General Opera One Appearance Feedback Topic
-
hucker last edited by
@darthgtb said in General Opera One Appearance Feedback Topic:
@gustavomolina if you have a 1080p screen on your laptop, it may be set to 125% screen in the settings. I have a 14'' 1080p display on my work laptop. To counter the issue of interface taking up too much space (in all software), what I did was to change the display settings to 100% and using zoom in the browser for making the content still have a good size, while the interface taking less space
You can't change the whole OS setting for Opera, then every other program is smaller than you want.
-
hucker last edited by
@darthgtb said in General Opera One Appearance Feedback Topic:
@hucker due to security. It's better you switch to another browser than stick to an outdated one.
I will not put in effort to get used to a new browser just for security. I'm sick to death of security. Whoever invented https is an idiot. It causes no end of problems when it's magically dangerous to access a website which is 1 minute out of date for something which was ok for a full year.
-
DarthGTB last edited by
Don't tell me, you think politics and browsers are magically linked.
I'm not going into the rabbit hole of explaining all my issues with Yandex as a company. On the software side, their software is honestly mostly well made. Some products are even better than the well known alternatives. The browser has one big problem though that made me quit it, which is the fact it can't have a narrow window. The narrowest possible is more than half the screen. It's so big, it doesn't even trigger the mobile design in websites. At this point, you are forced to use it maximized. This alone is more annoying than all the issues we have with Opera
You can't change the whole OS setting for Opera, then every other program is smaller than you want.
It's actually the size I want for all software. If I really need big letters on stuff that can't zoom, I can just easily move to the main monitor. Laptop monitor in my usage is only chat, which I usually use browser (WhatsApp, MS Teams, Discord, etc)
I'm sick to death of security
Good luck. Do whatever you want. Your computer your rules, right?
-
hucker last edited by
@darthgtb said in General Opera One Appearance Feedback Topic:
Don't tell me, you think politics and browsers are magically linked.
I'm not going into the rabbit hole of explaining all my issues with Yandex as a company.
All you had to type was yes or no. I'm getting sick of the anti Russian nonsense, especially in scientific avenues.
On the software side, their software is honestly mostly well made. Some products are even better than the well known alternatives. The browser has one big problem though that made me quit it, which is the fact it can't have a narrow window. The narrowest possible is more than half the screen. It's so big, it doesn't even trigger the mobile design in websites.
I assumed the trigger was using a mobile. Or is that more longwinded to detect?
If you had a different size screen, would it still be the same % width? Is it a pixel limit or a proportion of the screen limit?
At this point, you are forced to use it maximized. This alone is more annoying than all the issues we have with Opera
I assume you have a reason to need it narrow. I never use programs non-maximised, unless they're tiny like a calculator.
You can't change the whole OS setting for Opera, then every other program is smaller than you want.
It's actually the size I want for all software. If I really need big letters on stuff that can't zoom, I can just easily move to the main monitor. Laptop monitor in my usage is only chat, which I usually use browser (WhatsApp, MS Teams, Discord, etc)
I'm on the default of 100%. I was surprised you were suggesting someone might be on 125%. It should only be on that if they've set it that way on purpose, which means they want it that way.
I'm sick to death of security
Good luck. Do whatever you want. Your computer your rules, right?
Indeed. I don't worry about possibilities. No vaccine or seatbelt either. I think the word I'm looking for here is a kind of flower.
-
DarthGTB last edited by
All you had to type was yes or no. I'm getting sick of the anti Russian nonsense, especially in scientific avenues.
What I meant is that this is not the place to discuss this issue. Yandex for instance has been caught (not by me) sending suspicious requests. So there is a chance it's collecting data and selling it or doing surveillance. I don't like this sort of thing and I would definitely rather use DuckDuckGo or Brave if it delivered everything I need in a browser. Maybe I'll move to one of them and leave Opera again for the sake of privacy. I already use DuckDuckGo as my daily browser on mobile
I assumed the trigger was using a mobile. Or is that more longwinded to detect?
If you had a different size screen, would it still be the same % width? Is it a pixel limit or a proportion of the screen limit?
That's on desktop. The width limit is pixels, so it's fine to use the browser on ultra-wide monitor, but it's terrible on a normal monitor size
I assume you have a reason to need it narrow. I never use programs non-maximised, unless they're tiny like a calculator.
Multi-tasking. Sometimes I'm working on the left while documentation is on the right
I'm on the default of 100%. I was surprised you were suggesting someone might be on 125%. It should only be on that if they've set it that way on purpose, which means they want it that way.
Any new laptop you buy with a 1080p monitor that comes with Windows will come 125% by default. Yours is probably by default on 100% because you are basically on 720p
Indeed. I don't worry about possibilities. No vaccine or seatbelt either. I think the word I'm looking for here is a kind of flower.
Just remember you only live once
that's your choice and I respect that. I don't recommend, but I respect your choice -
hucker last edited by
@darthgtb said in General Opera One Appearance Feedback Topic:
I assumed the trigger was using a mobile. Or is that more longwinded to detect?
