How to win big market share for Opera Windows desktop browser (bookmarks, sync)
-
lem729 last edited by
Nice to hear from you. There was a start up curve with Fast Dial, and lazy me, it looked so horrible at the beginning, when I set it up. Are you saying, the ability with art/wallpaper, etc is as good with Fast Dial 4.11, as with Opera? And that the speed dials/folders don't have to cover it all up. That it can, so to speak, "knock you out." Or are you more of the pragmatic person, just focusing on what you can display in the dial. If so can it permit an infinite display of folders? And does it have a search bar? Since I"m a speed dial junkie -- one of life's small pleasures -- (when I was younger it was roller coasters):))) I'll have to play with it when I have more time
I do think Superstart is pretty good (It's right now my Firefox Speed Dial favorite), though prefer Opera's speed dial, it's terrific ability to customize, and which Speed Dial has an appearance, which often leaves me smiling, particularly when I add the new/perfect background theme.I saw the same thing you did on Opera's having plans via bookmarking, and was hoping they had in mind an "import/export manager," especially to cover imports from third party browsers. That seems to me the main hole in what they have for bookmarks (unless it's to add something in the basic browser, you can get now via extension, such as Add Bookmark. Some people are extension challenged.
so they might want to add a few basic type things. -
wcolwell last edited by
I'm the more pragmatic sort. I'd like if Fast Dial automatically grabbed thumbnails from contained URLs and displayed a random selection of 4 of them on the surface of the folder like Opera's, but the default is a manila folder image; you can add a jpeg icon to each folder apparently though I haven't done that.
I'm not sure about background and artwork generally in Fast Dial. It seems to offer lots of customization (though it may not automate that). I tend to like plain backgrounds so for me background isn't too relevant.
Functionally, I think Fast Dial is very slick, probably more sophisticated than Opera's Speed Dial (but that comes with more menu-driven, vs automated, customization).
-
lem729 last edited by
For me, how it looks, is 50 percent of its quality? Now Opera's Speed Dial is highly functional/customizable, but the other half is there too: it looks wonderful. For me, so far, nothing is close, really. Of course being able to add folders forever, and having a search capacity through them is a must too?
-
wcolwell last edited by
@lem729 I forgot to answer your search question. I just took a look and Fast Dial lets you insert a bunch of search windows across the top of the page(with choices of all search engines you have active in Firefox; I added DuckDuckGo to check; it worked). I haven't used this feature as I just use the combined address/search window for search.
-
rainspa last edited by
If my memory is correct Opera's original speed dial had nine thumbnails, personally I think that's about right, though I have ten, otherwise speed dial (to quote persala, I think,) it becomes slow dial, so in the end its a matter of taste, and personally I like to customise it with my own logos too, easier to recognise. I can't see the point of folders in a speed dial, a decent bookmark manager works better for that. I haven't tried Fast Dial yet but using a combination of Superstart and nicknames I've got Firefox pretty much like Opera Presto, for if or when I need to abandon Opera that is.
-
lem729 last edited by
@lem729 I forgot to answer your search question. I just took a look and Fast Dial lets you insert a bunch of search windows across the top of the page(with choices of all search engines you have active in Firefox; I added DuckDuckGo to check; it worked). I haven't used this feature as I just use the combined address/search window for search.
I meant a search of the links in your Speed Dial. (wcolwell, the search engines you are referring to sound like internet search engines. That's a different thing entirely). If you put a lot in the Speed Dial (you're wasting it, rainspa, lol), and with Opera, it's near infinite what you can put in, you simply have to have the ability to search there, to find what you want. I have about 100 links in it (and am only using up 1/2 a page, so the wallpaper looks great), and it's going very quick for me. It might depend on your computer resources. You can use a search feature on the Speed Dial page (a looking glass) to find the speed dial item/link). Opera Blink takes more resources than Opera Presto, and Opera 21, more than Opera 20, so if you're resource challenged, maybe that could slow things down.
-
wcolwell last edited by
Interesting. I hadn't thought about search within Speed Dial. Not sure that is something I need yet. I have things in very well-defined folders ("Email/Comm", "Portal/News", "Banking/Finance", "Computer", etc. and may yet add subfolders (to split Banking from Investments, etc.). Ideally I'd keep the number of thumbnails within each folder or subfolder down to 10 or less.
