Firefox 4.0 Goes Chrome, New UI In Q4 2010 556
sv_libertarian writes "Mozilla recently updated its product roadmap through 2010. According to the first draft, the current browser will see a minor update in Q4 2009 and another in Q2 2010. Version 4.0 is headed for an October or November 2010 release and will bring a new user interface and browser sync integration. 'There is not much information on [what] this new user interface will look like, but the first mockups that have been posted on Mozilla's website suggest that the Mozilla team favors a Google Chrome-like design that integrates Windows 7 graphics features. Overall, window elements seem to be floating over the background.' The mockup page emphatically notes that the design is not final."
Nice but.. (Score:2)
Let's hope this time they keep the user interface the same on all platforms. :)
Some of the mockups look pretty good though
Re: (Score:2)
http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/7051/tabui.png [imageshack.us]
Tabs on side, appears on hover of firefox edge. I use the add-on tree style tab. Ignore the colors, I have my theme dark on purpose.
Re:Nice but.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why keep it the same across platforms? No, seriously, do you use Firefox on multiple platforms AND are you bothered by the differences in UI between the various Firefox'en? You'll live.
The interface should be native to the platform, adhering to the platform's UI standards. The binaries location and configuration location should adhere to the platform's application development standards. Adhere to standards, they are good for you. (Note; Experts only: deviate from standards when necessary)
Programs that use non-native, non-standard UI (Quicktime on Windows) are quickly (haha) reviled. And for good reason.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I like having my Back, Forward, Reload, and Stop buttons left of the address bar. I can't believe they're considering adopting an IE-esque interface.
Their Chrome-like tab examples really fail, since they don't touch the top of the screen. That means not only are they not where you expected them to be, but you also can't click them by ramming your cursor to the top of the screen.
(This is a big one for me - I hate those X buttons that are in the top right, but are several pixels out, so that you actually have
Re:Nice but.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nice but.. (Score:5, Insightful)
What is the deal today with trying to get rid of the simple menu bar??
It is so easy and straightforward for finding things you use all the time....
Re:Nice but.. (Score:4, Insightful)
They seem to want to save vertical screen space, which is a valid argument with current machines (like netbooks) coming out with only 600 pixels of vertical space.
Then again, why not just use full screen mode on those?
Re:Nice but.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Um, not to beat a dead horse into the ground, but Windows XP Explorer and Firefox 3 did this well. I don't know why Microsoft removed that ability. You could drag your buttons into the file menu and have the file menu + all the navigation buttons in Windows Explorer. Why is this so hard for MS/Mozilla to do again?
image [imageshack.us]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Ask any UI expert and they'll tell you the Office Ribbon is the most important UI thing to happens since the GUI. If for any other reason is because the ribbon focused on task based UI instead of technical organization that didn't apply to your average user."
Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:5, Insightful)
Just as a counterpoint, I decidedly don't like the tabs-on-top design, don't use Chrome in part because of that UI, and would probably switch to Opera if Firefox didn't make tabs-on-bottom an option. ;-)
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:4, Interesting)
Tabs should be down the side. A monitor (even 4:3) is too wide to read comfortably all the way across, ergo, tabs and toolbars should be on the side where they are not using screen estate that can otherwise be used effectively for browsing.
Yes, I know Firefox does it with plugins, but I don't understand how this basic mistake can have stayed with us for what, 10 years+ of tabbed browsing...
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with tabs down the side is you either get (1) vertical text or (2) tabs that are as wide as they are above the window in which case the tab list takes up a HUGE proportion of the screen real estate, virtually all wasted unless you actually have a couple dozen tabs in one window to start eating up the available rows.
Neither of these options are very good IMO; I'd rather spend a few pixels of vertical height then have to read sideways text.
(Incidentally, this is why I never liked the taskbar on the side of the screen either. Maybe I should give it another shot with Windows 7 now that the taskbar is a little more icon-based and less word-based.)
Re: (Score:2)
http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/7051/tabui.png [imageshack.us]
These tabs appear when you move the mouse to the screen edge.
