Can you maximize your browser window like you can in windows?

[Kinkokoro]

Mac newbie here, I'm deciding on what macbook I should buy, and I'm using judgment friom goofing off with laptops in the stores..I can't seem to figure out if you can maximize your browser windows, like you can with Windows. Can you?

Thanks..

Josh

 

[klymr]

You can click in the bottom right corner of the window and drag it out to a larger (or smaller) size.

 

[PlaceofDis]

You can make the window bigger by adjusting it with the bottom right hand corner, I'm just confused as to why you'd want to do hat and waste space. The green button will adust the window to the size it "should" be.

 

[martychang]

You can make the window bigger by adjusting it with the bottom right hand corner, I'm just confused as to why you'd want to do hat and waste space. The green button will adust the window to the size it "should" be.

I don't know how much this applies to the OP, but I personally dislike it because I'm a VERY "single-task" person. I only have one window open at a time 90% of the time, and it feels wasteful to me to NOT have it take up the whole screen.

Pretty much the only time I'll open a second window is when I need more than one webpage open at once(I don't like tabs, go figure).

 

[nlivo]

i thought this was stupid aswell when i first migrated but then i relaized...mac's are very multi-tasking and its like it is made to have apps running on top of each other and so you can see the others. I do believe Safari will eventually be able to go full screen (as in you can't see the dock, etc.) and i would welcome that update. You'll get used to it.

 

[apfhex]

it feels wasteful to me to NOT have it take up the whole screen.

What's wasteful is filling up the whole screen with one window. There is a plugin for Safari that will give it a fullscreen mode (Saft? I can't remember) should you crave it. But maximizing windows is not the "Mac way" of doing things, it may take some time to adjust to but most switchers do and like it.

 

[D1G1T4L]

I think it is just an option with saft installed but command shift M should do full screen.

I think that is an option added with saft though.

 

[K-Funk]

You can make the window bigger by adjusting it with the bottom right hand corner, I'm just confused as to why you'd want to do hat and waste space. The green button will adust the window to the size it "should" be.

Oh please, give me a break. It's not unreasonable to want to maximize a window. If you're only working on one application, it's not a waste of space. It's fine that Macs have a "we'll figure out what window size is best for you" green button, but they should also have an option to maximize.

Look, Macs have a lot going for them, but it's a little silly to say things like "I'm confused as to why you'd want to maximize a window," or "Why on earth would you need a second mouse button?"

PCs do have a couple of advantages over Macs. Let's just all admit that. Another Mac annoyance is that you can only re-size a window from the bottom right corner. What's up with that?

 

[Dybbuk]

Oh please, give me a break. It's not unreasonable to want to maximize a window. If you're only working on one application, it's not a waste of space. It's fine that Macs have a "we'll figure out what window size is best for you" green button, but they should also have an option to maximize.

Look, Macs have a lot going for them, but it's a little silly to say things like "I'm confused as to why you'd want to maximize a window," or "Why on earth would you need a second mouse button?"

PCs do have a couple of advantages over Macs. Let's just all admit that. Another Mac annoyance is that you can only re-size a window from the bottom right corner. What's up with that?

The second mouse button and the maximize button are completely seperate issues. There are rarely EVER any reasons that a window should fill the screen.

 

[mkrishnan]

I believe Opera for Mac has a fullscreen mode; Safari and Firefox don't, at least by default. I haven't tried the one in SAFT.

EDIT Here it is in Opera... no scrollbars, at least by default. That may be adjustable. Basically just a clean fullscreen....

 

[Muzzway]

The second mouse button and the maximize button are completely seperate issues. There are rarely EVER any reasons that a window should fill the screen.

It's really personal preference. I prefer to have the browser window fill the screen if I'm not doing much else.

