What percentage of people are adapting well to the new Opera?
-
rh99 last edited by
I've always hated Chrome because so many things are not possible compared to Opera. Then Opera uses the foundation of Chrome for their new product. Ugh. Its like Ferrari using a Toyota frame and drivetrain for their next product.
So....are people finding the features they need through extensions?
And how about the Opera Mail stand alone program. Does it work better in any way than Mail in Opera 12? It wasn't a top quality thing but it was pretty good and for most people more than adequate for their needs. Guess we just get used to some stuff.
-
colderwinters last edited by
I use the new Opera as my main browser, that said I cant say it's any better or worse than any other browser such as Firefox, Ice Dragon, Dragon or Srware Iron, the bookmarks as they should be I have on Opera, I dont use garbage like that news feed, stash or Speed Dial, I'm running a computer here, not a tablet, I use the new Opera as my main brower but I also use the other browsers from time to time, I run dual monitors, so I can run two or more browsers at once, I guess the main reason I use Opera is the name of it probably, it works is all I care about.
-
lem729 last edited by admin
You've established your hostility to the New Opera right away with the way you presented the issue. Yes, it shares an engine with Chrome, but it's very different than Chrome, as Rafaelluik points out quite well in his quite precise and informative post.
Look, the extension possibilities in Opera 22 are superb (one can use extensions in the Chrome store AND the in the Opera add-on store), and I am getting more functionailty for what I need in Opera 22, than I got in Opera Presto which had all of those features bundled into it that I never ever used. I love the speed dial (with folders). It's polished, aesthetically pleasing, a superb vehicle for showcasing favorites. Chrome has nothing like it. Opera 22 has a wonderful, minimalist look. I hide in it the personal bookmarks bar, use Chrookmarks for Chrome as a bookmarks manager. I'm delighted with the blazing speed of the browser. Can access a full range of sites (Opera Presto was becoming dated, and had problems with a number of sites). All in all, I'm really happy with this browser. I realize they've had to reprogam the whole thing (and this does take some time) but I'm feeling good on where we are now, and -- as the programming proceeds with one update quickly following another -- for the future.
-
-
Deleted User last edited by
Still running 12.15. Will continue until it cannot render any pages, at which point hopefully somebody will have built a better browser. It would be great if Tetzchner founded a new browser company.
-
drewfx last edited by
I found that though there are some good extensions, in general they are a waste of my time.
There are a few that I use, but after spending much time searching for extensions and reading reviews and installing them only to find out they only worked badly, inconsistently or were tedious compared to 12.17, I decided I'd be better off creating my own extensions (assuming the extension API even supports what I want to do).
I look at Chrome-based Opera as a different browser entirely. It has some advantages, but it's a terrible substitute for Presto-Opera for those of us who actually used and/or depended on some of Presto's unique features.
-
-
drewfx last edited by
@drewfx
Which extensions are you trying to create?Nothing currently, as I don't have enough to desire for it.
The point is just that they are not difficult to create for anyone who can do basic web coding, but the API limits what you can do.
http://dev.opera.com/extensions/tut_getting_started.html
The API info is basically the same as on the Chrome dev site, but Chrome have some sample code too:
https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/samples
I believe it's easier to spend my time just creating one that both works and works the way I want rather than wasting time searching for something and being dissatisfied with it.
-
lem729 last edited by
If you make a good one, maybe you can get it for everyone on the Opera add-on site.
-
-
eldani last edited by
I kept using Opera 12 for a few weeks after the announcement of the switch to a Chromium/Blink base. After it became clear, that the old version wouldn't receive any bug-fixes anymore but would be limited to fixes for the most obvious security issues, I started looking for a proper alternative. I have grown used to Opera's wide array of features, having used a lot of them for several years, so I saw no sense in doing without most of these excellent features, just so I could keep using a browser with the Opera brand. If I had been happy with the new Opera 15, I would have already been using Chrome for months or years!
Waiting on Opera to get on top of their new code-base is a trying time for (formerly) loyal users like me. I have come to realize that the new Opera based on Google Chrome, like every other Chromium fork out there, has signaled the departure from the old "everything but the kitchen sink" Opera. With that realization came my acknowledgement, that it wouldn't fit my requirements anymore and that I would have to admit defeat sooner or later. Right now I'm still checking the developer version of Opera every few weeks or months, but there are too little changes, too few new features to make it worth my time.
