Live data from Hacker News

Face opera

quirksmode.org

31–40 of 116 posts

Re: Face opera

#31
post #27

"Installable web apps". The author doesn't seem to be up to speed. Opera has announced widget support will be dropped, along with Unite applications. http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2012/04/24/increased-fo... I guess this decision could be reversed if Facebook buys Opera.

From the article:

And Opera used to have a widget manager embedded in its browser, so it wouldn’t be too hard to dust it off and restart the project.

Re: Face opera

#32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Firefox on my Android. It's a little heavy but it's OK. I like it a lot because I'm a desktop Firefox user and it knows how to sync my bookmarks and my saved forms data and my history back and forth. The UI is also much better than Android's built-in browser and it's been making a lot of progress. I think people are not seeing the forest from the trees here. Firefox has a lot of potential on mobile phones, beca…

Gecko will NEVER render on a feature phone. The Mozilla team has repeated this statement again and again.

A year ago feature phones were being released with 1GHz processors [1]. I wouldn't say never.

[1] http://www.gsmarena.com/1ghz_s40based_nokia_c3015_pictures_s...

Re: Face opera

#33
post #22

Add to Chrome mouse gestures, and i will change browser.

And single key shortcuts!

And vertical multi-column tabs! And good performance for 100+ tabs on single core CPU-s! And speed dial! And integrated email/RSS client! And trash can! And notes! And so many more.

Then I might switch.

Re: Face opera

#34
post #14

I still don't see the value in it. It made sense when Google did it. Chrome came and shook things up introducing features no existing browsers had and placing an emphasis on JavaScript speed. This was critical for Google as a number of its apps make heavy use of it. I don't use Chrome anymore, I switched back to Firefox but its undeniable that it had a massive impact on the speed of browser development and probably t…

> introducing features no existing browsers had

Please, elaborate. The only feature I know is exclusive to Chrome is full page translation (since they own Google Translate it makes sense).

What else?

Re: Face opera

#35
post #31
post #27

"Installable web apps". The author doesn't seem to be up to speed. Opera has announced widget support will be dropped, along with Unite applications. http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2012/04/24/increased-fo... I guess this decision could be reversed if Facebook buys Opera.

From the article: And Opera used to have a widget manager embedded in its browser, so it wouldn’t be too hard to dust it off and restart the project.

>Opera used to have a widget manager

It still does. The upcoming Opera 12 will not have it. The author makes a reference to the fact that the widgets have not been receiving proper attention since they were launched and need dusting off.

My point is widgets are (and have been) basically dead, at least in terms of popularity. I'm not sure Facebook execs are aware of their existence, so it's probably unlikely they have a future. Just have to wait and see.

Re: Face opera

#36
post #34
post #14

I still don't see the value in it. It made sense when Google did it. Chrome came and shook things up introducing features no existing browsers had and placing an emphasis on JavaScript speed. This was critical for Google as a number of its apps make heavy use of it. I don't use Chrome anymore, I switched back to Firefox but its undeniable that it had a massive impact on the speed of browser development and probably t…

> introducing features no existing browsers had Please, elaborate. The only feature I know is exclusive to Chrome is full page translation (since they own Google Translate it makes sense). What else?

I thought that they introduced.

Sandboxing for individual tabs

Ability to drag tabs between windows

Isn't each tab a process or something so when you close it memory is freed?

I am sure there are some other things. This is all I can think of off the top my head.

Re: Face opera

#37
post #34
post #14

I still don't see the value in it. It made sense when Google did it. Chrome came and shook things up introducing features no existing browsers had and placing an emphasis on JavaScript speed. This was critical for Google as a number of its apps make heavy use of it. I don't use Chrome anymore, I switched back to Firefox but its undeniable that it had a massive impact on the speed of browser development and probably t…

> introducing features no existing browsers had Please, elaborate. The only feature I know is exclusive to Chrome is full page translation (since they own Google Translate it makes sense). What else?

omnibox

Re: Face opera

#38

Re Opera Mini and them having no competition in proxying browsers: Nokia's S40 Browser actually does proxying these days. This was released as a beta in late 2010, and is now the default in all S40 phones. ( http://betalabs.nokia.com/apps/nokia-browser-for-series-40-b... ) It's not a proper competitor of course, as one cannot install it to phones by other manufacturers, but it does still cover a pretty big chunk of t…

Well, Nokia is not for sale either since it was semi-acquired by Microsoft.

Re: Face opera

#39
post #27

"Installable web apps". The author doesn't seem to be up to speed. Opera has announced widget support will be dropped, along with Unite applications. http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2012/04/24/increased-fo... I guess this decision could be reversed if Facebook buys Opera.

Unite was awesome. The problem is hardly anyone used Opera. A company like Facebook could actually do something with it. Imagine the possibilities for apps and games if a big chunk of Facebook users had it.

Re: Face opera

#40
post #36
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> introducing features no existing browsers had Please, elaborate. The only feature I know is exclusive to Chrome is full page translation (since they own Google Translate it makes sense). What else?

I thought that they introduced. Sandboxing for individual tabs Ability to drag tabs between windows Isn't each tab a process or something so when you close it memory is freed? I am sure there are some other things. This is all I can think of off the top my head.

One process per tab is not a feature. It is (or should be) invisible for me, the user, and from my experience it creates more problems than it's worth (first time I tried Chrome it simply stopped my computer dead by running 10 heavy processes on a single-core CPU - so much for performance). It's a bad design decision that will only pay off when I have a 20-core CPU. Sandboxing for individual tabs? Just about the same.

My point is that saying "Chrome came and shook things up introducing features no existing browsers had" is a bit of a stretch. When it came out Chrome was basically not very different from Internet Explorer 6 (feature-wise), and it seems to have stayed that way (I like full page translation but that's it).

We should be fair and say that Google Chrome has a large market share because it has Google behind it. It doesn't have much else going for it.

Post reply on HN