If you’ve been on the internet today, you’ve probably heard something about Google, and a new browser they’re working on called Chrome. As someone who’s passionate about usability, something on page 18 of their comic caught my eye. They are talking about moving the “tab” section of the browser to the top, above the location bar. This strikes me as odd for two reasons.
Fitts’s Law
For those that aren’t familiar, Fitts’s Law states that the time taken to move to an object is a function of the object’s size and distance. Google appear to be suggesting that the reason for moving the tabs to the top of the browser is that they “… are the primary piece of the user interface …”. Personally, I can’t believe anything other than the view port being the primary part of the user interface, but either way, Google are sugesting that tabs are the most important which leaves the viewport as the second.
So if you consider Google to be correct, they are, at least according to Fitts’s Law, making their browser less usable. They are effectively increasing the amount of time taken to perform certain tasks. Now, it’s important to remember that we haven’t even seen any screen shots of Chrome yet, let alone used it, so it’s enirely possible that Google will do something clever to offset this (although, to offset this problem as far as Fitts’s law is concerned, they would have to icnrease the size of the tabs, which would cause its own problems). But moving tabs to the top of the browser causes other problems…
Memory and Expectations
One factor at play here is the expectation that the URL, or location, bar sits at the top of the browser with the tabs below. People are used to it, they expect it, and anything different will confuse them. Sorry, it’s just a fact. And not only are they moving the tabs, but they are also moving the other interface elements. In order to move the tabs to the top of the window, they will also have to move the location bar away from the top. This includes common, standard interface elements such as the back, forward, stop and refresh buttons. Moving these elements up and down a few pixels may not seem like a big deal at first, but you have to consider the ramifications fully – and to do that you have to think about muscle memory.
For the longest time, moving your mouse to the top left of your browser and clicking would take you back a page – no longer. Now, it’s going to bring the first tab into focus. This may seem like an easy thing for a user to overcome, but why would they?
There are enough competitive browsers out there, if they try one and they fail at a few tasks there’s no need to continue with it. They’ll just move in to FireFox, or Safari, or Opera, or …
In Summary
I don’t want to come across as if change and innovation are bad things. But I’ve always felt that there should be a driver behind interface change where you are changing an established standard. Here, I don’t see it. This smells more of a “Unique Selling Point” rather than a genuine attempt to improve the interface.
Popularity: 44% [?]
Tags: Browsers, Fitts's Law, Google
[...] The Usability Blog The highlights and lowlights of usability « Google’s New Chrome Browser and Fitts’s Law [...]
Yes, Chrome is doing things a little differently.
Maybe I’m naive, but wouldn’t they have had extensive user testing which backed up their tab position change?
The interface looks quite different from the other browsers, would this not somehow intervene muscle memory?
Personally I find it quite refreshing to use! But then again, I’m reading a usability blog. :)
Stuff on the perimeter of the screen actually has “infinite size” (you can aim for anywhere above the screen), essentially making the size part of the equation huge while only increasing the distance by a little bit. So when you apply Fitt’s Law, stuff on the perimeter ends up having a big advantage. There are lots of HCI papers verifying this, and it is implied in the analysis of Fitt’s Law. Mouse triggers on the corners are particularly effective (also papers documenting this).
And actually stuff “near” the top of the screen (like the regular old tab positions) is actually pretty much the worst possible position to put anything on screen, because it is at a large distance from most stuff, but still of small “finite” size.
You’re absolutely right Ian, it’s widely accepted that interface elements at the edge of the screen are calculated as having larger target areas than they physically posess. You’re also right about areas that are near the top of the screen being particularly difficult, especially for users who have difficulty using a mouse. Looking at Chrome, the tabs aren’t positioned at the top of the window, there’s a gap above them. This, in my opinion puts them into that dangerous “not quite at the edge” area. And of course there’s nothing to guarentee the browser must be used full screen anyway.
Tabs at the top, besides Fitt’s law advantages (re ian), also reuses the otherwise useless window header. I think Chrome is trying to minimize the total “toolbars” area. Merging the URL entry bar and the search bar is another strong example to maximize the browser area.
Maybe they did a study and found that people used the back-forward buttons more than switching tabs and so moved the back-forward buttons closer to the webpage and the tabs farther away.