What's Your Take on Launching New Windows?
September 04, 2003 | 
25 Comments
Lately I’ve been participating in some great open-ended discussion on various topics, from semantic coding to the use of newsreaders.
As you may know I’ve always been of the mind that there is usually more than one way to do a thing and so I find these discussions and all of the ideas they generate very helpful and interesting.
With that in mind I thought I’d throw a few more topics out for discussion. So I’ll periodically be asking, “What’s Your Take?” on various topics. This time I’m interesting in getting your take on launching new windows.
This is a topic I’ve had much discussion on over the years and I’m sure there are quite a few opinions on how to handle new windows, pop-ups and the like. I’ll add my take and perhaps write a summary article when we’re all done. So here goes, ponder the following and let me know what you think.
- When linking off-site do you target new windows? Why or why not?
- If so, what method do you use?
- Do you ever use pop-ups? Why or why not?
- Are there some cases in which you launch new windows and some cases you don’t? Again, what is your reasoning?
Filed under: Web General
Comments
1. Anne van Kesteren said:
1. No, I think the user who browses my site can easily do this: right-click > open in new tab/window
2. I mark all external links with rel=”external”, currently I’m only styling this, but I could add a javascript-event handler on it.
3. I used it for a client side. If I use one, I’ll make sure it is accessible.
4. I think this one doesn’t count for me.
Posted on September 4, 2003 11:24 AM | #
2. Mike H said:
1. Yes – it signifies that the user is leaving your site, so you the author are not responsible for anything broken on it.
2. I like the way CNN.com does it, where they have a little graphic that says you’ll be leaving their site if you click that link. target=”_blank”
3. eh
4. No. Consistency is more important than any of this. The user “learns” when using your page, and gets frustrated when it doesnt react as expected. At least thats what Jakob Nielsen says.
One other point… regarding accessibility, how do you tell the screenreader-user that they’re leaving the site?
Posted on September 4, 2003 11:42 AM | #
3. Dave said:
Links should usually open up in the current window. Users who know enough to have a preference also know enough to choose to open in a new window/tab themselves. Some users who aren’t very web saavy will be confused by a new window opening because this might be unexpected behaviour.
Excepts might be:
Clicking on the thumbnail of an image to see the full-size picture (unless the thumbnail leads to a full page, like a photo plus a narrative)
Clicking on an ad
Clicking on a document like a user manuel in .pdf format that alters the way the browser works
Posted on September 4, 2003 11:50 AM | #
4. Boyink said:
Only time I ever use pop-ups or link to new windows is when linking to docs rather than web pages (PDFs or DOC’s etc)because while watching people work they tend to “close” these instead of using the back button.
Posted on September 4, 2003 12:34 PM | #
5. Seamus said:
My opinion of this has changed over the past year and half because of tab-browsing. I am able to control my browsing with tabs so much and so easily that I do not like it when a site makes the choice for me.
I do think it is nice to have some icon to tell if you are going offsite, but it is better to have relavant links and text for the links.
Now sometimes there are places that I can see open new windows. Such as if you use webmail for composing an email and you want to add a contact. You click on a link that opens a new little window that can directly add contacts to the other page.
“Some users who aren’t very web saavy will be confused by a new window opening because this might be unexpected behaviour.”
This is a very true statement.
Posted on September 4, 2003 01:17 PM | #
6. Andy Baio said:
1. No new windows, because they “break the back button” (as Jakob often says) and I generally find as annoying as a popup window. Experienced users will Shift or Ctrl to open in a new window or tab, and inexperienced users often get confused by new full-screen windows replacing their existing window.
2. Just boring old hyperlinks.
3. God no, those are even worse. Many people now use browsers that block all popups, or the new Google toolbar which blocks popups by default.
4. The only possible exception, for me, would be a Word/PDF/Powerpoint/Excel document.
Posted on September 4, 2003 01:38 PM | #
7. Sam Newman said:
1. I never open content in new windows on my stuff (e.g. my blog), but do at work due to management conditions. Personally I hate it. If the users WANTS it in a new window then have the option - I don’t want to force it on them.
