I was using the tab-state as a sort of short-term working memory and I don't think it was doing me any favours, particularly in terms of focus.

Now when I'm working on a project, I keep a list of relevant URLs in a text file (i.e. bookmarks but checked into source control).

I also use two browser windows, a regular one for "stateful" browsing, and a private-mode one for "stateless" browsing. Quick queries and exploratory research happens in the "stateless" session, with the understanding that I can close any of these tabs (or nuke the whole session) at any time without losing anything important. If I do come across something important, it gets noted down elsewhere.

This is because I basically use tabs as bookmarks relevant to a project or subject area. Bookmarks are also tree-structured, but are much more high-ceremony to create.

To my mind, tabs and bookmarks should meld into one. If you don't close a tab actively, it stays deactivated, its tree likely gets collapsed until needed, so it's not an eyesore. When you need it again, it's there, in the proper context.

If you close a tab, it goes to history. But a tree view of history is possible, too (there are extensions for that), so that you can track, from which page did you open this link, what links did you open on this page, etc.

I can see the appeal of this, and more broadly, not having to think about tab management. But for me, I find I actively benefit from the process of deciding what to keep around.

I realize that traditional explicit bookmarks are also needed; where else can I easily put arbitrary searches using %s?

I outsourced that. Since I have seen leah2's anarchaias [1] tumblelog (and one of its successors project.ioni.st from the rails guys, I fail to find a snapshot online - it was pretty) I iterated through multiple software solutions. My bookmark manager is also a tumblog [2] and online accessible.

I would quickly get to overwhelmed by to many bookmarks and the lack of (plattform independent) organisation tools. I have a bookmarklet that adds the current site as entry (non puplic, and I edit it later (or delete)). It also mirrors and downloads stuff (images, reddit videos, etc).

1. https://leahneukirchen.org/anarchaia/

2. https://wecoso.de/bloogmarks

Different people have different needs, so it is useful to distinguish between the two. For example: I have groups of bookmarks that I like to open as tabs in a separate window. If I only need them once a week, I want to close the window when I am done and pull them up again when they are needed. Fishing them out of a history of all of my browsing is something that I don't want to endure (even if they are stored in the history as a group).

Other people have other needs. Some only want an extremely limited number of tabs open at one time (presumably to help them focus).

I agree entirely. I don't use the bookmark facilities in the browser at all, because I prefer using separate a bookmark server that I run. That way my bookmarks are available from any machine using any browser that happens to be available.

But I do use tabs. Not to the extent that they need management, though -- I rarely have more than two or three going at a time[1]. Combining bookmarks and tabs implies the addition of complexity that wouldn't benefit me, so I'd prefer not to have it.

[1] If I'm doing something where I need to have many sites open at a time, meaning research, I prefer to have multiple browser instances to organize things, because then I can have multiple pages visible simultaneously and can use the DE to organize things at a higher level.

Have you tried Arc? It's essentially completely designed around the concept you describe. I believe someone is actively working on an "ArcFox" clone of its behavior for Firefox, but I'm not sure what the current state of the project is.

I personally use them so I can context switch between projects. I can keep one group for project a, one for project b, one for project c, and so on while also keeping a group for day to day stuff, one for reading material, one for conference talks/background noise, etc.

Then I can just unload a given group when I don't need it without losing anything and I can bring it back up on that window (or a different window) later when I need it again.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/simple-tab-gr...

Firefox had this to back in ancient times, it was called Tab Candy, Panorama, or tab groups, depending on the release number. Then they killed it because "nobody used it."

Usually how I do it is at my office desk I have a second monitor I hook my laptop up to. So I open a new window, let that be the group, and then I use my mac for the terminal and my ipad sits to the side with spotify and any chat apps, out of the way and easy to dismiss.

What's extra satisfying is I'm a tab hoarder. But you finish a project and get to see all those tabs go away.

