CANeW, maybe?

Anyway, here's the idea: I use Firefox. I have a mouse (MX1000) that has buttons for forward and back, so I don't have to use the toolbar for that. And personally, I am sick and tired of stupid web sites that open new windows (I have Firefox opening new tabs instead of windows, but still...) for every stupid little link, stupid little screenshots, or--here is the worst--forums that think they have to open new windows for every link that people put in their posts! If I want to open a new window, I will click on the link with my scroll wheel. I am fully capable of making that decision myself! With a new window, I can't just use my mouse's back button, I have to move the cursor up to the new window (or tab) and close it! I'd like to strangle some of the web developers that do this!

Who's with me? Shall we start a Web site and a little 88x31 button for it? I'm thinking something like the anybrowser.org site, etc.

webmasters will not see the point

Man, everywhere I go, I come across people like you: naysayers, can't-doers, won't-workers...and the worst part is, you can't even be bothered to give a good reason, or use good English. I wish people like you wouldn't post when you are in that kind of mood.

Meh, I donno. Popup windows have their purpose, when implemented properly... :\

I prefer links opening in new windows. It allows me to continue reading while the content of the linked page is loading.

And maybe you should implement your idea in these very forums first, or are you not maintainer/admin

I am all for your idea by the way



The idea is to be able to decide for yourself when to do that

In a very few select instances, yes. 99% of the time, no.



That's cool. I do that too. The point is, the user should be able to choose. He should not have new windows forced upon him by some HTML writer who thinks that he knows best.



Good idea. I will ask Brian what he thinks. If he's for it, I will change it.

at first i thought this was about a new version of m$ windows, but i guess not.......:(

i agree with you though blu, tabs > new windows

I made Firefox open new tabs, and I actually perfer websites to open new windows when you click on a link that goes outside their domain. Because on my tab settings, its just a quick Ctrl+W and I'm back to the old window.

It's actually a quite well known convention to always open new windows when linking outside your site, and considered bad site design NOT to do it.

As such, quit whining and get over it. You can set your browser to open everything in the same window anyway, so :p on you. It's not like you DON'T have a choice, you just don't like that method for some odd reason.

I thought this was going to be about protesting the new windows longhorn

Yeah, pretty much, you can petition all you want but to be perfectly honest it is there site and there choice get over it.

I prefer it the way that it is, personally.

Closing a window is as easy as going back or fowards if you use mouse gestures.

I completely agree for once.

I always open the things in tabs, whether it wants to open in a new window or not. Occasionally it'll have right-click disabled as well, so I have to go through the hoo-har of disabling java.

But it is a bit annoying, maybe I should upgrade to a later version of mozilla/firefox, so I can put a button for enable/disable java up the top next to home/stop/etc...

There are a few firefox extensions you can get to end your pain. One of them enforces a "single window rule" (or maybe this is built in in some small preference now?), and another will do IE style history copying to new tabs.

With these combined, you can rule teh net

I like the fact it opens a new window on Massassi. Means I can continue browsing massassi whilst looking at the stuff that some bloke posted.

alt+tab and ctrl+tab are the best things ever

No, Ctrl-W is the best ever.

*tab closes*

DAMNIT!

It closes windows too. Thus, it rules.

I'm with you brotha.

BAND TOGETHER MX1000 USERS!

the good news is that when tab browsers become commonplace (and IE is burning in hell where it belongs) the w3C might implement a



<a href="blah blah" Target="#newtab" >blah</a>.


or similar attribute for links that allows you to code links to open in new tabs instead of new windows. It's inevitable.

Not in UED

They might but what's the point since all browsers which use tabs have options to open links in new tabs rather than windows

I like having sites open links in new tabs by simply clicking on them. I do have a mouse with back and forward buttons too.
It's useful if there is a load of links on a page that I want to look through I can just go down the list and click the ones I want and have them load behind my current tab so that I can still browse the list while the individual pages are loading.

Also here, It's useful to have links in posts open in new windows/tabs because then you can look at what people are refering too while reading peoples responses without having to think about middle clicking to open it in a new tab.

