Why has Opera 17 become Chorme/Firefox?
-
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by jaffar83:
I am still don't understand why they didn't just change the engine??
If only life was that simple.
We had a deep look at Opera’s internal architecture and it soon became clear that Quick, the cross-platform UI framework we’d introduced back in 2003, was so entangled with Presto’s code that just swapping Presto with Chromium was far from a straightforward task.
-
szady last edited by
I’m sorry, but Opera 17 won’t be a copy of Opera 12.
That's why I will not use it. If I would like to use Chrome with changed layout I could still use it. But Opera was something more. All the features are gone (even it is more poor than Opera 9...). I will stick with opera 12 as long as it will be possible.
-
-
funksoulbro last edited by
The Opera dev team thought that people wouldn't even need bookmarks in a browser. That's how out of touch they are with what people want. Folks that are sitting around waiting for them to say "here's Opera 21 with all of the features from Opera 12.16 in it!" are wasting their time. If that's what you want, this browser is done for you - as it is for plenty of other people - so just use a different one.
-
originalxform last edited by
Yeah, I cant understand how they even can remove bookmarks. Also, custom quick search, doesnt chrome/firefox have those as well?
Sure, Opera 17 is fast, reliable and has very little compatibility issues from what I can gather. But all the features (-quickbar) that I used and loved to use are gone... The question now is, change to another browser or hang around hoping for more features.
-
-
blackjack93117 last edited by
Ridiculous philosophy - make it simple like all the other browsers to attract more users.
So why shouldn't we just use one of those?I migrated to Opera after using the other "me too browsers for dummies" for years because I discovered that Opera had features for advanced users.
I'm tired of compromising to accommodate the needs of dummies that can't figure out how to use advanced features that would make them more productive, such as being able to organize tabs with tab stacking.
A downgrade is not an upgrade.
Just like Windows 7 I will be using Opera 12.16 forever I guess.
This sucks, Opera! -
gogo167 last edited by
I choose opera since it is powerful.
For a simplest browser, I choose Chrome, it should do better for now and for future. (she is target on common users, how can you fight with that giant, and many companies bundle their products with google, I can't see a good future for opera)Keep downgrade to Opera12 unless it is useless, then moved to a powerful browser.
Currently several sites like Yahoo mail working badly with opera, need the help of Chrome, it seems dead of my opera not far away, poor!
Guys here keep compliant cause they still love opera, but it seems no hope.
Love the bookmark sync, mail, tabs, fit to width, pic off, user mode, and many more... -
leocg Moderator Volunteer last edited by
Originally posted by funksoulbro:
The Opera dev team thought that people wouldn't even need bookmarks in a browser
And who can say for sure that they were not right? The majority if the ones that "needs" bookmarks are probably longtime internet users that are used to the old style bookmarks.
Newer users may have different needs. Even some of the longtime ones.
-
funksoulbro last edited by
Originally posted by LeoCG:
And who can say for sure that they were not right?
They obviously don't think they were right as it's one of the first things they did a u-turn on, as after complaints they promised to bring back proper bookmarks. For someone who only visits Facebook, Google and one or two other sites, it's fine. For people who have dozens - or even hundreds - of bookmarks, having to use the speed dial sucks and is obviously inferior to having a menu that's accessible from a button on the toolbar.
Besides that though, making a product look clean and easy to use does not mean that you have to dumb it down and strip out all of the features that differentiated it from other browsers. The reason I have a home page is because I visit that page a lot, therefore I want a home button. Now I have to press the "Start Page" button and then click on the thumbnail for my home page. In Opera 12.16 I have a custom button in the main toolbar that gives me a home button with a drop-down list for bookmarks, so it's one click to go to my home page and one click to view all of my bookmarks folders. Speed dial is fine for the few sites I visit the most. There's a reason why I don't have a massive speed dial in Opera 12.16 with dozens of sites in it.
-
twozero3 last edited by
Dumbing it down to cater for the lowest common denominator, is not progress. It is an approach that ultimately stifles and slows down development and it is not what got us where we are right now.
Alienating and turning your back on a generation of sophisticated Opera Browser users to satisfy an unknown element of basic internet users who may as well just use Chrome in the first place and probably will due to it's higher profile, will not be good for Opera in the long term
-
leocg Moderator Volunteer last edited by
Originally posted by funksoulbro:
They obviously don't think they were right as it's one of the first things they did a u-turn on, as after complaints they promised to bring back proper bookmarks.
It doesn't mean that they weren't right. Sometimes is better to take a step back and "agree" with the other than keep feeding an endless discussion.
Originally posted by funksoulbro:
For people who have dozens - or even hundreds - of bookmarks, having to use the speed dial sucks and is obviously inferior to having a menu that's accessible from a button on the toolbar.
The ones that have hundreds of bookmarks probably don't use 90% of them very often.
Imho bookmarks are a very outdated and less useful feature because, among other reasons, they demand spending time organazing them, deciding if belongs to a or b or both, etc. And, in the final, you use them once or twice.
-
kidxrated last edited by
Originally posted by Pesala:
Originally posted by originalxform:
Why has Opera 17 become Chorme/Firefox?
It hasn't. Please don't post disinformation.
Read how to use the Bookmark Importer and how to enable the Quick Access Bar.
Reopening a closed tab is a different action to undo text editing, so using a different shortcut is logical.
Opera is using the chrome engine so there for runs like chrome I don't know if all the google spying stuff is there but all in all, if it's using the chrome engine, then its a variant of chrome what makes opera different from torch?
