Opera Next and auto-update

Readers' comments

Comments left by My Opera members under the original post: the first 50, as archived.

• Tamil8. July 2011, 10:38

  TIL

• D1sasterp1ece8. July 2011, 10:55

  Thanks for the clarification and thanks for the hard work. To be honest, I don't rely on the auto updater, I always keep an eye on this blog instead.
  By the way, a little side question: I've subscribed to the RSS feed for the Desktop Team, but I've noticed that it has a huge delay sometimes - it happens that I get a notification for a new post several hours after it has been published even if the feed is set to update every 5 minutes - why is that?

• sleepyheadbooz0r8. July 2011, 11:01

  I don't think I ever once used the auto-updater, since this blog is so much faster!
  
  But thanks a lot for the informations.

• Tamil8. July 2011, 11:04

  Originally posted by D1sasterp1ece:

  By the way, a little side question

  Post in My Opera: Feedback, questions and discussions forum.
  

• Abhinavdecodedthought8. July 2011, 11:12

  Originally posted by Tamil:

  TIL

  
  +1

• maexl8. July 2011, 11:27

  Thank you for the information!
  
  A suggestion (at the same time I don't know, if this could work): Perhaps you could upload the build to auto-update at the same time when you are uploading it in the blog. The user could have the possibility to set a check-box in opera:config if he/she wants to recieve auto-updates although these ones where not verified yet ("active auto-update for unverified OperaNext-builds").
  When you verified the OperNext-build (for example one day later) your server guys set a checkbox: "verified" and all the other users who activated auto-update, but not for the unverified builds, recieve the build.
  
  I think this could be a useful solution for everyone, IF this is possible. Some users auto-update the save ones, some auto-update immediately, when a build is uploaded and some update via blog.

• Peterpman458. July 2011, 12:05

  Originally posted by D1sasterp1ece:

  Thanks for the clarification

  
  +1

• Pallab DeIndyan8. July 2011, 12:14

  Another suggestion: Push through delta updates, like Chrome does. So the download will be only about 100 KB, instead of 9 MB.

• Tommy A. Olsentoman8. July 2011, 12:46

  Originally posted by Indyan:

  Another suggestion: Push through delta updates, like Chrome does. So the download will be only about 100 KB, instead of 9 MB.

  
  We may do that in the future, but not for snapshots - it is much work for little gain to maintain deltas for so many builds.

• bachokocho8. July 2011, 12:53

  until Monday than ;-) No vacation this summer guys and gals?

• alekksander8. July 2011, 13:20

  Originally posted by D1sasterp1ece:

  By the way, a little side question: I've subscribed to the RSS feed for the Desktop Team, but I've noticed that it has a huge delay sometimes - it happens that I get a notification for a new post several hours after it has been published even if the feed is set to update every 5 minutes - why is that?

  
  
  My question is same as above. I wanted to switch to rss instead of constantly checking this site in my side web panel. So what's with the delays ?

• MossMan8. July 2011, 13:32

  It does kind of render auto-update on the Next builds ... how shall I put this kindly? ... completely pointless!
  
  Anyone using Next will have this blog in their feeds and will be installing it as soon as a new version is publicised. No-one wanting to run the newest experimental builds is going to wait a couple of days before installing it!
  
  Of course, things are different for the betas and finals... in that case I agree you should release it to the enthusiasts (us!) for a final check before allowing auto-update for everyone else.

• OlegYch8. July 2011, 13:42

  can you please add something like chrome dev/canary update channels?

• netmain8. July 2011, 14:07

  Originally posted by alekksander:

  Originally posted by D1sasterp1ece:
  By the way, a little side question: I've subscribed to the RSS feed for the Desktop Team, but I've noticed that it has a huge delay sometimes - it happens that I get a notification for a new post several hours after it has been published even if the feed is set to update every 5 minutes - why is that?
  
  
  My question is same as above. I wanted to switch to rss instead of constantly checking this site in my side web panel. So what's with the delays ?

  
  
  you can change the delay using M2:
  right click ---> Properties ---> and change the "update" delay to 5 minutes or 10 minutes

• D1sasterp1ece8. July 2011, 14:11

  Originally posted by netmain:

  Originally posted by alekksander:

  Originally posted by D1sasterp1ece:
  By the way, a little side question: I've subscribed to the RSS feed for the Desktop Team, but I've noticed that it has a huge delay sometimes - it happens that I get a notification for a new post several hours after it has been published even if the feed is set to update every 5 minutes - why is that?
  
