Developers › A Journal from Behind the Trenches › Poll: What do you think about Opera switching to WebKit?

Poll: What do you think about Opera switching to WebKit? comments

Page 3 of 4 (169 comments)

Left under the original article, as archived.

teresaejuniorThursday, February 14, 2013 10:45:03 PM
I already talked about this, a bit off-topic in another thread, but here is my two cents:

I mentioned Webkit is a constant CPU hog, to the point of being unusable. Then the user @utopian1955 did some benchmarks, and said the following:

Originally posted by utopian1955:

Webkit browsers will bring ANY single core CPU to its knees, simply because it is programmed to launch a bunch of simultaneous processes. If you look at the task manager you'll see at least 5 new processes when any Chromium browser is launched. More if you have any extensions installed.

I also said that I would switch back to Firefox, but today I'm in a better mood It is probable that the first Webkit release will come loaded with new bugs, so I'll give Opera some time, before taking any decision.

Instead of throwing so many years of Presto development out of the window, consider opening its source, like many other users said. The Free Software Foundation even offers free advice for choosing the best license. I have already done closed-source development, and today I regret, because if I had opened the source for my work, someone else could have helped me maintaining it, and even for free.

Consider also giving the user the choice for Presto or Webkit, but I believe this would be viable only if Presto is open-sourced, to reduce development efforts.

Also, what is more appealing for the end user?
1. Using a webkit based closed source browser;
2. Using a webkit based open source browser (and there's plenty of them);
SuntanaThursday, February 14, 2013 10:50:37 PM
That is true. It's not like Opera is going to change their mind because of the Poll results in the Sidebar.

None of us go around hoping to be wrong about anything on a normal basis. But, in this case, I hope Opera pulls a giant rabbit out of a hat and proves those of us who think it's a bad idea ... wrong.
LucarThursday, February 14, 2013 11:00:54 PM
Open the Code current Opera, do not let him die.

Open Source Opera will live forever.
LucarThursday, February 14, 2013 11:31:31 PM
Opera Software: Open Presto sources Petition

https://www.change.org/petitions/opera-software-open-sources-of-presto-engine?utm_campaign=twitter_link&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=share_petition
webtaxFriday, February 15, 2013 12:42:36 AM
after some time thinking, i would choose good idea(voted not sure earlier), as i think definitely more good than harm can come out of this decision, for Opera software, Opera users, and the web evolution.

let's hope the devs can keep most of the features that we all love!
Yeni SetiawanFriday, February 15, 2013 2:11:54 AM
I said it's bad idea, until I see a prove that Opera will still be "the same" as before.
IlgazFriday, February 15, 2013 9:17:46 AM
I try Firefox beta for Android & chrome on a relatively high end device. They don't (can't) even support my other Huawei 8650 with 256M RAM.
Going back& forth in history is a joke compared to opera as well as text rendering, it is impossible to tune it even on 4.3 inch gigantic phone.
Are you guys telling you will support both 256M (don't laugh, they work) and Android 2.3? You do perfectly now.
IlgazFriday, February 15, 2013 9:23:22 AM
Originally posted by sandalian:

I said it's bad idea, until I see a prove that Opera will still be "the same" as before.

I really wonder that too. Rendering engine is responsible for what we actually see in pages down to font sizes/layout. Apple and google drives webkit and we see the result. Google couldn't even release chrome for Android 2.3 which is a huge majority in Android scene and yet opera does.
AsiresFriday, February 15, 2013 9:29:37 AM
Bad Idea, because WebKit doesn't have:
- smooth autoscroll. Instead it has jerky eye-bleeding scroll.
- page fit feature.
- links selection.
- good speed and memory footprint with many tabs.
- not freeze the PC.
- overall interface response speed.
- not freeze the page, if JS and assets is loading.
- etc.
mubaidrFriday, February 15, 2013 11:25:18 AM
Originally posted by sandalian:

I said it's bad idea, until I see a prove that Opera will still be "the same" as before.

I have same opinion! and i think this is what Opera Devs are planning! Not just creating another clone like Chrome!
HaavardFriday, February 15, 2013 1:01:38 PM
Originally posted by Suntana:

Haavard, this change will go against the point that you had made in a certain 2010 Post that the more Browser Engines that were out there ... the more "Moving Targets" it made for malware writers. Thus, the more Moving Targets would make it tougher on malware writers.
I addressed this in the previous post, where I pointed out that if there is a monoculture, it already exists. We were not able to prevent it, and so changing to WebKit has no real impact on those things.