By the way, built-in tab grouping is also on the list of features in development. Hopefully they don't go the Chrome way

What is "the Chrome way"? What I'd like to see is that the addresses are not cached to ram, but either disk or swap (or a combination). I figure these tools are more used by tab hoarders as well, and if they're working as pseudo bookmarks (at least conceptually) I am very willing to trade some loading time and have non-active tabs have high niceness.

https://gist.github.com/theprojectsomething/6813b2c27611be03...

It's nowhere near perfect (see comments in the gist), but I genuinely enjoy the paradigm of easy access active tabs alongside a full laundry list. I find myself reinstalling it on new machines as I go. It's also just a few lines of CSS.

That said, keen to try out the nightly version of vertical tabs. Tho I'm hoping my active tabs hack might work with it too.

People with ADHD ("ADD" is a very outdated term) aren't always disorganized. In fact, they're often organized to an unusually high degree (sometimes to a fault). I've been diagnosed since 1996 and I rarely have more than 10 or 12 tabs open across all windows at a time. Paying close attention to organization and establishing routines to cut down on distractions and reduce the possibility of variation in daily activities are very common coping strategies.

The old naming scheme made more sense than the current one. Under the current definition there are three types of ADHD, of which the "inattentive" type used to be called ADD because it doesn't have the "hyperactivity" trademark. So for that type "ADHD" is a misnomer that causes people to not even consider they may have it.

I've actually been working hard to have less open tabs every evening than what I had when I started work. Maybe in 1018 day I'll close that last tab. And yes, there is a reason that every single one of them is open.

Every time I read about someone with that kind of tab count I immediately wonder:

1) if they have that many persistent tabs and actually need (probably the wrong word here) them, how many tabs do they actually close?

2) Does closing a long standing tab invoke a physiological/emotional response?

I'm only poking a little fun with #2. I have to actively overrule my subconscious when it comes to a few categories of physical things. Small electronics and computer parts/peripherals are a couple of things that if I don't verbally tell myself "you won't ever need this random old PC case panel thumb screw" I could very easily end up in hoarder territory.

I have a similar amount regularly, and have never tried vertical tabs. I did recently start using all tabs helper though.

It's funny finding fellow tab hoarders online, people rarely hit the thousands - you're pretty much the first person I've encountered who's got more tabs open than me.

Btw what's your PC specs? I'm using a Framework 13 (7840u, 32gb ram) and am currently at 56% RAM usage. I find a fairly big difference when I'm connected to power and when I'm not, for some reason.

$Work is actively merging teams from different companies so I'm going to be juggling having to use different accounts on some SaaS platforms until we've gotten everything combined.

Sidebary has so many very useful and powerful features but I'm trying to be disciplined and mixing them in with my typical workflow 1 at a time and actually using it for a while before moving on to the next. (Ok, I might have gone full ham when I first installed it but it was so different from my normal flow that I quickly realized it was counter productive).

I followed the same trajectory. I now keep one window for more stable things that will be left open for a while (calendar, email, some long-lived task) and another for stuff I'm actively working on (the app I'm developing, docs for some API, etc). If I go over more than two windows with ~6 tabs each I just start closing things because I've almost certainly gone past the point of needing some of those tabs and if I need to get back to them it's usually faster to just retrace the steps I took to get to them in the first place or search in my history.

These days I want to split my window in half and have two windows open at once, e.g. code editor & browser/shell/etc.

In general, I prefer having a search interface to my tabs, previously with Tabli, but now it's built into Chrome with Ctrl-Shift-A. I regularly have dozens of tabs open though.

I hadn't really thought about the side-by-side window thing, though, so I'll keep that in mind when debating vertical tabs. I usually run with a multi-monitor and while I do side-by-side with i3, that's on a large monitor so screen real estate isn't a problem.

Firefox has multiple ways you can do the tab search.

- Firefox View is an icon originally configured at the front of the tab bar that takes you to a dedicated page listing your tabs, recently visited, and lets you search tabs and otherwise manage them.

