[philonous]

Purely out of curiosity, how well would you rate the quality of OW 5.5? I myself hardly ever have to use another browser, but I am curious as to whether others have adopted it exclusively.

P

[Forrest]

I've dropped it, completely. I went back to 5.1.3 and Safari.

I use Firefox and Safari on a daily basis. I also use IE7(RC1) a few times a week.

[Drayon]

Safari-It has horizontal Tabs at the top of the window and URL AutoComplete is predictable and reliable.

[philonous]

Originally Posted by Forrest

I've dropped it, completely. I went back to 5.1.3 and Safari.

I use Firefox and Safari on a daily basis. I also use IE7(RC1) a few times a week.

Well, yes, you had that funky problem where your windows disappeared and you could not regain functionality? Or was it something else?

IE7? Well, I recall having to resort to IE a few months ago because Manpower's web site demanded it. Don't you think the IE7 GUI is just plain lousy?

P

[philonous]

Originally Posted by Drayon

Safari-It has horizontal Tabs at the top of the window and URL AutoComplete is predictable and reliable.

I would dispute that with autocomplete. Then again, I have not used it in quite some time. I recall that I encountered far too many forms that Safari messed up.

P

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by philonous

Well, yes, you had that funky problem where your windows disappeared and you could not regain functionality? Or was it something else?

A handful of other issues are the reasons I've gone back to 5.1.3. I'm happy to help test beta browsers, but when the finals don't do what I need them to do, I switch. That issue was likely a system issue, so it's not on my list of reasons I went back to 5.1.3.

IE7? Well, I recall having to resort to IE a few months ago because Manpower's web site demanded it. Don't you think the IE7 GUI is just plain lousy?

Maybe I'm able to focus on stuff more than others. Once I'm surfing sites, I rarely notice the GUI of a browser. I've got three screens in front of me. If something like a handful of pixels above the tab drawer is confusing to people, they would surely be knocked unconscious if they sat in my chair.

That said, the IE 7 GUI is so bad that it does make the browser hard to use for even the most basic stuff.

Originally Posted by philonous

I would dispute that with autocomplete. Then again, I have not used it in quite some time. I recall that I encountered far too many forms that Safari messed up.

He's talking about the URL auto-complete, not form auto-fill. To him it's unpredictable and unreliable because he hasn't discovered how it works yet. Of course, for me, I really like how it works and get irritated when I'm in safari and trying to find something. I like how in OW I can just start typing in "release" and I get http://www.omnigroup.com/application.../releasenotes/ as an option.

[Drayon]

Originally Posted by Forrest

He's talking about the URL auto-complete, not form auto-fill. To him it's unpredictable and unreliable because he hasn't discovered how it works yet. Of course, for me, I really like how it works and get irritated when I'm in safari and trying to find something. I like how in OW I can just start typing in "release" and I get http://www.omnigroup.com/application.../releasenotes/ as an option.

Forest is correct, sorry for the lack os specificity, URL AutoComplete indeed is what im complaining about. Forest yes, i have worked out how it operates, i don't like it, as its not predictable for the URL'S im expecting. To me its just plain dumb.

I type "omn" but the list returns 'forums.omniweb.com" well i don't want that, i want 'omnigroup.com' .If i wanted 'forums.omiweb.com' i logically start typing 'foru" so everything that starts with "foru" would list contenders, most frequently visited in this case forums.omniweb.com, then 'forums.appleinsider.com', 'forums.macnn.com' or 'forums.thisurlschemaistotallyM$thinking.com'

As much as i diss M$ for their clearly 'head up the arse' drunken ideas, they do actually have a browser that with 'SOME" functionality which actually makes sense, is logical and intuitive.

The idea you suggest Forest, about typing 'release" and the returning URL is "omnigroup.com/applications/omniweb/releasenotes/" i have no problem with, and yes it is a useful feature BUT, my point is "PRIORITY". This should ONLY result AFTER
A) accessed URL's frequency ie from History, URL's from Bookmarks, URL's in alphabetical order THEN LASTLY, the method you are suggesting that is randomly selecting words from URL's.

The thing is my method will work eventually better for you anywayz, because once you type 'omni' the list will display every url in order that "STARTS" with 'omni' that is

omnigroup.com, omnigroup.com/applications, omnigroup.com/applications/omniweb/, omnigroup.com/applications/releasenotes/

The reality is in every situation you WILL have to use the arrow key down to select the exact url you want unless you continue to type in the url field until the desired url slides up closer to the top of the list.

IE and Safari operate in a similar manner, on which i think is the most accurate and most representative for the action and results desired.

The other issue is that if i type 'forums' and i've visited 'forums.omniweb.com' MOST frequently and is reflected in the history list then Safari will select an highlight this url as its first and most obvious choice, place the letters you typed such as 'forums' IN the URL field AND highlight the rest of the URL that is '.omniweb.com'. If this is correct the user simply hit 'enter to load that url they don't have to scroll then list to select it then hit enter. The same goes if you were to type 'forums.m' then url field with change, the last bit of the url already typed to 'acnn.com' inc ase this is more accurate it filtered out the omniweb because it doesn't contain the letter 'm' after the .com' so logically this is the next preferred choice, its highlighted in the url field an the use just hits enter to load that url. Of course if they user has NOT used the 'forums.macnn.com' url in the session thus it is not in history, Safari logically uses as means of alphabetical order what is populated in the bookmarks list.

Sorry for the long drawn out explanation but it seems without it the mechanics of the situation and the logic behind it doesn't seem to sink in with some people.