Tom OlanderWednesday, February 13, 2013 3:16:03 PM
At first when I heard the rumours about switching to Webkit I was a little bit sad, as I think Presto is really good for what I need a browser to do.
But, if Opera uses all the freed up resources on optimizing and bringing new features to the browser this could be a good thing in the end. For those of you thinking that features will be removed due to this change, I don't think so. A renderingengine is just that, a renderingengine. Opera fetches the HTML-data and sends it through the rederingengine and then displays the result for the user.
The UI is a totally different thing and really has nothing to do witch renderingengine is used, as are all the extras Opera has compared to other browsers. So, I believe that featherlight-UI, mail, mousegestures, turbo, link, extensions, irc, feeds etc etc will be as is in the new Opera. Having done quite a lot of programming in my days I don't see a problem here.
And as for comparing the new Opera with Chrome and thinking that all the problems in Chrome will show up in Opera is wrong. The problem with Chrome using a lot of resources isn't because of the renderingengine, and will probably not be a problem with Opera. I have faith in the programmers at Opera, they do know what they are doing.
I hope that Opera makes the browser as adaptable as possible to different renderingengines now that the switch will take place. So that the browser won't be too integrated to Webkit, I had no problems with Presto being thightly integrated all the way, it was Operas own renderingengine.
I believe that Opera has been thinking of this change very carefully as it isn't a small action to take. But in the end this could be a step for Opera to get its marketshare to rise. One last thing, I have been an Opera fan for as long as I have been using the browser and that is about 10 years now (I think version 7.0x or 7.11 was the first), and Webkit browsers have been installed on my computers _only_ to test websites on them. Every website I have done is made in Opera.
Federico PanicoWednesday, February 13, 2013 3:17:12 PM
So all extensions we coded and others extensions I use are now rendered useless. And we lose Dragonfly too.
This surely will be the last news from Opera before it dissapears, merged with all the others webkit browsers out there.
I guess Jon's departure may be related to this course of action.
mega7starWednesday, February 13, 2013 3:39:48 PM
MossManWednesday, February 13, 2013 3:41:36 PM
Originally posted by Kitten85:
Kill Opera Mini...
Oh the freakin' irony! I installed Mini on my wife's old Samsung two days ago precisely because she can now surf on it using a recently upgraded phone connection.
VarunWednesday, February 13, 2013 3:42:10 PM
Sadly this is the beginning of the End for Opera.
Its USP was being different than the others, Now that uniqueness is lower significantly.
Google Chrome it is then after 9 years of using Opera desktop, fun times and all the best.
AltWoussWednesday, February 13, 2013 3:42:31 PM
This makes me very sad, I have been using Opera since version 5 or 6 and I really like it not being Chrome. I really hope we will not be forced to upgrade to the webkit version. The best thing about Opera is that when using the back button it gets the previous state of the page instead of browsing back to the previous address that should not be lost.
R.I.P. Opera
originalreceivedWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:01:27 PM
Your whining about “RIP” Opera and “Opera becoming Chrome” just shows how little you understand of how this works.
WebKit is an *open-source* *rendering engine*. Opera can (and will) innovate on top of that. Furthermore, webkit is not a monopoly like you make it to be. The fact that it is open-source means that if at any time they stray from Opera's values, they can just tell them to screw themselves and fork the project, cherry-picking the future features they want.
Even Chrome and Safari have different implementations of webkit, that's why some website work in Chrome and not in Safari. Do you think Opera just made this decision in two minutes? This is a team that has done a lot for the web, and that would not make a decision that would compromise their mission.
mubaidrWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:05:56 PM
Originally posted by originalreceived:
WebKit is an *open-source* *rendering engine*. Opera can (and will) innovate on top of that. Furthermore, webkit is not a monopoly like you make it to be. The fact that it is open-source means that if at any time they stray from Opera's values, they can just tell them to screw themselves and fork the project, cherry-picking the future features they want.
What do you say about this? Firefox Developer:
Webkit bugs would become the standard: there would be no way for developers to test on multiple engines to determine whether an unexpected behavior is a bug or intended.
I hope not I prefer the opera dragonfly tools over any other tools. (It's only missing 1 thing and that's the "trace styles" option that IE has). But dragonfly is opensource, so I'm positive that (if opera doesn't provide dragonfly) someone else will port it over
JanghouWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:10:31 PM
Originally posted by fearphage:
Sad to see a pioneer bow out. It is truly a sad day for the open web.
The day the dodo died was a sad day too,
Still I don't think it had any real influence on my happiness, (as you know I was born centuries later.)
ahoj1234Wednesday, February 13, 2013 4:13:30 PM
Originally posted by sirnh1:
I'm positive that (if opera doesn't provide dragonfly) someone else will port it over
Port it is not the same as develop it Opera is developing it (at leas Opera was developing it)
JanghouWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:20:15 PM
Originally posted by sirnh1:
I prefer the opera dragonfly tools over any other tools. It's only missing 1 thing and that's the "trace styles" option that IE has
Sorry, I like DF too, but it had a couple of real weaknesses, compared to Chromium tools. - no live update in the DOM representation - no drag and drop in the DOM representation - weak profiling options - no live JS editing
IMO Opera couldn't allocate enough resources to develop with reasonable speed new JS engine (harmony, audio api, Dragonfly, typed array etc., drag&drop api sucked in *nix.) I don't think Presto was the problem, Carakan was, Dragonfly relies on the (limited) Scope protocol, I doubt if that will be implemented in webkit.
originalreceivedWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:26:22 PM
Originally posted by mubaidr:
What do you say about this?