  
  My question is same as above. I wanted to switch to rss instead of constantly checking this site in my side web panel. So what's with the delays ?

  
  
  you can change the delay using M2:
  right click ---> Properties ---> and change the "update" delay to 5 minutes or 10 minutes

  
  
  Did you read my whole post?

• liv-public8. July 2011, 14:24

  This makes little sense. Opera Next is by definition intended for testing, and it comes with a big, fat and red tag informing users what it is for. Furthermore, how should we---the early, eager testers---get the builds to test if you don't push them through the usual channels that we get our builds. I want to test Opera Next as soon as it's out, but not at the price of manually downloading a build every time---this is what Synaptic is there for.

• Nimesh nimeshthakkar8. July 2011, 14:33

  Originally posted by Indyan:

  Another suggestion: Push through delta updates, like Chrome does. So the download will be only about 100 KB, instead of 9 MB.

  
  
  Are you sure Chrome works that way?
  I've seen the auto-update folder for Chrome in >100mb everytime there is an update.

• ahoj12348. July 2011, 14:38

  I think it isnt good idea.. Why do you released "Opera next" for us - "testers" ,when we have to wait to control by "pre-testers" who are on this blog every hour.. I think a lot of people want newest build of Opera for testing.. Do poll or something like that if you would not believe it..
  
  Please make autoupdate in Opera next when a build is released we dont want another waiting.. In "normal" installation of Opera would be waiting people for next "stable" build...
  Between "Opera next" and "Opera" must be difference

• vilpapa8. July 2011, 14:42

  Originally posted by liv-public:

  This makes little sense. Opera Next is by definition intended for testing, and it comes with a big, fat and red tag informing users what it is for

  
  +1

• ahoj12348. July 2011, 14:44

  Originally posted by vilpapa:

  Originally posted by liv-public:

  This makes little sense. Opera Next is by definition intended for testing, and it comes with a big, fat and red tag informing users what it is for

  
  +1

  
  +1

• Daniel HendrycksDanielHendrycks8. July 2011, 15:12

  Originally posted by liv-public:

  This makes little sense. Opera Next is by definition intended for testing

  
  +1 Have a poll on this blog, for which is preferable! Thanks for the post.

• highstream8. July 2011, 15:20

  The problem I encountered with 11.50 release is that it updated OperaNext, rather than going to - or offering to go to - a new folder. I had to do some renaming and copying of everything over to a new OperaNext folder before updating to Wahoo.

• samMD8. July 2011, 15:35

  Originally posted by OlegYch:

  can you please add something like chrome dev/canary update channels?

  
  
  uhh what do you think Opera Next is

• sTeeVeboY8. July 2011, 15:43

  Thanks for the explanations. Very much appreciated!

• Krzysztof Hankiewiczlordmorgul8. July 2011, 16:17

  Maybe you could consider making a Linux repository for automatic updates, like the Chromium team does? I know this isn't the place for suggestions, but it's on topic, so I thought I'd write it here.

• D1sasterp1ece8. July 2011, 16:28

  Originally posted by nimeshthakkar:

  Originally posted by Indyan:

  Another suggestion: Push through delta updates, like Chrome does. So the download will be only about 100 KB, instead of 9 MB.

  
  
  Are you sure Chrome works that way?
  I've seen the auto-update folder for Chrome in >100mb everytime there is an update.

  
  
  Why do you people always involve other [crappy] software when you talk about how Opera works?

• mjpa8. July 2011, 17:39

  Interesting to see that you guys give a snapshot build a day or 2 before pushing it out to auto-update snapshot users yet happily fly through numerous RC builds in less than 24hours and release a final version without waiting for full feedback

• Ian Murrayianmurray8. July 2011, 17:41

  I use opupdate which is part of the op2slk tool for Slackware Linux.http://my.opera.com/ruario/blog/2010/12/26/automatic-conversion-of-opera-generic-linux-packages-into-slackware-format

• Skipskip0298. July 2011, 17:52

  I think its pretty funny that Opera team has to wait until the snapshots are stable before it can go through to the Auto-Update feature.... I mean come on really? Everyone who is here comes to the Opera Desktop Team page to look for the latest snap shot to try it out anyways. That's all they want. We all know what risks we are taking already by trying them.
  
  The fact the Opera team has to take time out of their schedule to address this issue and even try to somehow 'improve' this feature is so bogus and is totally not headed in any positive direction.
  
