Vivaldi
-
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 byDon'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.
-
A Former User last edited by
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.
You're right. It depends on the engine though - OR if the developers are of genious enough to overcome some "built-in" awkwardness of it.
I imagine the structure would better be lego-like in order for each and every element to get replaced with a better one if needed. -
canadagoose4ever last edited by
In the final analysis it's all about money. Vivaldi, in my opinion of course, will fail for that very reason. Making a suite complete with a plethora of features similar to Presto Opera is only attractive to an exceedingly small group of users. Most people couldn't care less and once Edge has extensions, you'll likely see its numbers increase dramatically. How deep do you think Von Tetzchner's pockets are? His only hope to continue is to attract advertisers and how many of them will want to support a browser with a market share like Vivaldi's? Ultimately his pipe dream will fail and only a small group will be aware of this failure. The world of software browsers is moving rapidly towards the mobile market so that resurrecting a suite from the 90's to appeal to a small group of users is ridiculous.
-
A Former User last edited by
On the other hand, Canada, what is the share of people that enjoy, say, certain sports, or some kinds of music, or literature, or other arts? Or, say, convey certain very interesting but barely crowded branches of science?
There have always been essential minorities, and it's such minorities that have always driven the humanity. The progress, the science, the arts... Majorities are those who is driven, they've never been the primordial drivers - they could only PASS the impulse, reverberate, etc. - in cases of those revolutions, wars, etc. (those revolutions themselves have always been made by certain minorities initially, I believe).
I agree though that scientific research, most arts, sports require money...
-
A Former User last edited by
Making a suite complete with a plethora of features similar to Presto Opera is only attractive to an exceedingly small group of users.
I would say those who complain that Opera isn't the same any more are 'an exceedingly small group of users'. Maybe as a percentage of Opera users it's quite a lot but in overall browser usage, most likely tiny. It will initially be this tiny amount of users who will use Vivaldi and I wouldn't see it being enough to make long term development of the browser worthwhile...or profitable.
-
canadagoose4ever last edited by
I agree, cozza. And while Von Tetzchner may have altruistic motives for starting this new browser suite, that does not make something into a success. Money is required and his pockets are not deep enough nor are advertisers going to want to flock to support his suite. It cannot succeed in the long run and it's really as simple as that. People have moved past the 90's and browser suites that are feature rich. It's yesterday. I'm surprised he fails to see that. It may be that he's been blinded by the manner in which he was shown the door and his desire to recreate Opera but he's years too late for this. I suppose he could eventually charge for the suite to help pay his developers and I would almost guarantee that the small group of users will further fracture at that point. Vivaldi is dead in the water... but Von Tetzchner doesn't know it yet.
-
A Former User last edited by
@canadagoose4ever Another really important point is that a lot of internet usage has gone mobile these days. Many people have replaced desktop/laptop computers with mobile devices. If Vivaldi is to be successful, it would need to enter this already saturated market. Somehow I can't see their 'power user experience' transferring over to a mobile browser.
-
blackbird71 last edited by
... his pockets are not deep enough
... nor are advertisers going to want to flock to support his suite
... It cannot succeed in the long run
... Vivaldi is dead in the water...You've made some pretty absolute and categorical statements there. I have no idea of the depth of Jon's pockets nor just how Vivaldi will fare in the months/years to come. I only wish I had your sense of certainty about browsers in order to apply other areas of my life.
-
A Former User last edited by
If 'vivaldi' enters the Android market (perhaps with the new Nokia), they could call it the X-FAT Lady browser, perhaps...
:'D
-
A Former User last edited by
Vivaldi now has the option to disable inline auto complete inside the address bar, I requested this option from Opera for a very long time and they didn't care. Now I can type the stuff I really want inside the address bar without anything being added in front of it. Vivaldi all the way.