 

[jesses]

javascript:self.moveTo(0,0);self.resizeTo(screen.availWidth,screen.availHeight);


copy and paste that into your bookmarks bar. one click, and you got your browser full screen

 

[gkroeger]

Only being able to resize from the lower right corner remains my biggest gripe about the Mac interface compared to Windows. Windows also makes better use of context menus... finder really needs "clean up" available from a right click! As screen real estate grows, having to mouse all the way up to the menu bar becomes more time wasting.

 

[TheStu]

Only being able to resize from the lower right corner remains my biggest gripe about the Mac interface compared to Windows. Windows also makes better use of context menus... finder really needs "clean up" available from a right click! As screen real estate grows, having to mouse all the way up to the menu bar becomes more time wasting.

What exactly does Clean Up do, and why not just bind it to a keyboard command?

 

[Duflul]

Maybe steve is still looking for a fancy name, instead of maximize.
Then he will devote an entire keynote to it.

 

[esaleris]

This was one of the first things that bugged the crap out of me when I switched. However, like some of the other users here, I slowly found that using the "green" button was a lot more practical, especially on a Macbook.

Most sites aren't built for 1280 pixels across. For sites that let text wrap automatically, an auto-sized window brings out a better layout for the eyes. Text is typically harder to read as it extends horizontally. Bringing it in, and wrapping the text, makes most things much easier to follow. An example, is magazines and books, averaging 20-30 words across each line, not 50-70.

 

[Much Ado]

Look, Macs have a lot going for them, but it's a little silly to say things like "I'm confused as to why you'd want to maximize a window,"

Why? Many of us are genuinely interested. We're not used to filling the screen with just blank blocks of color, and to question the need of it is not 'silly'.

 

[Dybbuk]

I believe Opera for Mac has a fullscreen mode; Safari and Firefox don't, at least by default. I haven't tried the one in SAFT.

EDIT Here it is in Opera... no scrollbars, at least by default. That may be adjustable. Basically just a clean fullscreen....

And this is why maximizing is a bad idea.

 

[D1G1T4L]

And this is why maximizing is a bad idea.

Why is that a bad idea?

I'm not a fan of maximize but don't see why it is bad. If someone wants to open one screen up and just fill it.....well have at it. I don't understand why it is bad though.

 

[Jiddick ExRex]

Why is that a bad idea?

I'm not a fan of maximize but don't see why it is bad. If someone wants to open one screen up and just fill it.....well have at it. I don't understand why it is bad though.

From a user interface design perspective it is a bad idea. Say I want to add a smiley using the mouse. I need to drag it halfway across the screen to add one. Instead of finding a post icon I like by looking at two rows of icons, I need to scan from the left of the screen to the right of the screen in one large row etc. etc.

Websites are not built to fit grand screen resolutions, but smaller ones like 800x600 or 1024x768, and maximizing the screen will result in massive waste of time figuring out a user layout that was never intended to be autostretched to a HD screen.

But of course people should feel free to what they want. It just gives me the chills when people argue :"I am the only one using my computer, so user friendliness is not an issue", or "I can do what I want and I am used to shutdown my pc using the mouse". It's not a question about choice, but the will to working efficiently with your computer.

 

[Matek]

Websites are not built to fit grand screen resolutions, but smaller ones like 800x600 or 1024x768, and maximizing the screen will result in massive waste of time figuring out a user layout that was never intended to be autostretched to a HD screen.

This is absolutely untrue! A good webmaster will never build a site for a specific resolution and while some sites may become weird when stretched, most people do a nice job making sure this isn't the case. Unfortunately, most people nowadays use windows (where windows are usually maximised) and larger monitors are also gaining popularity fast, so it is wrong to claim sites are designed for 1024x768. Designers usually use one of these 2 options:

If you really want a fixed size site (usually because of graphical elements that don't allow stretching), you can do that by making white space appear on both sides of it while the content remains in the center and is reached just as easily as it would be in a non-maximised window.

The other option is to have your website (along with the content) stretch, which is the usual practice. This may probe a bit awkward in a couple of cases (as you pointed out), but usually it is more of an advantage. If I'm reading a discussion board, I want as much content as the screen can handle on it. This simply means I can have more posts displayed at the same time and I can read more content without having to scroll.