  It's like being in a closed beta video game and saying 'wow, this sh*t is buggy as hell, I wouldn't recommend anyone to play it!' idiots.
  
  Keep up the work Opera Team and don't let these fools bring you down.

• ClashCityRockerclashcityrocker8. July 2011, 17:58

  Originally posted by skip029:

  I think its pretty funny that Opera team has to wait until the snapshots are stable before it can go through to the Auto-Update feature.... I mean come on really? Everyone who is here comes to the Opera Desktop Team page to look for the latest snap shot to try it out anyways. That's all they want. We all know what risks we are taking already by trying them.

  
  
  
  That's not true, there are many people like web developers (the proper ones that bother to test with Opera), who want to test upcoming Presto changes, but don't want a flakey browser to go with it.

• Rafael Luikrafaelluik8. July 2011, 18:13

  That doesn't makes sense. Opera Next is obviously for appreciation of testers, they can't bother if their favorite websites are crashing, that's why they're using it at first (give feedback on that cases)!

• WildEnte8. July 2011, 18:29

  Originally posted by rafaelluik:

  That doesn't makes sense. Opera Next is obviously for appreciation of testers, they can't bother if their favorite websites are crashing, that's why they're using it at first (give feedback on that cases)!

  
  I don't agree. I read the changelog and only test those builds that contain something that I'm interested in (mostly mail changes). Not everyone wants to try out interesting stuff with a browser that's crashing all the time. I don't need to see the change THAT fast.
  
  So thanks for the explanation - I think it's the right process to use and it shows that Opera will risk annoying fanboy users occasionally with an unstable build, but that quality for the masses is a top priority.

• Rafael Luikrafaelluik8. July 2011, 18:52

  Originally posted by WildEnte:

  I read the changelog and only test those builds that contain something that I'm interested in

  Then it has nothing to do with auto-update.
  
  "2. Smoke test it internally while writing the blogpost" would be enough for a constant-crashing build.

• FataL8. July 2011, 18:55

  Originally posted by liv-public:

  This makes little sense. Opera Next is by definition intended for testing, and it comes with a big, fat and red tag informing users what it is for. Furthermore, how should we---the early, eager testers---get the builds to test if you don't push them through the usual channels that we get our builds. I want to test Opera Next as soon as it's out, but not at the price of manually downloading a build every time---this is what Synaptic is there for.

  +1
  
  I explicitly said opera:config#AutoUpdate|DownloadAllSnapshots that I want all snapshots. Opera Next is pointless for me in current state because I can only appreciate its different icon.

• Rafael Luikrafaelluik8. July 2011, 19:11

  Originally posted by FataL:

  Opera Next is pointless for me in current state because I can only appreciate its different icon.

  It's interesting for people who download without knowing it's for testing purposes (coming to this blog or by opera.com/browser/next), it automatically installs in a different path than the official one the person might have an Opera final installed.

• WildEnte8. July 2011, 19:14

  Originally posted by rafaelluik:

  Originally posted by WildEnte:
  I read the changelog and only test those builds that contain something that I'm interested inThen it has nothing to do with auto-update.

  
  I agree, I should have phrased this another way: without autoupdate, I wouldn't install every build but only those that I'm interested in. With autoupdate, I'm happy that I don't get the builds that crash but only those that have a certain quality. Hope that makes more sense.

• ahoj12348. July 2011, 19:59

  I dont know why are you saying something like that:
  "I read the changelog and only test those builds that contain something that I'm interested in (mostly mail changes)"
  so why do you need autoupdate or why do you need Opera next? ?? I thing Opera next is for these users for nothing so please make autupdate for all new build after released (in Opera next)
  

• ClashCityRockerclashcityrocker8. July 2011, 20:22

  There is some obvious flaws with AutoUpdate. I let it autoupdate today and it told me I was getting 11.50, and it ACTUALLY gave me 12.0 pre-alpha.

• ruaman8. July 2011, 20:41

  Originally posted by liv-public:

  This makes little sense. Opera Next is by definition intended for testing, and it comes with a big, fat and red tag informing users what it is for.

  
  +1

• HPearcehpearce8. July 2011, 21:41

  I think most people who use snapshots are pretty informed about the possibilities of bugs .... but if Opera feels that way about making the snapshots go "live", perhaps they should change the logic to "auto-ask".

