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

Opera Neon concept browser

opera.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 218 posts

Re: Opera Neon concept browser

#131

Post by aroch »

lsh wrote: post #115
domenukk wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you need bookmarks, either you google it again or can access it through some kind of chat... Tabs are nice though

in vivaldi you can ctrl-d to bookmark then shift-tab to set a shortcut name in future you can just ctrl-t then shortcut name to go straight to bookmark. yeah, it's bookmarks under the hood, but being able to just go 'ctrl-t' then 'webmail' or 'workmail' or whatever saves the convolutions of smartcomplete and autocomplete and displaying history or suggestions and such in the url bar.

^d in Firefox and Chrome also bookmarks the page

Both Firefox's awesomebar and Chrome's omnibox let you go to a shortcut by typing its name

Re: Opera Neon concept browser

#132

Post by iopq »

pawadu wrote: post #6
avar wrote: post #2

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

Opera moved to webkit in 2012 (2013?) and then to Blink soon after googles announcement.

They moved to Blink the day of the announcement. They knew it was coming before it was announced.

Re: Opera Neon concept browser

#134

Post by wongarsu »

gkya wrote: post #107
rospaya wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you don't use bookmarks or tabs?

Bookmarks and tabs are there already in all major OSS browsers.

Bookmarks and tabs are far from being easy, solved problems. For example adding a Firefox addon to display tabs vertically in a tree structure instead of a horizontal list has changed the way I use the internet (and I have always used a lot of tabs).

In the end tabs are just like booksmarks, except that they keep state during a browsing session. I find it very weird that we keep those very similar concepts in completely different UIs. There's a lot of room for improvement in that area.

Re: Opera Neon concept browser

#135

Post by wongarsu »

SloppyStone wrote: post #133

I don't understand vertical tab bars at all. Why not give an option to change it to horizontal? Also, seems quite resource heavy.

The line length of readable text is quite limited, yet our monitors are wider than they are high. Since websites still contain a lot of text they profit more from getting the full screen height than from getting the full screen width. Hence vertical tab bars.

I'm not a fan of the giant pictures they use as representations of tabs when my tab bar fits ~40 tabs in one screen height. But I guess that heavily depends on user preference.

Re: Opera Neon concept browser

#136

Post by akio »

globuous wrote: post #109
notatoad wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

window management is the operating system's job, not the browser's. you can do split screen in any browser by putting two windows beside each other.

That's true but there are counter examples: For instance, I'm very thankful that my text editor and terminal allow me to split panes within their window rather than through multiple instances handled by the OS. I seem to prefer having panes/tabs vs window instances when alt-tabbing. Especially if I have two browsers splitting my viewport and a couple full sized browsers. This makes it very annoying to alt-tab only be…

There are a few window managers for macOS that do what you want. I recommend kwm.

https://github.com/koekeishiya/kwm

Re: Opera Neon concept browser

#137

Post by matt_kantor »

sleepychu wrote: post #91
ek750 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The three browsers I use have command shortcuts that undo the accidental window closures. Though I have to wonder how much resources are taken by the undo feature.

> accidental window closures Really? Not just tabs. The danger is you have 5 tabs open, you only want one of them but you accidentally close all of them, now you've lost the window with the tab you wanted.

I'm not ek750, but this is true for both of the browsers I use regularly. In Chrome on OS X, Cmd+Shift+T reopens the last-closed tab, whether it was in a different/closed window or the one that is currently focused. In Firefox on Linux, Ctrl+Shift+T restores the last-closed tab in the currently focused window, and Ctrl+Shift+N restores the last-closed window.

I have both of these browsers configured to save my sessions and start from where I left off when I quit the application entirely. Both of them persist my closed tab/window history between sessions as well, so I can for example close my way out of 15 tabs across 2 windows, then reboot my laptop, then when I start my browser it will reopen whatever tabs/windows I didn't explicitly close and if I want to restore the ones I closed before the reboot I can use the restore shortcut(s) to get them back.

Re: Opera Neon concept browser

#138

Post by colemickens »

snowwolf wrote: post #38
StavrosK wrote: post #4

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.

Ahh, the paradox of being the market leader. Remember when Chrome tried to innovate with how we use bookmarks? [1] People cry out for innovation, but then freak out when said innovation happens. This is why disrupters are so successful - they can do something crazy and people will try it out and think - this is amazing. Because the mindset/psychology is that this is something new. But the market leader implements exa…

The bookmark manager is not a great example, in my opinion. There was massive outcry because there were major features missing and it was a major step back from a usability perspective.

They could have improved on it without forcing people to use another Google service too.

Re: Opera Neon concept browser

#139

Post by JoshTriplett »

thebspatrol wrote: post #87
snowwolf wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ahh, the paradox of being the market leader. Remember when Chrome tried to innovate with how we use bookmarks? [1] People cry out for innovation, but then freak out when said innovation happens. This is why disrupters are so successful - they can do something crazy and people will try it out and think - this is amazing. Because the mindset/psychology is that this is something new. But the market leader implements exa…

>This is why disrupters are so successful - they can do something crazy and people will try it out and think - this is amazing. Because the mindset/psychology is that this is something new. But the market leader implements exactly the same thing and people won't give it a chance because it's a change and they can't handle change. To play the devil's advocate, couldn't you argue that the reason the take-rate seems hig…

Exactly. The market leader can still innovate; just don't force it on the large body of existing users before you've proven it with early adopters and given plenty of lead time for a transition, or the volume of complaints will drown out the excited interest from those early adopters.

For example, consider what Mozilla did when they first came out with Firefox. They didn't replace the main Mozilla browser; they built a new browser and offered it as an alternative. It took a long time for everyone to switch over, and that's completely OK.

Re: Opera Neon concept browser

#140

Post by sydd »

pvg wrote: post #64
zzzcpan wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

What does that even mean? They're sparing a potential competitor the entire R&D cost of a modern, cross-platform browser. I don't think Google developed Chrome out of sheer altruism but it's probably cheaper now to compete in the browser space than ever. It's unlikely to be profitable, though, in itself.

That means Chrome is a very important strategic asset for Google, perhaps their most important one that end users can run. Imagine there was no Chrome and say FF held 70% of the browser market share. They'd would hold Google by the balls, and could do stuff like: Nag the user to use their search engine/mail suite, have bugs that kill Google products, delay features that'd be very important to Google (e.g. webm),...
Post reply on HN