Google "Office" Released 394
pumpknhd writes "Looks like Google has finally integrated Writely and spreadsheets into Google "Docs & Spreadsheets". Writely.com now redirects to this new location. The design has also changed to match the look of other Google services." The more "applications" I try forcing into a tabbed web MDI model under a Mac, the more clumsy it gets. They aren't in my Dock, they can't be apple-tabbed through. Issues like this really frustrate me as I find myself wanting to use more web2.0 ajaxy fancy pants programs.
Goffice? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll stick with LaTeX, thanks; but Goffice's real-time collaboration-feature [google.com] may make concurrent editing easier than under SVN.
Re:Goffice? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
LaTeX support for scientists? [Re:Goffice?] (Score:5, Insightful)
> than under SVN.
It would be nice if Google added LaTeX support to Goffice, because a lot of scientists author papers together in a distributed
collaborative scenario, and the workflow usually consists of mailing fragments and drafts around (ugh!) for the
majority, while a minority of more technically versatile researchers use CVS/SVN, both of which approaches suck
big time.
So Google, if you read this, please give us a SCIENTIST'S WORKBENCH to author papers more effectively
Re:Goffice? (Score:5, Insightful)
But you may not be doing serious work, then.
Let's say you have a five-hundred-fold bibliography: how are you going to port it between publishable papers if not in BibTeX [csuchico.edu]?
Re:Goffice? (Score:4, Informative)
OpenOffice.org has features for keeping your bibliography in a database. Much work is being done in this area to improve functionality and useability, including importing existing BibTeX data [openoffice.org].
Endnote (Score:3, Informative)
Endnote? It's basically the Windows/Mac GUI version of BibTeX. Granted it's not open source, but Word + Endnote is pretty much the standard among all journals except those in CS/Math/Physics. Most journals outside those fields won't even accept LaTeX/BibTex (and yes, I've tried submitting LaTeX to such places like Journal of Bacteriology)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
ClarisWorks was great for its day -- when it was rebranded AppleWorks, they added all the junk that ruined documents and caused the thing to crash. I've been using it since ClarisWorks 1.0, and the first update that Apple did was what began the downhill slide.
Pages is a page layout program, not an office package. It doesn't do vector graphics, bitmap graphics, spreadsheets, database, or word processing.
IIRC, MS Word was first released on Apple hardware (or at least that's whe
Re:Goffice? (Score:5, Insightful)
LaTeX is an unnecessary pain in the ass for non-mathematical writing where a WYSIWYG editor will suffice
Biting the flamebait here... you are (bzzt!) wrong. I wrote my graduation molecular biology thesis (almost no math involved) in LaTeX. I learned LaTeX for that purpose, and looking at my collegues struggling with word processors compared with the damn ease and elegance of LaTeX, I'd never turn back.
I wish my boss let me write research papers with LaTeX too *sigh*.
LaTeX (Score:5, Insightful)
How many times have you struggled to get an image placed just right in a popular WYSIWYG text editor? How many times has your favorite WYSIWYG editor added a page to your report that makes it go over the page limit, minutes before a critical submission deadline?
The little time spent in learning the language far outweighs the advantages it provides. Give it a try!
Re:LaTeX (Score:5, Insightful)
There's an edit-compile-test cycle; results are completely predictable; modern editors are almost full-blown IDEs for LaTeX.
A lot of programing is done with IDEs these days, for a reason.
It integrates well into multi-user editing scenarios: you can check in your source tex files into CVS or subversion, and get free version control with diffing capabilities. Try that with a binary format.
I think you're making three mistakes here. First, LaTeX is a layout application, than many people use for word processing. You can't compare it to MSWord and assume you've done a comparison of WYSIWYG versus markup. Second, you're discounting the learning curve and its affect upon collaboration. Third, you're equating LaTeX with text based format and word processor with binary, and that is just plain wrong.
Collaborating with LaTeX is a pain in the butt in almost every instance I've used it because their are invariably people who don't know the language and who then have to learn it, greatly slowing the whole process. As for CVS and Subversion, I often use them to check in both binary and XML files from other word processors and layout applications and collaboration with them is not a problem using these tools.
How many times have you struggled to get an image placed just right in a popular WYSIWYG text editor?