- Firefox has a tab search built into the address bar as soon as you enter the character '%' followed by a space. So for two sets of two keystrokes you're doing tab search: `Ctrl + '% '`.

IMO the latter especially is fast and easy enough that I don't miss Chrome's tab search, and I often go into Firefox View just to see what I've got open and trim it down.

it probably helped that I supplanted it with a better way to access history with vimium

For one thing I could just never get used to my normal tab-switching shortcuts moving me up and down compared to left and right. And all my other apps with tabs still use horizontal tabs, so I couldn't fully switch over to that model in my head. Additionally the URL is still at the top so it was more work to glance back and forth between the left of my browser for the tab and the URL at the top which in my mind are more "closely linked" for that to make sense.

But you also highlighted a good point, the limited space of traditional tabs does keep my organization in check. Once I get around the 20-tab mark and I'm unable to see any text beyond the website's favicon, I start feeling dirty and it gives me some incentive to clean up.

I tend to sit with 20-40 tabs open, which is in the vicinity of how many a vertical tab list can accommodate comfortably, but I get about 4 letters per tab. If I needed to be able to see the text, I'd have to cap a window out at maybe 8 tabs, which is just unreasonable for some workflows.

Also don't get the benefit of the stateless session as a private window - you can just as well close a regular second browser window and not look back at history?

The fact that the second window is private isn't hugely relevant, it just helps to stop me from accidentally doing stateful things in it (and reduces cross-site tracking in the process). The point is that I never have to ask "is this tab important?", the decision was already made up-front, based on where I opened the tab in the first place.

Firefox' UI has kinda stagnated. It's not like other browsers are far ahead – Chrome doesn't have vertical tabs either – but it does have groups and profiles. They really need to get out of this stale and boring state and innovate more, so I'm glad they finally found some time to do this.

https://old.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1emmfvb/ive_just_f...

I'm just as excited as you are for side tabs, but I don't think browsers need to be constantly innovating their UI. In fact, the last time Firefox did that it took a week of tinkering to get it back to a usable state, and I now have the constant "Compact (Unsupported)" layout hovering over me, reminding me that one day I'll probably have to tinker even more.

I use the browser for at least 8 hours a day, I don't need the experience constantly changing, it's a tool. "stale" and "boring" is also "stable" and "dependable".

  >  it took a week of tinkering 

  > They really need to get out of this stale and boring state and innovate more

I use the browser for at least 8 hours a day, I don't need the experience constantly changing, it's a tool. "stale" and "boring" is also "stable" and "dependable".

[0] Argument is about having legitimate browser competition and the privacy boost of containerizing what data Google could (keyword) collect. I'd really only bring it up when he'd be complaining about Chrome or Google, so quite often.

[1] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1197798

[2] https://kb.mozillazine.org/User.js_file

[3] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/profiles-where-firefox-...

The last innovation that really made a difference for me was the reader mode. I'm sure changing the relationship between tabs and bookmarks would improve things even more, and being able to treat my history as a knowledge store would make web browsing even better.

But even then, I don't want such experiments in my main browser. That's supposed to be dependable. Maybe what I want is a separate browser/profile/mode where features trickle into my main browser after I am comfortable with them.

Are there specific problems you keep running into? Or is this more a desire they were constantly improving?

My attitude tends to be that every new improvement is just something I risk getting used to and then getting sad when it (inevitably) breaks for me. So these days I just want to use as few features on my computer as possible.

We all have to consume to produce. But there's value in maximizing the yield. Produce a lot while needing to consume as little as possible. Seems more resilient for my own habits.

I keep running into the problem of not being able to find the website I visited. If the concept is not in the URL or the page title, it might as well not exist in the history.

I run into the problem of disappearing documents. Neither bookmarks nor tabs provide persistence. There are online services which save documents, but I don't want to rely ona third party to keep my stuff.

I often want to annotate a document before I bookmark it, so that I know why I should come back to it, and what the relevant sections are.

On top of that, I don't know what bookmarks are relative to tabs. Both are kind of bad at organizing knowledge.