However, we have considerable experience with browser engines in general, and especially security. We can make WebKit more secure, and we can improve its standards compliance, and thus deal with both issues while reaping the benefits of improved site compatibility.

Originally posted by Virusboy:

The only difference is Presto is yours to manipulate, Webkit isnt even own by you.
We have already started contributing fixes to the WebKit project, so we will indeed be able to influence its future direction. No one owns WebKit, but there are several contributors.

By the way, insulting our developers is not a good idea.
omul cu eliceFriday, February 15, 2013 1:08:07 PM
Originally posted by CREEPER:

I voted "not sure", however, I still feel it is a "bad idea"

And what do I think?

Well, from business point of view, I understand such move. In order to increase its market share on mobile devices, Opera sacrifices its desktop product. In other words, Opera wants more users, not fans.

Many of us like Opera simply for being different. Now it will just pretend to be different.

Totally agree.

Open sourcing Opera would have resolved many compatibilty issues blamed for the need to switch an also would have gained momentum in enlarging the user base.

OPEN SOURCE OPERA! (Or, ar least Presto)

As for the switch in itself:
- good move for webkit, will benefit a lot from Opera programmers' experience and skill
- probably good move for Opera SA from a businesss standpoint
- bad move for the open web
- probably bad move for the security of the Opera browser
- don't know about the evolution of UI and overall user experience which is the best now but can fast go down.

So, voted "not sure", but is a sad day for me, as a user, to lose A CHOICE.
Ayrton NadgelFriday, February 15, 2013 1:16:07 PM
Originally posted by sandalian:

I said it's bad idea, until I see a prove that Opera will still be "the same" as before.

+1
ChirpieFriday, February 15, 2013 1:49:08 PM
Originally posted by myownfriend:

With Chrome already having a huge market share, many that might consider switching to Opera now, won't have any reason to switch over.

Why? Because they likely already have Chrome.
What's with the trolling? Opera is not Chrome. Using the same engine doesn't mean you have the same UI, and people care about the UI not the engine.

Get a clue.

Stick with Presto and open source it. You need the market share, you have a dedicated user base that are willing to get you that market share, and are thus your cheapest employees.
Laughable. A bunch of hobbyists is not going to make a difference. Open-sourcing Presto would destroy it, and ultimately Opera.
teresaejuniorFriday, February 15, 2013 2:17:12 PM
Originally posted by Chirpie:

Laughable. A bunch of hobbyists is not going to make a difference. Open-sourcing Presto would destroy it, and ultimately Opera.

Laughable. Gecko and Webkit are open-source and no hobbyists have destroyed them so far.
sFriday, February 15, 2013 4:41:22 PM
I'm sorry, but this sounds like a white flag from Opera to me.. I'm on opera from 2004, and it always was up to my expectations and needs.. It was the only browser that could decently work on my netbook, and was most feature rich both on WinMo devices and recently bought Android tablet. Now i honestly dont know, what would keep me on Opera, if some (or most) of its features - handy UI, sane HW acceleration without blurry fonts, the fastest sw renderer and all other stuff - will be ditched in favour of memory hog that is WebKit.

This decision looks even more strange if you look at Q4 financial report..
Guy FlemingFriday, February 15, 2013 9:13:38 PM
Originally posted by haavard:

Originally posted by Suntana:
Haavard, this change will go against the point that you had made in a certain 2010 Post that the more Browser Engines that were out there ... the more "Moving Targets" it made for malware writers. Thus, the more Moving Targets would make it tougher on malware writers.
I addressed this in the previous post, where I pointed out that if there is a monoculture, it already exists. We were not able to prevent it, and so changing to WebKit has no real impact on those things.

However, we have considerable experience with browser engines in general, and especially security. We can make WebKit more secure, and we can improve its standards compliance, and thus deal with both issues while reaping the benefits of improved site compatibility.

Originally posted by Virusboy:
The only difference is Presto is yours to manipulate, Webkit isnt even own by you.
We have already started contributing fixes to the WebKit project, so we will indeed be able to influence its future direction. No one owns WebKit, but there are several contributors.