Firefox Developer:
Webkit bugs would become the standard: there would be no way for developers to test on multiple engines to determine whether an unexpected behavior is a bug or intended.
I say that you're missing the point. Not every browser changed to webkit, nor will it happen, simply because developers always like to tinker and do better/different things. We're talking about Opera switching, and only that. Presto was not the only alternative, nor will we no longer be able to make other rendering engines.
Also, of course you could know, by *reading the code*, that's the whole point.
Bear in mind I'm not saying I agree or disagree with Opera's choice, nor am I saying I think there should only be one rendering engine (I certainly don't). What I am saying is that the Opera team is not made of morons, they are actually very intelligent people that always fought for standards and an open web. Meaning that I trust they pondered their decision heavily, and the impact it will have.
And I think you too should trust their judgement, they've certainly earned that consideration.
Charles SchlossWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:35:09 PM
Was not expecting that
keerazwWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:40:07 PM
I'm sorry to see this happen, and it will mean I (and probably we) say goodbye to Opera.
For me, choosing Opera meant minor sacrifices in compatibility for the sake of a completely different code base for rendering and JS, which was advantageous from the point of view of security and rendering speed. It was a trade-off I was more than happy to make, and the security benefit of a code base completely independent from everybody else was far and away the single most important factor to me and our organization. That's lost now, and leaves precious little area for Opera to differentiate themselves.
I'm surprised to read comments from others saying they chose Opera because of its other features -- IRC or mail, for example. I thought the era of one-app-to-do-everything died with Netscape. The jack of all trades is master of none etc. and nowhere is that more apparent than Opera's IRC client.
JanghouWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:42:38 PM
Originally posted by bruce:
has built-in support for the WebM, Ogg Theora and Ogg Vorbis media codecs but does not natively support H.264 or MP3 media codecs (although if these are installed in a device's operating system it will allow that to render media).
Nice, I always disliked that my browser couldn't play what my computer could play.
Although I never understand why people use proprietary standards or files , like h264 or doc, or psd to communicate with other people: It's an insult to the free world.
QuHnoWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:43:55 PM
Originally posted by Janghou:
Brand it as an European browser, that doesn't fall under the Patriot Act,
Lunascape Orion (3 Engines, configurable and fast as hell, only missing M2, IRC and P2P to be the better Opera) Japan, SWRIron (webkit) Germany, Yandex (webkit + Turbo) Russia ...
all patriots act free
mubaidrWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:45:42 PM
Originally posted by originalreceived:
I think you too should trust their judgement, they've certainly earned that consideration
I do trust them. My only concern is that all of the current Opera features should be available. This should be same browser as before (feature wise), which is why most of the Opera fans are stuck to it, otherwise there are lot more Webkit browsers already. Resource usage should be optimized to meat the stats set by Presto/Crakan engines, and the best stability should be ported too (Opera can open 100s of tabs without crashing, i want that in new Opera too).
Now i just hope Firefox does not switch to Webkit, there should be some completion for the betterment for web.
marex100Wednesday, February 13, 2013 5:06:44 PM
I've been using Opera on a regular basis since 7.5x and i really like it. The thing about Presto is a bit emotional... but i realize the need for not wasting resources on doubling things and i experience some unsolved bugs which can be solved by switching to WebKit/V8...
Just pls don't put regressions in the next version. Some of the features can't be missed:
- Opera Mail is something special... without taking more resources it enables to notify when new e-mails are coming inside the browser, and to create and store e-mails - PLS don't drop it - The replacement for urlfilter.ini or just support for urlfilter.ini is essential in the world of ads everywhere - Help reducing RAM needs of WebKit engine as it is in Presto and port your code to WebKit - Don't reduce UI, including custom panels
s/ashWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:13:32 PM
^ I would also add to that the "Private tab" feature that only Opera has it.
Alphons van WervenWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:17:45 PM
I agree with the observation that not all complainants appear to be fully aware of what exactly a rendering engine is or is not. But having said that, I also feel compelled to point out that Presto has always been one of Opera's major selling points. Presto is lean, clean, robust, efficient and highly standards-compliant. WebKit is none of those things. And for the record, Gecko isn't all of those things either, but ex mea sententia it still would have been a wiser choice than WebKit. I know that Firefox is bloated and at times buggy, but most of that is not caused by Gecko. If these WebKit plans are indeed true I can't help but think that the decision is largely driven by an unsanitary desire to get into bed with Google.
I've been happily using Opera since version 4 or 5. In fact, I installed it on my Linux account at the university, made it publicly available and encouraged others to give it a spin. Several people happily used my binaries until system administration (finally) decided to install Opera site-wide, reportedly because my binaries were starting to put a strain on NFS However, if this WebKit bussiness is indeed true, this marriage is over.
