Vivaldi
-
blackbird71 last edited byFWIW, Opera's words at the time followed along the line that the move away from Presto was "mainly just an under-the-hood change". That did indeed raise certain expectations among Opera's userbase that much of the user-side of Opera would be preserved. I cannot help wondering whether or not those initial words were the result of naivete at the time by those who issued them regarding the inherent architectural issues with Webkit/Blink. But to be fair, there were other words issued at that same time by Opera cautioning users that Opera was intentionally targeting a broader userbase, and that there was no guarantee that certain Opera features would be continued.
In any case, that's ALL in the rear-view mirror now. What I or others hoped for, expected, or simply dreamed would happen has unfolded in its own unique way. Blink Opera is now here for all to see and use. Vivaldi is now emerging for users to also see and use. Both browsers are likely to follow their own distinct paths into the future. Other browsers offer still other paths. The world is constantly changing, software as well. I'm just grateful for the choices still being offered, whether or not any one of them fully meet my hopes or expectations.
-
blackbird71 last edited by
...
The question is, will Vivaldi ever get past Presto's previous 1-2% market share? Not that being a niche browser is untenable from a business perspective, but I'm sure they would hope for more. And now that Opera will be somewhat freed of pressure to mimic Presto, which direction should they go?I believe the real question is how to truly grow market share without simply eating each other's lunch. If Vivaldi were to absorb "most of the former Opera users", then Opera's remaining market share stats won't look good at all. To truly grow, both browsers have to figure out ways to successfully move users away from Chrome, IE, and FF, since they own the vast share of the browser market. I'm frankly not yet convinced either Opera or Vivaldi really knows yet how to solve that problem. There's a major chasm between having neat, creative technical ideas and having (and promoting) sound, creative concepts that can come to dominate an existing marketplace.
-
-
loxiw last edited by
I do not like that flat design, apart from that it's really interesting and I'll consider swapping when the time arrives, that depends of Opera
-
georgesywf last edited by
According to the review of Vivaldi browser on a blog it say that
"Like turbo or off road mode which enables anyone to save data, Vivaldi doesn’t seem to have one "
What you guys think, does vivaldi have a data saving feature or not ?
If not can we expect it in future ?
-
-
blackbird71 last edited by
+1 to what @sgunhouse just wrote. So far, this is just a Technical Preview version, akin to what Opera was releasing developmentally prior to v15. Jon has already noted Vivaldi plans approximately weekly update releases, starting shortly. So let's just see how it all unfolds before jumping to any conclusions about anything.
-
ozoratsubasa last edited by
The interface is entirely written in HTML. That makes it incredibly flexible. You can basically do anything you want with it.
This is interesting
Vivaldi is a good browser for power users, but for beginners it is not. Sometimes a person just to browse on the web and don't need a software with a lot of features that does not need.
I think different: Vivaldi as the old Opera give a lot of options for browsing. The user will just use the necessary features for him. Even I being a "power user", neither all of old Opera I used (or used less).
UI is very sluggish.
Yeah, i hope they improve it soon
Otter is closer to old Opera than Vivaldi. Vivaldi is a better Chropera, but still Chropera.
Yeah, I am thinking now if the dev will keep the Otter, now the Vivaldi Browser came out. Anyone knows?
-
christoph142 last edited by
UI is very sluggish.
Yeah, i hope they improve it soon
A huge performance bug was fixed recently. So the next public developer build (soon! ;)) will be mostly fine for anybody not using very high screen resolutions.
Otter is closer to old Opera than Vivaldi. Vivaldi is a better Chropera, but still Chropera.
Yeah, I am thinking now if the dev will keep the Otter, now the Vivaldi Browser came out. Anyone knows?
Jon is in contact with him. Time will tell. :sherlock:
-
namal23 last edited by
I don't like the name though...vivaldi..I wonder who and how they came up with that name
-
-
namal23 last edited by
I was thinking the same, weird name.
