I personally prefer this rendering of the trig segments:
(My avatar ---the logo of my company--- is based on it, and it's the inspiration for my iPhone app, Trigger. My attachment to this figure is significant ... but I digress ...)
I look at this picture as definitional. To me, $\tan\theta$ is defined as the length of a segment that's tangent to the unit circle. (So, the name makes sense!) The ratio that most textbooks give as a(n entirely-unmotivated) definition is actually a theorem. It expresses a proportion based on the similarity of the $\tan\theta$-$1$-$\sec\theta$ and the $\sin\theta$-$\cos\theta$-$1$ right triangles in the figure:
$$\frac{\tan\theta}{1} = \frac{\sin\theta}{\cos\theta}$$
Likewise, similarity with other triangles gives these proportions
$$\frac{\tan\theta}{1} = \frac{1}{\cot\theta} \qquad\text{and}\qquad \frac{\tan\theta}{1} = \frac{\sec\theta}{\csc\theta}$$
but I think I'm digressing again. :)
In any case, we resolve the length-vs-ratio-of-lengths conflict by realizing that
Ratio $\tan\theta$ represents length $\tan\theta$, over length $1$.
Conversely, length $\tan\theta$ represents length $1$, scaled by ratio $\tan\theta$.
The same goes for $\sin\theta$, $\cos\theta$, and the rest. They're lengths, and they're ratios-of-lengths.
In practice, you'll rarely think of trig values as lengths, just as you rarely think of the product $xy$ in some formula as the area of an $x$-by-$y$ rectangle. Nevertheless, the duality can be instructive; seeing the trig functions as lengths in the figure above explains a great deal about their properties and relations.
I'll end with a pointer to this answer of mine which describes how the power series for sine and cosine, and for tangent and secant, have geometric interpretations. Not only are the trig values presented at lengths, so is $\theta$ ---naturally, the length of a circular arc--- as well as each power of $\theta$, despite all of these things ostensibly being "dimensionless".