It occurs to me that Opera is relatively popular among technical people, largely because of Presto. Changing to WebKit is likely to drive many users away. I still sincerely hope that this whole WebKit monkey business is all part of an elaborate whopper of an April Fool's joke but if it isn't, I guess I'll have to go shopping for a new surfboard and if it turns out that that means having to put up with Firefox, so be it. I would probably still use Opera in a controlled environment in order to test any web development I do, but I'm not having any WebKit horsehockey on my personal machines.
Francisco PalafoxWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:19:48 PM
Does this mean that Opera will now become a resource hog? I recently switch from Chrome to Opera because it is light weight.
MiguelClaraWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:20:14 PM
I think many people don't really know what Presto, Webkit and V8 are....
Opera features don't have to totally change because of this change...
The rendering and JS engines are JUST THAT!
Losing Opera Mail? Changes in the UI? none of that are necessarily changing unless Dev's want it too!
I see a great opportunity for new features, specially with the mobile app! Faster browsing in PC and hopefully many more extensions with more functionality.
JanghouWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:21:25 PM
Originally posted by QuHno:
Lunascape Orion
Didn't know that one, but no *nix version. -Yandex - maybe for Gerard Depardieu, I don't think Russia is a great democracy. Yandex is fine -Maybe try the German one; SWRIron
But I stick to Opera.
Alphons van WervenWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:24:48 PM
Originally posted by pacman13x:
Does this mean that Opera will now become a resource hog?
I expect it will be somewhere between Chrome and current Opera. Chrome's resource hungriness is caused by more things than just its rendering engine.
ClashCityRockerWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:38:06 PM
WOW, I used to believe that Opera was the browser for smart people, able to seperate hype from reality and come up with informed and logical decision, but reading some of the comments here, it's clear that's not the case...
Why on earth would changing a layout engine affect the network features like Opera Turbo??? or UI features like keyboard shortcuts, or any of the other things being mentioned here.
There is absolutely no reason why Opera can't make a Webkit based version of Opera that performs just as well as the current Presto based one, with the same levels of memory performance and ability to open vast numbers of tabs.
if the talented people that made Presto so great are now working on Webkit patches, surely that will improve Webkit?
Also, Webkit "isn't owned by Apple and Google", that's utter nonsense. It's an Opensource project with thousands of contributors..
I'll be happy if this means that a WebKit-based browser finally gets Opera's preference settings for GIF animation.
This is one of the primary things that's kept me from using WebKit-based browsers for my day-to-day surfing: as far as I can tell, there is not even an API hook to disable GIF animation. There's been a bug open about this for four years (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23945), but nobody has ever claimed it. And thus, it's not possible to disable animation on a site-by-site basis (as in Opera), by pressing Escape (as in most non-WebKit browsers), or even via a global preference setting, in anything WebKit-based that I've tried so far.
As someone prone to migraines triggered by flashing images? This is an accessibility issue for me. And I especially like Opera's implementation because it allows me to disable GIF animation by default with exceptions for certain whitelisted sites.
David GouldWednesday, February 13, 2013 6:04:12 PM
Originally posted by xxgooglechromesuckmydick1337xx:
Google Chrome & Firefox lagging and crashing when 20 tabs open IE crashes when 5 tabs open
Opera works for 7 days with 120+ opened tabs... and now... it will crash at 20 tabs
RIP.
LOL 120? I sometimes get up to 100.
Frankly, I only need 1. I can access most websites in 2-3 clicks which is fine. Sometimes I want to leave pages half read. It would be awesome if Opera would park unused tabs.
woj-tekWednesday, February 13, 2013 6:22:11 PM
Originally posted by davegould:
LOL 120? I sometimes get up to 100.
Frankly, I only need 1. I can access most websites in 2-3 clicks which is fine.
Wow, good to know that you manage and that YOUR OWN poin of view dismiss the rest of the world...
anglerWednesday, February 13, 2013 6:22:35 PM
As a user since Opera 5 I'm shocked! I never thought something like this would occur. Now I have a very uneasy feeling of how things will turn out overall.
For all the comments about having many tabs open, I currently have 117 open. I always have 100+ open and rarely close Opera. Opera runs smooth with 1 or over 100 open tabs! I can't say that for Firefox and I can't comment about Chrome as I've never used it. I hope I will still be saying how smooth Opera runs with 100+ tabs when it's using Webkit / Chromium.
Davit BabayanWednesday, February 13, 2013 6:29:17 PM
Google: Web Search Google: Mail Google: Android Google: Translate Google: Blogger Google: Chrome Google: -Opera- Google is too much in the web
mubaidrWednesday, February 13, 2013 6:34:13 PM
Originally posted by davi807:
Google: -Opera-
Webkit does not mean Google, Stop acting like this.
Davit BabayanWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:04:59 PM
Originally posted by mubaidr:
Webkit does not mean Google, Stop acting like this.
Webkit , V8 , Chromeum. What do they mean, maybe potato ??
mubaidrWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:11:40 PM
Originally posted by davi807:
Webkit , V8 , Chromeum. What do they mean, maybe potato ??