I disagree, with multiple windows you can have simultaneous paths going on, there's nothing worse than not being able to go forward to where you were, because you went back and it got overwritten by the new crap. I ALWAYS open stuff in a new tab with avant, just easier.

Just download a mouse gestures extension. Hold down the right mouse button, move down, then right, then let go, tab closes. Hold down right button, move left, let go, back. Mouse gestures4tehwin.

Mouse gestures are slow compared to pressing a single button on your mouse :p

on websites, the person that makes that site gets to choose wether the link opens a new window or opens it in the same window


also i like it when it opens in a new window so i can just click back

All you people saying you like web sites to open new windows - do you know that if you shift+click a link it will open a new window for you? Or if you're in firefox, you can use your middle mouse button to do it? I completely agree with blujay - I *hate* new windows. Even though I'm using a tabbed browser (Opera), I hate new windows. Because if I "regular-click" a link, it means I'm done reading whatever it is and I'm ready to leave. If I'm not ready to leave, I'll middle-mouse click it and get it in a background tab and read it when I'm ready.

It's really hard to understand your guys' points of view. Because the functionality is in the browser to let you, the usser, choose, yet you still prefer to have it forced upon you.

The point is this: if they don't specifically target a new window, you have a choice. If they do specifically target a new window, you don't have a choice.

I usually right click "open in new tab" (using firefox), whenever I see a link that interests me. I usually open links to new pages before I've finished the one I'm on, to give the new site some time to load. It's never bothered me that clicking on a link in forums opens a new window by default because if you right click/open in new tab, it still opens as a new tab, rather than as a window. I personally don't see anything wrong with the way this forum's links work.

The point is this: The vast majority of users don't know these commands, so the webmaster selects for them as to what he/she sees as best (and as what common convention dictates.) Also, this vast majority (as sampled by the overwhelming response here so far) likes it the way it is.

All this webmaster control delves back into a long long ago argument:

To allow frame resizing or not. Is it acceptable for the webmaster to force a frame size on someone, and not let the user change it? Or is it right to allow the user to change this as they wish? The primary argument is that the webmaster should have overall control of the content and how he presents it. If he wishes to present it in a horrible and unusuable fashion, so be it. But it is his content, so he is allowed to do so.

It works the same way with novels and such. Lets say Tolkien released the first two books, which were as great as they are now. But then the last book, Return of the King, is total crap. Are the readers of that book allowed to just throw that book aside and rewrite it as they see fit? Hell no they are not, not without the permission of the author.

See what I am getting at?

If the webmaster wants to force opening new windows, let him/her. Almost every site I've seen uses a good convention when doing links, and that is "new windows for outside-domain content". And people here seem to agree that this method is fine, and I tend to agree with them. And the way I figure it, if a user must have it some other way, then they have an option in their browser to change it.

Me too

Why would you protest and operating system created by the gods?

I find that in a forum its necessary to have links open in a new window / tab. Otherwise you have to back up to get to the forum again, or worse, type more to go to the forum again. The hell with that. I *like* opening links in another window.

For those using a tabbed browser, having all links NOT open in a new window, I think is the best, because then you can either click or middle click, depending on what you want to do. Those using none tabbed are just shafted. Screw 'em :p

I say instead we make a site against laziness. Jesus christ, while annoying, it's less than a second's difference.

JediKirby

You're so bitter lately Kirbs...:confused:

Maybe we should start feeding him diffrently.

CoolMatty: the difference is that links shouldn't be considered *content* - it's the pages that contain the content. The links should behave in a standard way across all sites, which is exactly why the open-in-new-window thing should stop completely. I think there is a setting in firefox to stop it (or at least an extension). I'll tell you the real reason most webmasters force links to open in a new window: Because their number 1 goal is to keep users at their site, and they foolishly think that making new windows open for outside links will help.

*clicks item in taskbar*
*moves mouse arrow to upper right corner*
*clicks*

Damn, that was a lot of work.

*clicks close window button on mouse* Dogs, you are 1 step closer to carpal than I.