Never, as text editors don't support images. I've often placed images with ease in an exact location, however, using WYSIWYG layout programs, which I find to be much, much easier to use and more flexible for that task than LaTeX.
How many times has your favorite WYSIWYG editor added a page to your report that makes it go over the page limit, minutes before a critical submission deadline?
Never. If I have a page limitation, I'm almost certainly using the right WYSIWYG tool, like InDesign, Framemaker, Quark, or the like (depending on the particulars).
The little time spent in learning the language far outweighs the advantages it provides. Give it a try!
I use LaTeX for certain projects and it is even the best tool I know for certain types of projects. You seem, however, to have compared it to MS Word for certain tasks and concluded that it is superior and everyone should switch to LaTeX. This is not very good advice. Most people, performing normal tasks would be a lot better off with some of the WYSIWYG tools available, or better yet a hybrid tool like InDesign that allows the user to edit both the markup and the WYSIWYG view. It even uses the same basic layout engine as LaTeX, but you don't have to mess with all the hacks to get color and graphics and the like to function smoothly and you don't have to build it constantly to see the end result. Give it a try!
Re:LaTeX (Score:4, Interesting)
And of course, no mention of (La)TeX would be compleat w/o suggesting people look at the TeX Showcase:
http://www.tug.org/texshowcase [tug.org]
William
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
LaTeX with an appropriate front-end is no less a word processor than the tools that are marketted as "word processors". Its not WYSIWYG, but for a long time (even after WYSIWYG word processors were available), neither were most word processors.
For those of use who type well and for whom reaching out to grab the mouse breaks the flow, or attempting to go back after writing to apply structure is harder than typing in the structure
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The main advantage I find in my use for LaTeX over Word isn't exacting layout (yeah, its better at that than Word, too, though that's rarely all that important to me), but in ease of describing, perceiving, and maintaining structure when working with documents.
Re:LaTeX (Score:4, Interesting)
Hold it, are you saying it is easy to enforce page limits in Latex? I would love to know how. I had to abandon Latex years ago because of that very problem. For example, preparing a press release that HAS to fit on a single page because it is going out by fax to 120 companies, or doing a 12-page document that has 12 sections, each of which HAS to fit entirely on its own page.
Doing this in WYSIWYG is relatively quick and easy - adjust fonts, adjust leading, edit some text - bang I'm done. In Latex it was a nightmare of slow and tedious tweaking, running and rerunning latex over and over and over until I finally got something that both fit and looked good doing it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's a nice theory, though I've never seen it work well. I've never been in an office, large or small, where MS Office templates were designed well, or consistently used. All too often, the "templates" are built by people who treat them like a prototype of a regular document, and use the easiest way to acheive visual appearances in a docu
Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (Score:5, Insightful)
If I may comment more generally on this, releasing the Acrobat reader a long time ago for free use to anyone was ingenious of Adobe. Because the Writer/Creator for those files once cost tons of money (back then). Today, it's a bit cheaper [adobe.com] but I still love and cherish the PDFCreator project [sourceforge.net] under the GPL.
Really causes one to wonder how 'free' something is when it comes to standards. Now we'll just have to wait and see if Adobe begins to sue everyone who wants this functionality in their application. A lot of people I talk to regard PDF as an 'open' standard when the only part that's free is the ability to decode it--not encode it.
Re:Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not so - witness OS X. It encodes PDFs with wild abandon without paying anything to Adobe. The PDF standard is published and can be implemented by anyone.
I've honestly no idea why Microsoft backed down against Adobe. Perhaps it's because of the monopoly status or something, but what they wanted to include in Office seemed perfectly reasonable to me. after all, I'm used to doing the same thing with NeoOffice/OpenOffice and also with any application that prints on a Mac. Linux uses could say the same thing, and I'm sure I remember a freebie printer driver on Windows that creates PDFs as well.
Cheers,
Ian
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. One of the restrictions placed on a monopoly is that they can't use their monopoly status in one area to help them create a monopoly in another area. By adding PDF capability to Office, they would be expanding their near-total monopoly in "Office" to create a second monopoly in "PDF authoring tools".
