Posts made by tradeofjane

[Mod edit: Rude, derogatory post removed, Remember this is a public forum]

Originally posted by leushino:

The forums are intended for members HELPING members. Really, that is the long and short of it. I know you believe it helps your cause (and that of the other complainers) by labelling others, using foul language, threatening, bullying and generally disrupting but that is against the tos. Please abide by them.

And who the hell have you helped? You're only here to do damage control for Opera.

Originally posted by leushino:

The team that developed it is essentially gone.

But wait, doesn't that contradict the claim that everyone who worked on Presto is still working there? Funny, I thought everything was ice cream in rainbows in the wonderful world of Opera.

Originally posted by leushino:

There is NO turning back now and no matter how many threads are begun stating the disenchantment with the new browser or bemoaning the loss of features of the former, Opera Next is the new browser and the only browser that will be developed... period. If there are features you would like to see added back, be respectful (something that appears very difficult for you) and state them in the developers' blogs where they will have a better chance of being noticed. In the meantime, you can easily continue using a Presto version alongside the newer Blink version "if" you want to see how Opera Next is developing. If that is not satisfactory and does not meet your needs, then use another browser. In all of this, whining, complaining, swearing, threatening, bullying, labelling etc etc etc are both counter-productive and somewhat indicative of "other" problems (which I will mercifully leave unsaid).

And if you don't like people complaining about how badly ChrOpera sucks, stop acting like a paid shill and b*tching about everyone who b*tches about Opera.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by Tradeofjane:

to say that this wasn't a management decision to reduce cost is simply untrue.

Well, why would Bruce lie? Saying it came from engineering logically means it came from the management within engineering, but not from the company's overarching management. That makes his statement unnecessarily and perhaps misleadingly pedantic. (more)

Bruce works in the Developer Relations Department at Opera, which is responsible for creating and nurturing the developer community while leveraging the total community resources towards the software vendor's goals. He also works in the the Web Standards Department at Opera Software, which explains why he's in favor of using Chromium. He's also wrong about this being an engineering-led decision as even he states that Opera made the decision rather than paying engineers to maintain feature parity with other rendering engines. Engineers aren't going to lead on a decision to put themselves out of a job. The move to piggybacking off of Chromium was a decision made by management, NOT engineering, in order to avoid paying to develop their own engine by using one that was already available and being worked on for free.

Originally posted by rafaelluik:

Another quote I've shared countless times:
"The switch to using Chromium was an engineering-led decision, not a management decision to cut costs. It allows us to get an engine that thousands of developers work on (including our own, and we commit changes back for any other browser to use), that is compatible with most big websites and that we can build on top of." - Bruce Lawson from Opera Software

Bruce also said, "We took the decision that rather than paying engineers to maintain feature parity with other rendering engines, It seemed to be to us a much better way of using our resources, to take this open source rendering engine [WebKit], which is great, and then divert those engineers to do really cool sh*t".
Source: http://www.acquia.com/resources/podcasts/acquia-podcast-73-opera-browser-goes-webkit

Not sure what "cool sh*t" Opera has done since abandoning Presto, hell they can't even get bookmarks to work even with their freed up "resources", but to say that this wasn't a management decision to reduce cost is simply untrue. And they didn't just change the rendering engine, they changed their whole philosophy. From the rendering engine to the user interface, Opera 15+ is more of a copy of Chrome than an upgrade from Presto.

Originally posted by Kerygma:

Are there any alternatives out there to a 11.x or 12.x generation opera that is being updated? That is what I am looking for.

The Otter browser project aims to recreate the classic Opera web browser

Originally posted by doomjesus:

i didn't support this program for this long to be manipulated by the developers.

Blame management, not the developers.

Originally posted by Pesala:

Wrong. You can express your opinion if it is negative, as long as it is done politely.

Translation: "You can express your opinion if it is negative, as long as it is something I agree with".

Seriously, you're one to talk. You're rude to nearly every new member that posts on this forum and has a complaint about Opera.

