Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vivaldi – A Browser for Our Friends

vivaldi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 193 posts

Re: Vivaldi – A Browser for Our Friends

#161

Post by rntz »

Tomis02 wrote: post #119
StevePerkins wrote: post #46

I check in on Vivaldi every few months to see how it's coming along, and there are some things that I like. However, I think they're a bit TOO fixated on Opera as it was 15 years ago. I keep waiting for bookmark sync, which today is a fundamental browser feature rather than a nice-to-have. But the Vivaldi guys insist on pouring resources into an integrated desktop email client instead, because that was a signature fe…

Man, I really miss the skins in Opera 12, there were some gorgeous ones. I agree that the email client is not necessarily a priority, however > Every other major browser opens the link in a background tab, keeping the focus in the tab you're currently on. Oh wow, that's pretty bad for every other major browser. We have two use cases: 1) I want to open the link in a new tab and switch focus (presumably to read right n…

GP: and the response from the devs is simply to grumble that old-school Opera was best and all other browsers today have bad defaults

P: It's the wrong default behaviors

You're talking past each other.

Re: Vivaldi – A Browser for Our Friends

#162

Post by StavrosK »

rootlocus wrote: post #152
StavrosK wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The UIs work very well. Maybe on your top-of-the-line computer. On my two-year-old Macbook Air, browsing the web is pure frustration, because everything is slow. Don't even get me started on how inferior Slack is compared to a local IRC client.

Kind of off-topic, but is a two year old Mackbook Air having problems with just browsing the web? Because if it's not a "top-of-the-line computer", it sure costs more than one.

This thread spurred me to do some testing, and it turned out that the "HTTPS everywhere" extension was slowing down pageloads in Firefox by MULTIPLE SECONDS. https://www.tithess.gr/ loaded in 1.3 seconds in Chrome and 6.8 in Firefox. Disabling HTTPS everywhere brought them to parity, but I'm going to switch to Vivaldi, I think.

I've been having problems with slowness for years with this. I dreaded having to open the browser every time. Hopefully now it will be a better, and it's looking much better so far...

Re: Vivaldi – A Browser for Our Friends

#163

Post by StevePerkins »

Aoyagi wrote: post #153
StevePerkins wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. Like I said, I use Opera: * It still has a more impressive array of power user features than Chrome or Firefoxv * It's sync service is more reliable than the other two. * It works with Chrome extensions, and has no compatibility issues with websites (unless a site is stupid enough to check with User-Agent headers, and those can be spoofed with an extension in the worst-case). * Last but not least, Opera has the…

>I use Opera You might want to be more specific than that. Are you using version 12 or earlier, or 15 and later (currently sitting at about 43)? >Opera has the best mobile browser on the planet I haven't checked recently, but last I remember you couldn't disable Opera Turbo. >don't just be Opera 12.1 forever out of spite Well, Vivaldi already has some features O12 does not have, while at the same time not having some…

From the context of everything I've been saying, obviously I'm using the current Blink-based version of Opera. Not deliberately using an older version, for which you have search Google to even find a download link. I suspect that Vivaldi's target audience is limited to the niche of people who would think to ask.

BTW, you can disable Turbo in the current versions of both desktop and mobile.

Re: Vivaldi – A Browser for Our Friends

#165

Post by Fnoord »

StavrosK wrote: post #122
Fnoord wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The browser browses the internet. You mean 'the World Wide Web' [1] since 'the Internet' includes other protocols than HTTP(S) such as SMTP, POP3, and IMAP. Nowadays, Node is everywhere. Slack, using JavaScript, is replacing IRC. One of the best e-mail clients is Nylas N1 which uses JavaScript under the hood. Hyper is a terminal using JavaScript. Discord is becoming the defacto standard for VoIP gaming, and uses Ja…

> The UIs work very well. Maybe on your top-of-the-line computer. On my two-year-old Macbook Air, browsing the web is pure frustration, because everything is slow. Don't even get me started on how inferior Slack is compared to a local IRC client.

> Maybe on your top-of-the-line computer. On my two-year-old Macbook Air, browsing the web is pure frustration, because everything is slow.

I recently replaced my 15" MBP 2010 with a 15" MBP 2015, but that wasn't because of the speed of applications.

Try to use some browser addons to make the web work quicker, like uBlock.

> Don't even get me started on how inferior Slack is compared to a local IRC client.