What I'm missing in no particular order:
Bookmarks. While there is a bookmarks bar again, the functionality has been as basic as it gets for almost a year now. Even old pre-2000 browsers offered more in that regard. In short: it's a death-knell for anyone requiring a more elaborate bookmarks management, because my several hundred bookmarks require active administration and that's just not possible yet.
Sidebar. Just like any other Chromium-based browser, Opera 15+ has no side-bar. That's a real shame, because I have been using one for different purposes for as long as I have had a browser with that feature. Once I got my first wide-screen display, it has been active the whole time and even today the number of websites using a full wide-screen layout is small. Bookmarks, history, error console, news feed and whatever else you can think of, there is no place in the new Opera for it without the sidebar.
Per-site/domain settings. Although I believe this was promised to find its way back into the new Opera, this feature has been missing in action since version 12. The different settings per web page (respectively domain) have been one of the strongest features of the old Opera. I have been looking for an alternative ever since I stopped using Opera 12 and haven't found anything so far! An option like that would make Opera unique again.
Tab bar. I'm sad to say, but Opera's current tab bar is just as bad as the ones in all other Chromium-based browsers. It's nice enough for a casual user, but once you start with a dozen or more tabs, the whole thing goes to hell. I'm aware that there are a few tab management extensions for Chrome, but they are rather primitive, cumbersome to use and can't hold a candle to what the old Opera could do in this regard or what Firefox (with Tab Mix Plus for example) is capable of. No multi-row tab bar, no tab grouping, no fixed width tabs, no visual indicator of an updated website in a background tab, no way to protect tabs (stop from closing accidentally), no list of previously closed tabs, no unloaded tabs (so they don't take CPU and memory resources). In short, it's the major reason why I'm not using Opera 15+ as my primary browser.
Dragonfly. The old Opera had been a favorite development tool for years, but the small market share of Opera and the limitations and incompatibilities of Presto always required a second or third browser. Despite all that, I liked Opera Dragonfly the best and would prefer it even today over the developer tools in Firefox or Chrome. The new Opera is a disappointment in that, because it only uses a copy of the Chrome tools. I remember reading about a job advert for a Dragonfly developer some time last year, but that has been a long time ago already and nothing has emerged so far in the browser.
To make a long story short: the new Opera is clearly geared towards a different kind of user. Some functions have equivalents in form of extensions, but there are also a number of things that are simply impossible to replicate. Although I'm not always happy with my Firefox - it's not nearly as responsive and doesn't feel as fast as Opera or Chrome for example - it has by far the best options for customization, both visual and functional. In the end I much prefer modifying Firefox to my needs, rather than re-learning everything and forgoing essential stuff with a Chrome-like browser I didn't want in the first place. This lets me get the most out of the browser, which is very important to me, because I actually have to work with it.
That's where I stand at the moment and it seems that other people must have similar opinions, or there wouldn't be threads like these. By the way, I found the market share analysis of Clicky Analytics ( http://clicky.com/marketshare/global/web-browsers/opera/ ) very telling. If numbers are to be believed, there have been more people using Opera 12 than Opera 15+ until at least April of 2014, although the final version of the reinvented browser had already been available for around 10 months. Also, current numbers (0.19 percent using Opera 11, 0.25 Opera 12, 0.33 Opera 22) suggest that even as recently as June 2014, the old 11 and 12 versions of the browser remain rather popular compared to the current Opera in active development.
-
blackbird71 last edited by@eldani, I agree with most of your comments regarding missing browser elements, as they echo many of my own sentiments. However, in my quest for a replacement for Old Opera as my primary browser (thus far ending at the same destination as you with Firefox), I've come to realize that nearly all of the browser design in the present era is bent toward exporting detailed functionality to extensions. Even the browsers that still retain functional granularity (eg: FF) are increasingly either hiding it deeper in the bowels of the browser or are altering it beyond further usefulness. It seems to reflect the over-arching era of "no user serviceable parts inside", and it will probably persist for as long - that is, until the market currents driving it are diverted by some abrupt new trend that renders the current one unsustainable. But for now, things are what they are: namely, browsers themselves are becoming very basic, and user customizations must be bolted on after-the-fact via extensions, subject to all the limitations of speed, consistency, security, and performance which that entails.