I know I posted that earlier but I'm mentioning it again just for you =p the add-on is tree style tab by the way.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ugh, I hate UI elements that appear and disappear like that. I had the taskbar on auto-hide on my laptop (which only has a 1024x768 screen) and decided it wasn't even worth it there, even though that would have been present in every application.
Browsers have the added problem of me using ctrl-tab/ctrl-shift-tab to change between tabs a lot, but doing that non-blindly requires seeing where the tab is that you want. A hidden tab list would slow that down.
Re: (Score:2)
The tabs also appear when you press ctrl if that helps any.
But I'm just showing you an alternative. Don't take it too seriously. Also the tabs can be permanently stuck on the side, and it doesn't have to hide.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Agreed... I'm all for configurability, so making something like the tabs-on-top or your tabs-on-left options being a choice would be fine and dandy. But making either the only choice is a good way to get me to stop using Firefox. ;-)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:5, Funny)
No. Tabs should be diagonal. The obvious advantages of this are so obvious that I don't need to mention them. It can be mathematically proven, too, that diagonal tabs are the most aesthetic and comfortable layout. If you weren't so educated stupid by evil educators, you would realize the power of the four-corner diagonal tab.
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:5, Funny)
Tabs should be diagonal.... It can be mathematically proven, too, that diagonal tabs are the most aesthetic and comfortable layout.
Just get the Cantor Diagonal Tab add-on. It lets you have more tabs then you can count.
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:5, Funny)
I can see how diagonal tabs might seem sensible, but have we become so mired in the UI design rut that we're unable to take the concept of tabs to its logical conclusion?
What is needed is for the tabs to be split out of the application and handled by a hardware peripheral. Something with tactile feedback when you activate tabs. Mozilla International have conducted research (I lost the link but you can Bing it) that shows that people with alternating yellow and black tabs are paid 12.5% more on average.
So, yellow and black, and hardware. Caterpillar, fill this market need!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
If you weren't so educated stupid by evil educators, you would realize the power of the four-corner diagonal tab.
Browser has simultaneous four corner TAB CUBE in only 24 minute browsing session. 4 CORNER TAB, CUBE BROWSER.
BROWSER'S HARMONIC SIMULTANEOUS 4 CORNER TAB CUBE IS THE ONLY WAY!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
....And the horse you rode in on. I have a widescreen monitor an in a few years so will everyone else. My three rows of 100+ tabs are, frankly, optimally placed in Firefox 3.0
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
... if they go with the tabs on top and no titlebar, if only as an option, I am back on board...
Just as a counterpoint, I decidedly don't like the tabs-on-top design...
Tabs should be down the side...
I think tabs should be smack dab in the middle of the page.
OmniWeb - Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:3, Informative)
Tabs should be down the side. [...] I don't understand how this basic mistake can have stayed with us for what, 10 years+ of tabbed browsing...
OmniWeb [omnigroup.com] has been doing preview tabs on the side since 2004. Unfortunately, it's a Mac-only browser and has never really caught on.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Notebook.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, they should use as much horizontal space as they're given, but it's been proven that it's easier to read a narrow column of text than a wide one (google [google.com]). That's why newspapers use small columns.
If scrolling messes up your reading then perhaps you need to enable smooth scrolling or use the middle button to scroll slowly while you read.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I would like them to get whatever it is that makes Chrome usable on a Netbook. Firefox on it runs like a dog (even without flash) while Chrome functions more or less as it does everywhere else.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Tabs on top is horrible...one of the key reasons I dislike Google Chrome.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm shocked by the stupidity in this thread!
There is no either or! That's the very point of Firefox!
You can have it as you like it! I can *right now* put the tabs on top, on the very bottom, on the right or left side, hide them and replace them by a dozen different ways of navigation, etc, etc, etc.
If you are a serious UI designer, and you first priority is not *C*H*O*I*C*E*, then you are a failure at your job and have so stop working *right now*.
(Second priority is good *defaults*. But never hard-code stuf
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:5, Funny)
Your post contains twelve sentences. The majority of those sentences (seven) end in exclamation points. This is in a post regarding tab placement in computer software.