Originally posted by leushino:

What a load of tripe. First off... this is NOT a rant forum; it's a Help forum. You've not asked for help. All you've done is whine and that is against the terms of service. You are aware of the tos, right? Secondly, no one is forcing you to use Opera 18. Continue using an earlier version since you happen to like its features and that really is the end of it. Opera has been developing Opera Blink now for a year. The former Presto developers' team has essentially been disbanded and some have left Opera altogether. Your whining serves no real purpose. If you want to see changes made to the new Opera, then visit the developers' blogs and politely request changes there... not here. Once again, this is a Help (not Rant) forum.

If it's not a rant forum then why do you go into nearly every thread ranting about people ranting? Both you and Pesala have an odd definition of "helping" someone. Every time someone asks a question or makes a complaint it's either "search the forums" or you and Pesala b*tching about them having a complaint and telling them to deal with it.

Originally posted by blackbird71:

It isn't criticism, politely voiced and accurately framed, that is really an issue. It's the ranting, outbursting, obscenity/profanity-laced, I-want-what-I-want-and-I-want-it-NOW, exagerated rhetoric that is the problem - of which you, frankly, have been part. It's immature, self-serving, offensive, disrespectful of everyone else trying to help users in these forums, and has no place here. It's the kind of behavior that gives legitimate criticism a bad name, and I'm frankly amazed that the mods haven't come down on it with a large hammer long ago. But then, the wave of repetitive, ranting threads has perhaps led them to simply write these forums off as any meaningful input, especially in light of the eventual move and reorganization of these forums... in which case, all the legitimate users are the poorer for the behavior of the ranters.

NEWSFLASH: I don't live to please you.

It is leushino, Pesala, and you (although to a slightly lesser extent) aka the "Opera Defense Force" that have been annoying, obnoxious, self-serving, and disrespectful. Want to talk about me having a "I-want-what-I-want-and-I-want-it-NOW" attitude? Are you f@#king kidding me? It's people like you, leushino, and Pesala that have been downplaying everyone's concerns and telling everyone to love it, leave it, and if you have a problem with it then deal with it.

And no one would have to rant if the new Opera didn't suck so badly. Nor would you have to rant about people ranting.

Originally posted by leushino:

You're a :troll: pure and simple. If YOU don't like Opera, YOU should just get out of the Help forum. Go over to the Developers' blogs and register your complaints there. Nothing is going to happen here other than you whining and our enduring your whines. :lol:

And cut out your filthy language. Yes, you disguise it with some symbols in order to prevent your posts being censored but in truth, you have a filthy mouth and frankly should be banned from the forums.

If anything is filthy it's your attitude towards new members and anyone who says anything negative about Opera. Why are you so incredibly defensive? If anyone says anything bad about Opera, you and your buddies Pesala and blackbird71 are on the defensive in every single thread. Either you're paid to be here to defend Opera, and doing a terrible job of it, or you're being paid to drive people away from it.

Originally posted by blackbird71:

Absolutely true! 100% agreement. And because Opera isn't a charity, it operates its business to seek profit for its stockholders as it sees fit. If it believes it can gain more users (and revenue) going down Path A, we who represent Path B may be disappointed, but we're in no legal or moral position to rant and rave since the "product" costs us absolutely nothing. We are indeed free to politely suggest, recommend, persuade, perhaps even argue a bit while it still matters... but the decisions are Opera's alone to make - and they have made them. Over a year ago. We're now free to accept them or go elsewhere and get on with our lives. But we're not free, in decent societies, to come into their house and spit on their floor.

If Opera Software can't handle the criticism, they should get out of the game. I've used Opera for over a decade. I'm not going to sugar coat a product that sucks or pretend to like it. If Opera didn't want the criticism they shouldn't have released something that is pure beta quality cr@p. This love it or leave it attitude is only going to cost them users since they have nothing to offer us in the way of innovation except how desperate they are to be like Google Chrome. And if I could find a browser like Opera classic, I would leave Opera in a heartbeat. But like many others I became accustom to a browser that got f@#ked up by bad management.

Originally posted by blackbird71:

What does Opera owe you that they should do whatever you ask or pay mind to your opinions, particularly among all the insults you constantly toss at them? It's a free browser, for Heaven's sake... it costs you and me nothing. Where did any of us earn the right to criticise and insult them over the decisions they make about how to run the company for its owners? I don't agree with some of their choices; I've stated my arguments months ago, just in case it might matter. I'd like to think one or two things might have helped influence them. But it's certainly Opera's choice to do what they want with their own browser.