I'd love to try out new paradigms for the sake of more power, but have a safe, reliable browser to return to if the new thing turns out a bad idea. Sure, things take effort to maintain and get taken away. But it's a battle of mindshare. If there are no early adopters, no feature will ever become big enough to be resilient.

I've actually started to think that this kind of hodge-podge of tools is a good thing. Software is hard, bugs are inevitable. Multiple tools from different authors make my setup more resilient. Tools keep growing more complex; adding features to a single tool only exacerbates that trend. I also feel a greater sense of agency. I'm not at the mercy of my tool provider, I can identify problems and solve them for myself.

But that's not even my main problem. Integration is. Integration consolidates ideas in ways that can be packaged and spread to others, increasing the mind share of the paradigm. Unless a good solution is integrated, it will be the domain of a few hardcore adherents. Once an integrated solution appears, it will become resilient only by the virtue of being popular and cared about (I guess as long as it's free software).

The flip side is that a modern web browser integrates so many things not core to any data management idea that few dare experiment with it.

I'm curious about the Arc browser, but I won't bet my workflows on it unless it becomes open source.

And there is nothing dependable about you failure to do something for many years because the UI is stable in not supporting it

Firefox succeeded because it was a fresh take on the entire browser UX at a time when Internet Explorer had been stagnant for half a decade.

The UX of Firefox was (and, I'd argue, still is) not great, but it made up for that by being configurable enough that you could fix it for yourself.

Firefox (Phoenix / Firebird) initially got its userbase from the Mozilla userbase which was this capable browser with many features and flexibility (extensions), but it was bloated, slow, with a kinda outdated (non-native) UI. Firefox's differing feature was its lightness and (native-like, per-platform) UI freshness, not configurability.

FF success against IE was mainly caused by Microsoft completely dropping the ball by simply not developing IE for a couple of years. I think one of the elementary features which has driven mass FF adoption was tabbing support, which IE6 didn't have.

True. I avoid the 2 largest chromium browsers because their innovations have a goal of exploiting end users.

* Safari has tab groups. I guess Firefox is working on it again

* FF 129 just got Tab previews, but you have to hover over each to see it. Safari can show you previews for everything in a tab group

It sounds like FF is catching up slowly, but compared to Safari's UI, still feel like IE6. I use it for uBlock mostly.

But Chrome tabs don't even have horizontal scrolling. If you work with, say, more than 10 tabs, Chrome squashes them, and the more tabs you have open, the less usable it becomes. Meanwhile, Firefox has horizontal scrolling and neat (geeky) options for navigating lots of tabs.

Edge has the best implementation where you can define sites opening in certain profiles. Pity ms ruined that browser - it is completely untrustworthy with it auto turning on options such as syncing.

I always assumed Chrome also had all of these features, including scrolling, etc.

Firefox on the other hand has terrible support for profiles, I've been using Arc which is good but has worse performance when working with a lot of tabs (hundreds)

I am excited that FireFox is working this in by default so I don't have to keep fiddling with userChrome.css to get rid of the top tab bar.

Chrome is faster, snappier and works better on more websites I commonly use, but the fact that I cannot have "vertical tabs as trees" ruins the entire browser experience for me, so it's basically the only reason I use Firefox for the last decade or something.

I kinda dislike that Firefox only have one good option that involves completely hiding each group currently not in use, but it functioned ith their tab containers which made it worth the hassle.

If this does too, I'm switching permanently

Sidebery is nice, but it's missing an API allowing other addons to interact with it. This is a big benefit of Tree Style Tabs, especially as you can even exploit it as a user.

Their wiki also has a very simple and effective userChrome.css tweak to hide the top tab bar when the side panel is open. That's a rather crucial vertical space savings on a small laptop.

I'm a project manager and use it to manage about 200 tabs in about 12 groups. Each group represents a project and I switch between projects several times a day. Groups lets me keep those pages open and provides fast switching.

