Opera 12.17
-
christoph142 last edited by
@stng: I'm not working for Opera ASA so I'm not qualified to answer this question.
I'm 100% sure though that any regressions are not being introduced on purpose. -
igorditerni last edited by
What about the Opera Mail autoupdater? It's not the same of Opera 12.xx and so affected by Heartbleed?
-
Deleted User last edited by
Why every security update(with exception of 12.17 for obvious reasons) after 12.14 bringed new problems with web sites compatibility through the new rendering flaws? Does quality control still exist? Or it just unneeded for dying Presto and it's not in your company's priority anymore?
It seems evident that Opera Presto is becoming and will become increasingly incompatible with websites. Bear in mind that no development or correction of its engine will be made. All that Opera promised was a security update and they've provided that with 12.17. My guess is that this update will likely be the last. After all... what it the point? It's been 3/4 of a year since the new Opera was introduced. That is plenty of time for users to run in parallel to the old version and get used to its functions OR to download an alternate and migrate there. It's not the company's priority... period. I doubt it is even on their radar anymore.
-
-
hucker last edited bySo, do we get email and newsgroups in Chrome Opera yet?
They chopped off M2 and called it a separate application, Opera Mail.
Thanks, I thought it had gone for good. Pity it won't be in the same window though. I'll stick with Opera 12 until it hates a lot of websites as the main reason I got Opera was to be a 3 in 1 (mail, web, newsgroups), then I'll have to go to Opera mail and some browser or other I guess. I really love the Opera mail client.
-
hucker last edited by
I started my own thread about 12.17 AFTER SEARCHING using the phrase 12.17, which found NO RESULTS, and I think it's extremely rude of you to close my thread without any kind of warning.
What kind of warning did you expect? (Rhetorical!).
It was a duplicate. I pointed you towards this thread. End of story.
(And yeah, obviously searching for numbers isn't working in this forum...)It was because you accused me of not searching first, which I did. Sorry, it's more other admins on other forums that object to posts that don't agree with their personal opinion, they give admins a bad name.
-
hucker last edited by
They should return full-time to working on 12.xx because everything above it is garbage and not real Opera.
Don't be so silly. Deal in the real world. Opera 20 is their browser of choice AND it is the future whether you like it or not. And if you (and some other whiners here on the forum) don't like it, then you have the choice of using the older version OR finding another browser.
How did it get to version TWENTY? Is it just so it sounds a higher number than other browsers? That's eight versions since we changed from Presto? Come on....
-
jito463 last edited by
How did it get to version TWENTY? Is it just so it sounds a higher number than other browsers? That's eight versions since we changed from Presto? Come on....
Actually, it's 6. They skipped straight to Opera 15, jumping over 13 and 14. So from 15 to 20 is 6 versions. Why they have to jump an entire version every time they update is beyond me, though. Whatever happened to incremental version numbers?
-
hucker last edited by
How did it get to version TWENTY? Is it just so it sounds a higher number than other browsers? That's eight versions since we changed from Presto? Come on....
Actually, it's 6. They skipped straight to Opera 15, jumping over 13 and 14. So from 15 to 20 is 6 versions. Why they have to jump an entire version every time they update is beyond me, though. Whatever happened to incremental version numbers?
Maybe 13 and 14 crashed too much and were never released
-
blackbird71 last edited byActually, it's 6. They skipped straight to Opera 15, jumping over 13 and 14. So from 15 to 20 is 6 versions. Why they have to jump an entire version every time they update is beyond me, though. Whatever happened to incremental version numbers?
Maybe 13 and 14 crashed too much and were never released
Does it really matter "why"? In reality, those version numbers were assigned to other things besides the desktop browser at Opera at a time last year when Presto development of other things was still continuing along side Blink development. The real point is that the current fad (apparently started by Chrome) is to jump entire version numbers each time anything of substance is done to the browser code. And so a "rapid release" cycle will cause a rapid increase in version numbering. On the other hand, the new approach at least does away with the ages-old debate over whether a given change from version x to x+1 is justified by the overall degree of changes, or whether instead it should have been renamed to x.1 or even x.0.1. In the end, the version number is just a name to describe a momentary collection of features and compiled code. At any given moment, a browser is what it is - and what it "is" is guaranteed to change shortly thereafter. From my perspective, a better approach is to simply rely on build numbers plus a changelog.
-
hucker last edited by
Actually, it's 6. They skipped straight to Opera 15, jumping over 13 and 14. So from 15 to 20 is 6 versions. Why they have to jump an entire version every time they update is beyond me, though. Whatever happened to incremental version numbers?
Maybe 13 and 14 crashed too much and were never released
Does it really matter "why"? In reality, those version numbers were assigned to other things besides the desktop browser at Opera at a time last year when Presto development of other things was still continuing along side Blink development. The real point is that the current fad (apparently started by Chrome) is to jump entire version numbers each time anything of substance is done to the browser code. And so a "rapid release" cycle will cause a rapid increase in version numbering. On the other hand, the new approach at least does away with the ages-old debate over whether a given change from version x to x+1 is justified by the overall degree of changes, or whether instead it should have been renamed to x.1 or even x.0.1. In the end, the version number is just a name to describe a momentary collection of features and compiled code. At any given moment, a browser is what it is - and what it "is" is guaranteed to change shortly thereafter. From my perspective, a better approach is to simply rely on build numbers plus a changelog.
How does it do away with the debate? Or is there never a .1 Opera anymore? Surely there have been slight fixes other than the main 6 releases?
-
A Former User last edited by
Certainly the Developer versions of the new Opera have sub-versions.
At present it's 22.0.1471.8, it previously was 22.0.1471.5.
I don't know if that's the case with the Stable and Next versions too.
It only changes from 21>22>23 when it's a really major update and/or it moves from one branch to another, e.g. Developer will stay at 22 until it becomes Next, at which point Developer will become 23.
-
hucker last edited by
I wonder if any software has ever been called version 117?
Now that's what I call music gets that high. -
Deleted User last edited by
Is there any workaround to normally login and use mediafire.com
No longer usable in Opera Presto for a long time. -
-
ggmsmolly last edited by
With the inception of the current version, my pages keep crashing unlike before.
