ajgraves

I think this is fine. I won't use it, but it's fine.

It's the same reason I didn't use IE9. It's not user friendly and make me have to look in two different places to confirm which tab is which URL. It's exhausting and takes up too much space.

At the end of the day, we're 330 posts deep, and there's a universal consensus across users in terms of what your users, the users of Orion, would like to see.

Now, as a designer, I live by the phrase "The User Is Always Wrong", but in this case, they're asking for an interaction that they have experienced, enjoyed, and are comfortable with, as opposed to some amorphic feature with vague verbiage.

Vlad, you've created a great product. I love it, I really do. And I applaud the team for attempting to reinvent the wheel here and take a risk on improving the experience.

I think there's just a point where either the community needs to concede that its not going to get what it is looking for here in terms of compact tabs.

I'm sure there's a path forward to make a better compact tabs experience than Apple did, but IE9s implementation still feels the same as it did back then.

Trifocals3302 I agree, having the tabs seperate from the address bar is a terrible UX decision and quite confusing. Safari's implementation is far superior to this.

Put me down as another "Safari got it right". I'll Orion+ shortly either way, but, I wish it was mimicking Safari.

I can understand how the jumpy bar seems inconsistant. Relative to the window, sure, it's inconsistant.

I'll submit relative to the tab it's an impressively intuitive design. It wins on that tradeoff.

Sometimes, wisdom is knowing when to not do what you do elsewhere. I think Apple made the right call.

Vlad

That is a very bold statement.

Unfortunately, the conversations here mostly are subjective opinions being presented as objective fact without any evidence to back it up.

I just find it ironic that you want to adhere to Apple HIG, but you're looking to 2011 Microsoft for Interact Design Principals, which we're all aware of how great the Microsoft user experience was back then.

It was designed in an area where 75% of users had 3.59 tabs or fewer open, while the high end of tabs were upwards of 11 tabs. According this same article (which uses date provided by Test Pilot), Microsoft used similar data in designing IE9. [1]

Another study conducted by Patrick Dubroy in 2009, albeit a much smaller sample size than the million Test Pilot users, showed similar results to the Test Pilot study [2]

Today's browsing habits are significantly different. If there was research to conclude that this tab design provided a better user experience, or users had a significant attachment to it, Microsoft likely would have kept it around just 4 years later in the release of Edge. Instead, it only lived on with Internet Explorer 11. which was simply a release to keep corporations happy with a consistent interface for compliance reasons.

It was difficult to find modern large scale studies on the number of open tabs, but based on a quick survey of individuals near me, our average is as high as the outliers in the surveys from 2009 and 2010.

User Experience is not designed. Subjective opinions are not fact. A design not adhering to HIGs is not a poor interaction. In fact, some of the best designed products have gone against standard HIG.

In no world is a swipe to scroll an intuitive user interaction.
In no world is two fingers to click as a secondary menu an intuitive user interaction.
In no world is an address bar docked on the left side of the screen while my active tab is on the right an intuitive user interaction.

These are learned interactions.

That is not to say that your design is bad. It is good.

Now, it's important to acknowledge that design is always subjective, and a subjectively bad design can provide a better experience for many users.

Based on the forum here, more users prefer the compact tab design of Safari 15, but are willing to settle for Internet Explorer 9.

At the end of the day, innovation dies by adhering to 10 year old HIGs.

I admire what you're doing with Orion, and I'll continue to support both Orion and Kagi, but I am disappointed with the way that the discussion and implementation of this feature has turned out.

1. https://slate.com/human-interest/2010/12/a-new-data-set-from-firefox-reveals-our-browsing-habits.html
2. https://dubroy.com/blog/how-many-tabs-do-people-use-now-with-real-data/

Longely i really dislike the lack of contrast between the tab title bar. the actual tab is supposed to be actionable, as in u can drag that one tab around, right click on it, etc. the toolbar is usually considered a distinct part, and now, with it merged into the tab bar, makes confusing. it looks like as if the tab here is actually part of the toolbar, and not a tab

I really prefer the style of safari, or at least some sort of border or shading of each individual tab, so I know that they are distinct tabs.

Another example with the flat apple design:

also if you wanted it to look even cleaner, you could adopt Safari way of doing it in compact mode where the favicon becomes close button:

so you avoid things like this:

so would look like this:

I like how the Safari team did this for the compact tabs as well and it's one of my favourite design elements of Safari. Would like to see this in Orion!

I love compact tabs in Safari, and will be happy to see it in Orion.

Hi All

We had a new release today that addreessed a known memory leak.

Please let us know here if you experience an out of ordinary memory usage with Orion.

Out of ordinary usage means usage that is very different than Safari in similar cicrumstances (same open tabs, installed extensions etc).

If someone can provide exact steps how to reproduce a memory leak issue we can address it in the next update.

This behaviour looks a lot like the bug I encountered and reported, which is marked as fixed in the next release. here

The issue appears to only affect the horizontal tabs display mode. When using vertical tabs, the counter works as expected even when following the reproduction steps in the report.

https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=250270, thank you @ajgraves for submitting a report!

ajgraves Good catch thanks!

It may have been an extreme circumstance as I had a lot going on at the time but I'm monitoring the situation to see if I can identify some specifics.
Currently reading up on Apple Silicon and how Ventura OS handles memory management to try to understand better.
If I find out anything useful I'll post back.

George We never claimed we are ready. The browser is in Beta. Thanks for having high expectations.

Please split each bug report into a separate post so that others can upvote it and help us prioritize.

I would love to see this layout as well. It's one of my primary reasons for preferring Safari -- the experience feels a lot more fluid on account of it. I'm just curious: is this feature expected to show up in the beta?

ajgraves Yep we didn't time to fix this one in this release