Apple, not having a monopoly - at least in the personal computer space - has more flexibility to add a feature like this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In the areas where Google excels they find themselves only #1 by a small margin, but the breadth of their offerings makes them seem larger then they really are. Because they still have strong competitors it doesn't make them
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (Score:4, Informative)
Another PDF writer (Score:5, Informative)
Here is another tool that acts as a printer driver. I've installed it on all our workstations at work, and everybody loves it.
CutePDF [cutepdf.com]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, the problem here, as I understand it, is MS was trying to, once again, extend a format they didn't own to lock people into using MS products.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, that's not how it works.
Actually, it is pretty close.
Let's say GM is the dominant automobile seller (jokes aside, it's an analogy), and Ford invents airbags.
Why does it happen that every time a discussion about a monopoly comes up, someone immediately proposes an analogy that has no monopolies in it? Use a monopoly in all analogies about monopolies. Also, if someone invents something new, there won't be an existing market for it, so bundling is perfectly legal.
Okay, so here's a more apt analogy.
Re:Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (Score:5, Informative)
Adobe is suing because Microsoft is trying to create a new format that is embedded as part of the system. This was discussed many times in the previous discussion of the lawsuit. Both this app and OpenOffice have PDF exporting support. As you pointed out, there are PDF creators that are freely available.
Remember, Adobe opened the PDF standard so people could do this. (At least, I do believe that has how it went.) Like I said, it is not PDF creation that has Adobe pissed at Microsoft, it is their new, PDF-esque format.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Vista still ships with MS' PDF-esque format, just not PDF.
Yes, and Adobe is still trying to get the courts to do something about it.
Adobe was concerned built-in PDF-authoring in Vista would kill sales of Acrobat Pro, so they threatened to sue MS for "abusing" its monopoly status.
Adobe complained that both the PDF authoring tools and the XPS authoring tools would kill sales of Acrobat Pro despite not being the better product.
That is the whole point of antirust law, to ensure competition. If MS makes
Re:Neat Tool, What About Adobe? (Score:5, Informative)
Adobe holds the patents, but they'll license without royalties as long as you conform to the standard... and as long as they can't find a good reason not to. Of course, the minute they try to, the world will move to a free open format pretty quickly.
I don't know the details of the MS case - did MS do it without permission, maybe?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Bullshit. Many people already call PDF "Adobe format" because they don't know you can read it without Adobe. If PDF became completely proprietary tomorrow, few people would notice.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
bullshit, "ah doh bee for mat" has more syllables than "pee dee eff" so laziness wins....
Also, I work with some pretty goddamned computer-illiterate people and I have never, ever, heard anyone call a .pdf file an adobe file or an adobe format file...
Re: (Score:2)
I'm wondering if it's another case of "embrace and extend" so the final PDF wasn't compatible with anything Adobe made.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
It looks like ass and you cannot copy and paste from the PDF.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In this case as it is for Apple, Adobe will probably make no problem. Only Microsoft is forbidden to include PDF in Office.
Even more funny, as MaxOS export everything in PDF, the new Vista has the same capacity, but instead of using PDF, they push their own format( proprietary, off course ). Microsoft would probably not be authorised by Adobe to use PDF, but anyway Adobe is still complaining
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You just highlighted a problem of the proprietary formats ... the owner can deside who can and cannot use its format.
PDF is an open standard anyone can implement, so long as doing so does not break some other law.
In this case as it is for Apple, Adobe will probably make no problem. Only Microsoft is forbidden to include PDF in Office.
Actually, Apple is forbidden from bundling it with anything they have monopoly on as well (iPod being the only real candidate). If Adobe decided they don't want Apple or
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So while I was fooling around with this, I couldn't help but notice that it has the option of saving to a Portable Document Format (PDF) which, according to Wikipedia is: a file format proprietary to Adobe Systems for representing two-dimensional documents in a device independent and resolution independent fixed-layout document format.
Umm, maybe you should look for more than one source. Wikipedia has a lot of slant on various topics, including this one. The truth is PDF is a trademarked term that refers
For Taco (Score:2)
500k? (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyone know why this is there?
I would start recommending this to people if they could actually use it in the real world, but word documents get pretty big. It happens. They should be able to deal with it.
Re: (Score:2)
It's probably limited by AJAX. (Score:4, Informative)
AJAX-based applications really start to suffer from performance problems (when used on typical American broadband connections) when the amount of data involved exceeds about 650 KB. For an application like a word processor or a spreadsheet, where the data must be continually be updated between the client and the server on each change, even 500 KB is pushing it.