• BetaMorph8. July 2011, 21:45

  Originally posted by liv-public:

  This makes little sense. Opera Next is by definition intended for testing, and it comes with a big, fat and red tag informing users what it is for.

  
  True. On the blog. The issue is that people don't even read the introduction. They don't care to read the change log either, just read through the messages left from some of them. I think the better is to keep it the way it is, for now.
  
  I don't really understand why some are coming to test Next if they don't read anything about it. Already mentioned; Introduction, Change Log, not even posts.
  
  They just moan. About everything.

• Taufiq Ahmedtareqf19. July 2011, 05:11

  That clear things up. Thanks.

• Abrahamfenietzsche9. July 2011, 05:38

  I was installing Opera on Archlinux and suddenly I saw that is so beautiful the appearance, tabs looks really cute!
  
  Thanks, Opera Team!
  

• Blaž Pristavitalianjob449. July 2011, 08:29

  When you do a blog post and about the same time should auto update also work, well ok lets say half hour later that you can establish working conditions for update. Sounds reasonable for me what about you, you can say on your blog post autoupdate fill out in approximately 30 minutes.

• sudos9. July 2011, 10:08

  Originally posted by clashcityrocker:

  
  That's not true, there are many people like web developers (the proper ones that bother to test with Opera), who want to test upcoming Presto changes, but don't want a flakey browser to go with it.

  
  
  There aren't a whole lot of proper web devs like that, though.
  From what I've been told, it "costs more money" to get a webpage to guarantee to be operational with Opera... big steaming pile of lies is what it is. it costs no more to make a webpage work with Opera/Presto than it does FF/Gecko or Chrome/Webkit. In fact, most web developers still believe that Opera has rendering problems! and then there are those that purposely make the webpage work incorrectly on Opera for the heck of it. I hate devs like that.
  
  Especially since Opera is the best browser ever. ever ever ever. Keep that awesome work up, Desktop Team.

• ClashCityRockerclashcityrocker9. July 2011, 10:25

  Originally posted by sudos:

  In fact, most web developers still believe that Opera has rendering problems!

  
  
  I don't even class them as developers, they clearly still think that IE is the standard, and if something does not render like IE, it must therefore be wrong. the web standards thing has totally passed them by, and they carry on clueless wondering why their sites don't work right on mobiles and such. if you write your site to web standards, chances are it will work everywhere...

• Rafael Luikrafaelluik9. July 2011, 15:17

  Originally posted by archive1:

  Is it possible to get opera link bookmark to sort by name

  No. Please say you want it by replying to this topic:
  http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=554871
  
  In case you're talking about the bookmarks in the browser, there's a "View" button on the "Manage Bookmarks" page (Ctrl + Shift + B), it'll let you to sort the bookmarks by various kinds of data including by name.

• Renatorenato20059. July 2011, 17:56

  Thanks for the clarification and thanks for the hard work.
  
  If someone wanna know when a new snapshot (opera-next) is released, just sign the RSS feed of the Opera Desktop Team.
  
  But, click 'OK' (or 'CANCEL') on the update notification balloon and, then visit the blog, is the easiest way to know about new snapshot.
  
  
  (sorry my English)[<0>]

• Skipskip02910. July 2011, 05:03

  Originally posted by sudos:

  Originally posted by clashcityrocker:

  
  That's not true, there are many people like web developers (the proper ones that bother to test with Opera), who want to test upcoming Presto changes, but don't want a flakey browser to go with it.

  
  
  There aren't a whole lot of proper web devs like that, though.
  From what I've been told, it "costs more money" to get a webpage to guarantee to be operational with Opera... big steaming pile of lies is what it is. it costs no more to make a webpage work with Opera/Presto than it does FF/Gecko or Chrome/Webkit. In fact, most web developers still believe that Opera has rendering problems! and then there are those that purposely make the webpage work incorrectly on Opera for the heck of it. I hate devs like that.
  
  Especially since Opera is the best browser ever. ever ever ever. Keep that awesome work up, Desktop Team.

  
  
  True..... but you forget to mention the only reason why the 'standard' is Internet Explorer is because it comes with Windows which is installed on the majority of PC's. According to some research IE owns about 54% of the browser war. If you're a web developer and you want to cater to the 2% (opera users) than go ahead. No one is stopping you. Just don't cry when people don't come to your site because they can't see sh*t.

• Alessandro Cassaràtouchmyhands10. July 2011, 18:23

  Opera Rich Text test results at browserscope.org are very bad.. :/