To love Opera, or not to love Opera

Don’t be so patronising. We can’t help it if you never got to grips with all that Opera 12 had to offer and so you don’t realise half the stuff you’re missing out on, but for those of us who did, having to suffer the lack of functionality that every other browser out there gives is like trying to play tennis with both hands tied behind your back. I have installed Opera 24 on my laptop, which I only use occasionally, and I hate it. I have tried it, and it’s seriously inadequate.

1 Like

You are right. New users understand the things well.

Okay everyone! Remember this is a “To love Opera, or not to love Opera”, which means everyone can express their opinion. Lets not make things personal. Obviously we have some who strongly dislike Opera 12/24 and are glad to see it decaying along the side of the road. Then we have the other party that still loves it for the features it brought to us (not so) long ago (many of which still remain, some of which haven’t caught on to the general population).

Nonetheless, but are valid because that was the point. To express your own love for the software or the fact that you don’t see the big deal. We aren’t trying to convert anyone from one side to another and that goes well beyond the scope of this topic.

If we can’t bring this back to a happy medium, I’ll have to close the topic.

You paint it backwards.
That would be “some who strongly dislike Opera 24” :wink:

and this would be the hating party right here, both on Opera 12 being forgotten and on new road for new Opera…

Tomato, Tom-ato :wink: Nonetheless, we need to be more mindful and less direct in our responses so the discussion can continue. I’ve updated my prior post to take into account some of those points :slight_smile:

Have I replied to this thread yet? I can’t remember.

Anyway, I used opera in the early 2000s playing browser games because it allowed me to turn off images and load the pages faster. Other than that, I don’t see a reason for Opera to exist other than complicating my life slightly… but not really. I don’t care about browsers who make up less than 5% of my users. I might fix something if an issue is brought up and it’s not too complicated, but that’s really about it.

It looks like Chrome. And if you didn’t knew how Chrome was like you could be mistaken with Opera at which Chrome reminds. Its really stupid.

Opera 24 (the one referred to earlier in the thread) looks like Chrome because it is built on the same rendering engine.

Opera 12 (the one with all the features that many Opera users can’t live without) looks nothing like Chrome because it is built on a different rendering engine.

Both of these are still considered to be current Opera versions.

I think Opera developers did the right thing by moving to a chrome-derived browser because they had no other choice. Seeing now that their progress on the browser is happening at a snail’s pace - 2 or 3 insignificant features every release - it’s clear that they possess very little manpower to work on Opera. If the devs were to support the old Opera they wouldn’t have time to update their rendering engine - with such slow progress it would still become more and more obsolete. So the devs had no choice - either Opera would die or continue existence as a chrome offshoot like now.

I’ve read the management at Opera fired most of the old developers and changed everything in that company. So there’s no one really there to work on a real browser. Passion was lost and so the browser died.

1 Like

My guess is you were in fact using Chrome all the time. Opera looks nothing like Chrome.

Ok its not I have something against Opera but isn’t that obvious? I mean even settings inside opera are identical to Chrome. Past Opera was looking better then now.

Again, nothing identical. Sure, there are similarities, but it’s anything but identical. Settings are different, tabs are different. Searching from the address bar is very different as you get to choose the search engine from the drop down suggestion list, an improvement against all the other browsers. The changes are big and consistent, improvements over the old Opera are significant. But to acknowledge those one would be required to actually look by him self rather than gathering knowledge by listening to gossip. And the gossip keeps pointing at the common Blink engine, while the complaints are not about the rendering accuracy or rendering speed, but about the lack of certain non-standard experimental features outside the rendering engine, while ignoring the complete different UI vis-à-vis Chrome. Oh, the irony.

This is what I don’t get. I don’t understand why the rendering engine is so closely tied to the overall appearance and functionality of the browser. I don’t understand why switching to Webkit also means having the same functionality as Webkit. Surely the whole point of having different browsers using the same rendering engine is that you can make them different? The hard work has already been done, leaving you free to play with the fun stuff.

I had no great love for Presto – in years gone by, it was great to have the only browser that rendered even close to the standards (well, both great and incredibly frustrating at the same time!), but as the others have caught up and overtaken it, that’s no longer a USP and it’s no longer a feature I’m bothered about. But why do we have to throw the baby out with the bathwater?

First off, Opera is Blink not Webkit.

Secondly, Opera 24 does not look like Chrome, does not behave like Chrome, does not feel like Chrome.

This goes to show a user should take the time and dive deeper instead of basing their opinion on false premises fed by other misinformed users. Really, take the time and document the likeness. You’d be extremely surprised how much different they are.

True unless Opera Presto became a big mass of spaghetti code without any basis for interfacing with another rendering engine. Who knows, this can be true. Opera’s source code can be really dated if they didn’t do any refactoring in recent years. I guess it was easier to take Chromium and slowly mould it to something different than to make Presto’s ancient UI code talk to a modern rendering engine.