But I could see the "Computer" folder growing, but Speed Dial probably isn't the construct I want for large numbers of bookmarks. After all, it's supposed to be "Speed Dial", no? LOL
-
lem729 last edited by
Yes and no on how you want to use it. Some people may use it as a primary bookmark resource. It can have infinite folders in Opera. So the ability to search internally is essential. Now maybe you don't care, but the key is that Opera gives the ability to go either way. With the ability to search the Speed Dial, one can make it a primary bookmarks resource. Personally, I prefer it as a secondary resource (spruced up with nice wallpaper, etc.). And would rather use the Personal Bookmarks Toolbar as the primary resource. But the internal search engine for the Speed Dial makes either approach viable.
But even if you had the Speed dial as a primary bookmarks resource with myriads of folders, as long as you can quickly find the folder you want (via the search engine), click on it, open let's say ten items there and it's a Speed Dial of ten items in the folder. Each folder opened becomes its own Speed Dial.
-
lem729 last edited by
The placeholder idea in Superstart for Firefox is quite interesting. Opera ought to try use something like that.:) Perhaps you've explored it, rainspa. The idea is, let's say you have a speed dial -- hypothetically 3 rows and 3 columns of folders (filled with links-thumbnails). You can make any of the locations placeholders (the size of a folder). They then become transparent folders. When the mouse isn't near them you can't even see the borders. The idea is if you have a background image that is cut off at a critical point by a folder (with thumbnails in it), ruining the background (let's say, for example, it's the top of the Pyramid at Chichen Iza), you just put in the speed dial a transparent "placeholder," so the background image (at the critical spot) shows through. You're allowed as many as you want. No problem then about the missing top of the pyramid. You put a placeholder there, and the background image look great.
Also, you can easily, at any time shift the position of the image up or down in Superstart. That's another way of taking an action to avoid a folder blocking a critical part of the theme. In Opera's Speed Dial, once you create a theme, it's not really movable. At the time you select the theme (maybe an image from your computer) and are ready to move it to the Speed Dial, you have some ability to align it up, down, etc. but once it's created, you're locked. You'd have to find the picture again on your computer, and re-create it, to do the aligning. In Superstart, you can do it much more flexibly. Opera could also improve it's themes by adding that adjustability type feature.
The more I look at it, I'm still unhappy with the captions for the folders in Superstart. They're just hard to read, particularly if you make the folders smaller.
-
rainspa last edited by
Placeholder is a neat idea and I do use it, three rows of three in my case with the tenth thumbnail in the centre of the bottom row. I have the same in Opera Presto but transparency can only be achieved by installing a suitable skin. It's visually pleasing but not essential so I guess we'd have to wait a long time for things like that in Opera Blink.
What I would like to see in Blink is bookmark nicknames, available in Presto (and FF). This is what I see as Opera Blink's problem, it's got a good way to go in adding functions to catch up with established browsers.
-
lem729 last edited by
I'm not agreed that Opera needs a lot more functions in it's basic browser to match others. It needs some, I think, -- like a good bookmarks manager importer and exporter. I would not try, though, to match features, as that's a bottomless pit, and goes against what I believe to be the idea -- keeping the browser lean and fast, and to leave the features for the extensions. When Opera 17 (Blink) was compared against Firefox, IE and Chrome, it did extremely well:
http://www.slideshare.net/MID_AS/browser-performance-tests
"A lot has changed with Opera since we last tested browsers twelve months ago. Since then Opera have switched from using their own "Presto" rendering engine to instead using the same engine as Chrome. Whilst this change has been received with mixed reviews by Opera users, with some unhappy that many of Opera's original features were dropped, our tests results actually show that the "new" Opera is a browser to be reckoned with outperforming Internet Explorer 11, Firefox 25, and Safari 5 in our tests. Opera 17 came top in 3 out of our 15 tests, and runner up in 6. The browser also secured highly on HTML5/CSS3 compliance and in our aggregated Javascript performance tests . . ." (Of course, we are now at Opera 21 as the last stable version).
They also noted that if you keep the browser open a lot, Opera Blink is the best choice because "initial page loads are the quickest of all the browsers tested."
And by the way, Firefox was crawling. On page load time, non-cached mode: Opera 17 (3.526 seconds), Firefox (11.091 seconds). On page load time from cache: Opera 17 (1.685 seconds), Firefox (5.179 seconds). Maybe
too many features made it a tortoise.I'm not saying there can't be some additions to the basic Opera blink browser, though the bulk of the extra functionality should come via extension. I'm not worried about Opera needing to play a lot of catch-up. They're varooooom, fast. Even Secretariat might have ended up lapped by this browsing demon. It's the others -- feature heavy -- who will need to fear being left behind.