Don't forget that some overhead comes from AJAX itself. It takes bandwidth transmit the XML data that encapsulates the XML-RPC AJAX request. So while 650 KB is the practical limit of a request, it's plausible that 150 KB of that is being used to cover the XML overhead, thus reducing the amount available for actual data down to about 500 KB.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You know that "show quoted text" feature? Yea, well the quoted text is counted towards your "used memory" for every occurance of the text but is only stored once.
Problems with AJAX (Score:2)
I know a lot of my issues at one time were relat
Re:Problems with AJAX (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
People like to innovate; it's what we do. Sometimes that means making something new entirely, sometimes it just means improving or adding functionality to something that already exists. That's not something worthy of negative criticism in itself.
Re:Problems with AJAX (Score:5, Insightful)
Keyword: "installed"
No argument that there exists plenty of standalone, purpose-made applications that do a better job, but they need to be downloaded and installed.
If you happen to use a computer that isn't yours you can still access your documents in "native format" with a consistent interface as long as the computer has a javascript capable browser installed... and any computer with internet access is practically guaranteed to have a web browser installed. Consider things like editing your documents at a library if you're out of town, or any other public web access kiosk you might find. Borrow someone's laptop for a few minutes, etc.
Of course, if you don't encounter those situations you may as well use a dedicated application - it's all about the right tool to suit your particular needs.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2)
Also, the internet connection is the single least reliable part of most people's computer setup.
If you have multiple computers it is. (Score:3, Interesting)
If you're constantly floating between multiple computers, then the ability to just sit down at a browser, type your L/P, and have all your documents presented to you is a real "killer feature." One that might completely outweigh any limitations of importing and exporting.
As people get more computers -- a whole lot of what I'd call 'average people' now have more than one (at least one work computer and another personal computer) -- this becomes more
Re:Problems with AJAX (Score:5, Insightful)
Now look at Google Docs. It handles all of that for you. Just grant someone access to the document and they can instantly edit it. Everyone always has the latest version. In addition, it allows multiple people to simultaneously edit the document and instantly merges those modifications together in real time. I shows you what parts other people are editing, and gives you chat ability so you can discuss those changes together.
This would be great for a group of students working on a research report. You write the outline together, then each person takes responsibility for researching a subsection of the topic and fills in that part of the report as they go. You can review what the others in your group are doing, so you can see what progress people are making (or not making). If you see something that conflicts with what your research has uncovered, you can point that out. Likewise, if you learn something that it looks like they missed, you can suggest they add it.
I've never seen a feature like this in MS Office, Open Office, or any other office suite.
Opening/importing Excel (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Opening/importing Excel (Score:5, Informative)
That happens to me, too. What version of Office were you using to import the Excel spreadsheet?
Oh wait
Re: (Score:2)
PicasaWeb? (Score:2, Interesting)
"Frusterate"? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
tabbed web MDI model (Score:2)
MDI browser model (Score:3, Interesting)
API? (Score:4, Interesting)
Dan East
Spreadsheet Wrecker (Score:5, Informative)
It has columns for printer brand, model, location, ink or toner type, ink/toner model number, price, and how many I need to order the next time I do. Very simple spreadsheet.
It stripped the price column of it's "currency" setting and changed it to "general".
It broke the simple "price times quantity" formulas.
It resized the columns and made them too small to display the numbers.
This app is nowhere near ready to be considered an actual spreadsheet. Proof of concept maybe, but I can't see myself ever using it for anything useful. I can't imagine how much damage it would do to a more complex spreadsheet.
Import / export != Useage (Score:4, Insightful)
Have you ever tried to do that same type of import/export sequence with a WordPerfect spreadsheet inside Excel? Or even an older Excel version? You will have simmilar issues.
How long (Score:2)
How long do you think it will take companies to realize that users are starting to see browser tabs and AJAX sites as basically their own "programs" and will want to manage them like they do all of their programs, not just within the confin
File Storage (Score:5, Interesting)
1. How do I easily upload and organize all my locally saved Word and Excel files?
2. How do I maintain a local copy of all my changes and new files?
3. How safe should I feel about uploading files with sensitive personal info?
Answer these questions, Google, and I'm on board. And, I suspect many other people will be too.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I wouldn't. Whatever Google says, It's just not a good idea.
