The name of Google's browser, Chrome, comes from the technical term for a web browser's window frame, or "chrome", that is wrapped around a web page.
I was a staunch defender of Safari's "tabs on top" during the Safari 4 beta, because it was a minimalist interface that saved vertical screen space and eliminated redundant information: tab title and window title were the same thing. Safari understood that tabs are simply docked windows. Tearing off a window and merging a window back made that obvious. Users could have learned this, but Apple caved under the outcry, and reverted back to tabs beneath.I'm using Chrome 5 now that it's out of beta, and I'm happy the tabs on top have survived, but I'm dismayed by the loss of space to the "favicons" on the bookmark bar.
I have my bookmark bar tuned for Safari and iPad (they sync over MobileMe), so my often used bookmarklets and couch surfing sites fit in the portrait orientation on the iPad. I use verbs for the bookmarklets, and use one or two letter abbreviations for each site. It's efficient and it's not visually distracting while surfing.
The following two screenshots are exactly the same width and height of 709 x 93 pixels. Notice how many more bookmarks fit in Safari's bookmarks bar with the favicons omitted:
In Chrome, the interface wastes a lot of space. Even with the "tabs on top" that merge window title and tab title, Chrome fits only three rows of information where Safari fits four rows. Safari fits both clickable tabs and a full length window title bar.
What's worse, Chrome spends pixels on favicons that don't add any usability. There is no useful information conveyed by the nine bookmarklet icons showing a generic blank page:
In the same space that Safari shows 10 of my one or two letter bookmarks, Chrome fits ... none. It's worth mentioning that the » in Safari is discoverable. The equivalent in Chrome wastes an inch of space. Do users really need the », a folder icon, and the phrase "Other Bookmarks" to figure out what that's for? After the first time they click the », do users still need all three affordances?
Because of its financial model, Google gets a pass for conflating the URL and search fields. Google naturally wants users to use Google to find sites, and many users already typed URLs in the search box, so this approach goes with that flow.
While on the topic of using space, Safari 4 accomplished its tabs on top in the standard title bar, meaning with top tabs Safari offered another row of vertical space:
In landscape mode on the iPad, that space is helpful, suggesting why tabs are hidden behind another click. That said, I prefer the excellent iCab browser for the iPad. Not because the tabs are shown, which saves clicks, but because they load in the background and switch without reloading.
In case you never saw Safari 4's "tabs on top", here's a reminder of what the interface looked like. The [x] icon and tear-off triangle were only shown when the mouse was over the tab:
Chrome is a great browser, and I'm enjoying it, but it does not offer a polished, or even unified, experience.
It's a shame that openness and choice so often seem mutually exclusive with simplicity and elegance. Proprietary software shouldn't have a corner on aesthetic usability.