Why Use Opera?
-
A Former User last edited by
@wojcieche Since you're a coffee lover, I find no fault in you (to quote Pontus Pilate). I think I over-reacted to your post and that of ayespy's. Forgive my unwarranted defense of Opera. Best wishes to you both (and Steve as well).
-
A Former User last edited by
@leocg said in Why Use Opera?:
When I started using Opera, about 20 years ago, installing it from a floppy disk, the web as we know today was just starting, few people had a computer at home. Today people carry a computer in their pockets thousands of times more powerful than the ones used at home two decades ago and the Internet is what we are seeing now.
It appears we both began with Opera at the same time, Leo.
Those days are now far behind us. The online world has radically changed but sometimes I wonder if the change has been for the better. I just don't know. -
blackbird71 last edited by@leocg said in Why Use Opera?:
... So different situations, different needs.
This!!!
For many years I used Olde Opera precisely because it fit nearly all my browsing needs, just as my needs had evolved around the many features of that browser. When Opera elected to follow the Blink pathway, I was a rather ardent Opera defender for a time in Opera's old forums amidst the truly massive outcry against that change. My key point then was for users to be patient and give Opera's developers time to integrate various key features (whose losses were being loudly decried) into the new browser. As time went by, some of the key 'dropped' features needed for my work flow were indeed restored to the evolving design (bookmarking, in particular). But others were not, and even the bookmarks feature itself lacked certain sub-features that were very significant to me (eg: the ability to set bookmarks bar titles to text only, since I need 50-70 bookmarks on a given single-line toolbar and abbreviate their titles severely). During that time, I often found myself increasingly agreeing with @ayespy's postings in the old Opera forums trying to persuade the developers and posters of the need for what we viewed as better control, features, and customization capability in New Opera, but to diminishing avail. Opera's focus had shifted.
What was actually occurring was both a change in the way the Opera browser was targeted and a change in (or more accurately, my recognition of) the importance of various detail requirements of my work flow using browsers. Opera was now developing a browser for 'the marketplace', whereas I had evolved solid work patterns dependent on my having detailed control/customization of browser settings, functions, and features. Thus, for a long time, I persisted in using Olde Opera (12.18) for much of my work-related browsing and both New Opera and Firefox for my casual browsing. Fortunately, as Olde Opera became unacceptably obsolete in terms of website compatibility, Vivaldi came upon the scene. It allowed me the detailed customization and features in areas that my work flow had come to demand. It's design mantra was that it was "a browser for our friends", meaning those users who require detail browser functionality and control. Hence, it's a browser that is actually a configurable tool.
Today, I have different needs than most of the users now targeted by Opera. So I use Vivaldi for my primary browsing and New Opera for some casual browsing. And I experiment a bit with Otter. They're all good browsers given the roles they're intended to play... but they're each aimed at different user needs and priorities. Frankly, I'm glad they all exist. And they're free...
-
A Former User last edited by
@blackbird71 said in Why Use Opera?:
It's design mantra was...
"Its"?
And it's free!
Mandela's free!
Well, I use Opera 36 for some casual browsing, too. Because it's neat and very comfortable to scroll and handle.
But not only that casual, some tasks of business because it feels secure. TS360 integrated. -
newworldman last edited by
@sgunhouse I have Vivaldi installed but so far haven't used it very heavily. But I did get the impression it's not yet quite as polished as Opera.
-
newworldman last edited by
@wojcieche In terms of the way Opera 15+ came about I agree with you. I'm not especially fussed about needing to change the name but certainly they could have left Opera 12.x as the default while informing users that there will be a radical incompatible change to Opera 15 in due course and Opera 12 will be patched for the next year or whatever. During that time 15 would then get better and better. Of course, there would still be many unsatisfied customers but at least they wouldn't have been suddenly faced with an initial bare-bones Opera 15 for a new installation. Personally, it didn't affect me as, although I had old Opera installed, I was a very light occasional user. Firefox Classic -> Quantum caused similar fireworks because of the junking of the more powerful legacy extensions model.
Re: Opera vs Vivaldi design approaches, I can see a need for both. Most people, most of the time do want something bare bones. That's one reason why Chrome took off. In my case its simplicity was a reason why it didn't take off for me and I stuck with Firefox back then.
In the current situation, Vivaldi is more customisable than Opera but Opera is customisable enough for me for most purposes. But when I have a need to do some specific task I might turn to Vivaldi. E.g., I like its screen-split feature when I'm reading technical content for example, so I can refer to explanations to diagrams or formulas. No doubt Vivaldi has lots of other features that I've yet to discover that I might find usable. It takes time, just as it's taken me time to customise Opera the way I like.
-
newworldman last edited by
@coffeelover My take is that in a Lounge forum we can be a bit more free-wheeling. But in the help forums I wouldn't appreciate posters banging on about other browsers - unless it's along the lines of "can Opera have a feature similar to browser X's, blah, blah" rather than "Opera sucks, use Chrome."