Google Docs looks good for the random paper for school or something that you want to work on at school and home and don't want to carry disks around or bother emailing yourself it again and again. I wouldn't put every document you've ever made on it. If you're never going to use the document on another computer, or if it contains information that would be totally bad if
Re:File Storage (Score:4, Interesting)
I am surprised there is so little discussion here about this. Lots of "ooooing and aaaahhing" over "save as pdf" (which is kinda cool) but little about the fact that if you want to use as your main office suite then you need to upload your personal information. It would be really cool if they distributed the program for installation on my own web server.
Very nice in a pinch though and will probably use it, even if in a somewhat limited fashion.
Dashboard Web Clip (Score:4, Interesting)
Picasa Web (Score:2)
Works for Me (Score:2)
If I wanted, I could write an HTML wrapper I keep on my local machine or my own webserver that pops up Javascript UIs to populate the URL with parameters for opening the remote webpage.
The only real problem is IPC between the webpage app, but that's always been a terrible problem with webpages since the beginning that practically no one has addressed
Ultimate Conspiracy Theory 2006 (Score:5, Interesting)
Late 2007, Vista adoption is still beginning to happen, WGA eats at Microsoft share of OS. People looking for alternatives.
Google buys Ubuntu and rebrands it as a powerfull "plug and play" web platform that interfaces with Google apps and Firefox. Google Box is born.
Google buys Mozilla. Firefox keeps it's brand and keep on expanding its web platform features in FF 3.0 and 4.0 as it adds 3D and OpenGL acceleration.
Late 2009: Microsoft share is dropping quickly at the same time increasing their revenue as pirates are slpit between those paying up, and those going for Google Box.
Late 2011, Google purchases Adobe and makes Flash and a light version of PDF part of their web platform. Google announced mobile web platform: Google Boxmobile.
Windows share has dropped below 50%. This allows Microsoft to innovate and integrate applications in their OS without threats from antitrust and anti-monopoly lawsuits. Spectacularly, with nearly half the share it had before, Microsoft's revenue is higher than ever. Microsoft releases Windows Vienna, amazing advancement in the world of desktop OS and computer-interface technologies.
Microsoft positions Windows Vienna as the desktop os for power users, business users and IT professionals, and phases out Vista and XP.
Google Box positions itself as the casual computer platform for people looking for entertainment, photo management, word/spreadsheet functionality, light games etc.
Err... (Score:4, Insightful)
Then why are you not opening the apps in separate windows? IIRC, that will put them in your dock, and you can navigate to them with Exposé. I guess you can't Apple-tab to them, but you could Apple-tilde (right?) to them when you already have your browser selected.
Web versions of desktop apps == Bad Idea (Score:2)
Desktop apps are the kinds of things people open once and work with for long stretches. I think of desktop apps as being like separate workspaces...my IDE is my workbench, Photoshop is my darkroom, etc. I go into these "places" to work on something where I need a vareity of tools that are centered around one type of activity and complement each other. I can use all of my desktop space (two monitors), and I have the speed and respons
Web Apps (Score:2)
Ah, good, another person has figured out that web apps are kludgy. My hopes that the API exposed by browsers will eventually grow up to give us a cross-platform API to creating native interfaces just went up a notch. That's something I've been hoping for for about ten years now, but so far, it hasn't happened. Perhaps XUL...
Don't Forget about Google Photos (Score:2)
What java could have been... (Score:2)
Now just imagine if there were a standard virtual machine interpreter that was available by default on every end-user OS in existence. Imagine that it worked the same on all platforms and was quick and responsive.
Now imagine having that little suite of programs on your thumb drive written to that VM.
Oh well.
presentation, please (Score:2)
The best part... (Score:4, Interesting)
Your rights granted by Google (Score:4, Interesting)
Your Rights
Google claims no ownership or control over any Content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through Google services. You or a third party licensor, as appropriate, retain all patent, trademark and copyright to any Content you submit, post or display on or through Google services and you are responsible for protecting those rights, as appropriate. By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through Google services which are intended to be available to the members of the public, you grant Google a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, adapt, modify, publish and distribute such Content on Google services for the purpose of displaying, distributing and promoting Google services.