-
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by kidxrated:
what makes opera different from torch?
Lot's of vehicles use BMW engines but that doesn't make them BMW clones. Opera will evolve in it's own direction, and they will do their own development work on the Blink rendering engine.
The Vision Behind Opera 15 and Beyond
Nor are we cloning Opera 12, or any other browser. We will continue to innovate to build the best browser.
I assume that browsers using the same rendering engine will have similar site problems, and benchmark performance. That's about as far as the similarity goes.
My PeaceKeeper Results
Opera 17.0.1241.45 scored 4091 and 5/7
SRWare Chrome Iron Version 30.0.1650.0 scored 3997 and 5/7
Opera 12.16 build 1860 scored 3303 and 4/7
Opera 11.64 build 1403 scored 3052 and 4/7
Firefox 25.0 scored 2275 and 7/7 -
kidxrated last edited by
Originally posted by Pesala:
Originally posted by kidxrated:
what makes opera different from torch?
Lot's of vehicles use BMW engines but that doesn't make them BMW clones. Opera will evolve in it's own direction, and they will do their own development work on the Blink rendering engine.
The Vision Behind Opera 15 and Beyond
Nor are we cloning Opera 12, or any other browser. We will continue to innovate to build the best browser.
I assume that browsers using the same rendering engine will have similar site problems, and benchmark performance. That's about as far as the similarity goes.
My PeaceKeeper Results
Opera 17.0.1241.45 scored 4091 and 5/7
SRWare Chrome Iron Version 30.0.1650.0 scored 3997 and 5/7
Opera 12.16 build 1860 scored 3303 and 4/7
Opera 11.64 build 1403 scored 3052 and 4/7
Firefox 25.0 scored 2275 and 7/7What's a variant of chrome have to do with a clone I never said it was a clone, but it is a variant of chrome?
In memory of Geir Ivarsøy. Copyright
1995-2013 Opera Software ASA. All rights reserved.
Made possible by the Chromium open source project and other open source software.
Terms of Service -
originalxform last edited by
Originally posted by LeoCG:
Imho bookmarks are a very outdated and less useful feature because, among other reasons, they demand spending time organazing them, deciding if belongs to a or b or both, etc. And, in the final, you use them once or twice.
I really dont know what's so outdated about bookmarks? Do you mean that people dont need to save addresses any longer? I , sadly, HAD a great collection of bookmarks and used them often and had no problem organizing them. So just because the basic users only visit a handful of popular sites I shouldnt be able to save as many sites as I want to visit at a later time?
I really need my bookmarks but there are far too many to have on speed dial or the QAB, and I only saved the .adr file so I cant even import them without reinstalling Opera 12.16 and exporting them.Opera Dev-team, are you just ignoring your old user base in the hunt for growth and simplicity?
-
leocg Moderator Volunteer last edited by
Originally posted by originalxform:
I really dont know what's so outdated about bookmarks? Do you mean that people dont need to save addresses any longer?
Well, majority of people uses (or used) bookmarks as a shortcuts for their (half a dozen) favorites pages. Nowadays with autocomplete, Speed Dial, QAB, Stash and so on, i don't think most people needs to keepe saving and sorting (too many) pages.
Originally posted by originalxform:
So just because the basic users only visit a handful of popular sites I shouldnt be able to save as many sites as I want to visit at a later time?
I'm saying that you shoudn't need to do that. You should be able to just "mark" the page and then be able to find it by its content without having to organize anything, without, i.e., having to keep three ou four entries of the same page just because it belongs to three or four different categories.
Even better, just visiting the page would already make it searchble like in Opera 12.16
-
twozero3 last edited by
Some people use bookmarks (I do) some people don't.
There is no intelligent rationale for the total removal of bookmark functionality from a good internet browser.
For those that don't use bookmarks, what do you gain by bookmark functionality not being present in a browser? Nothing! The use of bookmark functionality is not compulsory and is unobtrusive. Those that use bookmarks instantly lose a lot of functionality in their browser.
Removing bookmarks from a browser is pointless. Those that don't use bookmarks, gain nothing and those that do, lose something.
-
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by 203:
Removing bookmarks from a browser is pointless.
They were not "removed." Opera 17 is a new browser, and a bookmark menu was not added back yet. The Bookmarks Bar, now called the Quick Access Bar is already available in Opera 17. Please search to find out how to enable it and import your bookmarks. I guess that a menu and a bookmarks manager tab will return later. I don't expect to see panels any time soon.
-
funksoulbro last edited by
Originally posted by LeoCG:
Imho bookmarks are a very outdated and less useful feature because, among other reasons, they demand spending time organazing them, deciding if belongs to a or b or both, etc. And, in the final, you use them once or twice.
It takes me next to no time to organise them. When I add a bookmark, I choose which folder to save it in and that's it - job done.
Now if you gave me 1,000 bookmarks that were unsorted, sure, it would take me a long time to go through them and put them in folders, but that's not how it works.
What do you propose as an alternative to bookmarks? Speed dial? With that you are expected to create groups of dials inside a single dial, i.e. it's no different to using folders other than being less convenient to use. Either that or you have potentially hundreds of dials on one page - that's not good either. Perhaps Microsoft should replace folders in Windows with giant "dials" and replace the regular file name view with a huge icon - that would make it easier for people to use File Explorer, right? Erm... no.
The point of speed dial is that you put your most visited sites on it for quick access, just like you would put your favourite contacts on speed dial on your phone. Or maybe a smartphone should dump the contact list and have massive dial images for each contact as well, yeah? Again.... no.
