Questions about Opera 20.
-
rainspa last edited by
@blackbird71
I agree with you. I too now have Firefox customised to look and behave as much like old Opera as I could have hoped or would have expected. I can't claim to have migrated, old Opera is still my preferred browser with a button for open in Firefox for problem sites. If extensions in Opera Blink could mimic old Opera perhaps all would have been well and good but that isn't the case.As to the original post I think its apparent that Opera Blink isn't intended as a replacement for old Opera, if it was Opera would have made that clear by now and if the old functions are to make a come back they won't work in the same way as they did.
-
lem729 last edited by
A good business doesn't go against the market. It tries to divine the market. Sometimes it has to look more than a few years down the road. I think Opera has done that, as have Firefox and Chrome. At this point the market, and the model that the vast preponderance of people want, is clear.The effort now is to build a fast, attractive, bare bones browser with an emphasis on safety -- to keep it sufficiently insulated from the extensions so that if an extension is bad, it can be uninstalled without adversely affecting the architecture of the basic browser. All of the major browser developers have adopted the extension model as the way for a user to add extras that they need, rather than the software developer's lavishing the extras on the browser, even if many or most of their users have no need or desire for them. Now @jitto463 wants Opera to do more, because as he says: " being able to customize the placement of toolbars, the keyboard/mouse layout, etc. These things are not going to "slow the browser." I think he is "letting wish be father to the thought." If the litany of extras -- customizable toolbars, session managers, ways to deal with 50 or 100 tabs a la Tab Mixed Plus in Firefox -- that people bandy about in this forum were put in the Opera browser, it's hard to imagine that it could be done in a way that was cost-effective for Opera, and that didn't impact overall performance. I do think, though, that Opera ought to let its users decide whether they want to install updates. It seems to me that that should be no big deal, and a matter of common sense and basic fairness to the user.
-
-
lem729 last edited by
No. It's a verb, though maybe not used that often, meaning: To guess , discover, or understand . . .
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/american-english/divine_3
though that verb has an echo of (the same word as adjective) which means godly or the god-like. I guess I was thinking that these big techno-players are above us, a force of sometimes huge creativity, etc. And also maybe one could say, only God knows the future. We, on the other hand, take what information we can and try to "divine" the future. If we can do that, in that limited sense, we're perhaps god-like. That may be where the verb divine comes from.
-
blackbird71 last edited byA good business doesn't go against the market. It tries to divine the market. Sometimes it has to look more than a few years down the road. I think Opera has done that, as have Firefox and Chrome. At this point the market, and the model that the vast preponderance of people want, is clear.The effort now is to build a fast, attractive, bare bones browser with an emphasis on safety -- to keep it sufficiently insulated from the extensions so that if an extension is bad, it can be uninstalled without adversely affecting the architecture of the basic browser. All of the major browser developers have adopted the extension model as the way for a user to add extras that they need, rather than the software developer's lavishing the extras on the browser, even if many or most of their users have no need or desire for them. ...
A better business shapes the market... and you don't shape the market by copying the market's leaders or their strategies. You shape the market by creating demonstrably better mousetraps and showing the marketplace they're actually far superior. The problem is that most businesses see the market as it is, and carefully extrapolate evident trends or competitors' strategies well down the road ("divining", as you term it). But the companies that actually shape the market see beyond where the market is and where it appears to be headed, leaping outside the box to create something truly new that itself causes the market to be drawn in that same direction. Case in point: there was nothing quite like Google when they started out... they created both an effective search-entity and the data-marketing business model that have since re-shaped the entire marketplace.
Perhaps Opera has such a level of innovation in mind... but thus far I haven't seen it. I initially had hopes that Stash might actually be the start of some new, revolutionary concept - but it now seems still-born. Usually market-shaping innovation comes from those not wedded to "market models" per se, but to a compelling vision of where the market might go if only it had a tool with thus-and-so capabilities... along with the capabilities to make it actually happen.
