Create an additional (optionally) smaller search field for the navigation toolbar

[ghost]

The reason why, more advanced users love to work efficient and sometimes use more then one search engines for various reasons.

Having a possibility to make use of a second search engine instantly would enable it to open a tab and make a search in the common address field with one search engine and opening a second tab and starting instantly a search with the second set search engine in the smaller field, without the need to be forced to change the search engine in the main field before being able to start a new search with another search engine.

If this is overkill in your opinion and not wished for brave, give us at least a function which makes it possible to switch search engines with the least possible amount of additional steps, would work the same way (search shortcuts aka g for google and so on).

[bradleyrichter]

@sj-diamond I agree the use case is warranted. It should be solved with some future additions. I'll keep this open and post a UI mockup to get your feedback.

Thanks for the detail in your request. - Brad

[ghost]

Nice to hear that you are open for suggestions :) One thing i forgot, if there is such a smaller field created, there should be an option that you can set search engines in a separate way, so if you have for example Duckduckgo in the main field and Wikipedia in the small additional search field and you are switching to Google in the main, Wikipedia should still stay in the smaller field.

[Arandhras]

I like this too, being able to switch search engines would be very useful... in my workflow it's something I do very often and it would be nice to have it also in Brave!

[psimyn]

@SJ-Diamond what about being able to use the main bar as a search bar, as shown in this ultra-HD gif:

Enter a search engine name, then tab to start search. Backspace in empty field clears it. Could be made a bit more clear with some UI hints, but I think this way allows everything you want without needing multiple search bars

[ghost]

A secondary smaller search field enables it to have 2 active search engines at once in the browser. No need for typing keywords or additional search engine names. A more convenient and faster way for making as fast as possible multiple searches. To make it clear, i am only talking about one additional field, where you can easily set a second search engine, not of multiple additional fields.

So what is wrong with an optional search field? There are enough browsers which offer minimalism or simplicity. If Brave wants to stick out of the crowd, you should offer also features "normal" browsers do not offer. Just ask yourself why for example an user should use Brave instead of Chrome and Firefox if it offers almost exactly the same functionality. And with the unique structure of Brave you guys could create both a browser, which simple users and power users would love. Electron gives you so much additional unique possibilities, why not using them? Simplicity and features do not exclude each other, as long as advanced features are optional nature so that less advanced users have no reason to scream "Bloat".

[Arandhras]

I am not sure I like @psimyn's suggestion. I understand the need of keeping it as simple as possible, but having to write "google.com", "wikipedia.org" or "youtube.com" before every single search in the omnibar is quite a hassle. At the very least, if only a single bar is going to be used, at least you should offer (editable) shortcuts, like what duckduckgo.com does internally (using the previous examples, !g = google, !w = wikipedia, !yt = youtube).

Anyway, as SJD said a secondary (maybe optional?) search field for using another search engine isn't such a bad idea, in my opinion it is an immediate and logical solution.

[psimyn]

@Arandhras they are editable - could be whatever you wanted. And if you just type it uses the default search engine

@SJ-Diamond that is a good point, having 2 text fields could be pretty handy

[Arandhras]

@psimyn That is awesome, thanks for the clarification!

[ghost]

Exactly that is what i wanted to say, sorry if i made myself not clear the very first time. But it is important that you are able to "lock" the search engine, so if you switch engines in the main field or the secondary one, that your second choice is kept instead of overwritten (so you have 2 search engines in the UI active instead of one).

[bradleyrichter]

Proposed UI for managing search engines, and also quick-type shortcuts. I would like to avoid adding a second search box since we will aim to have the most powerful and easy to use combo-search bar. Please share feedback...I'm all ears. : )

(settings panel to manage search engines, and contextual help regarding slash commands)

(ignore the old UI skin, search UI is still relevant and planned for future work)

[ghost]

So, even as optionally available feature a second search box is not wished? Too bad. But the idea about split search which will open dozens of search engines i do find interesting. If this feature is coming like shown in the screen, i am fine with that.

[bradleyrichter]

Yeah, the 2nd bar seems to have trended away in favor of more flexibility/functionality in the main bar in most browsers. I’ll keep my eye out for request volume though….thanks.

On Feb 18, 2016, at 2:45 PM, SJ Diamond [email protected] wrote:

So, even as optionally available feature a second search box is not wished? Too bad.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #466 (comment).

[ghost]

That may be true, but still keep in mind that flexibility and also adding so called non famous features these days can bring you quite a lot of users when they discover Brave and find out that it supports their features.

Just speaking for myself, i see it that way if there is a check box to activate such an additional box or not is not at all browser bloat if it does not get into user's way who do not want to have such a feature. Power users and geeks instead would be very thankful for that even if it is a mouse click away ;)

Just as a side note: Vivaldi has added it, and even Opera has added it again (even if they are these days mostly about simplicity and minimalism and anti power users), so there is still a need for such a feature.

[bradleyrichter]

I agree. And the early adopters have different requests/needs than the eventual mass market.

On Feb 18, 2016, at 3:21 PM, SJ Diamond [email protected] wrote:

That may be true, but still keep in mind that flexibility and also adding so called non famous features these days can bring you quite a lot of users when they discover Brave and find out that it supports their features.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #466 (comment).

[ghost]

I also would say the mass minimalism/simplicity users are not the main target group of Brave, as that kind of users would instantly label Brave as "Ads-Ware" because for that class of users ads are in general bad and they would most likely not understand the concept that there also can be more better kind of ads.

Delivering to power users instead means that they bring with them their own amount of users which help build Brave's audience, but for this you have to insert their toys. It is a simple calculation ;)

Users do in general trust more their supporting guys than a browser developer who has recently entered the competition market, and the more unique the concept is, the more you are in need in the first place for that often dismissed "vocal minority" which will advertise and spread the news that Brave is great.

[luixxiul]

FYI: search shortcuts have been implemented with #2726, whose follow-up is #4238.

[cndouglas]

+1 from this comment.

[bsclifton]

What functionality is not met by our current search shortcuts? Can this issue be closed?
@bradleyrichter @luixxiul @bbondy

[bradleyrichter]

@bsclifton

We can close but I'll monitor for requests for a second redundant search box ala Firefox style as explained by @SJ-Diamond .