61–70 of 218 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or maybe take out the operating system
If you look at the page with $OS it looks like there is only a version for $OS available. I can see how that might lead to headlines like this. I also initially assumed it was a mac-only app.
This made me realize how little innovation there is in the browser space today. Opera used to innovate extensively before the sale, and it looks like at least they're trying to keep doing it. I'm also hopeful for Vivaldi. Chrome and Firefox are completely stagnant, unfortunately.
I don't think that's true. There's lots of innovation, but it's in things that aren't necessarily obvious to the end user until there's decent levels of adoption by developers. Websites can access gamepads, advanced hardware-accelerated 3D, bluetooth, accelerometers, different layout engines, P2P data sharing, push notifications ... the UI that doesn't change very often, but that's only a tiny aspect of what a browser is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think users necessarily want much innovation in browsers? What do you think would happen if Google changed the Chrome UI (the little there is) around? Non-user visible innovation in browsers does happen BTW. But you dont't see it :-)
Nothing would happen, as long as they have UX professional on the team, who won't let them do stupid things like removing a backspace keyboard shortcut and not leaving options for those who got used to them.
Although I believe that was Microsoft's fault, but Google shouldn't have copied it. I've lost more data to that than any web browser bug over the years. Fortunately Chrome had an extension that let me turn it off!
This made me realize how little innovation there is in the browser space today. Opera used to innovate extensively before the sale, and it looks like at least they're trying to keep doing it. I'm also hopeful for Vivaldi. Chrome and Firefox are completely stagnant, unfortunately.
> how little innovation there is in the browser space today That was the purpose of Chrome, I believe, to monopolize the browser market and make it very expensive for others to compete and innovate google's business model out of existence.
Still missing the old Opera though - I use neither televisions nor game consoles.
-- http://www.operasoftware.com/press/releases/devices/giving-g...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Opera moved to webkit in 2012 (2013?) and then to Blink soon after googles announcement.
does this mean they are using webkit, chrome and mozilla under the hood for rendering pages? All 3? What is the benefit? If a page is designed for Chrome then Opera could render it as intended and not how Webkit might render it, which could be wrong?
User agents are confusing things now. Everyone says they're Mozilla, and have done since pretty much the dawn of the web (Netscape, IE, everyone). WebKit claims to be Gecko. Etc.
Why? Because many websites used to look at your user agent and serve you a different version of the page to try and give you the best experience. So new browsers, or improved browsers, started pretending to be other browsers so that they could get these versions of the pages and not the one for their release from three years ago.
Eventually you ended up with a mess because everyone claims to be everyone else.
Which is why friends don't let friends sniff for user agents.
In a hilarious twist, when trying to download Opera Neon for Windows with Opera for Windows, the download is blocked: http://i.imgur.com/5kIyxzw.png
This made me realize how little innovation there is in the browser space today. Opera used to innovate extensively before the sale, and it looks like at least they're trying to keep doing it. I'm also hopeful for Vivaldi. Chrome and Firefox are completely stagnant, unfortunately.
For anyone hoping for a Presto revival it's Chrome under the hood: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_12_2) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/53.0.2785.21 Safari/537.36 MMS/1.0.2459.0