You really need to switch to decaf. Seriously.
Function before form (Score:5, Insightful)
Make it not crash, and I don't care what it looks like.
Re:Function before form (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Why is this post marked as a Troll? It's a legitimate viewpoint and one I agree with. I'll take function over form every time. Give me a good, fast, stable browser with a UI that isn't flashy, cluttered or distracting.
Perhaps mods took the view that Firefox was being called unstable and thus regarded the post as a troll?
They are abusing moderation for a long time now (Score:5, Insightful)
That is exactly why we must meta moderate like crazy these days. Troll has a very strict explanation and believe or not, it means exactly same on slashdot.
These idiots really confuse Slashdot moderation with digg down&up while Slashdot does make a favor to them, overrated and underrated are exactly for that purpose.
There are unhappy people with every kind of browser&application out there and yes, in this age, a browser should be really fast, simple to use and stable having very good standards support. It is valid for every browser out there. It is not just Firefox who doesn't get people's concerns, I have heard first time that system's default browser can't download files. It is Safari for Snow Leopard. Way to go Apple... All of this for run a freaking in 64bit mode, hurry of release to show finger to MS. See Firefox loving moderator? Every browser these days are a bit disconnected from users actual needs and demands.
Re:They are abusing moderation for a long time now (Score:5, Informative)
>That is exactly why we must meta moderate like crazy these days
Except that Metamoderation these days doesn't present you with already-moderated posts. At least, not for me. All I get is a selection of 10 random posts and I have to decide if you, the average Slashdotter, would benefit. Nearly every post I'm given to "meta-moderate" us not previously moderated.
Now, someone mod me down.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Meta moderation is not re-moderation of posts, it is used to hunt down the moderator abusers and people not understanding what moderation really is. You moderate the moderator in fact. So, just because poor guy says "Firefox crashes" and talks completely on topic about a different focus developers should have rather than cosmetic stuff and gets "dugg down" as troll, you will notice it and tell it is not fair.
I know it needs considerable time but that is why this and limited Karma prevented Slashdot from bec
Re:They are abusing moderation for a long time now (Score:5, Informative)
I understand that meta moderation is moderating the moderator. My problem is that when I go to meta-moderate, none of the posts I'm given have been moderated. Go re-read the paragraph at the top of the meta-moderation page. It's changed in the last few months.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Give me a good, fast, stable browser with a UI that isn't flashy, cluttered or distracting.
No problem, just go here [opera.com].
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How is this a troll?
I agree. I personally don't care how pretty the browser is, and don't really like the Windows 7/Vista graphics interface.
What will it look like in Linux? Thats what I want to know.
I don't like the overly simplified interface, I think it makes it seem like they think their users are idiots. I don't use google chrome for much the same reason.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Crash? The only Firefox crashes I've seen in many many months were due to testing 64 bit Flash. If FF is crashing, I have to wonder about your operating system and/or hardware, but the primary culprit is probably buggy code in addon/plugin/codec/peripheral software.
Re: (Score:2)
Firefox crashes and locks up on me every single day. And lets not start on the issue of every browser instance hanging if one instance has DNS lookup issues.
Re:Function before form (Score:5, Insightful)
Yea, I'm getting sick of this Firefox doesn't crash shit. Someone needs to start modding these fanbois troll. Not that I don't like FF, but it doesn't shit golden bricks either.
Re:Function before form (Score:5, Interesting)
I do have to say, what I really want out of a browser is function, not a flashier interface.
Make it not crash, and I don't care what it looks like.
"Form Follows Function" [wikipedia.org]. It's an eternal debate.
I'm of the team that says we can have both. Especially if they factor in software ergonomics [wikipedia.org] into their design decisions. Most people don't realize it, but they like intuitive designs. Clearly, minimalism (an element of both form and function) is what is "in" for web-browser designs right now. We don't apparently need 8 menus with 20 submenus with 14 more sub-submenus, combined with 9 sections in the options menu, each with 15 subsections. We don't need 40 icons between the top of our web page and the bottom of our address bar.