Opera has an interesting dilemma, having decided to join the design trend of a basic browser relying on extensions for user functional customizations. In order to grow share, it has to provide a basic browser distinctiveness sufficient to break loose a part of the competitive browsers' user bases without incurring crushing developmental costs in crafting that distinctiveness... developing the necessary distinctiveness implies putting things into the browser that diverge from the economics of a simplistic browser. You can only go so far with unique themes, backgrounds, and such. Browser speed races are illusionary and transient, as past history has demonstrated. Having abandoned its proprietary Presto core, Opera has adopted the same core as many of its competitors, which limits to large degree the liberties it can take in economically fashioning truly revolutionary user concepts or configurability - and made whatever it does develop easier to be more quickly copied by its competitors.
I have no idea how this is all going to play out. I still have hopes for Opera, since they still exhibit creativity, something that must never be underestimated. I also have hopes that a return to native user configurability will happen in the realms of browser design, particularly once the market's infatuation with all things Chrome has run its inevitable course. Frankly, my secret hope is that Opera, in order to obtain the necessary distinctiveness needed to survive in the marketplace, will gradually discover that it has to turn back to providing elements of the user control that was for so long its hallmark under Presto. In the meantime, I use the best browser at hand that meets my needs, whatever browser that might be, and I watch and trial various browsers as they emerge.
-
lem729 last edited by
I have no idea how this is all going to play out. I still have hopes for Opera, since they still exhibit creativity, something that must never be underestimated. I also have hopes that a return to native user configurability will happen in the realms of browser design, particularly once the market's infatuation with all things Chrome has run its inevitable course. Frankly, my secret hope is that Opera, in order to obtain the necessary distinctiveness needed to survive in the marketplace, will gradually discover that it has to turn back to providing elements of the user control that was for so long its hallmark under Presto. In the meantime, I use the best browser at hand that meets my needs, whatever browser that might be, and I watch and trial various browsers as they emerge.
Now @blackbird71, you think/hope Opera will have nowhere to go but back to the Presto universe of more and more configurability? I wouldn't go to the bank on that one
I think that Presto approach was a dead end -- not viable financially. I mean, if even the bottomless financial mega-giants aren't going that route, what would make you think a much more financially limited company could do it. I think Opera will find a way, within the limitations of the engine (the fact that others are using the same thing), to out-perform by being innovative, creative . . .Coast for Ipad is an example of highly creative Opera using the same engine as all browsers in iOS, -- WebKit / Nitro HTML and JavaScript engines... Now let's look at the "more" idea, that is, "more is better." Coast has less ability to bookmark than some others, is a bit slower, though not terribly, is maybe harder to handle multiple tabs with, doesn't provide voice searches, like Chrome, doesn't have an ad blocker like Dolphin, doesn't have a separate reading feature (which complex pages are rendered simpler, and more manageable, like Mercury. And yet the browser is awesomely distinctive, original, has won all sorts of awards, is a pleasure to use, etc. In Coast for Ipad, every bookmark feels like an app -- which is quite a browser breakthrough, and makes the heart and soul of it feel closer to the Ipad itself, than any other browser is. The platform/atmospherics, with the background art is superb -- giving you the ability to set as wallpaper, every photo or piece of wallpaper you have in the ipad (no other browser has a platform/setup to be able to make use of that).
What it shows is that sharing an engine with other browsers in no way limits creativity, or the ability to distinguish, that the whole isn't necessarily how many features you offer and how fast you can go. It's maybe Western, and perhaps not healthy to always think that more more more (in terms of features), like our consumer driven society with its endless gadgets, clothing, furniture,wealth accumulation, etc., is better. There's something to be said for originality and quality, even when it's understated, or minimalist. There is now. There always has been.
I see Opera doing similar things with its desktop browser -- finding a way within the constraints of the similar engine, to stand out, from others who have that engine. And I'd be shocked if they try to do it through greater ability to customize, or with more features. I don't see them playing the more more more game. They simple can't compete with the giants, like Google, on that playing field. The path for them though innovation, creativity and art is to offer less in the accumulation of endless features, but to make the experience for the user better.
-
Deleted User last edited by
I can guarantee that Opera is not going back to a Presto-like browser. I love the new browser with one exception: its current inability to deliver a readable toolbar. Once that is resolved, it becomes my default.
-
lem729 last edited by
That's a basic problem, @leushino
By toolbar are you referring to the icon extension bar? Strangely, and I can't figure this out at all, I can barely make sense of the icon extension bar in Firefox, the icons are so tiny there. But in Opera 22, they're fine for me. I'm using Windows 7. I've stopped using Firefox much as a backup browser to Opera 22 because of how bad/incomprehensible the tiny icons are. Isn't it odd, my problem with Firefox icons in Windows 7 is the flip side of your problem with Opera 22 extension icons. It seems to be related to the interaction of Windows 7 and Windows 8 with these browsers. -
blackbird71 last edited by
...