By the way, insulting our developers is not a good idea.
I think my friend put it best "What do you think of Opera going from Presto to Webkit" "Welcome to Safari 2.0"
Guy FlemingFriday, February 15, 2013 9:21:12 PM
Originally posted by teresaejunior:

Originally posted by Chirpie:
Laughable. A bunch of hobbyists is not going to make a difference. Open-sourcing Presto would destroy it, and ultimately Opera.

Laughable. Gecko and Webkit are open-source and no hobbyists have destroyed them so far.
That isn't the reason Opera doesn't open source the engine.
LuchioFriday, February 15, 2013 10:14:31 PM
I voted not sure. I think it's a good idea for Opera itself, and I'm convinced it was not an easy decision to make.

However, like others have pointed out, I'm afraid we'll lose the unique features that made long time users choose Opera. Here's the features I personnally wish would stay:

- Ability to have tons of tabs without melting down
- Customizable Gestures, flip gestures
- Site-specific preferences (CSS, popup control, etc)
- Snappiness
- Smooth scrolling
- Plug-ins on-demand
- Auto-fill forms
- Download manager
- IRC
- Ability to always maximize popups

Best of luck to you, Opera team.
FireFFFUUUSaturday, February 16, 2013 4:59:39 AM
I strongly agree with many of the above concerns, and also some of his views (positive or negative), maybe I make a summary of that later.

I'm going to comment on the apocalyptics concerns about the "monoculture" and "The Open Web".

Sorry, I don't want offense to anyone, but "monoculture and open web" is bullshit; demagogic speech that has never existed and has always have been a farce.

Monoculture is bad yes, but also the biculture and triculture, and that's what we've had all this time and it is the reason why today Presto dies; developers took into account only the (bi|tri)culture and Opera was ignored, leaving incompatible, making it the Opera Team must make infinite patches for infinite websites, and of course be ignored by users because "Opera is incompatible".

Today, many people tear the garment for the "monoculture" (related Gecko, chiefly), but these never were bothered when the web was "Not Open" and shut out Opera, in fact they didn't care when THEY were monoculture = "This site is optimized for Firefox" e.g.; only care now because they weren't elected and because they can capitalize on the situation using demagogic speech "the open web is in danger, and we are the solution" "Webkit is the Evil, we are the Messiah."

Today, they say Webkit is the bad, but the truth, Webkit brought variety because a few years ago was the Gecko monoculture, sites optimized for Firefox, but "all the people" applauded because "Firefox is the Open Web and IE is Satan" "Monoculture is good if it is to defeat the Evil" "the Monopoly is Bad, then we are creating other Monopoly for kill the Monopoly".

It was sad that so many people was manipulate with this demagoguery. If you used Opera you could know that the "open web" just was a war against a monopoly to impose another monopoly and you weren't invited. It was never about standards or multiple choices, except in the speech.

Never has been "Open Web", all the greats (IE, Firefox and later Chrome) were responsible for that; and this lack is what hurt Opera and Opera only.

Sorry my bad english.
EricJHSaturday, February 16, 2013 6:22:57 PM
Originally posted by FFFUUUFox:

It was sad that so many people was manipulate with this demagoguery. If you used Opera you could know that the "open web" just was a war against a monopoly to impose another monopoly and you weren't invited.
And by consequence you are trying to impose your monolithic pov on a situation...
SuntanaSaturday, February 16, 2013 8:46:42 PM
Originally posted by Luchio:

However, like others have pointed out, I'm afraid we'll lose the unique features that made long time users choose Opera. Here's the features I personally wish would stay:

I sure hope Opera brings along the Popout at the Bottom Extended Progress Bar. That kicks butt on any progress indicator that Firefox or Chrome have.
mubaidrSunday, February 17, 2013 4:36:15 AM
This is what Bruce Lawson mentioned in the post:
Of course, a browser is much more than just a renderer and a JS engine, so this is primarily an "under the hood" change.

http://my.opera.com/ODIN/blog/300-million-users-and-move-to-webkit

Thats means overall Experience/features will be same (with some exceptions).
CristianSunday, February 17, 2013 5:50:43 AM
It's good for me... More compatibility with a lot of pages, and no more NSL.
ayespySunday, February 17, 2013 6:04:46 PM
Originally posted by mubaidr:

Thats means overall Experience/features will be same (with some exceptions).

"It's built using the open-source Chromium browser as one of its components."