So, you can have your function (a web browser with less junk crammed into it, and therefore a lower probability of things going wrong) and I can have my form (a nice looking, easy to use minimalist web browser). Everyone wins.
Re: (Score:2)
I would really appreciate it if they would fix that.
Re:Function before form (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
of all the things to copy from Chrome (Score:5, Interesting)
If there's one thing I hate about Chrome it's the way the tabs replace the normal title bar functionality. It makes the window harder to drag, harder to maximize, and basically throws 25 years of Windows usability standards out the window. I expect something like this from Apple but not from Firefox (or Google for that matter).
A nonstandard UI is the epitome of developer arrogance. The tabs-on-bottom mockup is excellent, but the tabs-on-top concept needs to die on the drawing board.
On the flip side, if Firefox 4.0 supports some of the new Windows 7 standards like Aero Peek controls I will be very pleased!
Re:of all the things to copy from Chrome (Score:5, Interesting)
Tabs on top makes a sense, they just shouldn't be part of the title bar.
I say they make sense because the address bar, back button, forward button, refresh/stop buttons, and home button are all part of the current tab, rather than the browser as a whole.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:of all the things to copy from Chrome (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, IE7 was originally designed with the combo stop/refresh/go button, but they recieved a ot of feedback from users that stop and start/refresh are distinct functions and should not be combined. Eventually, Microsoft relented and made stop seperate.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Tabs on top make me move my mouse further to get to them (although I usually Ctrl+Tab anyway). Tab on bottom, now that's worth a look.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Tabs on top makes a sense ... because the address bar, back button, forward button, refresh/stop buttons, and home button are all part of the current tab, rather than the browser as a whole.
A cardinal rule of good user interface design is that controls are always in the same place. When the buttons are part of a tab, they may move around, for instance if the tab bar is set to hide if it contains one tab, or if the tab bar can expand to multiple lines, or if it can be placed horizontally or vertically.
In a GUI, "part of" means what visual grouping it belongs to and not the conceptual grouping it belongs to. If all the tabs contain the same controls, in the same positions, then these controls
Re: (Score:2)
Chrome is better optimised for small screens and maximising window real estate. I actually like the "throwing the title bar away and integrating tabs with window decorations" of Chrome - it gives a couple of cm more vertical space for the html render window. As does hiding the bookmarks bar, and status/download bars by default. Going back to a default Firefox layout now reminds me of those old 3D wireframe Elite style shootemups, and how they used to have huge blocks of static graphics at the top and bottom
So why don't you browse in full screen mode? (Score:2, Troll)
In FireFox, enter fullscreen mode. Boom, 100% - a few pixels at the top, all for rendering the page content.
Want to get to the tabs - hover your mouse over those few pixels.. voila, there's the tabs and address bar.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Chrome is better optimised for small screens and maximising window real estate
That's a fantastic point. I've got a 22" monitor at home and use a fairly high resolution laptop at work so I'm sure I'm out of touch with those with small monitors and netbooks. I still argue that disposing windows UI/UX standards is not the best way to accomplish this task, though.
Re: (Score:2)
The tabs don't replace the title bar functionality in Chrome. The title bar, including its minize, maximize, and close buttons, is in its normal place, and performs its normal function. It's slightly less tall than on a normal window, though.
Re: (Score:2)
In your current installation of FireFox, double-click your title bar.
Now go to Chrome, open enough tabs to fill up the row from left-to-right, and try to double-click the title bar.
For me, double-clicking an app's title bar (same function as "Restore Down" or "Maximize") is especially useful when I want to restore a maximized window so I can drag the app from my primary display to a secondary, or vice versa. I suspect many people do the same.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
"Windows usability standards"
You were shooting for the newest oxymoron? Ohhhh-kay.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's odd you mention that, considering the last two releases of Windows (Vista & 7) both have different interfaces (Vista with Aero, 7 with it's dock, er, task bar). I like how Google implemented its tabbed interface, but there is room for improvement. I find it fascinating that 10 years ago, IE *was* the internet! Now FF and Safari (along with WebKit dominating in the mobile space) have begun to push aside IE's presence
Missing what?? (Score:2)
I don't know what you're smoking but Chrome has a title bar. It's an easy drag target. Here, have a look: http://www.google.com/chrome [google.com].