EDIT: While writing this post, I had my Firefox browser window maximised and I noticed it doesn't get streched like the screenshot above shows. It is more of an Opera bug/feature, which further proves the point some of us are trying to make.

 

[Jiddick ExRex]

This is absolutely untrue! A good webmaster will never build a site for a specific resolution and while some sites may become weird when stretched, most people do a nice job making sure this isn't the case. Unfortunately, most people nowadays use windows (where windows are usually maximised) and larger monitors are also gaining popularity fast, so it is wrong to claim sites are designed for 1024x768. Designers usually use one of these 2 options:

If you really want a fixed size site (usually because of graphical elements that don't allow stretching), you can do that by making white space appear on both sides of it while the content remains in the center and is reached just as easily as it would be in a non-maximised window.

The other option is to have your website (along with the content) stretch, which is the usual practice. This may probe a bit awkward in a couple of cases (as you pointed out), but usually it is more of an advantage. If I'm reading a discussion board, I want as much content as the screen can handle on it. This simply means I can have more posts displayed at the same time and I can read more content without having to scroll.

EDIT: While writing this post, I had my Firefox browser window maximised and I noticed it doesn't get streched like the screenshot above shows. It is more of an Opera bug/feature, which further proves the point some of us are trying to make.

Good point.

You say you can have more posts because those posts are then 1-2 lines long but every digital reading test and every web aestethics theory says that the maximum amount of words on a line are max. around 50 before you lose your perspective.
So you gain more posts per page but you also spend more time reading them because they are all 1-2 lines of text per post.

I must also ask you this question: what does the blank and wasted space of a maximized website give you in terms of user efficiency and ease of use regardless of the website being designed for any kind of screen resolution?

 

[Matek]

Good point.

You say you can have more posts because those posts are then 1-2 lines long but every digital reading test and every web aestethics theory says that the maximum amount of words on a line are max. around 50 before you lose your perspective.
So you gain more posts per page but you also spend more time reading them because they are all 1-2 lines of text per post.

I must also ask you this question: what does the blank and wasted space of a maximized website give you in terms of user efficiency and ease of use regardless of the website being designed for any kind of screen resolution?

I only partly agree about the words stretching over just a couple of lines. The last 3 posts in this topic stretched over about 10 lines each (not counting the quoted text) so that strongly depends on the content you usually read on the internet. If you read larger amounts of text (news, articles, etc.) or forums where people actually argument their statments, text rarely ends up in just 2 lines.

And even if it does - I'm using a 13" macbook and I have this window maximised. I counted the words in random lines (mostly picked the longest ones) of this thread and never got over 30. So I think I'm not losing my perspective yet.

Blank space on the side of maximised windows with fixed webpages inside them doesn't give you any great advantages over non-maximised windows, but for people who don't multitask much it also isn't any worse either (maybe it's even better because programs from the background, often dynamic, don't bother you). So it's really a thing of preference if you're one of those people.

 

[jaywong87]

Okay, simple answer to your question: No, you cant maximize your screenw with a button. You do have to drag it, and I believe the system will remember it. Although, you can still move it around. So it isnt really a "fixed" maximize like Windows. Which I sort of missed.

 

[jaywong87]

I believe Opera for Mac has a fullscreen mode; Safari and Firefox don't, at least by default. I haven't tried the one in SAFT.

EDIT Here it is in Opera... no scrollbars, at least by default. That may be adjustable. Basically just a clean fullscreen....

You know, for people with attention problems, its much better to have one fixed window, taking up the whole screen to focus your concentration on. One at a time. Not everyone wants to see 4 browser windows, fit to the site's needs.

Tabbing wont do neither, because since all sites dont have the same dimensiones or resolutions requirements, every website you tab is going to be different in size. So you'll still have to scroll, or adjust the window everytime. I wonder, is there a browser out there that does it automatically for each tab?