Simple Tab Groups separates context for the user, i.e. hides the tabs of inactive groups (while also supporting containers). It's not the same thing.

I absolutely love the hiding feature and find Containers incomplete without them. What's the point of switching context if the context is still visible there at all times? At that point, let me just use a different User. And I'd find Simple Tab Groups weirdly incomplete as well if they insisted on hiding tabs but not providing Container functionality. Because tab groups with hiding don't feel "ephemeral" enough. Takes too long to make a group, and the interface changes too much when jumping around. That dissuades me from going on tangents online and then grouping that tangent and keeping it on the side temporarily. Chrome's approach is better for that latter thing.

I want something in between. Something that let's you see all groups on a single bar or on a tree bar, and then further groups that can be containers and switch the bar. Chrome was close with their group save+hide feature, but they eat into the bookmarks bar with no options about where.

Tab Groups is a way to be able to swap sets of tabs within a window. I can have groups for each of projects A, B, and C. Each project group can have a couple dozen tabs. When I switch groups, I only see the tabs for that group. I alternate among several projects each day and need to keep the pages live. Without groups, it is impossible to manage all of the tabs.

Brave has had vertical tabs for.. more than half a year now. Maybe a year?

On top of that it has a sidebar, it has a built-in adblocker, the rest of the settings are more hardened than default Firefox, they do tonnes of research (https://brave.com/research/), including really cool one's like SugarCoat that benefit everyone.

Brave is basically the promise Firefox left unfulfilled.

Having a built-in ad blocker is probably quite nice. Of course, it's also the feature that brings in Brave's cryptocurrency features. Although to be fair to Brave, they made BATs optional, so it isn't as bad as it could be.

And of course, the merits of the software are what matter, not the people behind them, but at least personally I wouldn't want to rely on software by Brendan Eich. The kinds of things he has said don't exactly create confidence, and he did resign from Mozilla for a reason.

A few months ago I played with forking it for my own tinkering but bailed because it seemed likely to turn into a rolling mass of merge conflicts if I were to make anything but minor changes.

You can see the profiles by going to about:profiles or launching Firefox with -ProfileManager as a cli option, which launches a profile manager window.

I do agree that this needs a better UI

For a few years I have thought that Firefox could gain market share by doing more with the browser UI, steal a few ideas from Arc Browser for instance. There's a lot of value to be added in the UI for sure.

Asking users what they want and then building it ends up with solutions like these. I really hope this gets a lot more iteration before landing in stable.

I currently use SlidePad on Mac which allows touching the left side of the screen to pop out a vertically tabbed browser, for IMs and most used AI chat but would rather keep everything in Firefox with some kind of panel system. I think most of us have pinned tabs for communication channels, email, socials, etc.

Vertical tabs on left with titles works if you can also configure a useful slide out panel on right, mixing the two feels odd to me.

But really good to see something happening finally, so good news overall.

UPD: I saw that there's a way to enable text titles - that's much better. Still, without grouping it would be too painful to use for me.

In other words, the ability to see two browser sessions, side-by-side, with a vertical split between them. Two viewports, each with their group of tabs. The same type of view you can get in, for example, Notepad++ with its "Tab>Move to Other View", or Visual Studio's "Tab>New Vertical Document Group".

I frequently arrive at situations where I want to compare the contents of one webpage against the contents of another webpage. So far, the most usable option I've found is to split the 2nd tab off into a new window, then arrange the two windows side-by-side.

There is "Side View"[1], but that shows a bare viewport, which makes browsing in the 2nd viewport much more restricted than regular browsing.

[1] https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/its-a-new-firef...

Tabs are tabs, they’re not windows. Next thing you tell me is that they should implement virtual desktops and loading tabs remotely.

They are already tiny window managers, and may as well lean into it.

Though the most innovative feauture is their deep integration of services like Notion, GitHub, telegram etc.

Quite astonishing actually and definitely one of my favourite pieces of software.

