apps) is to show in which have been some activity while arent the front tab, maybe they are adding this feature too (if have a meaning for non-console apps, of course).

Wonder if will be able to manipulate those tabs as in Chrome/Mozilla, dragging a tab to the desktop to create a new separate window with it, or dragging a window to another to put it as a new tab there. And if that will have some conflict with those browser apps that already do the same.

Tab bars versus taskbars? WTF? (5, Interesting)

macraig (621737) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346382)

It's rather disappointing that even now there are still people who think that "bars" crammed full of "tabs" with truncated text are somehow a game-changing paradigm shift compared to "bars" crammed full of "buttons" with truncated text.

More of the same, please!

Re:Tab bars versus taskbars? WTF? (1)

Xiaran (836924) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346566)

I don't think it game changing. But there is the important difference that I only have one taskbar. With my browsing I will tend to have multiple browser windows each with multiple tabs... each window will be a different "topic" such as a particular thing I'm looking up... or a personal window with my email etc. If people are using tabs and only have one browser window then I think they are doing it wrong.

Fluxbox Already Has This (1)

thePsychologist (1062886) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346404)

And has had it for years. It's useful for things like grouping together PDF documents, or say, a separate terminal window to Gvim for coding and compiling, or the like.

How about making it stable? (1, Flamebait)

SlightOverdose (689181) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346438)

So far I've tried several releases of KDE4 and every one of them has been buggy as hell. Constant crashes, graphics glitches, and general random unpolished fuckups.

How about locking down functionality for a few months and focusing on stability? It's gotten so bad I've switched over to Gnome after many, MANY years of being an adamant KDE supporter.

No, they won't. (0, Troll)

amn108 (1231606) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346466)

The next big thing will be when they will finally make computers work more for people than the other way around.

Tabbed interface in Windows 3.11 (1)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346478)

My first computer was a Compaq Presario with a Pentium 75 processor and a 650 Megabyte hard drive. It came with Windows 3.1x (not sure the exact version) but it came out the same year Windows 95 was released because I only used that operating system for a short amount of time.

What I remember distinctly is that Compaq included this program which had a tabbed interface for organizing your applications which when I upgraded the Windows 95 the "Start Menu" felt like a downgrade.

Dockable windows and toolbars in the WM please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346494)

Looking beyond tabs, I'd like to see 'dockable' windows and toolbars into the domain of the window manager: the application presents separate windows to the window manager, and the window manager makes these features available to all apps: pinning them side-by-side, tabbing them etc.

This takes away yet more pain from application developers, makes it available for all apps. Importantly it allows more flexibility beyond what the application developer anticipated: when a user has multiple monitors (including different sized ones) or a virtual desktop.

I've often found I'm restricted by the app when I want to put a toolbar on a separate monitor, or tear off a sub-window onto a separate virtual desktop. If they were truly separate X windows, my window manager could look after this.

Windows 1.0 (2, Funny)

Kayamon (926543) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346496)

Isn't this basically Windows 1.0? All applications tiled onto fullscreen?

What goes around comes around...

e*p! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346498)

future aT All

Boring... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346524)

Boring. Useless. I can do the same thing with the task bar. If I REALLY need multiple windows open I use my multiple monitors (WAY more useful).

Positively Entirely Absolutely Not (1)

billsayswow (1681722) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346536)

If you think about it, the greatness of tabs as they are now is to avoid clutter in your taskbar by bundling multiple iterations of the same program into one window. I could see tabbing expanding into other programs, perhaps, but the taskbar as it is now serves, essentially, as tabbing of different programs already. Tabbed windows would only be a novelty, or serve a niche market, such as people who use many, many programs at once, or people on netbooks who use a moderate number of programs at once.

KDE SC? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30346542)

Is that a fork of KDE?

Not a new feature but new in a big DE, I think (2, Interesting)

Lemming Mark (849014) | more than 4 years ago | (#30346570)

Don't think GNOME has done this, don't know about XFCE. Compiz can do it, plus at least some basic tiling I think. And obviously not on Win or Mac. So KDE it the most "mainstream" desktop to have tabbed windows so far. But it's far from a new invention. There has also been talk of tiling support for KWin, the KDE window manager, which would make it even more useful. Various window managers using tabbing / tiling exist, such as ion, dwm, wmii, Xmonad, etc. They're nice but I missed the integration of having a full DE (though you can get it if you try). Partiwm is a project to create a more DE-friendly tabbing window manager but AFAICS it's gone a bit off track since its creator invented xpra and concentrated on that instead...

Friends of mine have observed that tabbing in the WM makes a lot of sense. Tab together a load of single browser instances and you have a multi-process web browser. OK, so it's not quite Chrome in security features but it's a heck of a lot simpler. Tab a load of terminals together and get a slick multi-terminal app. Tab OpenOffice together with your web browser whilst you're writing a report and researching stuff online. Tab together emacs + console running LaTeX + PDF viewer and get an integrated development environment for scientific papers. Nice.

I'm exaggerating the simplicity slightly but the point is that things are far more flexible if commonly-needed features (how many apps use tabs these days) are provided by the platform where possible.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...