Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 30th Jan 2008 22:57 UTC, submitted by irbis
Opera Software "Tabs. Mouse gestures. User-agent switcher. Dedicated transfer window. Pop-up blocking and javascript abuse filtering. Integrated search box. Page zoom. Session saver. Chew on those features. We'll be coming back to them."
Thread beginning with comment 298650
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: How I would improve Opera
by Liquidator on Thu 31st Jan 2008 13:36 UTC in reply to "How I would improve Opera"
Member since:

If you get rid of all that, Opera will not be Opera anymore, and I might use Seamonkey instead, LOL.

I don't understand why using Delicious instead of the synced bookmarks. Synced bookmarks are really nice IMO.

I don't know why removing the IRC client. I don't use it because I don't chat but it doesn't hurt to have it. Granted that integration with commercial chat services such as MSN, ICQ, AIM, Jabber and Gmail would be nice for some people.

Widgets aren't extensions. They really *are* widgets, they are for your desktop, not for your browser. See:

You're asking to remove M2 but... Many people use Opera mainly for M2 (it's my case). M2 is an excellent email client. I use webmail when I'm not at home or at work but a webmail will never be as fast as a desktop email client. I really can't imagine Opera without M2, that would be terrible...

One of Opera's advantages is the wealth of features. If you remove these features, you get...Mosaic.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: How I would improve Opera
by Coxy on Thu 31st Jan 2008 14:08 in reply to "RE: How I would improve Opera"
Coxy Member since:

I appreciate your points, and maybe if Opera has it's own online bookmarks then maybe isn't required, but whether widgits are different from extensions, addons etc is just semantics.

Take a poll of your non-web designer, non-os geek friends:

Which three options below are things that extend a computer programmes functionality or adds new features?

A: Extensions
B: Add-ons
C: Plug-ins
D: Widgits

I bet everyone would reply a, b, c

Pretty much everyone has heard of a, b or c in one form or another in at least one computer programme that they use. The words themselves give you an idea of what they do (with maybe plug-ins giving the list hint out of options a, b and c). D would give no one that doesn't use computers 24 / 7 an idea of what they do. Maybe, someone might associate it with the buttons and such that make up a GUI, but I'm certain if a national newspaper in the UK polled people as to the meaning of widgit, most people would say it's the thing you get in the bottom of a can of beer that produces a head when you pour it in a glass.

Why try and make problems for yourself? There are existing terms that would be clear for users. Have you ever tried a peice of software that has a sort of Wizard to help people accomplish tasks? Some programmers (who probably play RPGs) refuse to use common terms that are understood by most users thanks to wide spread use... instead of a wizard they create a Druid, a Shaman or a Priest to guide his programmes users through completeing some action (I even saw one once that called wizards a Mage... why make square wheels for your applications when existing round ones would make the ride much smoother for the user?). Opera calling extensions/add-ons/plug-ins widgits is no different and just as annoying. While I'm on the subject, rename the 'Wand'...

Edited 2008-01-31 14:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

Liquidator Member since:

It's called "inovation" ;)

If Opera named their widgets "Extensions", people would scream and say these aren't extensions because they don't extend the browser, they extend the desktop. The same way, Firefox's extensions are not widgets because they only extend Firefox itself. For instance you can't have a Firefox extension that shows an analog clock on your desktop, this is why it's called an extension, not a widget. Desktop vs. Browser. If Opera called its widgets "extensions", it wouldn't be accurate and people would once again complain. And Opera didn't invent widgets. They've been around for years. We shouldn't blame Opera for using an existing term and concept. People aren't forced to use widgets, they're there. Who wants to use them, can. Who doesn't shouldn't worry about it.

Regarding the Wand, Opera had to come up with a creative name, as it's a completely new feature. I think "Wand" is better than "Password autofiller and form autosubmitter" ;)

Edited 2008-01-31 14:25 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2