Re:Google May Kill Chrome URL Bar
by mryall on Sunday February 20, 2011 @03:30PM
(#2242948)
The compact size comes mainly because Chrome has discarded the default window format, title bar and menu bar. An interesting question to ponder is, What if every application did that? Wouldn't your desktop experience be much more confusing due to the inconsistencies in how each application was laid out?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Personally, I go back and forth between Linux, Mac OS and Windows so I'm used to inconsistency.
Also, the applications I use are already highly inconsistent:
- Gimp has an interface which discards the patterns present on every platform in existence
- Browsers are already all different - Safari, Chrome, FF
- Kate, Komodo and Notepad++ are all pretty different - then there's vi.
> Gimp has an interface which discards the patterns present on every platform in existence
Do you say that because of the multiple windows? If so Apple's Interface Builder seems to follow the same convention.
It is somewhat similar to Mac applications, but where's the menu bar at the top? Gimp doesn't even use the functionality present for that on Mac OS or Linux, instead putting a menu into each image window.
Re:Google May Kill Chrome URL Bar
by MartinCron on Sunday February 20, 2011 @07:28PM
(#2243660)
Gimp is an example of how much non-standard YX can hurt.
If every one did it that well, I say they're welcome to it. Few do / would, but despite all being capable of it now, few attempt. That probably wouldn't change much.
Most important is that by doing so Google is taking another step towards reinforcing the idea that Google is the door through which we access information. As typing in long URLs becomes less common (thanks to URL shorteners), shortening of the URL bar becomes less inconvenient. Furthermore, Google reinforces the idea that you should always type what you are looking for and then click on a link that Google finds for you.
I may be reading you wrong, but your post implies Google has some ulterior motive or that there's some trade imbalance by reinforcing that behavior. I find my interactions with Google to be pretty fair and explicit (they're going to attempt to monetize the information I give them, in exchange for pretty awesome services).
My experience might be dated, but I remember having a Windows desktop around 2000 where each and every application tried to introduce "skins" to look distinctively not like a desktop application. Remember WinAMP? There were tons of applications like that then. Damn, even the same InstallShield installers looked different by application!