Chromium is an open source project! Google, Safari, maxthon etc use it, so now Opera is going to use it.
Jonathan BalletWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:21:13 PM
That was courageous for Opera to develop, maintain and innovate such a rendering engine as Presto is, especially in this market with such fierce competition. I guess it's probably for the best of the resources to adopt a new engine, if it doesn't change what Opera (the browser) has been reputed for.
Still, that would be a shame if Presto just disappears like this. Any plan to open it, at least? That would just be awesome!
Tarraccas ObremskiWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:27:15 PM
From a compatibility and resource perspective, this decision makes sense. My concern is with performance. WebKit, while it may support everything and the kitchen sink, seems to struggle to so when everything and the kitchen sink is thrown at it. Presto performs better. Even Trident performs better. And Gecko does the best. The only reason I'm not still using Firefox as my primary browser is because it became a bloated monstrosity that became more and more difficult to revive when it wasn't off terrorizing the villagers. Was Gecko considered by Opera? Because that engine with Opera's UX would be pretty sweet.
Because I hate Adobe Flash more than any proprietary format, so I more likely watch YouTube HTML5 with a proprietary format rather than using Flash. The same applies also to the mp3. I listen HTML5 based audio even with proprietary format rather than crappy embedded Flash.
In the desktop... When I send to someone odt or ods they usually don't know what to do with it. When I encoding a video/movie or I download I prefer the best format. If there are an equally good open source format I will prefer that. But if not, the quality beats the principles.
Originally posted by clashcityrocker:
with the same levels of memory performance and ability to open vast numbers of tabs.
Actually, the resource requirement (and the installer size) will increase with the engine switch. But won't be the same as Chromium, because Chromium has multi-process architecture which is notoriously resource intensive.
Originally posted by clashcityrocker:
if the talented people that made Presto so great are now working on Webkit patches, surely that will improve Webkit?
Because they are will be just one of many contributors. They don't own the engine anymore, so if the other contributor will say: "The RAM is cheap (yeah, in the welfare societies), so buy more" or "The CPU is cheap so buy more", etc. it will be what the majority says even if it is huge bullshit. (Like in the democracy )
DanatkaWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:31:32 PM
I really was thinking it's 1st April.
The main reason I use opera is because of the different rendering engine.
I think i'll go back to opera 9.20.
Alphons van WervenWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:32:54 PM
Originally posted by mubaidr:
Originally posted by davi807:
Google: -Opera-
Webkit does not mean Google, Stop acting like this.
People have every reason to be wary of Google. And since there is a dotted line somewhere between WebKit and Google it's understandable that people are concerned, even if they don't know precisely what that dotted line is.
For the record: Google is not the biggest problem ex mea sententia. Google *using* WebKit is hardly relevant (heck, Microsoft could replace Trident with WebKit if they wanted, if only they could live with the licenses ) and Google being involved in the development of WebKit is something to keep an eye on but not much more than that (for the time being, at least); not everything Google do(es) is evil and driven by privacy-violating commercialism. The bigger problem is WebKit itself: its performance in terms of speed, resource requirements, dependencies, reliability, standards compliance etc. leaves a lot to be desired and to be honest I think that improving WebKit to a level of performance that comes even close to Presto's is likely to require more work than just maintaining Presto. Dropping Presto and adopting WebKit would be a significant step back for Opera.
But back to your original statement: ex mea sententia one can hardly fault people for raising concerns when they learn that Opera is planning to use components that are partly developed by Google. The thing to do is to *honestly* explain to these people how Google fits into the picture - and more to the point: how it does not. Hopefully, it will alleviate unnecessary fears and draw more attention to the real problem, which is simply that WebKit is nowhere near as good as Presto and will need a LOT of work to get even close.
h143570Wednesday, February 13, 2013 7:39:19 PM
As long as M2 (mail and rss), Panels, On Demand and Out of Process plugins remain, I can live with this, at least it is not Gecko.
James KyleWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:57:26 PM
The responses to this announcement seem to be off base and lacking thought..
For users the interface and functionality of the browser stays the same (they made a point of that), although it will come with the better performance of V8 and Webkit. No opera will not be losing any customizability, it will not be losing any gestures or anything like that.
As a front end engineer, I almost never test in opera although I constantly test in webkit/v8 browsers. Any support I do for opera comes inherently through its standards compliance. So as they make this switch, Opera will be better supported by developers as it will be more standard compliant and up to date.
The webkit and v8 communities are vast and fast (oh boy a rhyme), with the Opera team working with these communities rather than against them it will benefit everyone.
I cannot see a reason that this announcement could be received with anything but excitement.
EricJHWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:59:55 PM
Originally posted by Kildor:
There is no answer to the main question. What will it be for users? What`s about mouse gestures, about UI, about menus, toolbars and buttons, about wand and MDI? What`s about M2? There is no webkit-based browsers as highly customizeable as Opera. All of them are not chromium, they are cast ironums.
Originally posted by brucelawson:
Kostia
we're not going to comment (yet) on features of forthcoming products. But the aim is to move focus away from playing catch-up on rendering engine, and put more focus on the kind of UI innovations that you mention
Thank you for commenting on this important point because that is what many users with me are more than just anxious to know about.
