this post was submitted on 23 May 2024
703 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

59534 readers
3199 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Thrife@feddit.de 28 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Tab grouping, nice! Finally back after they removed then years ago..

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I wish they'd backpedal on the floating tabs too. I still fucking hate them and they never really used them for anything like they said they would. They're just as shitty as they always have been.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Eh, I honestly don't notice it. There's a very small (like <5px) gap between the tab and the next bar down, and it's only noticeable when I'm looking at it, which is pretty much never. I've attached a screenshot for reference (I use the built-in dark theme, Container Tabs, and shrunk my tabs in about:config).

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Aside from the fact that this is way more than just 5 pixels, it's also not just the bottom but also the top, doubling the wasted space. Followed by another gap before reaching the toolbar at the bottom, and another gap at the top above the tabs.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I use container tabs, which fills the space at the top on most of my tabs. In my screenshot, that is literally the top of my screen, there's no extra space above it. Here's a slightly bigger screenshot just above my extensions:

I used a screen measuring tool, and the black gap (the floating part) between the tab and my extensions bar is 2-3px (hard to tell exactly). The tab itself is ~30px (give or take 1-2px). So if Firefox used non-floating tabs, it would save about 2-3px. That's it.

Chrome doesn't have floating tabs, and it takes up more space than Firefox, here's a screenshot comparing the two:

Brave has floating tabs, and is also bigger, here's a screenshot comparing Brave and Firefox:

This is on my Macbook Pro, so YMMV on Windows, but it looks very similar to what I have on my Linux devices. At least for me, Firefox is plenty compact and more compact than its main competitors.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You're conveniently ignoring the huge spacing within the floating tab. lol That's about 8 pixels, plus the 3 outside the tab we're already at over 10 pixels of empty space, on both sides, making it over 20 pixels in total.

In my FF it is worse though. It's a total of 16 pixels from the icon to the top, 19 pixels to the address bar (excluding the 1 pixel border of that). It's like 85 pixels before I reach the website content area. https://i.imgur.com/0MxEcW5.png

No idea why you bring other browser into this when the comparison was with older FF designs. I really don't give a shit about any chromium browser to be honest.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I showed the other two since they're popular, and what others would be comparing against. Firefox (on my machines) is more compact than them. So it's not like Firefox is especially wasteful here. One has worse floating tabs, and the other has worse non-floating tabs. So it could be way worse.

Removing all the space would make it super cramped, and I don't think it's worth it for 10-20px. On a typical 1080p screen, that's like 1-2% of the vertical resolution.

That said, it should be configurable. You can probably get what you want with the userChrome.css or whatever it's called.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

"Others do it just as bad / even worse" is just not a good argument for making your own software worse imo.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They have other things to consider as well, such as accessibility. You can't just eliminate all whitespace without consequences.

I do agree it should be easily configurable, but my point is that they're better than pretty much every competitor, so I'm satisfied.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

How did floating tabs improve accessibility over the previous design?

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If they go back to non-floating tabs, you'd save like 2-3px per my screenshots. You seem to want more than that, and that's where the accessibility issues come up.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 1 points 6 months ago

I love how you didn't answer the question and instead went on a hypothetical scenario with an outcome that is a flat out lie.

[–] madis@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Hi,

We bring a modernized and differentiated look to tabs since Firefox 89 in order to create a signature Firefox look and experience. This major redesign will help us enable more use cases and features in the future.

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1338169

Before this, tabs were clearly separated and were directly connected to the rest of the browser UI, while also using much less space & padding. It was one of the major enshittification updates for Firefox and to this day they have not given us any of those mentioned "use cases and features" that would make use of this redesign.

[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago

It was one of the major enshittification updates for Firefox

That's not what that term means. That term specifically and explicitly means "making a service worse for the user in order to wring more money out of it." It doesn't mean "feature or design change I didn't like."