How does it come down to a situation where users of a free browser feel entitled to come into the forums housed on the browser-maker's own servers and insult them? It's like going into somebody's house and spitting on their floor! Back where I come from, people would say, "Those folks don't have any fetchins up."

Opera derives revenue through revenue sharing with its partners. For example, several search engines make usage payments to Opera for searches made by Opera users. This is the major source of income for Opera. Opera depends on its USERS in order to generate revenue. Opera may be free to use but that's only because it is profitable and the only reason why it is profitable is if people use it. This isn't a charity.

Originally posted by leushino:

Here's another idea. Why don't you just go away?! You haven't posted a solitary positive post since you began posting... nothing but whining and complaining. You've consistently violated the terms of service here on these help forums. If you don't like the new Opera, no one is forcing you to adopt it. Continue to use Presto. End of story. And if that doesn't cut it for you, then go away and find another browser that does. How's that for a suggestion? I'm not going to engage in calling you a d**k as you have the developers but it would be appreciated by all if you stopped acting like one. Try and little maturity for a change. Behave yourself.

Leushino, if no one is paying you to be here then stop acting like it. You sound like a paid shill. And you do nothing but attack anyone who doesn't have anything positive to say about the new Opera. I don't live to please you and I wasn't even talking to you, so why don't you just shut your f@#king mouth.

Originally posted by blackbird71:

Split an already resource-stressed design group into two pieces? If they were going to split it, they'd have kept the Presto team intact for one group and started up a different group for Blink. But they didn't, because they have to give a financial accounting to their stockholders. Stockholders who demand efficiency.

They already have split Opera. There's Opera and then there's Opera mini/mobile. Here's an idea: Why don't they stop being stupid and give users the ability to customize it to suit their own personal preference instead of being a bunch of dicks about it.

Originally posted by blackbird71:

While I completely agree that I wish New Opera had far more advanced user configurability (one of the two or three major things that really block me from adopting it), nothing involving 'design, development, and testing' comes without a price - in money and in competition for scarce company resources with other key projects. And whether the price is deemed worth paying depends on how the creators evaluate the market they're designing into and their own inside knowledge of their ultimate cross-product relationships, their business strategies, and their internal costs of doing the work they anticipate would be needed. Providing configurability costs design and test effort, unavoidably. And in a corporation supplying multiple user-related products, those costs will be significantly different from those of two guys working in their garage on a part-time project or even some third-world startup operation. How much and whether it's "worth it" to add levels of configurability simply cannot accurately be evaluated outside the company itself. Of course, whether it would have been worth it will ultimately be determined by the general market's reaction to the product that doesn't have it; but until that verdict comes in, we on the outside can only guess.

And yet...

In an interview with Digi.no, Opera's CEO Lars Boilesen notes that as a result of the WebKit transition, the company now has twice the resources working on the desktop as it previously did. Freed from having to expend effort on its engine, the company can focus on the interface and other software features.

Source: http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/02/operas-webkit-switch-saw-it-lose-90-employees-many-developers/

Originally posted by blackbird71:

One more time: bookmarks weren't "left out"... bookmarks don't "come naturally" to code and have to be cut out. Instead, "bookmarks" weren't designed in. There is a design-cost difference between the two, perhaps significant. Whether we believe Opera's initial market 'survey' was accurate or not, they've stated they believed the market demand for bookmarks did not justify their knowledge of the resource costs involved in providing them. They may or may not have been wrong, but that does not make them stupid.

Bookmarks were left out of the design plan which is why 5 versions later they have yet to return. Opera never asked their users which features they would like to keep. Instead they collected usage data from 100,000+ randomly-selected people ( exact number unknown) and claimed that 90% of their 300 million+ users don't use bookmarks.

This isn't a resource issue, it's a problem with Opera not getting their priorities straight.

According to the latest blog post (and comments by Odin Hørthe Omdal), you shouldn’t expect native bookmark functionality in the near feature as Opera’s first priority is the quick access bar. Instead, they suggest relying on the third party extensions, which doesn’t sound like a good idea.