I've yet to see a chromium-based browser that was configurable in REMOTELY the same way or degree as Opera. They are all almost like different skins of the exact same browser (though not nearly as much variation as is possible with Opera skins).
FransSunday, February 17, 2013 6:24:57 PM
Originally posted by ayespy:

"It's built using the open-source Chromium browser as one of its components."

Where's that quote from? As far as I know I've only seen them say they will use the same branch of Webkit also utilized by Chromium.
FireFFFUUUSunday, February 17, 2013 7:27:48 PM
Originally posted by EricJH:

And by consequence you are trying to impose your monolithic pov on a situation.

I'm not trying impose a point of view.
And I wish were pov, but it is a reality that has beaten we faces all these years.

The reality shown that Triculture (Gecko/Webkit/Trident) has crushed Opera.
And before the Triculture was Biculture (Gecko/Trident) or directly Monoculture (first Trident, and later Gecko because Trident was the Evil).

There isn't a new danger because Opera support "the monoculture Webkit", is a danger that always has been old and all (the majority browsers) have participated in it, and the only hit was Opera.
s/ashSunday, February 17, 2013 7:49:18 PM
Originally posted by Frenzie:

Originally posted by ayespy:
"It's built using the open-source Chromium browser as one of its components."

Where's that quote from? As far as I know I've only seen them say they will use the same branch of Webkit also utilized by Chromium.
http://my.opera.com/ODIN/blog/300-million-users-and-move-to-webkit
teresaejuniorSunday, February 17, 2013 8:07:26 PM
Originally posted by slash4real:

Originally posted by Frenzie:
Originally posted by ayespy:
"It's built using the open-source Chromium browser as one of its components."

Where's that quote from? As far as I know I've only seen them say they will use the same branch of Webkit also utilized by Chromium.

http://my.opera.com/ODIN/blog/300-million-users-and-move-to-webkit
And what does that mean? No Webkit based browsers I know (at least the ones I know) have Chromium embedded to them... That's too strange.
FransSunday, February 17, 2013 8:19:41 PM
Right after that it continues with "Of course, a browser is much more than just a renderer and a JS engine, so this is primarily an 'under the hood' change." I therefore assume it's just confusingly worded.
ayespySunday, February 17, 2013 9:02:31 PM
Originally posted by teresaejunior:

And what does that mean?

As Chromium is a browser, it would appear to mean that Opera will attempt to hang its UI (front end) on the framework that Chrome, Dragon, etc. use. Ie, it seems like it would have to have the same essential properties, and be just as (non)configurable as these browsers. Further, I don't see how it would be able to accommodate an integrated email client. Every time you try to add any kind of email or contacts "extension" to a chromium browser, all you get is a link to a webmail provider.
teresaejuniorSunday, February 17, 2013 9:26:25 PM
Both of you make sense, but I hope Frans is right... If ayespy is right, that would be more like forking Chromium, wouldn't it?
teresaejuniorSunday, February 17, 2013 9:29:23 PM
Oh, and BTW, if it becomes a Chromium fork, Opera will be forced to become open source, unless they make non-free components on top of it, like Oracle did to VirtualBox.
M-ZSunday, February 17, 2013 11:16:36 PM
Unless you are prepared to port current features to Webkit, you will loose user base.

I will stick to Opera 11.64 and see what happens.
Ich bin LudaMonday, February 18, 2013 12:45:42 AM
I wouldn't mind pay for Opera browser if you would pick up development for real from 11.62. (without webkit!)
10,15EUR per month, no problem.
Will you slowly abandon Desktop version completely now that you spent 150 mil $ for that firm for mobile video streaming and something? Skyfire Labs or something like that
s/ashMonday, February 18, 2013 2:06:36 AM
Originally posted by ayespy:

and be just as (non)configurable as these browsers.

I hate the way any WebKit-based browser acts. Even Opera is not the way I want it to be out-of-the-box, but after I configure it by my likings, I simply LOVE it. But lets just hope that's not the case. Otherwise the only configurable browsers will be the Gecko-based ones, which indeed have some advantages but they're still far away from Opera's flexibility/easy-customisation.

And YES, Opera would be one of the few softwares that I would pay for.
PeterMonday, February 18, 2013 9:55:12 AM
Originally posted by ichbinluda:

Will you slowly abandon Desktop version completely now

I fear the same. Somehow I feel that Opera is giving up competition on Windows-based PCs and starts focusing on Android-based mobile devices.

Abandoning Presto for me is like kicking out your own child, because other kids do not want to play with him, and adopting a new one, which is more convenient and average.

