Opera 104.0.4944.33 Stable update
-
A Former User last edited by
@andrew84 I‘ve been using it for quite a while now. There are some minor issues now and then, but not so much, I‘d like to change.
I‘ve seen some gruntling about it, but others are rather enthusiastic.
I‘ve tried Vivaldi for some days, but there were even lots of bugs more, especially on Mac. And a lot of refinement missing.
On the other hand many other browsers are really missing functonality that‘s built into Opera.
I‘ve seen many complains by you in this Forum. But if your experience with Opera is so horrible, why bother with it any longer? You can change that easily, you know.
Which browser would you prefer to Opera then, anyways? I‘m eager to know. -
andrew84 last edited by
@healingcross My experience is horrible not with Opera (I'm using it since when it was yet on Presto engine ), but with Opera One. I'm still using Opera daily, but pre-One version.
I don't know about Mac, I never used it.
But here on Win 10 the 'One' version is just unusable for me, the glitches (when using the basic functionality) are everywhere if comparing it with pre-One version. And instead of restoring the basics, they're implement the useless animations and similar staff. And this is not only my opinion.@healingcross said in Opera 104.0.4944.33 Stable update:
Which browser would you prefer to Opera then, anyways? I‘m eager to know.
I don't. know, there's no much difference if use shortly some approved browser to make online payments and similar. Usually I use Edge or Chrome for these purposes.
@healingcross said in Opera 104.0.4944.33 Stable update:
why bother with it any longer? You can change that easily, you know.
Yes. I know. We are talking here about reasonable complaints about basic staff, which looks broken. And known bugs (obvious bugs) are migrating from one Stable release to another. I think you understand that one of the main purposes of this blog and forum is feedback. If you think, that if some bug is fixed after negative comment this is bad, then it's your choice.
-
cookie-drummer last edited by cookie-drummer@andrew84: I simply suspect they are having personal problems within development team. It's hard to believe how many obvious bugs are present in Opera One since 100 build. It's been like two, three (?) months since they released this unfinished product. Maybe Chinese people are pushing them to release things faster? Maybe they fu*ks things up in testing process? Maybe they don't even test on macOS builds? Dunno. They won't tell us.
To Opera development team (especially to QA, Testers and Designers): hope you'll find a way to release a stable product (stable for real, not just by a name).
-
A Former User last edited by A Former User
@andrew84 I understand you. But wouldn‘t you as a long time Opera User be better off with Vivaldi then? Especially when you’re not using Mac.
I don‘t think they will ever return to pre-One. They were going all-in with these AI-things and layout-changes. Maybe the devs were actually driven by their Chinese overlords to rush out with these versions. Who knows?
-
andrew84 last edited by andrew84
@healingcross said in Opera 104.0.4944.33 Stable update:
better off with Vivaldi then?
Currently the UI of Opera (I mean pre-One version) looks better and more clear to me.
Vivaldi has a lot of settings to customize the UI. But even after spending some time to make it similar to Opera, Vivaldi still looks a bit outdated to me. Also, Vivaldi misses features that I actively use daily. Those are search popup, click on tab to scroll to top of the page, sometimes video pop-out). Mentioned features are very old, but still very actual for me.
Almost all the recent features I keep off.
Can't comment how buggy the Vivaldi is because I didn't use it for a long period.*But in future when sites will start to display incorrectly in pre-One version and the One version still will be in a bad state, of course, something will have to be chosen. Vivaldi is the only who has (currently) the normal built-in speed dial start page so maybe it'll be a good choice.
-
-
burnout426 Volunteer last edited by
@karen-arzumanyan Small update. This is being analyzed and worked on. Turns out the bug is caused by this change in Chromium. Opera will have to adjust things because of it. No guarantee on when, but at least it's being looked at.
-
burnout426 Volunteer last edited by
@xb70 On macOS, I think there's an issue with cookies not being migrated properly. On Windows, things seems to be good so far. Of course, no guarantees.
-
leocg Moderator Volunteer last edited by
@healingcross Opera Just tries to follow Chromium development pace, and since they seem to be little bit behind, they may need to speed things up
-
A Former User last edited by
@leocg I think, that may be a problem for every browser maker that relies on Chromium and isn't Google. AFAIK even Microsoft is still one step behind. Especially when they modify the UI like Opera and Vivaldi do.
-
leocg Moderator Volunteer last edited by
@healingcross Yes, Opera has always been a few builds behind but usually on the same version. However, now it seems to be a couple of versions behind.
-
-
andrew84 last edited by
@burnout426 So the issue is related to this one https://forums.opera.com/post/330740?
Because no cursor for Ctrl+F depends on scale factor in Windows.
Details here https://forums.opera.com/post/327812 -
burnout426 Volunteer last edited by
@andrew84 said in Opera 104.0.4944.33 Stable update:
@burnout426 So the issue is related to this one https://forums.opera.com/post/330740?
That mentions other input fields besides the ctrl + f one, so not sure if it's related to that case, but might be.
Because no cursor for Ctrl+F depends on scale factor in Windows.
Details here https://forums.opera.com/post/327812Yes, it's noted in the bug that the cursor issue is at 100% scaling and that at 120% it's fine, but input field borders are cut off.
-
-
xb70 last edited by
I installed 104.0.4944.33 on one of two Windows 10/64 machines, and it worked, albeit, with a hiccup. At first it seemed to have bombed out--with a loss of personalization, but upon closure and reopening, it was okay. I downloaded and installed manually, rather than using the auto-updated instance--which was showing, the little dot on the O, and a notice of an impending update, upon closure and reopening, if that even would have worked--usually on my machines updating from Update & Recovery doesn't work.
I do have a question about auto updates or updating using Update & Recovery in settings: In doing the manual version, one has to click past first the download permission, allowing or not, cookies, then after the download upon installation, there is another place to disallowed cookies with an additional four check boxes to uncheck. What happens with all that if one uses the auto-update loaded instance? I do not believe that one is prompted for any of that. Does the process simply (1) allow all cookies by default, or (2) does it know one's previous choices, and assume those, or (3) does it by default disallow cookies (the way that it should be, but is not now)? -
-
xb70 last edited by
@leocg Is that a reply to my question? Or a previous post in the thread? If it is to my question, I was not intending to ask about cookie treatment except to find out, if auto install takes place of if the installation is Update & Recovery in settings, what happens to all those cookie setting which one must click through, five of them, in doing a manual install? There seemed to be three possibilities: Does the process simply (1) allow all cookies by default, or (2) does it know one's previous choices, and assume those, or (3) does it by default disallow cookies (the way that it should be, but is not now)?
-
-
burnout426 Volunteer last edited by
@xb70 If you're talking about the consent settings in the installer, they are also available in Opera at the URL
opera://settings/privacy/consentFlowafter you install Opera. An auto update should keep whatever settings you have there.
, that doesn’t sound good for user security.