- Workspaces/Desktops with mouse gestures - Spotlight like Quick Launch - Alt Tab like Tab switch - Window management within the browser - Dedicated area for Media control - Widgets on mouse hover

It’s preferable to have such building blocks of functionality, which one can then combine in many ways.

Sometimes I want two browser session side by side. Sometimes I want a browser session next to Gimp or my IDE. Sometimes I want a 3-row terminal with that thing I’m keeping an eye on just below the browser.

i3 to the rescue!

- use userChrome.css to display ALL tabs side by side:

profile/chrome/userChrome.css :

  tabpanels {
    display: -moz-box !important;
  }

  tabpanels > notificationbox {
    -moz-box-flex: 1;
    border-width: 2px !important;
    border:solid #888;
  }

- with extension like last_selected_tab AFAIR, or your own, to have content-secondary, handled - then hide any browser of other type with styles as well (as by default you have only: tabpanels > notificationbox > browser[type=content-primary] - being the active tab). :)

We lost a lot when they abandoned that.

I find the tab paradigm very deficient, though. I used to think tabs were great (like everyone), until I learnt Emacs. Emacs doesn't have tabs. You can just open anything in any window at any time and split windows arbitrarily, even in text mode over SSH. It's so much better. Having each tab limited to some viewport is so unnecessarily limiting.

https://imgur.com/hoOlRDy

Happy that this will finally be a feature of FF. Still pretty useless for me, though, for these reasons:

- There's an empty tab bar shown at the top of the window.

- Currently, there's now way to enable a wider sidebar that shows tab titles, too.

I think this is a bug, I had the same issue but then went to "Customize Sidebar" and toggled "Sidebar settings" to "Always show" and now I see titles, regardless of which sidebar show setting I have

It's funny how we've gone full cycle. Early versions of Firefox get vertical tabs because the plugin system is very rich and you could do whatever you wanted with XUL. Firefox quantum comes around and kills XUL based extensions, vertical tabs are dead. Arc revives an ancient idea as something new and hip, firefox "responds" by reviving the very thing they killed.

I've got something that works reasonably well, but it's really hard to have CSS that always works correctly.

- like mplayer or vlc plugins to play every video format independently of browsers licence - right ?

> you could do whatever you wanted with XUL

- except undoing it (restartless extensions) - but you could do better without it anyway.. (XBL was to powerfull idea ;)

.. except since you couldn't hook in early enough to replace some XPCOM pieces before they are cached.. anymore.. RIP Firefox.

1st. Tabs are both tabs and bookmarks. They exist to be more or less persistent (as long as you add them to folders - I get it, it's not everyone's workflow, but for people like me, it's a blessing).

2nd. It has a brilliant tab sync between devices. Something Firefox doesn't do - in fact, only Edge does that.

3rd. Is much lighter on resources on macOS. Some months ago I decided to give a - yet another - try at Firefox on my MacBook and I started not being able to do my full work day job on battery. At first, I didn't understand what was going on and thought it was docker that was killing the battery. Then I went to investigate, and yup, it was Firefox, again, after all these years of telling that now they are good on macOS. No, they aren't, they still use 4x more battery than Edge, or Arc, or Brave...

TLDR: Give Arc a try. You might be pleasantly surprised.

That, together with clearly defined workspaces, is fantastic for me.

Bizarre to me that they didn't take TST's popularity as a hint of supporting vertical tabs as a native feature until almost 7 years later.

I got the impression they were eventually going to add back in the horizontal tab bar disable as well but if that was even true they clearly forgot about it. I've been using the userChrome hacks for close to 7 years now.

Kudos to the Firefox team.

What age are you?

How long have you been using computers?

Sorry to be this blunt, but I am asking as Firefox has had addons for vertical tabs for a long time.

Vivaldi, Edge, Brave all have vertical tabs.

Opera Presto was first.

Why even mention this Arc? I feel like you just jumped on some hype train and you have been using Google Chrome and just recently found out about vertical tabs. Good for you but it is not a new development.