Without a solid PC product, Opera will lose many users both on PCs and mobiles. With Webkit browser they have only one shot. If they miss, they are doomed.

It would be quite a shame, if their desktop release would be generally rejected by users, what some surely will do anyway
jts7Monday, February 18, 2013 6:06:44 PM
I think it will not work good enough on old devices of all kinds! :S
FransMonday, February 18, 2013 8:27:58 PM
Originally posted by Guy Fleming:

And for the record, replacing 11.xx with the engine of 6.4 would actually be less work. But that's what I think.

6.4? There's no such thing.
Rafael LuikMonday, February 18, 2013 9:23:53 PM
I have no problems with 12.x version, it's only better and faster than any 10.x or 11.x.
Guy FlemingTuesday, February 19, 2013 1:23:22 AM
Originally posted by Frenzie:

6.4? There's no such thing.

point being something that actually worked and had little issue.
Guy FlemingTuesday, February 19, 2013 1:27:48 AM
Originally posted by rafaelluik:

I have no problems with 12.x version, it's only better and faster than any 10.x or 11.x.

you running a CRAY computer or something?
teresaejuniorTuesday, February 19, 2013 3:46:11 PM
Originally posted by Virusboy:

CRAY

I've got a three year old, unexpensive in those days, laptop, and Opera 12.14 is the fastest browser I've tried so far.
AndreaTuesday, February 19, 2013 4:09:26 PM
Originally posted by AnuarSh:

If you change only what is below the address bar and above the status bar, then "as you want" ...
These are my words!
Rafael LuikTuesday, February 19, 2013 11:27:21 PM
Please keep the highly customizable Speed Dial, we choose the sites there and keep keyboard shortcuts for the sites added...
And notes panel, mouse gestures, None / Ctrl and Shift modifiers for searching selected text or do other things in current or new tab (or in the background), a tab bar that will shrink the tabs size and show thumbnails when you hover it, (re-)load an image without having to reload the page, sessions, private tabs, TAB for form elements and spatial navigation, ability to select linked text from anywhere inside it, priority on text over images and style, etc...! These are the things that really matter to me in Opera.
morbitWednesday, February 20, 2013 2:21:56 AM
I've only now realized 'skins' are missing

Netbook Skin 9.5.2 was most space efficient skin ever, and compatible all the way up to 12.14.
crash71Wednesday, February 20, 2013 2:47:40 AM
Well on the old skins pages, it was mentioned skins would be merged with themes. That "warning" has been there for quite a long time. Yet removed entirely seems to be a bit extreme, even for Opera.

See this thread: Keeps Skins (forget about Themes!) for Windows.
Or my post, further down the page in that thread.
morbitWednesday, February 20, 2013 10:57:17 AM
Well I didn't pay attention, I've just updated Opera and skin transferred automatically, now I'm not longer able to find it at all (good I have it
installed, maybe it's time to dig in .opera/).

Looks like whole family of "minimal" skins was orphaned by this decision. Now we
have "wallpapers", totally defeating purpose of using skin for me.

edit: Yup, it's there... netbook_skin_classic-952.zip Well at least I still have it...
M-ZWednesday, February 20, 2013 2:33:36 PM
Originally posted by crash71:

If we know anything from Opera's beginnings to Opera 11, they can deliver a solid product. Getting rid of Opera 12's engine is the right move - it would either need to start again from Opera 11.64 (way too much work) or this switch to Webkit - which likely is the right move.

The problem is porting features to Webkit. No sane person will accept loosing most of Opera's capabilities, just to satisfy some managerial decision (which are frequently targeted at short term profit). Most of us have chosen Opera despite some compatibility issues, but we are not willing to give up features.
I don't believe Opera has too much marketing power - they cannot "suggest" using different browser on major portals - so it makes a necessity to deliver quality. If they don't they are doomed.
ComunicarrThursday, February 21, 2013 4:40:38 PM
Originally posted by M-Z:

Most of us have chosen Opera despite some compatibility issues, but we are not willing to give up features.

+1

opera user since opera8

no app have this features (mail, contacts, notes, link, turbo, unite...) and where is "opera next" new things in browser world that opera invent??

« Previous Pages: 1234 Next »

« Back to the article

Poll: What do you think about Opera switching to WebKit? comments

Page 3 of 4 (169 comments)

Browsers

Add-ons

Services

Developers

Help

Company