If you had a different size screen, would it still be the same % width? Is it a pixel limit or a proportion of the screen limit?
That's on desktop. The width limit is pixels, so it's fine to use the browser on ultra-wide monitor, but it's terrible on a normal monitor size
What number of pixels is the limit? My main screen is 1920*1080. Just standard HD.
I assume you have a reason to need it narrow. I never use programs non-maximised, unless they're tiny like a calculator.
Multi-tasking. Sometimes I'm working on the left while documentation is on the right
Ugh. I would never squeeze two programs onto one screen. Multitasking requires multi monitors. I had two at work, but I have 5 at home. One has security cameras, it's cool, I can watch outdoors, see who's coming to the door, etc. Even found my neighbour's lost cat once. One is the main one I use. Another is if I'm referring to something. And the other two are to monitor 10 computers running science projects.
I'm on the default of 100%. I was surprised you were suggesting someone might be on 125%. It should only be on that if they've set it that way on purpose, which means they want it that way.
Any new laptop you buy with a 1080p monitor that comes with Windows will come 125% by default. Yours is probably by default on 100% because you are basically on 720p
This is a 1080p monitor. But then I installed windows myself and don't have stupid settings from manufacturers who don't have a clue. 100% is 100 for a reason, it means normal. More than 100% means you want to magnify it (bad eyesight etc).
Indeed. I don't worry about possibilities. No vaccine or seatbelt either. I think the word I'm looking for here is a kind of flower.
Just remember you only live once
that's your choice and I respect that. I don't recommend, but I respect your choicePity the police don't, but I've worked out how to avoid them or talk my way out of things. I got one very irritated when he said "at the end of the day you're only endangering yourself", and I responded with "why are you wasting my time stopping me then?" He then asked "do you want a ticket?" and I said "what do you think?"
-
DarthGTB last edited by
@hucker ok, so you don't care about security in the web, but you care about it in your home? why don't you get rid of your cameras if you are sick of security? Whoever invented keys is an idiot am I right? You can easily pick a door open after all
What number of pixels is the limit? My main screen is 1920*1080. Just standard HD
I don't have it installed anymore, so I can't check that for you anymore. But it was more than half of a standard screen like that one
I would never squeeze two programs onto one screen
ok
100% is 100 for a reason, it means normal. More than 100% means you want to magnify it (bad eyesight etc)
It comes with 125% by default mainly because in 14'' laptops 100% is tiny. The only reason why I changed that back to 100% is because interface takes up too much space. I agree with you though, it should come with 100% by default and give you a tip that you can change that in the settings. Most of my colleagues are clueless about that setting and they struggle to fit content on their screen while working
About the life choices you make, I have no business on that. I wasn't talking about legal punishment either, I was talking about actual safety. I'm not a saint myself
Now, this conversation has gone way too long away from the topic's actual purpose and this will be my last reply to you.
If you want to try it out, check Yandex Browser. You don't care about your privacy, so you will probably like it. The only big functional issue I have with it is that window width problem that started impacting in my daily work cycle. Everything else works very well and it has the same basic functionality as Opera has (sidebar, popup video, speed dial, built-in ad blocker, etc.), but every one of them works better. It also allows for tabs in the bottom like the original Opera used to allow. It may have a few untranslated Russian text on new features from time to time too, which is honestly fine as they fix those fairly quick. It didn't impact me because I speak Russian, but I think it may impact others...
The only thing I'd say though is that I used to use it before Chromium browsers started to add the border and rounded corners, so I can't say for sure if it has that now too. It was also before Opera's rebranding, so I don't know if they also added tab grouping. But since it's a fork from Opera and they try to keep up with Opera's features, there is a chance this feature is there or may be in the making
-
DarthGTB last edited by DarthGTB
@andrew84 something like this could work for tab islands (top is when you have your cursor on the address bar and bottom not)
I still don't like that the active tab is too dim, but with this visual connection, it would make it easier to spot
This connection would also fix the weird under glow on selected non-islanded tabs
-
-
hucker last edited by
@darthgtb said in General Opera One Appearance Feedback Topic:
@andrew84 something like this could work for tab islands (top is when you have your cursor on the address bar and bottom not)
I still don't like that the active tab is too dim, but with this visual connection, it would make it easier to spot
This connection would also fix the weird under glow on selected non-islanded tabs
What on earth is that? You've got the word speed dial in a kaleidoscope. Why would I want one thing repeated 8 times?
-
-
DarthGTB last edited by
@andrew84 ah yes... that would be the case in case their understanding of a module is different than mine (which so far it has been).
If modularization means having actual modules, that would make it possible to move these modules around the UI, like it used to be in the original one, pre-chromium times
If modularization means "boxes", then yes. This design would go against their current goal
-
-
andrew84 last edited by
@darthgtb said in General Opera One Appearance Feedback Topic:
If modularization means "boxes"
That's exactly what I see now.
I see no advantages having the simply visually separated modules.
All the elements (buttons blocks, icons, panels and etc. ) are still not movable.
