Why does the chat forum open in a new window?

aliasojo

I prefer new windows opening, so I hope there's no change made tbh.

System

aliasojo wrote:

I prefer new windows opening, so I hope there's no change made tbh.

I prefer new windows opening too.

sra

The intention must be to keep the main site open even if you go to the chat forum.

But it's backfire if people simply bookmark the forum and enter the site through here.

Less people going through the main site - not more!

Rex_Mundi

I've personally never found the fascination with tabs myself. When I'm surfing, I generally have loads of windows open (not unusual for 10 to 20 windows open). I find the task bar at the bottom is exactly the same as using tabs. I can click between different web pages in an instant, which is basically the same as using tabs. With the tab bar open, I just find this reduces the screen area of the web page. Firefox is my browser of choice.

While I'm typing now, I have 8 windows open. 3 Three on this site, and five other sites. They all open in full screen and I find this handy for referencing different sites at the same time (plus when this site is on a go slow, it's handy to be able to go away and read while I'm waiting........one click gets me back to the page I'm waiting for).

It's definately a preferrence thing.......

sra

Rex_Mundi wrote:

I've personally never found the fascination with tabs myself. When I'm surfing, I generally have loads of windows open (not unusual for 10 to 20 windows open). I find the task bar at the bottom is exactly the same as using tabs. I can click between different web pages in an instant, which is basically the same as using tabs. With the tab bar open, I just find this reduces the screen area of the web page. Firefox is my browser of choice.

While I'm typing now, I have 8 windows open. 3 Three on this site, and five other sites. They all open in full screen and I find this handy for referencing different sites at the same time (plus when this site is on a go slow, it's handy to be able to go away and read while I'm waiting........one click gets me back to the page I'm waiting for).

It's definately a preferrence thing.......

I can't browse without being able to middle-click links (opens them up in a background tab)

It makes it so easy to look at a boards index and just middle-click 4 or 5 threads and have them pre-loaded ready to read in the background.

If years ago IE had made middle-click = open link in background window, it would have made the thing 10 times easier to use without even having tabs

Rex_Mundi

sra wrote:

I can't browse without being able to middle-click links (opens them up in a background tab)

It makes it so easy to look at a boards index and just middle-click 4 or 5 threads and have them pre-loaded ready to read in the background.

If years ago IE had made middle-click = open link in background window, it would have made the thing 10 times easier to use without even having tabs

See, this is the thing. IE has had this option open for many years (I was using it and still do, it works with Firefox). We're doing exactly the same thing in different ways. You are middle clicking a link, and reading it once you've done with the index (in a tab). I click a link while holding the shift button down (opens in a new window) and read it once I'm done with the index. If Im writing (I'm left handed), I use the right click function to open a new window (I use the mouse right handed) this only takes a moment. Tabs open in a tab bar, and windows open in the task bar are exactly the same. The reason I don't like the tab bar is because it reduces the visible area of the web page. As with all programs I use, I always reduce the toolbars so I have the maximium possible window to work with.

This is all a matter of preference.

I've always liked Firefox for the extra security it offers me without having to secure the 'ActiveX' settings, and the fact that it asks you before installing background programs (unlike IE). I've seen so many times that it is popular because of the extra functions like tabs, plugins etc.......This has never been for me. I've always figured that the more feature features you add to ANY program, the more you are exposing yourself to a vulnerability. After using Firefox since it came out, I still use it in its 'raw state', the only plugin I have is for the search feature (I've added Wikipedia).

Like I say.....It's definately a preference thing. There's nothing I can't do on the web, but because I wont install toolbars, plugins etc. Sometimes it takes me a couple of clicks more to do it.

jdavtz

I know Firefox can open links diverted to new windows in same window or tabs. But I'm not using Firefox - I'm using Camino (Gecko based Mac OS X browser) which at the moment doesn't have that function but does have a lot of other things I like.

I could easily use Firefox for this site instead, but really all the views expressed above and comments about it being "a matter of preference" would be IMHO best-resolved by having CONSISTENT behaviour (I guess EVERY link on the site could open a new window?... would the people who prefer a new window opening prefer that? - or only for certain links? - in which case which ones?) and then we can all at least know what to expect when we left-click or cmd/ctrl-click or shift-click a link.

tigermatt

sra wrote:

I can't browse without being able to middle-click links (opens them up in a background tab)

It makes it so easy to look at a boards index and just middle-click 4 or 5 threads and have them pre-loaded ready to read in the background.

Same here...