Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 28th May 2013 12:59 UTC
Opera Software "Countless hours of hard work, hectoliters of coffee, tons of improvements, two version numbers skipped, and here it is: the all-new Opera for desktop is now out as an Opera Next version, Opera's channel for what used to be called beta. Made from scratch, this version is available for Windows and Mac and brings a new, elegant design and a bunch of new features that will make your browsing experience sleeker and easier than ever." The first version using something called 'Chromium's engine' - I guess they can't call it WebKit anymore, but they can't call it Blink yet either. It's looking great, but the bookmark functionality seems to not have been implemented yet in this preview
Thread beginning with comment 563021
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
So
by peteo on Tue 28th May 2013 13:29 UTC
peteo
Member since:
2011-10-05

So I downloaded and gave it a spin.

It feels like I'm using a slightly inferior reskin of Chrome 28.

Opera is dead.

Reply Score: 1

RE: So
by jacquouille on Tue 28th May 2013 13:54 in reply to "So"
jacquouille Member since:
2006-01-02

It feels like I'm using a slightly inferior reskin of Chrome 28.


Yes, that is what you're using.

Opera is dead.


Yes.

Opera's claims to contribute to Chromium are ridiculous. The whole reason for Blink is that Google found that not even Apple's contributions to WebKit were enough to offset the hassle of dealing with a shared browser engine. So there is no reason to expect that Google will be interested in the contributions of another company that is much smaller than Apple.

So yes, Opera will just be an irrelevant Chromium reskin.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: So
by Valhalla on Wed 29th May 2013 00:47 in reply to "RE: So"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

As someone who never really used Opera I was under the impression that it was the innovative features (many of which was later implemented in other browsers) which set it apart, not the rendering engine.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: So
by cyrilleberger on Wed 29th May 2013 11:13 in reply to "RE: So"
cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

The whole reason for Blink is that Google found that not even Apple's contributions to WebKit were enough to offset the hassle of dealing with a shared browser engine. So there is no reason to expect that Google will be interested in the contributions of another company that is much smaller than Apple.


Not quiet. Google was using Webkit1, while Apple was moving to Webkit2, and Google had no intention to moving from Webkit1 to Webkit2, since the main difference between the two is that Webkit2 uses several processes for rendering, while Webkit1 is single process. And Chrome uses a different multiprocess approach, and they had no attention of changing it. So in effect, Google was working on Webkit1, and Apple on Webkit2, and Google figured that it would be easier to just rename Webkit1 blink and not depend on Apple's webkit infrastructure.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: So
by PresentIt on Fri 31st May 2013 12:52 in reply to "RE: So"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Opera's claims to contribute to Chromium are ridiculous. The whole reason for Blink is that Google found that not even Apple's contributions to WebKit were enough to offset the hassle of dealing with a shared browser engine. So there is no reason to expect that Google will be interested in the contributions of another company that is much smaller than Apple.

Pure nonsense. Not only has Opera already contributed to Chromium, but Google welcomed them with open arms. They even mentioned Opera specifically in their Blink announcement!

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: So
by bhtooefr on Tue 28th May 2013 14:42 in reply to "So"
bhtooefr Member since:
2009-02-19

I seriously hope they reinstitute Z-order for tab switching in later betas, rather than simplistic left to right.

Also, mouse button navigation isn't working.

Those two things are probably the biggest quirks that keep me on Opera, and this doesn't have them.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: So
by Doc Pain on Thu 30th May 2013 05:58 in reply to "RE: So"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

I seriously hope they reinstitute Z-order for tab switching in later betas, rather than simplistic left to right.

Also, mouse button navigation isn't working.

Those two things are probably the biggest quirks that keep me on Opera, and this doesn't have them.


Same here. I've been using Opera for many years now, I think since somewhere around version 5. I did always like the work Opera developers have been putting into delivering a user-friendly interface which emphasized excellent integration of mouse and keyboard. Mouse gestures and keyboard shortcuts made simple things easy. It felt like they had "invested brain power" to make things work smoothly. Maybe I'm just stupid, but I found competitors (Firefox, Safari, Chrome) not as "fast and easy" as Opera... yes I know, there are extensions, add-ins, add-ons and who knows what to enable "Opera-like" functions in those browsers, but Opera had them out of the box. :-)

Within the last years, I've been observing a significant decline in program functionality. The features of the file dialog (prefix to change directory, automatic appending of file extensions, editable directory hierarchy dropdown) and the printer generator, as well as (for some versions) the unneccessary coupling to CUPS (I don't have it, I don't need it, my printer speaks PS, thank you). And prior to using Opera, I had to configure more and more things.

I'm interested in seeing if the new "inner bowels" of the browser are able to provide a fast and modern browsing experience with the known and reliable "outer interface" many Opera users love so much (me included). Sadly, my OS is not on the list yet. :-)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: So
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 28th May 2013 18:32 in reply to "So"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

There's still time before it's actually released to, you know, (hopefully) improve it.

I'm not running Windows or Mac and I don't want to try Wine (which works half-ass, if at all, most of the time), so I'll just wait and see. Hopefully they can fully Opera-ify it. Opera *was* a really good browser.


Edit: From the article:

"...two version numbers skipped, ..."

Uhh... I really hope this is just a one-time thing and not a hint that they're going to pull the same version-jumping game that the Google and Mozilla are playing, bumping the major version number every time they take a shit to see who can count to 100 fastest...

Edited 2013-05-28 18:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: So
by Fergy on Thu 30th May 2013 07:53 in reply to "RE: So"
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

Uhh... I really hope this is just a one-time thing and not a hint that they're going to pull the same version-jumping game that the Google and Mozilla are playing, bumping the major version number every time they take a shit to see who can count to 100 fastest...

It has been six years since Chrome went to a rapid release cycle and you still haven't managed to get informed about it?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: So
by PresentIt on Tue 28th May 2013 18:37 in reply to "So"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Opera is dead.

Why? Because you didn't get to dictate how the new version was supposed to look?

Opera has more than 300 million users and record revenues and profits... Hardly sounds like a dead company.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: So
by Lurking_Grue on Wed 29th May 2013 16:26 in reply to "RE: So"
Lurking_Grue Member since:
2013-03-15

Look, This isn't a few minor bits are missing. EVERY major feature that opera users like are gone.

It went from a power user browser to a cheap skin of Chrome.

Yes, The opera browser died. The company will probably go on but it lost most of it's userbase.

Reply Parent Score: 2