See. Title bar. Big, double-clickable, dragable, resizable, titlebar.
I'm not a Chrome user but if you're going to complain, at least get it right ;)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to see these features as options or themes. Maybe even make an easy option to go into "support mode" which will provide a unified standard UI.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If there's one thing I hate about Chrome it's the way the tabs replace the normal title bar functionality. It makes the window harder to drag, harder to maximize, and basically throws 25 years of Windows usability standards out the window. I expect something like this from Apple but not from Firefox (or Google for that matter).
A nonstandard UI is the epitome of developer arrogance. The tabs-on-bottom mockup is excellent, but the tabs-on-top concept needs to die on the drawing board.
On the flip side, if Firefox 4.0 supports some of the new Windows 7 standards like Aero Peek controls I will be very pleased!
With UI there's a trade-off between "flawed but we're used to it" and "innovative but so different nobody will catch the hang of it." QEWRTY sucks. Scientists can prove with lots of charts and numbers that there are better ways to layout a keyboard. Unfortunately, this is a change that won't likely happen. Everybody is used to QWERTY even if it sucks. Metric beats customary every time but I can't think in metric.
The problem with most of these changes is there really doesn't seem to be much of an improvement
Sort of old... (Score:4, Insightful)
These screen-shots have been available for months. This is old news.
Frankly, I think worrying about minor details like whether the tabs are above or below the taskbar sort of shows how far browsers have come. On the list of things I was worried about 5 or 10 years ago, it's near the bottom.
Separate search box option? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
My keyboard shortcut is to hit tab to go to the search window :-)
Not really different than typing w for wikipedia, etc.
Actually not too bad (Score:2)
I was half expecting to have to go on a tirade about the new look but it's actually pretty decent. Just looking at FF right now there's a lot of empty space that can be consolidated (mainly the file menu bar and the tabs bar area). The go/stop/reload consolidated into the path bar is a pretty good idea. Clears up a few buttons worth of space. And the file bar could really be hidden and opened up by right clicking the title bar icon in the upper left (where you'd normally just see 'restore, minimize, close,
Why transparency? (Score:5, Interesting)
If I wanted to see a partially obscured, blurry version of what's behind my browser, I can just smear my glasses with Vaseline and minimize Firefox.
Re:Why transparency? (Score:5, Interesting)
It doesn't look cool. It's the UI equivalent of spinners and under-chassis neon lighting.
Re:Why transparency? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. I don't pick the highest quality screen I can afford to look at blurry screen.
Re:Why transparency? (Score:5, Interesting)
My favorite thing to uncheck.
Mockups page slashdotted? (Score:2)
How about just getting 3.5 to work right (Score:2)
Been using 3.5 on OSX. Works like crap. Downgraded back to 3.0 and issues went away.
max (Score:2)
for transparent backgrounds, I reply this:
most browsers are maximized, and transparent looks awkward
"Going Chrome" (Score:2)
Re:"Going Chrome" (Score:4, Informative)
We're working [mozilla.com] on multi-process [mozilla.org] too, and also hoping to have it in Firefox 4.
Combo stop/refresh/go button FTW (Score:2)
I like tabs on top because it makes them "pop" more--I save almost 0.1 second when hunting for an open tab at the top of the window compared to looking past the normal clutter to a lower tab bar! The lost title bar functionality doesn't affect me much since I always browse in a maximized window, but the mockup shows a thin strip above the tabs which should help those who don't.
The Windows 7 stuff doesn't excite me, because I am no longer a Windows user except here at work, where we will not be moving to 7
Combo stop/refresh/go button FAIL (Score:2)
The nicest feature IMO looks to be the combo stop/refresh/go button. That makes so much sense that I'm surprised I haven't seen it before.