Slack is just one example. Personally, I'm not a proponent of a proprietary software client based on open standards (stuff like Electron, JS, etc). IRC is just a protocol, with many clients available.

Re: Vivaldi – A Browser for Our Friends

#166

Post by norswap »

StevePerkins wrote: post #46

I check in on Vivaldi every few months to see how it's coming along, and there are some things that I like. However, I think they're a bit TOO fixated on Opera as it was 15 years ago. I keep waiting for bookmark sync, which today is a fundamental browser feature rather than a nice-to-have. But the Vivaldi guys insist on pouring resources into an integrated desktop email client instead, because that was a signature fe…

Bookmark sync should be provided by an add-on (so that it can sync cross-browser as well). There's Xmarks and given that Vivaldi has some compatibility with Chrome Addons, this should work (if it doesn't, improving addon compat should be top priority).

Re: Vivaldi – A Browser for Our Friends

#167

Post by Fnoord »

bigbugbag wrote: post #145
Fnoord wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The browser browses the internet. You mean 'the World Wide Web' [1] since 'the Internet' includes other protocols than HTTP(S) such as SMTP, POP3, and IMAP. Nowadays, Node is everywhere. Slack, using JavaScript, is replacing IRC. One of the best e-mail clients is Nylas N1 which uses JavaScript under the hood. Hyper is a terminal using JavaScript. Discord is becoming the defacto standard for VoIP gaming, and uses Ja…

I'm not sure about the excellent user experience and UIs working well. Im my experience of fixing computers for everyday people with not so fast DSL connections, those javascript based things usually have terrible performance and causes problems by breaking basic web browser functionalities such as history and bookmarks that those people rely on. Then there are the UI issue of too small resolution, or increased font…

Fair enough regarding websites, but I was talking about rich feature clients for usage other than the WWW ie. other protocols than HTTP(S).

If you prefer, you're free to use more lightweight applications.

I could mention you're free to put JS off, but I know that isn't always feasible. I agree w/you that this sucks. Majorly.

Re: Vivaldi – A Browser for Our Friends

#168

Post by StevePerkins »

morganvachon wrote: post #157
bigbugbag wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what you are talking about, Opera did stop and turned into a Chrome clone which brought vivaldi and otter into existence to close the gap it left. I don't get Where the extra click you are talking about is, either click on open in new tab or open in background tab, same number of click. I'm not sure what kind of customization you are asking for, you want to remove the choice of opening in background tab ? Wh…

> I don't get Where the extra click you are talking about is, either click on open in new tab or open in background tab, same number of click. Vivaldi: right click -> "Open in new tab" = two clicks Chrome: right click -> "Open in new tab" -> click the newly opened tab = three clicks

If you're only opening a single link, then sure.

But if you're only opening a single link, then why use a new tab to begin with? Just click the link ("one click!"), and go back to the previous page if and when you want. If I'm opening links in new tabs, its generally because I'm reading a page, and queuing up things to read after I finish that initial page.

Some of the old-Opera diehards in this thread are acting like 99% of the browser market has made an objectively "incorrect" UX choice. That is absolute nonsense. You guys don't prefer the old-Opera new tab behavior because of some objective truth, you prefer it simply because that was the old-Opera behavior and you're used to it.

Objectively speaking, it is already the behavior of a default single-click to change focus. So if users take extra steps to open links in some different manner, then it's actually kinda weird to expect them to want the same focus-change behavior as if they hadn't taken those extra steps. Which is probably why every other browser has gone in that direction over the past decade. But I can acknowledge that preferences may vary.

Re: Vivaldi – A Browser for Our Friends

#169

Post by Tomis02 »

bigbugbag wrote: post #143
Tomis02 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All disagreements aside, I would really like understand why you feel "open in new tab" should not focus the new tab (apart from habit). In my experience Chrome users click "open in new tab" and then click the newly opened tab anyway, which is one extra mouse click and more mouse movement than in Vivaldi/Opera12 where you only have to click 'open in new tab' (fewer clicks and less mouse movement overall, it's obviousl…

Funny that I also came up with the 15 pixels value in my answer to steveperkins, though I second guessed myself and replaced it by "few" pixels. Is it 15 pixels really a valid approximation ?

Probably just a coincidence (in my case it might be related to how 14 used to be a common font size in my documents). On my current monitor (2560x1600) the value is more like 25-30 pixels.
Post reply on HN