Now @blackbird71, you think/hope Opera will have nowhere to go but back to the Presto universe of more and more configurability? I wouldn't go to the bank on that one I think that Presto approach was a dead end -- not viable financially. I mean, if even the bottomless financial mega-giants aren't going that route, what would make you think a much more financially limited company could do it. I think Opera will find a way, within the limitations of the engine (the fact that others are using the same thing), to out-perform by being innovative, creative . . .
...Well, we'll have to agree to disagree about some aspects of that. The "bottomless financial mega-giants" aren't going 'that route' for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that free web browsers, to them, are packaged goods designed to support other corporate agendas. One could reverse your observation just as easily... what would make you think those "financial mega-giants" aren't able to innovate and be creative to a greater extent than a "financially limited" company like Opera? Or simply copy and refine whatever Opera innovates upon? That kind of outfit invented Webkit and Chrome to start with, after all, and set in motion a galaxy of offshoot browsers... and every single one of those Chromish offshoot browsers remains a minor-league player, some of them after years of trying. Perhaps they simply lack the creativity or innovative sense that Opera possesses, but that might also be a dangerous over-simplification of some underlying realities.
In one sense, I'm a believer in the fact (not opinion) that companies who receive negative customer feedback absolutely need to look carefully at the specific pinch-points that prompt the feedback. Companies that dismiss such complaints as customers who just don't understand, are stuck in their ways, or are either too dumb or stubborn to "adapt" are companies that will find eventually find themselves out of touch with their base and ultimately out of the market. While you (and perhaps Opera) might think they'll just create a new and bigger base of other new users, that base will necessarily consist of users easily wooed from other browsers for "flashy" kinds of reasons-'d-jour. And such a base will just as quickly desert them as soon as a competitive browser comes up with its own bigger kind of "flashiness"... there is no real loyalty in such a zero-sum world.
Repeatedly, old Opera users and newcomers alike have observed and complained of various kinds of 'awkwardness' with Opera's current bookmarking. Ditto for per-site settings, side panels, lack of tab/tool bar configurability, and so on. One can always dismiss these complaints by telling them to use extensions, or that they need to adapt to the New Order... but that is doing precisely what a smart company will never do: simply dismiss the pinch-points. These complaining people are telling us that Opera as presently delivered has problems itself that users are discovering, noting, and writing Opera about. Most of those complaints can be summed up in the term "configurability".
If Opera is half as smart, creative, and innovative as you think (and I hope), they should be able to eventually address at least some these issues themselves without simply blowing off the sources of the complaints. @leushino and @lem729, I'm neither advocating Presto or a return to a 'Presto universe". But I am hoping (obviously no longer secretly) that Opera will eventually address at least some of these user-configuration issues creatively within the browser itself. Otherwise, I fear Opera will ultimately be performing a 6-foot leap across a 10-foot ditch in pursuit of a market it sees on the other side.
-
lem729 last edited by
Ahhhh, you hope Opera eventually addresses some user-configuration issues . . . Well, sure. I have no problem with that, though I thought maybe you went a tad bit further when you said: "Frankly, my secret hope is that Opera, in order to obtain the necessary distinctiveness needed to survive in the marketplace, will gradually discover that it has to turn back to providing elements of the user control that was for so long its hallmark under Presto." On the other hand, if you just said, some additional elements of user control are desireable -- and didn't mention Presto in the same breath -- I would've been right on board. (I just wasn't sure how far you were going with the Presto reference). I mean, why shouldn't users have a right to opt out of Opera reviewing all the website we go to, because it wants to be able to warn us of fraudulent/phishing sites (there are privacy issues there), or to have control over whether to take an update, over the size of menus or icon bar, to name a few user control issues. I think accessibility is an important issue. What good is a browser if one can't read the menus?