I think it is a grave insult to all Opera's long term users this was not mentioned in any of the publications that I have seen about this. Please send this message up the food chain asap. Along the same lines even a preliminary road map would be highly appreciated as a sign of commitment of the current powers that steer Opera to its user base.
If it is true that also FF is seriously considering then there is a serious danger of monoculture/kartel. Let me see. Various commercial entities working together in a long term for non profit development process. Add to that modern management that loves to shirk, having a three month outlook on the world while trying to take advantage of other contestants contributions. One can expect a race to the bottom at one point... The future will be interesting for sure...
I see many many concerns, many of which I share, about what is to be expected from the new Opera browser. What will it do in the realm of performance? What functionality will it bring and leave behind.
Other than Bruce Larson's contribution there are no people of Opera telling us more. For a long term Opera user (this summer it will be 10 years) that is the biggest insult and truly sticking a finger to its loyal user base.
Vasily MyazinWednesday, February 13, 2013 8:04:13 PM
Never really used Opera, likely never will. The role of this browser is so insignificant in my life and the lives of my peers that I can't bring myself up to care enough, nor do I see many people caring much at all.
With that being said, I did like the fact that there with a little guy standing up against the giants with its own proprietary technology. And it's a European company unlike most other players who are based in the US.
Alphons van WervenWednesday, February 13, 2013 8:04:54 PM
Originally posted by thejameskyle:
it will come with the better performance of V8 and Webkit.
Which will happen in how many years exactly?
Gecko has some performance (although admittedly mitigated by Firefox itself). Presto has way better performance. WebKit hardly has any.
Alphons van WervenWednesday, February 13, 2013 8:06:55 PM
btw: Operas JS engine produces less errors in the ecma262 test than the V8 of build 182247
edit: Chromium managed to kill all installed extensions ...
pareo1Wednesday, February 13, 2013 8:21:29 PM
Originally posted by thejameskyle:
As a front end engineer, I almost never test in opera although I constantly test in webkit/v8 browsers. Any support I do for opera comes inherently through its standards compliance. So as they make this switch, Opera will be better supported by developers as it will be more standard compliant and up to date.
Opera _is_ very standards compliant. That is one of the reasons why it has problems with poorly coded websites.
I doubt that the devs will be able to port the user experience to another engine. Settings will change, features will be missing and I fear Opera will not stay the same. Because Opera now is close to perfection for me, I think this change will not be for the better. I will give the new version a chance, but I'll be surprised if it can keep up with the current version. Pity, because I really love it.
morbitWednesday, February 13, 2013 8:31:21 PM
Originally posted by skysmurf:
<...>
Hi fonz, I'm afraid this also spells end of neat, self-contained tars for FreeBSD
Originally posted by QuHno:
I can't help, it sounds somewhat military to me. Are there some browser wars anywhere?
It's common_data_storage not commando_storage
metudeWednesday, February 13, 2013 8:53:18 PM
If I expect only site compatability from Opera, I prefer Chrome or at least IE.
I wish good luck to Opera Software for future releases. Old Opera users will proud of with Presto.
Tom OlanderWednesday, February 13, 2013 3:16:03 PM
But, if Opera uses all the freed up resources on optimizing and bringing new features to the browser this could be a good thing in the end. For those of you thinking that features will be removed due to this change, I don't think so. A renderingengine is just that, a renderingengine. Opera fetches the HTML-data and sends it through the rederingengine and then displays the result for the user.
The UI is a totally different thing and really has nothing to do witch renderingengine is used, as are all the extras Opera has compared to other browsers. So, I believe that featherlight-UI, mail, mousegestures, turbo, link, extensions, irc, feeds etc etc will be as is in the new Opera. Having done quite a lot of programming in my days I don't see a problem here.
And as for comparing the new Opera with Chrome and thinking that all the problems in Chrome will show up in Opera is wrong. The problem with Chrome using a lot of resources isn't because of the renderingengine, and will probably not be a problem with Opera. I have faith in the programmers at Opera, they do know what they are doing.
I hope that Opera makes the browser as adaptable as possible to different renderingengines now that the switch will take place. So that the browser won't be too integrated to Webkit, I had no problems with Presto being thightly integrated all the way, it was Operas own renderingengine.
I believe that Opera has been thinking of this change very carefully as it isn't a small action to take. But in the end this could be a step for Opera to get its marketshare to rise. One last thing, I have been an Opera fan for as long as I have been using the browser and that is about 10 years now (I think version 7.0x or 7.11 was the first), and Webkit browsers have been installed on my computers _only_ to test websites on them. Every website I have done is made in Opera.
Federico PanicoWednesday, February 13, 2013 3:17:12 PM
This surely will be the last news from Opera before it dissapears, merged with all the others webkit browsers out there.
I guess Jon's departure may be related to this course of action.
mega7starWednesday, February 13, 2013 3:39:48 PM
MossManWednesday, February 13, 2013 3:41:36 PM
Originally posted by Kitten85:
Oh the freakin' irony! I installed Mini on my wife's old Samsung two days ago precisely because she can now surf on it using a recently upgraded phone connection.