2. Boring old hyperlinks too :-)
3. I hate hate hate popups! That said, management at work insist on them as a method for informing customers of new deals. Popups as Dialogs however are perfectly ok. The distinction? Firstly dialogs are always ‘on demand’ - e.g. I click a link to delete something, it says ‘are you sure’? Secondly there is a reason for it being in a new window. If you decide not to delete something, then there is no point in having to navigate from the soruce page and back again.
4. Exceptions? None on my stuff, many at work :-(
Posted on September 4, 2003 02:17 PM | #
8. Dutchcelt said:
Funny, I had a discussion on ‘new windows’ with a project manager today. And overall I’m not very keen on the use of pop-ups or the use of target. For arguments sake I’ll disregard the fact that XHTML strict doesn’t allow the use of target. Also I’ll ignore the Semiotic reasoning to be careful when using popups.
The Internet is made up of connected documents that are some related to each other. Opening a ‘new’ webpage quickly became a feature in web browsers because users wanted to hold on to the information on that page. It served as holder, as a reference to be looked over later. This allowed the user to continue ‘surfing’, to ride out the wave as it were. I believe that this is still true today and why, more often than not, I do not force the use of ‘new window’ or ‘popups’. There would have to be a strong reason for me to use this method.
Often the reasoning seems to be based on the fact that companies don’t like customers ‘walking out the door’ when ever they feel like it. A brick and mortar concept copy-pasted onto websites. Opening a new window tells the bean counters that they never really left and that profit is still to be made. So they hope.
Sadly these practises also hide the fact that the site maybe poorly written. The use of external and internal links should be clear, whether they open a new window or not is not very relevant.
Using popups so users can add comments, for example, seems to be popular, but quite unnecessary. Popups should, in my view, contain content that is not related to the site. Like advertising or a poll, ironically these are two reasons why we hate them in the first place. The use of a popup to restrict the format of a webpage seems to be a throwback to print design and often isn’t a very web savvy solution.
I’ve been lucky in convincing clients that using ‘new window’ or popups is often a waste of time. It must be the luck of the irish. ;)
Posted on September 4, 2003 05:49 PM | #
9. Keith said:
Very good points so far, I can’t wait to see what others think about this.
I think I’m of the same belief as Dutchcelt on this. The whole concept of targeting a new window makes less and less sense as time goes on. With the maturation of the Web and browsers (tabbed browsing) it’s just not all that…well, logical, anymore.
A common argument is that by targeting a new window with off-site links will keep people on your site. This is simply not true.
Good, quality content will keep people on your site. Not to mention, why would we want a user to be kept on a site. Oftentimes a user wants to get in, get whatever tasks they have to do, or information they’re after, and get out.
When did the idea that trapping a user on your site equaled more sales or a more successful Web site. That’s kind of silly if you think about it. More time spent could easily mean more frustration looking for something, for example.
You could make a case that by not launching new windows and letting your users have that control, you are actually increasing usability and the overall user experience of the site.
Pop-ups in my opinion are ok, as long as they are tied to a specific function and used in such a way that the user expects a window to pop-up when they click a link, Seamus talked about an icon, and I like them as well, or maybe a tooltip (title attribute) or descriptive text.
Like the “launch window” button in my Song of The Week player. This was added based on specific needs voiced by people who enjoyed and used that feature. I think that has been very useful and it’s obvious what it’s going to do.
I also see launching a new window as useful for things like PDF, Word and the like – as Andy and Boyink point out.
Now, how to get clients and stakeholders to buy all of this reasoning is another story. Sam’s concerns about “management conditions” are shared by many others I’m quite sure. I often come across marketing folks, for example, who’ve read just enough outdated Jakob Nielsen to be dangerous. We’re getting to a point when many of those guidelines (there are no rules in Web design right?) are starting to breakdown. Unfortunately many people still want design like it’s 1999.
Any good ideas on how to get around this mentality? Any ideas on good ways to convey pop-up (or external link) functionality to a user?