You have, in Safari, it sucks dirty swamp water through used oil filters [slashdot.org].
URL copying fail. (Score:2)
Botheration, that should be it sucks dirty swamp water through used oil filters [slashdot.org].
Re:Combo stop/refresh/go button FTW (Score:4, Informative)
One reason the triple button might not be such a good idea is that when you want to stop a page load, you might accidentally cause a refresh instead
Happened for me within minutes of installing Safari. There's no "might" about it.
Options. (Score:5, Insightful)
Please make it look like Firefox 2. I want it to look like an ordinary Windows XP application. Nothing flashy.
And if you do add something flashy, please make sure to ADD IN THE OPTION TO DISABLE IT. Options are GOOD. KEEP ADDING OPTIONS. Make the options VISIBLE.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So much for "Redmond, start your copiers" (Score:2)
This copying trend is going out of hand. How about some innovation from someone other than Apple for once?
IE8 (Score:2)
Can we look anymore like IE8? Did I ever tell you I don't like IE8's UI?
FIXME: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why'd all the browser developers decide that this same model we have for browsing web pages is adequate? Considering how much time we, as a human race, are currently using the web browser, I would hope that we could make one that is a little better than this Netscape 26.0 shit we're stuck with. Apple, are you there? Can you please do for the browser what you've done for the phone? Google, we know you have like $n! dollars, can't you throw some more money at this problem? Chrome (which I am browsing from ATM) is pretty half-baked.
Shouldn't this thing read to me by now, standard? Shouldn't I have a better way to look at multiple pages than separate tabs and windows? Why does it all crash so much? Why must it be such an unelegant, awful thing to display information to from programming languages?
Follow The Leader (Score:5, Insightful)
If Google or Apple but their tabs in a rotating circular drum surrounding the window, you can be certain that Open Source developers would follow swiftly behind. It's disappointing to see it confirmed that Open source will never, ever have the confidence to put forth its own designs, paradigms or new innovations directly in front of users unless a glitz and glamour company has broken the mould first. The worst part is how eagerly FOSS developers ape the latest trend. A little dignity would be a lot more digestible.
By contrast, Microsoft would simply wait to see what Apple did in their next revision before implementing what was kept.
To the topic at hand, Tabs on top are an atrocious development, unfit for human consumption. They are the product of people who spend too much of their time using flashy, UI paradigm-less monstrosities like Winamp skins, Flash site and those awful OSX floating widget things, not to mention that ridiculous top bar. Inclusing that was the worst decision GNOME has ever made. Most normal people on the other hand expect applications and button that stay within their window box, that don't warp or distort when your mouse draws near, and that don't look like they just had a full body wax job done. There was very little wrong with the 1997-era user interface.
I curse the Cult of Mac and what it has wrought on my UI's over the last 10 years. I'm hoping the Order of Google will not cast its baleful eye towards what little sanity remains in modern day GUIs.
it look slike ie 8 (Score:3, Insightful)
Thats when all the bugs in 3.x will be fixed (Score:2)
Actually , probably not.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I can only see good things in that migration.
Care to elucidate? Man, give examples in a case like this.
Combo Button is hateful. (Score:5, Insightful)
I really hate the combo button. Safari introduced this and I started running into the following problems:
1. A page is loading slowly (slow site, busy computer, DNS lookup failure, ...) and I go to click "stop", but the load finishes just before I click, the stop icon changed to a reload, and now I have to wait through it loading again.
2. A page is refreshing on a schedule. I decide I want to reload it sooner, so I go to click the reload button... just as it starts reloading, so now the automatic reload gets stopped.
Moving it to the end of the address box in the latest Safari is just an extra layer of manure on the sandwich.
Re:Combo Button is hateful. (Score:5, Insightful)
Press CTRL/CMD-backspace or CTRL/CMD-W before hitting submit next time. The fact that it's possible to avoid using a bad user-interface doesn't mean it's not a bad user-interface.
If you want to run some minimalist browser under Ratpoison, you're welcome to it.