Mosaic created a browser that truly opened up the Internet. IE integrated the browser into the OS. Netscape made it user-friendly. Opera made it into a flexible, one-size-does-it-all tool filled with technical innovations. Chrome made it simple to use for non-technical users and guaranteed site compatibility by using all manner of paid tie-ins and favored placements. The next generation of successful browsers will be as distinct from its predecessors as these were from each other... and the company with a strong vision of that next generation will shape that market, not follow it.
-
lem729 last edited by
Opera, the incredible innovator in so many things -- tabs, the magic wand, the trash box for unclosed tabs, the speed dial, the speed dial with folders, Discover, Stash, Off-Road Mode, and it goes on and on -- has no reason to feel bad, if someone else other than Opera came to the extension idea first. Is anyone right on everything all of the time? And by the bye,
might I suggest that sometimes market leaders have generally correct strategies! (Lol, what kind of a world would it be if the strategies were always defective). In looking two, three, four years down the road, it appears to be Opera's belief that the browsing public WILL STILL PREFER a fast, attractive, fun browser, one that is not cluttered and slowed by a range of features they have no desire or use for.As for extra features, the extension route is time-tested and has a strong popular appeal. Because Opera came to the extension idea late, in no way means it can't execute it better. The play is in how well the bare bones, fast, attractive browser can be set in an architecture insulated enough from the extensions, that if the latter fail -- or if a consumer decides he or she doesn't want a particular extension -- all is well with the browser through an uninstall of the extension or extensions. And the success in this strategy is also in how productive third party developers will be in providing a sound product to meet demand, not just now, but further down the road as needs become clearer.
In the end, we will lose people to other browsers (regrettably, you to Firefox, Mr Blackbird71), but we have new people coming here all the time too, who are fed up with those other browsers. Opera does need to do something better than in Opera 20 for importing bookmarks from other browsers, or these wannabe Opera users may not be willing to give us a close look (and I'm not sure there's time to wait for an extension to adequately do it). For the moment, that's rather pathetic, a weakness, that Opera needs to fix. Surely (smile) the Opera browser development team must know it. Finally, instead of fighting a rear-guard action to preserve the past when the metaphoric Opera horse is out of the barn, and like a thoroughbred, off and racing, the focus of our community ought to be much more with advocating for extensions that are safe, and which meets needs that the bare bones browser doesn't. I look at the Opera Add-On forum, and there is not much substantive discussion of the extensions/add-ons that are already out there (and there are some good ones) -- they're strengths and shortcomings, if any. If we help to encourage the development of more and better extensions, through articulating here in the forum why something works, and why it doesn't, we will ultimately -- one at least hopes -- benefit ourselves as Opera users.
-
Deleted User last edited by
A question about Opera 20: how can I put only icons of the sites in speed dial?
-
Deleted User last edited by
@sidneyneto: I don't believe it's possible at this stage.
@rainspa: Quote: " I think its apparent that Opera Blink isn't intended as a replacement for old Opera.."
I completely agree. Opera is not going to recreate the Presto browser suite so if there are users still clinging to that notion, I think you've been mislead. In my opinion, lem said it best when he posted: "A good business doesn't go against the market. It tries to divine the market. Sometimes it has to look more than a few years down the road. I think Opera has done that, as have Firefox and Chrome. At this point the market, and the model that the vast preponderance of people want, is clear."
There are reasons why Opera has remained under 2% for years and why Chrome and Firefox shot up to 20% almost instantly. This is where the market is and Opera realizes this. We can bemoan the loss of the unique suite but "we" are few in number and fast becoming an online oddity. Opera is looking towards the future and as I said earlier, there will inevitably be casualties and no doubt some of them are posting here in this thread and elsewhere on the Opera forums.
-
-
Deleted User last edited by
Thanks. At least, some sites has the icon when it is added, example: when you add Facebook or Google.
