What happened to Opera while I've been gone?
-
euphrates last edited by
I went back to opera 12 . What scares is the sense that the opera is no longer the same, like the old versions that we have loved and used to. I really do not understand why the company made such an absurd decision. They just try to make opera resemble to Chrome. For god's sake, if somebody wants to use the Chrome features, let him/her to go and use Chrome.. Why are you guys making such an irritating and unnecessary change while everything was just perfect with old opera.. ???
-
A Former User last edited by
I didn't vote because there's no suitable option on the poll. Opera Next is not only a little worse — it needs many essential features before it will be usable for me. However, it is not a catastrophe.
It works well, is stable, and fast, it doesn't look too bad, and it's not difficult to find your way around after upgrading. However, there is just too much missing for me to even consider using it yet.
Originally posted by euphrates:
Why are you guys making such an irritating and unnecessary change while everything was just perfect with old opera.. ?
Unfortunately, that's not the case. Everything was far from perfect, so Opera had to abandon the losing battle to maintain the Presto rendering engine. That meant building a new browser around the new engine, which will take a while.
If it was my decision, I would have left Opera 12.16 as the default download and offered Opera Next as an alternative to try out. That might have avoided a lot of the flack from existing users, while still tempting some new users to look at the new Opera version. It's enough for many users, but not for those of us who like to customise our software to get the most out of it.
-
dickcaverly last edited by
I only just discovered this move to Blink yesterday, and after installing v.17, was totally chagrined. I've used Opera about as long as it's been available... and, without a doubt, it's has always been the software I use most. I've tried the other browsers and never understood why they had any users when Opera did so much, so well. So, yesterday, in my fit of pique, I checked 'catastrophe' in the poll. Last night, however, I was reading at Huffingtonpost, which has been becoming increasingly balky in v.12.16, and I decided to test it in v.17. The difference was remarkable. So, now I'll admit this move is probably a good thing. Hopefully they can bring back the features I've come to rely on.
-
Deleted User last edited by
It takes time. It's an enormous task they have in front of them. Run both v.12 and v.17 alongside one another and use each as the tasks require. In time the new browser is going to rock.
-
malacath360 last edited by
I like the new Opera. It means I can finally ditch Chrome which you could almost class as spyware.
I just think Opera needs bookmarks
-
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by malacath360:
I just think Opera needs bookmarks
It already has bookmarks — enable the Quick Access Bar with "opera:flags" and in settings, then import your bookmarks from old opera or D&D from HTML file links to the QAB.
-
malacath360 last edited by
Originally posted by Pesala:
Originally posted by malacath360:
I just think Opera needs bookmarks
It already has bookmarks — enable the Quick Access Bar with "opera:flags" and in settings, then import your bookmarks from old opera or D&D from HTML file links to the QAB.
I've done that. But it doesn't do anything.
There is no quick access bar below the address bar.
Also the bookmark import option is greyed out.
EDIT: I got the bookmark bar working but can't get the importer working at all. It's still greyed out.
-
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by malacath360:
I've done that. But it doesn't do anything.
There is no quick access bar below the address bar.
Also the bookmark import option is greyed out.
EDIT: I got the bookmark bar working but can't get the importer working at all. It's still greyed out.
I'll copy-paste my post from here
if you have stable version with working bookmarks, just copy Bookmarks, Bookmarks.db and Bookmarks.db-journal to developer folder.
If not, try to manually force import from old presto opera with shortcut command switch--presto-small-prefs-dir=ROAMING_PROFILE_DIReg. right click on your Opera 18 shortcut, go to properties, shortcut tab and under target add code with the RIGHT path to your roaming profile folder at the end of it
(probably C:\Users\USER_NAME\AppData\Roaming\Opera\Opera)
note: after the program path under "" put space before the code
--presto-small.....After you import old profile with bookmarks from it, don't forget to delete that code from shortcut, because every time you click it, it will start importing again.
If you have x64 version of Presto, change profile name in the way so that it doesn't have space in it, like "opera_x64" instead of "Opera x64"If you don't want to bother with all this, install RealBookmarks extension through developer mode, and import bookmarks as HTML
http://my.opera.com/Sumpfkrautjunkie/blog/2013/07/16/export-tooltips-thumnails-thumbnail-mode
it's not finished, but it is fully functional
-
-
cooljoebay last edited by
Sunnuva Nut. I went from 12.16 to THIS!! What a piece of SHIT. And to think how many hundreds of times I took a few seconds to click on that jelp menu to send information about a broken website. Apparently they don't listen at all to the users. This is getting to be like the bureaucratic Micro$uck. If that's the case, then its time to switch to a different one. Guess I''ll go back to Firefox. Not my favorite choice. But at least it isn't like that piece of hogshit Chrome.
-
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by cooljoebay:
And to think how many hundreds of times I took a few seconds to click on that help menu to send information about a broken website.
Broken web sites were the main reason why Opera made the decision to drop development of Presto and switch to Webkit/Blink. Rather than investing so many resources in fixing Presto to work with web sites, they can invest a fraction of that time in fixing Blink, and the rest in improving the browser.
Although there are still many missing features, the Bookmarks Bar is already available, and more will return gradually. The switch brought several minor benefits like this — not only defects.
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by Pesala:
The switch brought several minor benefits like this — not only defects.
This particular benefit is annulled by inability to select text when it contains a link. This is by design, by the way http://my.opera.com/ODIN/blog/show.dml/59961552#comment105445992
Also, there is a CSS class that prevents the user from copying text. It didn't work in Presto (so it was okay) but is implemented in webkit http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=1291752 This class is, IMHO, evil in principle. The user should be able to operate with what is displayed on the screen, otherwise what is the display good for? I always use a set of utterly different other browsers to go round odd problems like this. No single browser ever satisfied my needs completely, though Presto came close.