Posted on September 4, 2003 07:18 PM | #
10. Mike Steinbaugh said:
On my site I don’t use the target attribute except in the comments window. I like to have my comments in a pop-up window (user controlled of course) because Moveable Type can then generate the comments on the fly instead of via static rebuilds. This makes managing comments easier. I find that people hate it when new windows open, especially those addicted to tabbed browsers like myself.
Posted on September 4, 2003 08:43 PM | #
11. Egor Kloos (aka Dutchcelt) said:
What I’ve always found important is that when advising a client I’d really have them focus on the narrative and presentation. Does the content require this that or the other? Does it achieve it’s goals? And I’d do this on different subjects, I never hammer one subject home I always tap several of them in gently across the board during the entire time I’m on the project, which usually is from start to finish. This way you educate your client. However always be prepared to defend your position, know how to argue your point clearly and concisely. You WILL, no matter what you do, end up having to defend parts of the project, not that the work is bad but because negotiations don’t just stop when the client signs the contract. Also having account managers and project managers thinking along the same lines is vital. In a company you’re a team and you have to get your communications synchronized.
The problem I often see is that account managers really don’t care about product, they care about not losing the client. That is often like opening a ‘new window’, a waste of time and effort.
Posted on September 5, 2003 02:56 AM | #
12. ryan said:
1. I target External links target a new window. Although it breaks the BACK button, external links arent always in context with the displayed information. It allows novice users to easily reference the referring page.
In advanced scenarios users can organize information via tabs. Most advanced users simply shift/alt/option + Click or Right-Click by default anyway.
2. target=”_blank”
3. Pop-ups are used sparingly. Context-sensitive information can’t always fit into an abbr/acronym tag.
4. External links spawn new windows. Internal links remain un-targeted.
Great topic by the way.
Posted on September 5, 2003 10:20 AM | #
13. Anne van Kesteren said:
ryan,
A novice user _wants_ to use the back-button. Most of the time they don’t even see they opened a new window.
The window is opened, they think it’s the same, they want to go back and they can’t. I also think you misinterpreted the definition of an advanced user. They don’t exist. Someone who is advanced responds to this weblog and is not a ‘normal website’ visitor.
Egor,
HTML4 Strict disallows the target attribute. This is the same for XHTML 1.0/Basic/1.1.
Keith,
You great at posting comments, thank you!
Posted on September 5, 2003 10:35 AM | #
14. Britt said:
1. No, not anymore. Personally, I hate it because I prefer to have control, especially in a tabbed browsing environment.
2. NA
3. I try to avoid them, but was talked into using one for a client who wanted to promote an upcoming concert.
4. I have launched smaller windows that contain tips/help or for multimedia.
Posted on September 5, 2003 03:12 PM | #
15. Egor Kloos said:
Anne, though I’m not sure why you felt you needed to point out where the target attribute is not allowed, I am aware of this and disregarded this fact because discussing it would have detracted from my comment.
Your point that many users don’t understand that a new window has opened is an important one because it underlines the fact that clients and even their designers often project their understanding onto a user. This occurs because the distinction between the needs of the client and the understanding of the user is ignored. They are for the sake of convenience perceived to be same. Big mistake.
This is just one reason why interface design should be treated in accordance to the different guidelines set out by the W3C. Even just conforming to markup conventions promotes familiarity to site builders and users alike. Everyone gains.
Posted on September 5, 2003 05:28 PM | #
16. pete said:
A lot of this obviously comes down to how people work. I’ve never browsed with a full size window so it’s quite obvious when a new window opens. Also when browsing a page of links it’s handy if the link opens in a new window so I don’t lose the link page.
In my view the argument that something breaks the back button needs to be revised with the advent of tabbed browsing. Opening a link in a tab means the page has no history and so the back button is disabled. Therefore surely, according to Jakob this is a “bad thing”.
The fact that the user has opened the tab is irrelevant as the user will quickly forget which tab came from where and where it leads back to. I say this from personal experience as there are many times I’ve tried to use the back button in a tab I’ve opened straight from another page.
Surely to keep consistency using the back button in a new tab should close the tab and take the user back to the tab or window the new tab originated form? (are you keeping up with me here?).