Source: http://www.favbrowser.com/opera-real-bookmarks-is-not-our-priority/

Originally posted by blackbird71:

If the rendering engine is the foundational code of the browser (and it is), one might logically expect it to set many of the limits and boundaries of how the end result might look, regardless of the effort applied in designing a user interface. Whatever else, you have to build a round barn on a round foundation... you don't really build a square one on such a foundation. So there will be structural resemblances between all browsers based on the same rendering engine, no matter what else the developers might do or wish. However, over time and with enough creativity, features and forms of implementation can eventually be found that cross over or get around some of the limits and boundaries imposed by the rendering engine design. At that point, distinctive features can and will appear between different designs built on the same foundation.

That's not entirely true when it comes to the user interface, which has to be built before the browser can even be released. Opera could've added the ability to change it to suit a user's own personal preference or at least have tried to make it less Chrome like. If I want Opera to look more like it did pre-9.50, then I should have the ability to do so since that's what I'm use to and have been able to do up to 12.16. I don't expect to have all the features back that were included in 12.16 since some features, like Opera Mail, are tied to Presto's code base. However, I do expect Opera's management to be at least smart enough to innovate and not do something stupid like leaving out bookmarks or basing their efforts on trying to be so much like Chrome.

Originally posted by haavard:

The user interface was made from scratch, so it is not a copy. Chrome did not invent the basic browser interface, and we had to start somewhere to get the new version off the ground (namely with a solid foundation).

So it's just a coincidence that they happened to build from scratch a browser interface that looks like Chrome while also copying Chrome's extension system and rapid release cycle? And if Opera wanted to start somewhere they should have started with an interface that was more like it was in version 9 or at the very least 12. Tell me what does the new Opera look more like, Opera 12 and under or Chrome? It has more in common with Chrome than it does with its former self. I'm sure the people at Google are just laughing their ass off at how desperate and pathetic Opera is in trying so hard to be like them. I don't want a wannabe browser. I want the innovation and features that drove me to use Opera in the first place.

Originally posted by softmoonwebware:

The real problem is that by using Opera 10 some years ago, when it WAS the best browser, locked me into its favorites in the first place. No browser can import from Opera, and Opera 12.16 mangles the HTML export of the favorites, so not only do sub-foldlers become top-level folders, many folders just disappear and their contents mingle randomly at the top-level. And I am only guessing that no links were lost that way...

So to move to another browser becomes a real pain when you have 1000 links.

I've had no problem exporting my bookmarks and sub-folders over to Firefox. The only problem is having to sort them manually. http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/sort-bookmarks-quickly-find-ones-you-want

Anyone else notice how Opera now has more in common with Google Chrome than it does with its former self (pre-15)? While I can agree with Opera's decision to move away from Presto due to compatibility issues, they've gone beyond just a change to the layout engine. So far they've copied Chrome's layout engine, user interface, extension system, and even Chrome's rapid release cycle. If Opera was trying to be Opera, then why all these changes and why all at once? If this is suppose to be an opportunity to increase Opera's market share, it sucks. All this does is draw attention to Chrome, not Opera. The market is already saturated with browsers imitating Chrome.

Regardless of how low Opera's market share has been pre-15, it was not because they didn't have a good product. Opera was the one that started tabbed browsing, mouse gestures, sessions, speed dial,..etc. Opera's main problem is that their marketing sucks. IE and Safari are the “default” browsers on their respective operating systems. Google’s brand positioning is simplicity and speed. Firefox is that it's the most customizable browser and has strong support from the open-source community. And Opera... I don't even know what they tried to market their browser as. If they started offering Opera as the perfect Facebook browser for example they would quickly move up. And if we're going to look at Opera's market share, lets look at the fact that Opera was ad-sponsored, which prevented OS distributions from including it, and didn't become free until late 2005 with 8.5 (more than a year after the release of Firefox).

Originally posted by rilef:

Nor does Chrome, or Opera Blink for that matter, crash more than other browsers visiting the same web sites. In fact, these browsers crash less than other browsers, which are not using the same architecture as Chrome/Opera Blink.

That's complete bullsh*t. Chrome crashes the most out of all the major browsers and is notorious for doing so. Why? Because Google uses the rapid release cycle which causes immature code to sneak into a release if not well managed and limits the amount of time for testing.