So, for these reasons, your example of benefit is imaginary.
-
stng last edited by
Pesala
Broken web sites were the main reason why Opera made the decision to drop development of Presto and switch to Webkit/Blink.
"The reason for dropping Presto was indeed funding." (c) Former Opera Software ASA CEO and Opera's co-founder.
Rather than investing so many resources in fixing Presto to work with web sites, they can invest a fraction of that time in fixing Blink, and the rest in improving the browser.
A few specialists involved into the Browser.js(web-site fixing) department (less than 5 people, AFAIR) was an investing so many resources???
I'd rather not believe in this PR's fable.Although there are still many missing features, the Bookmarks Bar is already available, and more will return gradually. The switch brought several minor benefits like this — not only defects.
That's doesn't make sense since Opera has lost all of its functionality (besides a very basic features) and customizability (that won't return back anyway, according to their PR).
The most advanced browser has turned into the faceless shell of the Blink engine and Chromim's framework. This is the end of Opera browser that we known and like. -
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by ersi:
This particular benefit is annulled by inability to select text when it contains a link.
I can select text that contains a link “topic.dml?id=1291752” or “http://my.opera.com/community/” How hard is that?
Originally posted by ersi:
Also, there is a CSS class that prevents the user from copying text. It didn't work in Presto (so it was okay) but is implemented in webkit
So that's another improvement due to the switch.
Originally posted by ersi:
IMHO, evil in principle.
:lol: Evil in principle to support CSS properly? Now I am sure that you have lost it. If you really want to select text that is supposed to be unselectable because it is defined to be unselectable, view the source code.
Originally posted by ersi:
The user should be able to operate with what is displayed on the screen, otherwise what is the display good for?
Err, it is good for reading and following links.
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by Pesala:
Originally posted by ersi:
This particular benefit is annulled by inability to select text when it contains a link.
I can select text that contains a link “topic.dml?id=1291752” or “http://my.opera.com/community/” How hard is that?
In Presto you were able to select from the middle of the text.
Originally posted by Pesala:
Originally posted by ersi:
IMHO, evil in principle.
:lol: Evil in principle to support CSS properly? Now I am sure that you have lost it. If you really want to select text that is supposed to be unselectable because it is defined to be unselectable, view the source code.
When speaking about selecting text, which was your example, then this CSS is counterproductive. Maybe Presto didn't support it for a good reason, consciously. Ever thought of it this way? :idea: They even included unsupported CSS and HTML elements in changelogs to show what they thought of the specs.
Then there's other good CSS that Presto supports and Webkit never did (and Blink never will), all discussed to death in the thread you loathe most. You are free to weigh the details for yourself, objectively.
Originally posted by Pesala:
Originally posted by ersi:
The user should be able to operate with what is displayed on the screen, otherwise what is the display good for?
Err, it is good for reading and following links.
So you'd be happy with an HTML viewer or restricted internet kiosk? Hardly an improvement.
Anyway, talk is cheap. Your main browser is Opera 11.64. Actions speak louder than words. You dabble in Chropera and pretend to defend it just to infuriate people. You are succeeding too.
-
missingno last edited by
:sherlock:
This non-standard property: http://css-tricks.com/almanac/properties/u/user-select/ ?
Good thing Opera never supported it. -
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by ersi:
Maybe Presto didn't support it for a good reason, consciously. Ever thought of it this way?
I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories. If you can link to a post by Opera Presto devs stating that it was a conscious choice, I would believe it.
Originally posted by ersi:
Anyway, talk is cheap.
Your divisive talk about “Chopera” is not just cheap, it's worse than worthless. Whether you like it or not, Opera is moving on. When it has the features that I need then I will start using it as my default browser, which may be at least six month or never. Until then, I am happy to use Opera 11.64 and I will continue to help users get to grips with the inevitable, while still providing constructive feedback so that what is not inevitable can be avoided, i.e. things that can and should be done in future versions of Opera.
Originally posted by ersi:
In Presto you were able to select from the middle of the text.
The 1 in 100 use case is trumped by the 99/100 use case of selecting plain text on the web page, whether that's for copying to the clipboard, searching, or using “Go to web address.”
My motives for posting have nothing to do with defending Opera and everything to do with helping users, and preventing the spread of disinformation by disaffected users, aka Trolls.
For someone who hates the new Opera so much, you sure waste a lot of your time attacking it, when you could be learning how to use Firefox, or whatever browser you intend to use after dumping Opera 12. Your negative posts won't do anything to turn the Opera devs away from their chosen path. If you want to improve Opera Next, post in the blogs, report bugs, etc.
-
stng last edited by
Originally posted by missingno:
:sherlock:
This non-standard property: http://css-tricks.com/almanac/properties/u/user-select/ ?
The standard is irrelevant since Internet overlords (Google, M$) have decided to support it.
-
missingno last edited by
Originally posted by Pesala:
The 1 in 100 use case is trumped by the 99/100 use case of selecting plain text on the web page
This isn't a 1 in 100 use case. Use case is "be able to select text within a link". Either you can or you cannot. The other 99 use cases are (hopefully) still supported by any modern browser. You only could argue that supporting 100/100 use cases isn't much better than supporting 99/100 use cases.
Originally posted by STNG:
The standard is irrelevant since Internet overlords (Google, M$) have decided to support it.
I know, right? Because that is what made Opera so different: open the web.
-
frenzie last edited by
Originally posted by Pesala:
The 1 in 100 use case is trumped by the 99/100 use case of selecting plain text on the web page, whether that's for copying to the clipboard, searching, or using “Go to web address.” (emphasis mine)
Plain text? Do go on.