-
Deleted User last edited by
That's a basic problem, @leushino
By toolbar are you referring to the icon extension bar? Strangely, and I can't figure this out at all, I can barely make sense of the icon extension bar in Firefox, the icons are so tiny there. But in Opera 22, they're fine for me. I'm using Windows 7. I've stopped using Firefox much as a backup browser to Opera 22 because of how bad/incomprehensible the tiny icons are. Isn't it odd, my problem with Firefox icons in Windows 7 is the flip side of your problem with Opera 22 extension icons. It seems to be related to the interaction of Windows 7 and Windows 8 with these browsers.I'm on Windows 8.1 and have just the opposite issue of yours, lem729. I'm not a fan of FF but it's far
more readable so it is currently my default. And yes... it is odd. I'm certain this issue will soon be
resolved. -
blackbird71 last edited by admin
Ahhhh, you hope Opera eventually addresses some user-configuration issues . . . Well, sure. I have no problem with that, though I thought maybe you went a tad bit further when you said: "Frankly, my secret hope is that Opera, in order to obtain the necessary distinctiveness needed to survive in the marketplace, will gradually discover that it has to turn back to providing elements of the user control that was for so long its hallmark under Presto." On the other hand, if you just said, some additional elements of user control are desireable -- and didn't mention Presto in the same breath -- I would've been right on board. (I just wasn't sure how far you were going with the Presto reference). ...
Probably I wasn't clear enough in my choice of wording. What always impressed me about Opera ASA in the Presto days was its responsiveness to user needs, and which acted to make the browser into a convenient tool to use in various scenarios for a wide array of users. As we all realize, each Old Opera user (or any user, for that matter) has a 'short list' of things he feels he needs in a browser. As the "needs" from different users in voiced complaints are overlaid on each other, certain ones will stand out as common to many user complaints... and those are the ones that are user 'pinch-points' for the browser. Having watched the forum threads both here and in MyOpera, its clear to me that the ones mentioned above by @eldani or myself are some of the ones that recur many times over... they're pinch-points. Certainly there are many configurability elements from the Presto era that may never re-appear - some because they're minor, some because they're now obsolete on the web, and some because there are only so many things that can be done without disrupting design strategy and the budget.
But there has been a 'temper' or 'flavor' in quite a few user complaint threads, and frankly in some developer comments, that are rather dismissive of those more common issues cited earlier in this thread - and the people raising them. As I've noted in other places in the forum, extensions have their place, but they'e not a cure-all; there are some recognizable performance problems with extensions which attempt to substitute for, or supplement, Opera's current performance (or lack) in these areas of more common complaint. It's to your ( @lem729 ) great credit that you so often go the extra mile to point out relevant extensions for folks having "issues", but for some users in some situations, extensions don't "cut it" like a built-in functionality. And it's in these commonly-voiced areas that Opera should be paying serious attention to the nature and foci of the negative user feedback. However, as @eldani has pointed out in a different thread (https://forums.opera.com/post/43420), significant time has now passed for Blink Opera with not much to show in terms of design response (and even less to show in terms of developer comments) to the more-common user complaints of configurability omissions. Time goes by quickly in the technical world, Internet time goes by even faster. That perceived slowness of Opera to respond to the complaints, coupled with the all-too-common drift in forum responses toward dismissiveness of complaints, combine to raise concern that perhaps Opera is simply ignoring the negative feedback. One can only hope, however, that Opera has learned something about the dangers of that, back when the first backlash deluged the forums, largely because users felt Opera wasn't communicating with them about their concerns, and about which Opera promised to do much better.
-
lem729 last edited by
Well, Opera, I'm sure, is not disinterested in feedback, though they have been doing pretty well lately, so that can't be too down and desperate. Did you see the article about Microsoft selecting Opera as the first default browser on their phones.
http://betanews.com/2014/06/24/microsoft-selects-opera-as-default-browser-for-its-android-phones/
I think Opera will do what it will do on desktop based on what it perceives to be a good product
I have respect for their creativeness. And that may involve adding more configurability as time passes. I mean, giving the user some choices seems like common sense. However, you know, with the mobile market (andoid, apple, desktop, they have a lot of irons in the fire. Their time frame to get things done on their desktop product, and that of certain users like eldani, might not be the same thing. Now, I would think the highest priority for something very soon has to be importing bookmarks from third party browsers. I mean, that's a first step, before anything else significant. I believe you once said also it ought to be their highest priority. I'd be worried if we don't see that by maybe Opera 24, or even 23 (would be even nicer). Maybe the Opera Next people have heard something. What's hard to gauge is whether they're having problems with the importing feature. Another urgent feature, I would think is making the icon bar readable for Windows 8.1 people. (Although Firefox has a similar problem with thier icon bar for Windows 7 people: I can barely see mine, it's so tiny). These priorities -- a bookmark importer, and propsective users being able to see the icons -- have to be a far greater priority than that customization stuff.I don't feel like I'm sitting waiting for something, because I do like the browser right now.