VarunWednesday, February 13, 2013 3:42:10 PM
Its USP was being different than the others, Now that uniqueness is lower significantly.
Google Chrome it is then after 9 years of using Opera desktop, fun times and all the best.
AltWoussWednesday, February 13, 2013 3:42:31 PM
R.I.P. Opera
originalreceivedWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:01:27 PM
WebKit is an *open-source* *rendering engine*. Opera can (and will) innovate on top of that. Furthermore, webkit is not a monopoly like you make it to be. The fact that it is open-source means that if at any time they stray from Opera's values, they can just tell them to screw themselves and fork the project, cherry-picking the future features they want.
Even Chrome and Safari have different implementations of webkit, that's why some website work in Chrome and not in Safari. Do you think Opera just made this decision in two minutes? This is a team that has done a lot for the web, and that would not make a decision that would compromise their mission.
mubaidrWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:05:56 PM
Originally posted by originalreceived:
What do you say about this?
Firefox Developer:
sirnh1Wednesday, February 13, 2013 4:07:15 PM
Originally posted by ahoj1234:
I hope not
JanghouWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:10:31 PM
Originally posted by fearphage:
The day the dodo died was a sad day too,
Still I don't think it had any real influence on my happiness, (as you know I was born centuries later.)
ahoj1234Wednesday, February 13, 2013 4:13:30 PM
Originally posted by sirnh1:
Port it is not the same as develop it
JanghouWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:20:15 PM
Originally posted by sirnh1:
Sorry, I like DF too, but it had a couple of real weaknesses, compared to Chromium tools.
- no live update in the DOM representation
- no drag and drop in the DOM representation
- weak profiling options
- no live JS editing
IMO Opera couldn't allocate enough resources to develop with reasonable speed new JS engine (harmony, audio api, Dragonfly, typed array etc., drag&drop api sucked in *nix.) I don't think Presto was the problem, Carakan was, Dragonfly relies on the (limited) Scope protocol, I doubt if that will be implemented in webkit.
originalreceivedWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:26:22 PM
Originally posted by mubaidr:
I say that you're missing the point. Not every browser changed to webkit, nor will it happen, simply because developers always like to tinker and do better/different things. We're talking about Opera switching, and only that. Presto was not the only alternative, nor will we no longer be able to make other rendering engines.
Also, of course you could know, by *reading the code*, that's the whole point.
Bear in mind I'm not saying I agree or disagree with Opera's choice, nor am I saying I think there should only be one rendering engine (I certainly don't). What I am saying is that the Opera team is not made of morons, they are actually very intelligent people that always fought for standards and an open web. Meaning that I trust they pondered their decision heavily, and the impact it will have.
And I think you too should trust their judgement, they've certainly earned that consideration.
Charles SchlossWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:35:09 PM
keerazwWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:40:07 PM
I'm sorry to see this happen, and it will mean I (and probably we) say goodbye to Opera.
For me, choosing Opera meant minor sacrifices in compatibility for the sake of a completely different code base for rendering and JS, which was advantageous from the point of view of security and rendering speed. It was a trade-off I was more than happy to make, and the security benefit of a code base completely independent from everybody else was far and away the single most important factor to me and our organization. That's lost now, and leaves precious little area for Opera to differentiate themselves.
I'm surprised to read comments from others saying they chose Opera because of its other features -- IRC or mail, for example. I thought the era of one-app-to-do-everything died with Netscape. The jack of all trades is master of none etc. and nowhere is that more apparent than Opera's IRC client.
JanghouWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:42:38 PM
Originally posted by bruce:
Nice, I always disliked that my browser couldn't play what my computer could play.
Although I never understand why people use proprietary standards or files , like h264 or doc, or psd to communicate with other people: It's an insult to the free world.
QuHnoWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:43:55 PM
Originally posted by Janghou:
Lunascape Orion (3 Engines, configurable and fast as hell, only missing M2, IRC and P2P to be the better Opera) Japan,
SWRIron (webkit) Germany,
Yandex (webkit + Turbo) Russia
...
all patriots act free
mubaidrWednesday, February 13, 2013 4:45:42 PM
Originally posted by originalreceived:
I do trust them. My only concern is that all of the current Opera features should be available. This should be same browser as before (feature wise), which is why most of the Opera fans are stuck to it, otherwise there are lot more Webkit browsers already.
Resource usage should be optimized to meat the stats set by Presto/Crakan engines, and the best stability should be ported too (Opera can open 100s of tabs without crashing, i want that in new Opera too).