Browser UIs have barely evolved in the past decade so I guess I'm excited that Firefox is trying something new.

So we are lonely in the dark :)

- Safari (Mac) has a vertical tabs, but a very confusing UI, mixing Profiles, Windows and Tab Groups (only 1 level).

- Edge has Workspaces and Vertical Tabs, along with Groups (only 1 level).

- Chrome does not have vertical tabs and has 1 level groups

- Vivaldi has vertical tabs and groups, not sure how many levels of grouping.

- Firefox has Containers and Vertical Tabs (today), but for best results you still need something like Tab Stash, Sideberry or TST.

- Orion Browser (Mac) has the best UI imho and allows for grouping tabs at as many levels as you want, but you cannot have proper "folders", only nested tabs.

- Arc gets everything right, in my opinion, but I do not specially care much for the candy UI.

Personally even 1-level vertical tabs are valuable because labels don’t get truncated or hidden nearly as badly as they do with traditional tabs, plus vertical scrolling is more natural and effortless than horizontal is. Additionally, most screens these days have tons of width while height is at a premium, and vertical tabs takes advantage of that.

I guess that's easier when you only care about one platform, and everything that comes with it.

I wonder how fast you could make a browser if you don't make it cross-platform and only support usage on Linux for example. What things could you do if you don't care about cross-platform support?

The annoying thing about the vertical tabs in Edge is that Microsoft eliminated the vertical taskbar option in Windows 11. One step forward and two steps back.

Why is having a vertical option for the taskbar not on Win11? That sounds like one of the easiest features to port over.

I really, really don't understand the hype around Arc. I tried it for a while and just wasn't at all impressed. I've heard, though, that a lot of people praise how it help them deal with hundreds of tabs, and I don't keep my tabs open, so maybe I'm the wrong audience?

(This is ignoring the fact that I tried it again a month ago and it wouldn't load a single page. I emailed their help and never heard from them, so I guess that's my last try for a while.)

Is it slow with a fresh profile? It can become suprisingly slow as session files grow, but cleaning it can revert some of that

Edge, Brave, Vivaldi have native vertical tabs built in.

Firefox now too.

Opera Presto was first way before them all.

Why are you and another comment mention some no-name flashy browser?

I wish UI toolkits just came fully loaded and let me spin views and panels and anything in any which way I liked.

I tried TST once but didn’t get why they were bettter than horizontal tabs. I might be missing something.

2. Most screens are wider than they're high. This is especially true of laptops. So using vertical space for a horizontal strip really eats into the vertical real estate.

3. Most written scripts are horizontal. As a result, lists are usually arranged vertically. This aligns with how lists in nearly every other context are arranged (how many times have you found a list where the second item is to the right of the first, the third to the right of the second, as opposed to them being on new vertically arranged lines?)

4. Since the text in most languages flow horizontally, it's trivially easy to adjust the width of a vertical tab container to customize how much of the text you want visible. This could range from really wide tab containers so you can see the entire title (which the larger width of monitors makes almost cost free) or you can make it really narrow to only include the icon, or somewhere in between. Arranging tabs horizontally provides no such easy and obvious UI to do such a thing, so you're reduced to either seeing fixed size tabs or icons only, controlled largely by the browser.

5. Again, because of horizontal text, tabs are shorter than they are wide. You can fit a lot more tabs in a vertical tabbar while still displaying their text than you could in a horizontal one.

Also most websites scroll vertically and it feels better to have more in view at the same time. After 600px horizontally, most sites just render white space.

I've long been a big fan of Sidebery for vertical tab management, so I was expecting something closer to that than what I got. The vertical tab view does work, although it seems pretty basic. E.g. there's no way to group any of the tabs or modify the display style. By default the tabs come in quite "chunky" as well.

Also, on another note, the toggles at the top of the sidebar keep restarting for me in nightly. I keep unchecking most of them since I don't need any Chatbot integrations or anything like that, but the selection doesn't stick.