Opera is much more similar to Chrome than to Opera Presto. And out of all major browsers today Chome is the most similar one to Opera. And Opera’s rendering engine is almost identical to Chrome, which means it has inherited all the virtues and bugs of Chrome, for example long opening of large xml documents, long parsing of certain large html documents, no built-in smooth scrolling, font rendering method (deteriorated in latest Chrome so we can expect it to trickle down to the next Opera version) and a lot more.

But these opinions didn’t appear out of thin air. They came from people actually using the new Opera. It’s true that Opera gradually is adding more features so these opinions can be a bit outdated - but Opera themselves are to blame for this misinformation because they used the name “Opera 15” for a completely different browser to Opera 12 - a browser that was in early alpha stages was given number 15 implying it’s a largely improved version of Opera 12. It is logical then to expect that Opera 15 is more and better than Opera 12 while the opposite was true (only the rendering engine could be called “improved”). When starting a new piece of software the numbering should start at 1, not at 14, 15 or whatever, and unfinished or experimental releases should be called alpha, beta, pre, etc. instead of having full numbers in the vicinity of 20.

1 Like

And that’s where the similarities end. Opera web browsing is NOT Chrome web browsing experience, UI wise, features wise, user experience wise.

Presto was introduced in Opera 7. By your logic, it’s a new piece of software, so they should have started at 1. Also, Opera 7 Presto was a mess. So, these opinions are not coming from people using new Opera, they come from people looking for something to complain about. It just happens to be new Opera they complain about.

As I said, I couldn’t give a stuff what rendering engine is used. When Opera 7 was launched, regardless of whatever was going on behind the scenes, from the user experience point of view it was an evolution of Opera 6. Sure, they may have been some additional bugginess (although I don’t remember any), but apart from that it had all the same features as before plus some new ones. It made sense to count it as the same browser and increment the version number, because functionally it was a newer version of the same browser. That isn’t true of Opera 15+. It doesn’t function like a newer version of Opera 12.

I don’t go out looking for things to complain about. When there’s something that bugs me, I try to ignore it, I try to look for the positives, I try to see if I can cope with it … I’m not one of life’s whingers … but Opera has fundamentally changed its game here, and made a deliberate choice to alienate its established user base, who were its most powerful advocates. Yes, that’s their prerogative, but they can hardly get upset when those self same people complain about Opera turning its back on them.

If you genuinely can’t comprehend why people who were power users of a cutting-edge advanced browser are upset and frustrated about being given a choice between (a) an old browser that is being left to moulder and will become obsolete, and (b) a basic browser that remains current but offers them a significantly worse experience and none of the advanced functionality that they were used to, then I guess we will never find any common ground and its pointless to continue this discussion.

Let me say this. You are a power user. I don’t really know what this means when it comes to Opera 12 browser, features and all, Firefox and Chrome are honestly way more advanced, are being used as OSs in a number of devices, so the title would fit well there, but I know this: if you don’t give a stuff about the rendering engine but you care deeply about something else then you’re using it wrong. It’s a not a web browser you need. Fortunately, Opera understood what it has become and made the move back to being a browser, instead of some SeaMonkey-like weird animal. And if you can’t comprehend a browser has a browser job to do first then you can go on and get upset and frustrated all you want.

Exactly.

Opera 7 included all of the functionality from Opera 6 and simply changed the rendering engine.

With Opera 15 none of the functionality (which has always been the reason for Opera’s popularity) was transferred across. They basically started off with Opera 15 as a brand new version one browser (no matter what number they give it).

As for what rendering engine is used - who cares - all of the rendering engines these days work basically the same. There may be a few of the newer things that Presto can’t handle which may eventually become a concern in a few years time but at the moment with most of the web still basically using HTML 3.2 that is a long way off.

It is the functionality the browser provides that counts the most and at the moment Opera 12 is still decades ahead of all the others in that area.

No, Opera did not understand anything like that, it simply laid off most of its best developers, for whatever reasons, and as a result lost the resources needed to support their own browser (link and link) - or the other way round, they laid off staff because they stopped caring about the browser. Opera browser as we see it today is not a result of careful and thought out planning but is a consequence of difficulties, problems and turmoil that happened in recent years at Opera. They never figured out how to be successful with their browser (in terms of market share) and finally gave up and reduced the developer team to the bare minimum needed to maintain a Chrome offshoot. They are now in a much safer place, taking fewer risks but at the same time making fewer innovations.

Some people will like the new browser, some won’t (as usual) but one thing is sure - there is no more so much passion in what they do and the browser has gone into the background in their order of importance. Only time will tell how it will play out for them - quite often simple and dumbed-down technology can make a lot more money than advanced stuff that appeals only to a small percentage - it’s mostly a question of good marketing and being in the right place at the right time.

1 Like