Now i just hope Firefox does not switch to Webkit, there should be some completion for the betterment for web.
marex100Wednesday, February 13, 2013 5:06:44 PM
Just pls don't put regressions in the next version. Some of the features can't be missed:
- Opera Mail is something special... without taking more resources it enables to notify when new e-mails are coming inside the browser, and to create and store e-mails - PLS don't drop it
- The replacement for urlfilter.ini or just support for urlfilter.ini is essential in the world of ads everywhere
- Help reducing RAM needs of WebKit engine as it is in Presto and port your code to WebKit
- Don't reduce UI, including custom panels
s/ashWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:13:32 PM
Alphons van WervenWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:17:45 PM
I've been happily using Opera since version 4 or 5. In fact, I installed it on my Linux account at the university, made it publicly available and encouraged others to give it a spin. Several people happily used my binaries until system administration (finally) decided to install Opera site-wide, reportedly because my binaries were starting to put a strain on NFS
It occurs to me that Opera is relatively popular among technical people, largely because of Presto. Changing to WebKit is likely to drive many users away. I still sincerely hope that this whole WebKit monkey business is all part of an elaborate whopper of an April Fool's joke but if it isn't, I guess I'll have to go shopping for a new surfboard and if it turns out that that means having to put up with Firefox, so be it. I would probably still use Opera in a controlled environment in order to test any web development I do, but I'm not having any WebKit horsehockey on my personal machines.
Francisco PalafoxWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:19:48 PM
I recently switch from Chrome to Opera because it is light weight.
MiguelClaraWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:20:14 PM
Opera features don't have to totally change because of this change...
The rendering and JS engines are JUST THAT!
Losing Opera Mail? Changes in the UI? none of that are necessarily changing unless Dev's want it too!
I see a great opportunity for new features, specially with the mobile app! Faster browsing in PC and hopefully many more extensions with more functionality.
JanghouWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:21:25 PM
Originally posted by QuHno:
Didn't know that one, but no *nix version.
-Yandex - maybe for Gerard Depardieu, I don't think Russia is a great democracy. Yandex is fine
-Maybe try the German one; SWRIron
But I stick to Opera.
Alphons van WervenWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:24:48 PM
Originally posted by pacman13x:
I expect it will be somewhere between Chrome and current Opera. Chrome's resource hungriness is caused by more things than just its rendering engine.
ClashCityRockerWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:38:06 PM
Why on earth would changing a layout engine affect the network features like Opera Turbo??? or UI features like keyboard shortcuts, or any of the other things being mentioned here.
There is absolutely no reason why Opera can't make a Webkit based version of Opera that performs just as well as the current Presto based one, with the same levels of memory performance and ability to open vast numbers of tabs.
if the talented people that made Presto so great are now working on Webkit patches, surely that will improve Webkit?
Also, Webkit "isn't owned by Apple and Google", that's utter nonsense. It's an Opensource project with thousands of contributors..
DanielWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:58:14 PM
Something like: http://i.imagebanana.com/img/9oxsoltf/new_opera_logo.png
CodyWednesday, February 13, 2013 5:58:15 PM
This is one of the primary things that's kept me from using WebKit-based browsers for my day-to-day surfing: as far as I can tell, there is not even an API hook to disable GIF animation. There's been a bug open about this for four years (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23945), but nobody has ever claimed it. And thus, it's not possible to disable animation on a site-by-site basis (as in Opera), by pressing Escape (as in most non-WebKit browsers), or even via a global preference setting, in anything WebKit-based that I've tried so far.
As someone prone to migraines triggered by flashing images? This is an accessibility issue for me. And I especially like Opera's implementation because it allows me to disable GIF animation by default with exceptions for certain whitelisted sites.
David GouldWednesday, February 13, 2013 6:04:12 PM
Originally posted by xxgooglechromesuckmydick1337xx:
LOL 120? I sometimes get up to 100. Frankly, I only need 1. I can access most websites in 2-3 clicks which is fine. Sometimes I want to leave pages half read. It would be awesome if Opera would park unused tabs.woj-tekWednesday, February 13, 2013 6:22:11 PM
Originally posted by davegould:
Wow, good to know that you manage and that YOUR OWN poin of view dismiss the rest of the world...
anglerWednesday, February 13, 2013 6:22:35 PM
For all the comments about having many tabs open, I currently have 117 open. I always have 100+ open and rarely close Opera. Opera runs smooth with 1 or over 100 open tabs! I can't say that for Firefox and I can't comment about Chrome as I've never used it. I hope I will still be saying how smooth Opera runs with 100+ tabs when it's using Webkit / Chromium.
Davit BabayanWednesday, February 13, 2013 6:29:17 PM
Google: Mail
Google: Android
Google: Translate
Google: Blogger
Google: Chrome
Google: -Opera-
Google is too much in the web
mubaidrWednesday, February 13, 2013 6:34:13 PM
Originally posted by davi807:
Webkit does not mean Google, Stop acting like this.
Davit BabayanWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:04:59 PM
Originally posted by mubaidr:
Webkit , V8 , Chromeum. What do they mean, maybe potato ??
mubaidrWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:11:40 PM
Originally posted by davi807:
Chromium is an open source project! Google, Safari, maxthon etc use it, so now Opera is going to use it.
Jonathan BalletWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:21:13 PM
Still, that would be a shame if Presto just disappears like this. Any plan to open it, at least? That would just be awesome!
Tarraccas ObremskiWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:27:15 PM
PengeWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:29:12 PM
Originally posted by Janghou:
Because I hate Adobe Flash more than any proprietary format, so I more likely watch YouTube HTML5 with a proprietary format rather than using Flash. The same applies also to the mp3. I listen HTML5 based audio even with proprietary format rather than crappy embedded Flash.
