This is how you're going to save Opera
-
koshi4 last edited by
Opera has many problems in compatibility. If you knew anything you'd appreciate it when someone comes in and criticizes. It can help you make it better. But you shrug them off like they're worthless people. That's why Opera will never be more successful than any other browser.
-
Deleted User last edited by
LOL... uh... seriously? Opera will never be successful because "I" shrug off a handful of first-time posters whining and complaining rather than asking how to make the new browser adapt to their style? Too funny. I didn't realize I had such clout in the browser world. Fancy that - Opera will stand or fall based upon my shrugs. :whistle:
PS: Opera doesn't need saving. It's doing very well in the marketplace.
-
-
Deleted User last edited by
Opera is doing well and it is an amazing browser. I wonder if the devs had changed to Webkit earlier. How would be today?
-
A Former User last edited by
Which of the two different browsers did you mean, Sidney?
What a confusion, isn't it, Sidney? -
-
-
diamondtiara last edited by
I'm just saying, when you make a software that is an alternative to
- ie, a preinstalled piece of junk
- the official chrome, a botnet and
- mozilla
You have to reconsider what you're doing because I still think Opera has potential and it must not turn into abandonware.
Functionality isn't that bad, even if I remember using opera 9 for years and it was more complete, email and various plugins.
I'm talking about aesthetics and I'm explaining what could be easily improved. Opera 9 by example supported a lot of skins of all kind created by artists, from Deviantart or others.
Now it's like if you compare what Ubuntu or Windows used to be: a true OS becoming a minimalist junk for tablets with little or no personality or taste.
I still use Opera9 for some applications. No way I'm going to overwrite it with that chromium clone. If I wanted Chrome, I'd install it.
-
-
-
Deleted User last edited by
I go back to version 3 which was released in 1999. At the time I ran it opposite Netscape.I don't recall what I paid for it, but pay I did. In truth, I paid for my first version of Netscape (Netscape Gold 3.0) but that is back in 97.
I personally like the look of Opera now. It's clean and it does not need a bunch of dumb skins to mess it up. And those who think it is a clone of Google Chrome do not know what they're talking about.
-
Deleted User last edited by
Appearance customization would be great, but I think there's more pressing issues, like the broken font rendering, or the myriad of missing features.
-
Deleted User last edited by
The missing features are slowly being added back into the new browser. I agree that the font rendering needs to be addressed. Aesthetic considerations are the least important factors at this juncture and I continue to re-iterate: Opera does not need "saving". It's doing perfectly well.
-
A Former User last edited by
The missing features are slowly being added back into the new browser.
First, you're right - it's a new browser.
Though the adding is peculiarly slow... However - if we do not consider the versions'/releases' number, the time period doesn't seem especially vast.:rolleyes: -
sablatnic last edited by
I especially miss one bookmark feature; 'open all elements in folder', which opens all elements in a subfolder under bookmarks. (Main reason for still using series 12 Opera)!
Will it come "back"?
-
leocg Moderator Volunteer last edited by
I especially miss one bookmark feature; 'open all elements in folder', which opens all elements in a subfolder under bookmarks. (Main reason for still using series 12 Opera)!
Will it come "back"?Maybe: http://blogs.opera.com/desktop/2014/10/share-bookmarks-opera-beta-26/#comment-1658057743
-
sablatnic last edited by
No, but thanks?
Anyone know how to sort bookmarks and sub folders alphabetically?
No, screw it. Sticking with series 12 and Exploder!
-
A Former User last edited by admin
See here -
https://forums.opera.com/topic/6167/opera-12-and-opera-26/5
-