Saying all this I don’t use new windows for links. I just don’t like being told what I can and can’t do :-p
My site has a lot of screenshots and I use javascript to open a new window without the menu bars, etc so that more of the image can be seen. I also like the “framed” effect the border gives.
The javascript is configured so that if a browser has javascript turned off the image will open in the same window rather than a popup. I feel that this way its at least accessable to all (most?) even if there are those that dislike popups.
Posted on September 6, 2003 06:12 AM | #
17. Egor Kloos said:
Pete, your backbutton suggestion sounds interesting. Although the thought of my browser removing a tab that I deliberately opened as a tab doesn’t quite feel right. The UA shouldn’t assume the users intention was correct, I mean the user could have forgotten that they opened a new tab, their locus of attention has, after all, moved on to the new tab. Having the UA jump to the original window does sound like something that might work, but this also forces the user to switch modes.
Your argument that you use a popup to let the users view ‘more’ of your work is a design decision and has nothing to do with your user. You should consider what you want the user to see and devise a way for them to see it. Opening a new window is just lazy and unnecessary. But hey, don’t take my word for it, take a look how it can be done.
http://stopdesign.com/portfolio/web_interface/adaptive_path.html?fs=2
Posted on September 6, 2003 07:38 AM | #
18. pete said:
Egor: My decision to use a popup window to display an image is indeed a design decision but also has everything to do with the user. Most of the images on my site are 1024x770+ in size. The newer ones are 1280x1024 and will probably get bigger as time goes on. I have to consider the best way to display these to the user who may well be using a screen resolution smaller than the image.
In my view currently the best way to get round this is to use javascript to hide the menu and status bars so that more of the image can be seen without forcing the user on a smaller resolution to needlessly scroll around the image.
The window opens as 800x600 and can be resized and/or made full screen at the users resolution. Also with the menu bars and other bits missing it looks nothing like a new window and so cannot (in my view) confuse the user.
Before I started learning some of the various aspects of web design I was simply a user. I’d seen various examples of what I’ve described, and felt it worked really well so I decided to make use of it. As a user, was I wrong to think it worked well?
The stop design example you pointed out is very clever but does nothing for the user. The zoomed image is still too small from my (user) point of view and certainly wouldn’t merit using a popup in any case.
Saying that it would have been better to have simply displayed the full size images and let the user scroll down the page. If there were more images then I would have said that it was justified but all that extra coding for three images?
Look at the Lycos example which can be accessed from the same url. It has one image which can be zoomed. Why not just use the larger image? It doesn’t make sense and offer no benefit to anyone. As it stands I feel it’s design for designers, not end users.
Maybe I’ve missed the point you were making. I don’t code sites for a living (but would like to when I feel good enough) and so am tempted to defer to your (and others) experience in these matters but in this case I think you are wrong as there will always be exceptions.
The idea with the tabs was that they would follow the history of the parent window. Not only would hitting the back button close the tab and take the user back to the tabs parent window but hitting forward would reopen the tab. I think I assumed people would fill in the blanks. Sorry about that.
Btw. I like your site, especially the home page. Yeah I know I’m sad! It’s got the feel of a splash page without the uselessness (is that a real word?) of a splash page. nice one!
(whoops! nearly posted without my details there)
Posted on September 6, 2003 03:12 PM | #
19. Suzanne said:
All the way down here I’ve lost site of what each question was…
I do my best to convince clients not to use targets, I use a class to identify some external links but I’ve been really inconsistent on it. I let context provide the cues. For example, on a page of partners, all the links will be to external sites, and in the navigation, *all* the links are internal. I don’t allow my clients to put mailto or external links in their navigation at all.
If I do use popups, I tend to use my own JavaScript code that was based on tutorials by www.irt.org on the topic, to have the popup part in the onclick and the real link in the href so any user can click on the link or right-click and choose new window/new tab and get what they need out of it.
I use popups for images, where I can’t get extra information added into the page (for whatever reasons, usually political, sometimes a matter of issue with existing CMS systems), and haven’t considered it for pdf or docs, but I do like that idea now that I’ve heard it, since even as an advanced user, I have a tendency to close the window after viewing, which means I close all my tabs, too.