In the desktop... When I send to someone odt or ods they usually don't know what to do with it.
When I encoding a video/movie or I download I prefer the best format. If there are an equally good open source format I will prefer that. But if not, the quality beats the principles.
Originally posted by clashcityrocker:
Actually, the resource requirement (and the installer size) will increase with the engine switch. But won't be the same as Chromium, because Chromium has multi-process architecture which is notoriously resource intensive.
Originally posted by clashcityrocker:
Because they are will be just one of many contributors. They don't own the engine anymore, so if the other contributor will say: "The RAM is cheap (yeah, in the welfare societies), so buy more" or "The CPU is cheap so buy more", etc. it will be what the majority says even if it is huge bullshit. (Like in the democracy
DanatkaWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:31:32 PM
The main reason I use opera is because of the different rendering engine.
I think i'll go back to opera 9.20.
Alphons van WervenWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:32:54 PM
Originally posted by mubaidr:
People have every reason to be wary of Google. And since there is a dotted line somewhere between WebKit and Google it's understandable that people are concerned, even if they don't know precisely what that dotted line is.
For the record: Google is not the biggest problem ex mea sententia. Google *using* WebKit is hardly relevant (heck, Microsoft could replace Trident with WebKit if they wanted, if only they could live with the licenses
But back to your original statement: ex mea sententia one can hardly fault people for raising concerns when they learn that Opera is planning to use components that are partly developed by Google. The thing to do is to *honestly* explain to these people how Google fits into the picture - and more to the point: how it does not. Hopefully, it will alleviate unnecessary fears and draw more attention to the real problem, which is simply that WebKit is nowhere near as good as Presto and will need a LOT of work to get even close.
h143570Wednesday, February 13, 2013 7:39:19 PM
James KyleWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:57:26 PM
For users the interface and functionality of the browser stays the same (they made a point of that), although it will come with the better performance of V8 and Webkit. No opera will not be losing any customizability, it will not be losing any gestures or anything like that.
As a front end engineer, I almost never test in opera although I constantly test in webkit/v8 browsers. Any support I do for opera comes inherently through its standards compliance. So as they make this switch, Opera will be better supported by developers as it will be more standard compliant and up to date.
The webkit and v8 communities are vast and fast (oh boy a rhyme), with the Opera team working with these communities rather than against them it will benefit everyone.
I cannot see a reason that this announcement could be received with anything but excitement.
EricJHWednesday, February 13, 2013 7:59:55 PM
Originally posted by Kildor:
Originally posted by brucelawson:
Thank you for commenting on this important point because that is what many users with me are more than just anxious to know about.I think it is a grave insult to all Opera's long term users this was not mentioned in any of the publications that I have seen about this. Please send this message up the food chain asap. Along the same lines even a preliminary road map would be highly appreciated as a sign of commitment of the current powers that steer Opera to its user base.
If it is true that also FF is seriously considering then there is a serious danger of monoculture/kartel. Let me see. Various commercial entities working together in a long term for non profit development process. Add to that modern management that loves to shirk, having a three month outlook on the world while trying to take advantage of other contestants contributions. One can expect a race to the bottom at one point... The future will be interesting for sure...
I see many many concerns, many of which I share, about what is to be expected from the new Opera browser. What will it do in the realm of performance? What functionality will it bring and leave behind.
Other than Bruce Larson's contribution there are no people of Opera telling us more. For a long term Opera user (this summer it will be 10 years) that is the biggest insult and truly sticking a finger to its loyal user base.
Vasily MyazinWednesday, February 13, 2013 8:04:13 PM
With that being said, I did like the fact that there with a little guy standing up against the giants with its own proprietary technology. And it's a European company unlike most other players who are based in the US.
Alphons van WervenWednesday, February 13, 2013 8:04:54 PM
Originally posted by thejameskyle:
Which will happen in how many years exactly?
Gecko has some performance (although admittedly mitigated by Firefox itself). Presto has way better performance. WebKit hardly has any.
Alphons van WervenWednesday, February 13, 2013 8:06:55 PM
Originally posted by vasilybigtime:
Welcome to the Opera community, then...
QuHnoWednesday, February 13, 2013 8:18:13 PM
btw: Operas JS engine produces less errors in the ecma262 test than the V8 of build 182247
edit: Chromium managed to kill all installed extensions ...
pareo1Wednesday, February 13, 2013 8:21:29 PM
Originally posted by thejameskyle:
Opera _is_ very standards compliant. That is one of the reasons why it has problems with poorly coded websites.
I doubt that the devs will be able to port the user experience to another engine. Settings will change, features will be missing and I fear Opera will not stay the same. Because Opera now is close to perfection for me, I think this change will not be for the better. I will give the new version a chance, but I'll be surprised if it can keep up with the current version. Pity, because I really love it.
morbitWednesday, February 13, 2013 8:31:21 PM
Originally posted by skysmurf:
Hi fonz, I'm afraid this also spells end of neat, self-contained tars for FreeBSD
Originally posted by QuHno:
It's common_data_storage not commando_storage
metudeWednesday, February 13, 2013 8:53:18 PM
I wish good luck to Opera Software for future releases. Old Opera users will proud of with Presto.