Wie gesagt, in der nächsten Version gibt es einen Fix:
https://forums.opera.com/topic/83818/opera-117-0-5408-142-stable-update/16?_=1742715101154

@andrew84 Yes, I understand. Even small Vivaldi team isn’t that much behind.

Abwarten: Das nächste Update auf Version 118 lässt sicher nicht mehr lange auf sich warten. Dann wird das Problem bestimmt behoben sein (und ein anderes auftreten )

Opera stable is still on Chromium 132, whereas actual Chromium is already on 134. Chrome, Edge, Brave and Vivaldi to my best knowledge are already as well. Is there a reason to be concerned or how does Opera handle security that comes with newer versions of Chromium?

@andrew84 Opera doesn’t have to maintain Chromium.

@pilis00 That’s good news.

@pilis00 I tested Brave the other day by the way. But I didn't like it. I think it's simply about looks and the missing sidebar.
Only alternative I'd consider by now is Vivaldi, which I keep as secondary on most of my devices.

They went 115 stable on November 27th, changed to 116 on January 8th and to 117 on Februar 13th.

In the first case it's 32 days if I'm correct, in the second it's 37. Now we're already waiting 58 days for version 118.
They could easily proceed to version 119 directly.

@burnout426 I get it, but still I ask myself why even Vivaldi seems much faster, at least they patch every Chromium security very fast. And I wonder what that means for Opera securitywise.

We're having Version 117 for two months already. Its Chromium is 132, whereas Chrome, Brave and Edge are on 135. Even Vivaldi has 134 already. What about security fixes? What about performance improvements?
Isn't Chrome on a six week release cycle? Why is Opera with Chromium 132 for nearly eight weeks?
I've been an enthusiastic Opera user for three years, but that's annoying.
Give me a reason for that! And a reason for sticking! I'm already writing this on Brave.

Is the information of these documents handled locally or will it be shared with third parties like OpenAi e.g.?

I understand the advantage of PWA on mobile but it doesn’t appear to me on desktop. Switching to another on the task bar isn’t more handy than switching to another tab within the browsers.
Wasn‘t it Google‘s attempt to lure users from loading apps from Apple’s app store and to circumvent Cupertino‘s walled garden in the end?
But to each what he needs.

@deathcat TBH they were already behind latest Chromium versions before when there was no GX or Air.
I suppose, it's like @daria19 pointed out: Opera's features and UI modifications are the main reason for the delay. They have to adopt their modifications to Chromium in order to work.

Brave doesn't tweak Chromium's rsp Chrome's UI that much. So, they are very much on par. Same goes with Edge. Although I'm no expert on this, I would suppose that this is the main reason.

Vivaldi also slips every second Chromium versions and sticks with a LTS version due two their own tweaking.

For me I'd say: As long as Opera performs well enough with no speed or compatibility issues, I wouldn't mind. Another factor may be security. We're reassured time and again by Opera team that this delay doesn't pose any security issue because urgent security fixes are backported. Again, I'm no expert, I just have to rely.

In sum: It's up to us to decide whether we want to accept and live with Opera being behind. If not, the surest way would be to switch to another browser like Brave, Edge or maybe Vivaldi. Or simply stick with Chrome or Firefox that always use the latest version of their rendering engines.
Opera gives me some neat features I won't get otherwise, so I'll keep it around as my go-to.

@leocg I'm interpreting it differently:

Sounds very much like a promise, doesn't it? Not that I'm dependent on that, as I'm using the built in ad blocker - which is hit and miss.

Maybe at the end of the day it's simply their way to promote this native blocker anyway.

@burnout426 @leocg I get it. But developers are not less smart than we are, are they? Why do they promise to uphold MV2 if that's simply too much to do? That's what a plain reading of the text suggests.
I guess, everybody reading their press release is therefore expecting them to do these patches.
So, it's only some marketing in the end, then?