Ok, I have done some thinking. Vivaldi was a componist and he wrote some operas
-
Deleted User last edited by
Jón von Tetzchner is a opera music fan. Thats why the company he had cofounded was named Vivaldi Technologies AS, and therfore the web browser is Vivaldi.
-
A Former User last edited by
Vivaldi now has a drop down button inside to reopen typed URLs. I requested this to opera several times and now Vivaldi brought it back.
-
A Former User last edited by
If any of you are trying it out on Linux and you get the blackened menu options and right click menus then start it from the terminal.
vivaldi --disable-gpu-compositingThey don't have a GUI option to disable it. It's also throwing errors on a VM and on a live install and on a normal install with Ubuntu, Lubuntu, and Linux Mint. I've not tried anything else.
-
limboslam last edited by
Vivaldi Beta is now out and ready for download!! See blog post here: https://vivaldi.net/en-US/teamblog/66-the-first-vivaldi-beta
-
A Former User last edited by
I've tried the Vivaldi Beta and it's impressive (don't like the simple ui though). Unfortunately at present, there are a few missing features which would stop me using it as a main browser. The Speed Dial is nowhere near as good as Opera's and it can't be set as the homepage. I'm sure they'll improve the features before stable release. Not sure I'd ever use it instead of Opera though.
-
A Former User last edited by
Don't you think, perhaps, they're trying to catch the yester day?
I imagine a browser like Opera (now) or Firefox, where I can put any needed extension to improve capacity/comfort/usability - and it'll most probably work. If it wouldn't, I'll dump this and try another, or something...
Like that home page, like my speed dial in Firefox - by extension... -
A Former User last edited by
I mean what? The old Opera was all in one. Now they're building an all-in-one TODAY -- well, I might see it as making a Frankenstein: in any browser now, if something ain't working, you take an extension or use another browser for a while - till the patch/update (if it works). In a frankenstein you'll have to wait for an update/upgrade in any case - well, unless there's a beta stream, or even yet another - dev, like in Opera now...
I don't know. Depends, maybe, on the existence of an engine, say, that might "do lego" of sorts - easily mended. I mean making a frankenstein - making it a bit less Frankensteinish... -
blackbird71 last edited by
Don't you think, perhaps, they're trying to catch the yester day?
I imagine a browser like Opera (now) or Firefox, where I can put any needed extension to improve capacity/comfort/usability - and it'll most probably work. If it wouldn't, I'll dump this and try another, or something...
Like that home page, like my speed dial in Firefox - by extension...And when Firefox switches to their new extension API to accommodate Chrome extensions (soon, as in their next major version or so, as explained by their roadmap), all those wonderful and unique Firefox extensions you may rely upon for important (to you) features will have their code broken. Broken, that is, until the extension authors get around to learning the elements of the new API and coding their products accordingly or unless a similar Chrome extension exists. Obviously, there will be a transition period so the old extensions won't 'go away' quite so suddenly, but there are indeed a number of key extension coders who have already stated there's no possible way they can do what their extensions do currently in Firefox if forced to use the new API - so they'll be bailing out and their extensions (and all those users) will eventually just go 'poof' into yet another kind of "yester day".
The reality is that if the browser itself doesn't deliver a feature that a user wants, that feature either will remain missing or the browser must rely on a third party to deliver it via extension. When the browser sustains major redesign, it forces all the third-party extension authors to do likewise, whatever the costs or impact to them. And even if they do redesign, a smooth and reliable outcome is not guaranteed, particularly since the browser developers are under no obligation to help make things work. On the other hand, if the browser does contain a feature the user wants, its own developers have the full responsibility to keep making it work even if the browser is heavily redesigned, or else publish that the feature is being discontinued - in which case, they must face a potential user firestorm similar to what Opera has endured over the last two years.
Personally, I much prefer the idea of including as many features as possible into the browser itself along with user options to employ them or not, PLUS including the ability to utilize extensions as well. This is what Vivaldi is attempting to do, though how well it turns out is yet to be fully revealed.