Google reserves the right to syndicate Content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through Google services and use that Content in connection with any service offered by Google. Google furthermore reserves the right to refuse to accept, post, display or transmit any Content in its sole discretion. You represent and warrant that you have all the rights, power and authority necessary to grant the rights granted herein to any Content submitted.
I have to say that does seem pretty far from evil. Why do I even keep this hat anyway?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So, not your docs which are intended to be available to you and who you choose to share it with.
Rob, you don't know how to use a Mac. (Score:5, Informative)
Duh. Apple+Tab = applications. Apple+~ = application windows. I personally find this 2-level hierachy much better for working with data than the Windows-inspired "everything is a Window". I also like that I can quickly hide applications I'm not interested in (Apple+H), or merely minimize some Windows (which do get stuck in the dock, Apple+M). The only bad thing is that I haven't found a way to pull minimized windows out of the dock with the keyboard.
For quickly getting between windows in an application when I'm not sure of the order, I just press the Expose key for all application windows (suddenly, all my TextEdit windows are on the screen, waiting for me to pick one!). I can do this for all applications and their windows with a different Expose shortcut.
Between the Expose graphical picking, having a distinction between "another application" and "another window in this application", I find the MacOS X ui richer and more comprehensive than the usual point'n'ook GUI interface that exists under KMW or MS Windows. It's easy to pick up, and I'm missing it so much when I go to my KDE desktop that I'm tempted to write a patch to KMW to make it act more Mac-like.
Lousy formatting for text documents (Score:4, Informative)
I lost ALL of that formatting with the test upload of a document. For writers who need properly formatted manuscripts, this is definitely a no-go. I'll have to wait until they can do proper headers and page layouts.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, when you have different applications embedded into another (like a webbrowser) this distinction breaks down. Crashiness aside, it would indeed be interesting to s
Need to make tabs the "base unit" of the UI. (Score:5, Interesting)
If you have a bunch of stacked browser windows, everything works peachy on OS X, just like you described. Cmd-Tab cycles through applications, and then Cmd-` goes through the windows. This is because the OS is designed with the idea of a "window" as its most basic unit. Each window is owned by an application and has one task going on in it. This has been the way of things since the MultiFinder in MacOS 6
Unfortunately, since tabs are part of the application and not really handled by the OS, there's no universal command for cycling through them. In some applications (e.g. Adium), you use Command-[left/right arrow]; in other applications (Firefox) it's different. I don't even know if there's a hotkey for cycling through tabs in Safari -- I hope there is, but that I just haven't found it yet.
At any rate, I think tabs are something where the application developers and users latched onto a useful feature, which the operating system UI designers never really counted on.
What needs to happen is that the OS' windowing system itself needs to implement tabbing, instead of leaving it to each application to do differently. Think of the neat stuff you could do -- any window could become a tab in any other window, maybe by just dragging one window's title bar into another. So you could have a Finder tab going inside of a Safari "window," or vice versa. Want to break a tab off into a separate window? You could do that, too. Individual tabs could be independently reduced to the Dock, and expanded back up into their parent windows, or their own, or into different windows.
But the point is that rather than leaving tabbing up to each application to do a little differently, Apple needs to step in and provide a guideline as to what the best practice is, and make it easy to implement universally.
IMO, rather than having the "window" being the base unit of UI design, the tab needs to become that. Today's "window" needs to become a looser concept -- call it a "frame." A frame is just a variable-size, resizable object that holds tabs; if it only has one tab in it, then the tab itself isn't shown and it looks like a window does today. The frame isn't owned by any application; applications instead create tabs in frames. So if an application instance crashes, all of its tabs would close, but any other tabs in the same frame would be unaffected. The menu bar would change contexts as the user switched from one tab to another, rather from one frame/window to another as it does now.
Tabs are a really useful invention, and frankly I think the concept should be broadened. Word processing and many other activities could each benefit from tabbing, and the user would get a coherent and cohesive interface for manipulating and working with tabs, that would save them time and confusion over the current situation. That it would make web applications vastly easier to use would be a very positive side-effect.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I like the behavior of the XP Alt-Tab Power Toy better than either the Mac behavior or the default Windows behavior.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
i just sensed a sudden disturbance in TheForce ... sounded like 98% of the computer users got together in sayin "so what"? ;)