I really don’t like it when people spawn new windows because it takes me out of my nice tidy tabbed situation, but I don’t mind for comments and larger views of images, et cetera, and I appreciate it for terms and conditions, privacy agreements, et cetera.
Posted on September 6, 2003 04:29 PM | #
20. Egor Kloos said:
Pete, my remarks were intended to point out that you could have the larger picture in the same window, I still don’t see the need for you to use a popup, hence the stopdesign link. Also with the stopdesign reference you can see that you do not need a full scale version of your screendumps, no really I mean it. My thinking is that you need to convey the quality of your work and communicate what you tried to do, a smaller size screendump will do the job just as well. I’m absolutely convinced that this also applies to your site. Users would benefit from not having a popup do deal with and would have no scrolling to do. Don’t make the user work for it, just let them admire your work, as they should.
btw. I’m not a coder either, although I did write all the clientside code myself. The way I’ve always worked is that if my design doesn’t work the production side of things won’t matter.
Posted on September 6, 2003 05:37 PM | #
21. pete said:
I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree on this one although I have taken on board some of your points.
Unfortunately reducing the image size is not really an option for me as far as I can see. The skinning community is very particular when it comes to the quality of desktop screenshots and I’m sad to say I’ve actually seen people flamed simply for submitting an over compressed jpeg.
I guess I’ve become like that as well as my first reaction when visiting stopdesign was that the zoomed image wasn’t looking too hot.
Reducing the image size creates an blurry image which would be unacceptable to the people visiting my site and I haven’t found a way round this yet. I’d love to as I’m all for reducing bandwidth use wherever possible.
There are probably very few cases in which I would use/justify popup windows but this is one of them.
I think I’ve gone further than the original questions wanted so I’d better stop.
Thanks.
Posted on September 7, 2003 12:03 PM | #
22. Bryan said:
I’ve always targeted new windows when linking offsite, but I’ve started giving the reader a visual hint that a new window is coming.
Posted on September 8, 2003 09:35 AM | #
23. Andrew Bowden said:
1) Never. I used to but I realised it annoyed me. It annoyed me and I was the one writing the site! Later I saw user testing being done - they didn’t get it at all. The new window would fire up - sometimes they wouldn’t see it, sometimes they’d use it. If they did use it, they’d find the original window later and simply close it. Hey, why bother? People know what the back button is.
2) is of course a N/A.
3) I used to use popups as well - not much but for a few small things like showing a full size image. Guess what? They started to annoy me. Bye bye. I only use one on my site now, and the user is heavily warned! They have their uses but overuse is a big problem.
4) I would only use a new popup/window if there was a valid reason - a media console perhaps. help text that you want to display so people can view it whilst looking at the page they want help on. But most uses of new windows and popups are annoying to the user.
Posted on September 10, 2003 05:17 AM | #
24. Webdesign Köln said:
(Just answering your few questions.)
1. Sure. I hate when I lose my articles during reading just because I followed a link.
2. target=”blank”. JavaScript does not make sense here. On plain link-sites I will likely define the main-target in the header.
3. Pop-ups are a wide spread and well known feature of sites. I doubt that there will be a real professional that made more than fifty sites and did not use once a pop-up. There are countless reasons to use a pop-up. The main reasons are to accomplish a design-wish, to have full control of the browser dimensions and to hide some details or browser tabs. Well programmed JavaScript-pop-ups should work perfectly without JavaScript. So where is the point. :-)
4. If I want to compare content that I read, I wish to have those content-sites in different windows opened. When the content is tiny like a picture and fits perfectly in the pop-up than there is no reason to avoid the pop-up. The only thing I dislike are pop-ups with advertising, but my Google-bar knows perfectly to suppress them.
Posted on December 30, 2003 01:57 PM | #
25. Richard said:
After skimming the responses, I didn’t see this mentioned, so I will add that in my job I do a lot of training/help pieces.
Opening a new browser window when a user is seeking help makes more sense because 1) If you’re in a web app you won’t lose what you’ve already entered and 2) Because it’s likely the user will want to have both windows open so the help screen can guide them through the work.
Posted on June 4, 2004 09:15 AM | #
Comments are now closed