When I first heard 'modular' design, I indeed though it will be possible to 'assemble' the browser's UI how user wishes. But I see simply 'bordered' elements on practice instead. And what's even worse is that the browser's habitual functionality is partially broken. -
DarthGTB last edited by
@andrew84 agreed. My thoughts exactly. I even remember getting confused because when this was delivered, I couldn't find the setting. Sure a change like this would have been easier to find. It was then that I came to the forums more frequently and even pinned the bug report page because this has become quite a mess honestly. I still think they should actually make it modular instead of it just being a marketing stunt
-
DarthGTB last edited by DarthGTB
@hucker ah yes, true. I forgot you decided to stick to v99. That explains the confusion. There are no vertical lines here. These divisions is what they call "tab islands"
You see, since version 100, now it's possible to group tabs. What @andrew84 and I were discussing is the fact that on current version, their choice for pseudo-modularization forced them to make the interface have floating buttons instead of actual tabs like the ones you showed in your picture.
This is what the tab grouping looks like right now on version 104:
Here are 3 groups, two of them with 2 tabs and one with three. There is also another tab that is alone, without a group. The center one in the group with 3 tabs is the selected tab.
The discussion was about making the connection of the selected tab to the tab's content more visible even if inside a group, so my proposal for fixing that, would be to connect the group with rounded outwards corners and the selected tab, which coincidentally has the same colour as the address bar, then connect to the address bar. This would make it much more visual than what we have now and still maintain the grouping functionality available. Groups that are not selected can stay floating
Since their modularization approach doesn't entail actual modularization, this should work, although I would argue, this could work even if they take modules seriously. If bottom tabs for instance, the connection would happen upwards (even if no address bar down there, but it would visually help anyway)
Edit: just for reference, this is what collapsed groups look like:
The grouping feature is honestly helpful particularly for my work cycle as I would pair a tab with what I need to do with the documentation regarding that, collapse groups with tasks that are waiting for other people to finish their stuff and so on.
The only issue is that it's not well implemented yet
-
hucker last edited by
@darthgtb said in General Opera One Appearance Feedback Topic:
@hucker ah yes, true. I forgot you decided to stick to v99. That explains the confusion. There are no vertical lines here. These divisions is what they call "tab islands"
They are vertical lines, I see vertical bars of colour. Those cannot look differrnt on your end, it's a picture attachment, we both see the same.
You see, since version 100, now it's possible to group tabs.
Why on earth would you want to do that? Extra complications.
What @andrew84 and I were discussing is the fact that on current version, their choice for pseudo-modularization forced them to make the interface have floating buttons instead of actual tabs like the ones you showed in your picture.
And what I see on your example has faded out text, why?
This is what the tab grouping looks like right now on version 104:
Here are 3 groups, two of them with 2 tabs and one with three. There is also another tab that is alone, without a group. The center one in the group with 3 tabs is the selected tab.
It just looks like a vague mess. One tab is wider for no reason, the lettering fades out, and I can't see any divider between each one.
The discussion was about making the connection of the selected tab to the tab's content more visible even if inside a group, so my proposal for fixing that, would be to connect the group with rounded outwards corners and the selected tab, which coincidentally has the same colour as the address bar, then connect to the address bar. This would make it much more visual than what we have now and still maintain the grouping functionality available. Groups that are not selected can stay floating
Nothing should float, that's a silly gimmick.
-
DarthGTB last edited by DarthGTB
@hucker why are you mad at me? like... honest question
You reply to me as if I were an Opera designer. I'm not. "why there is faded out text?" I don't have a clue. Ask Opera not me. My reply has literally nothing to do with that. The only thing I talked about you didn't reply about
Dude, maybe you need a Snickers. You are not yourself when you are hungry
-
hucker last edited by
@darthgtb said in General Opera One Appearance Feedback Topic:
@hucker why are you mad at me? like... honest question
You reply to me as if I were an Opera designer. I'm not. "why there is faded out text?" I don't have a clue. Ask Opera not me. My reply has literally nothing to do with that. The only thing I talked about you didn't reply about
Dude, maybe you need a Snickers. You are not yourself when you are hungry
I'm not mad at you, I'm just trying to understand the weird screenshot you posted, which you said was "better". It's unusable. The tabs should look like my screenshot from v99. They should simply label the page and let you click them, a very simple function, it requires no fancy flower arranging round it.
-
DarthGTB last edited by
@hucker yeah, and I explained it in the second time I sent. The first screenshot in that second message isn't edited, so it's pointless to argue over that like you did. The second one is the "better" version. And I don't mean better than v99. I mean better than the first image, which is the current design.
I hope you understood what I meant, even if you disagree with my proposed design. I for one think the groups should stay. You can always turn that feature off if you don't like it.
The connection I proposed would work on single tabs too and it would then look like they used to be on v99 (but rounded. I know you don't like roundness, but at this point, I just accept they won't go back to squared design, so I would rather suggest them with rounded edges to fit their design new pattern). That's what I meant in the first message when I said it would get rid of the unpleasant underglow we have now on the selected tab. I didn't do it before, but here is what ungrouped tabs look like now:
And what they could look like with my proposal:
