Apple and Google managed to do what Microsoft never could and make it unprofitable to create a commercial web browser.
A sad day.
Opera moves to WebKit
191–200 of 295 posts
Re: Opera moves to WebKit
#192Dragonfly is in my opinion better than Webkits inspector. I love using it.
Does anyone know what will happen to Dragonfly after the switch?
Re: Opera moves to WebKit
#193I'd like to know what the pros and cons of Opera switching to WebKit instead of Gecko are. Was Gecko ever a possibility?
Opera makes most of its revenue on mobile, and these days, mobile web = webkit.
I don't think gecko was ever a serious choice for them.
Re: Opera moves to WebKit
#194Mixed emotions here. I think it makes every sense for Opera to do this. The cost of maintaining their own rendering engine must have been huge and the advantages it brought were slender. It's also good to have another major player contributing to webkit. On the other hand it's a step closer to an unhealthy monoculture in rendering engines. It's already the case for the mobile web that people are starting to define st…
On the other hand, if all browsers just used webkit then maybe we'd finally get "write once, run anywhere" JS, CSS, etc.
Interesting that you mention JS, because the two major browsers running WebKit have totally different JS engines.
Re: Opera moves to WebKit
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? how is competition better than collaboration? webkit routinely gets breaking changes, it was never constrained because of compatibility concerns over non-standard features. Wouldn't having a load of developers in different environments, working on the same codebase actually accelerate innovation? Something could go from W3C/WHATWG draft to implementation in a matter of weeks, then we wouldn't have things like cs…
> it was never constrained because of compatibility concerns over non-standard features. Seriously? You should go read the www-style archives or public-html archives or the relevant W3C bug databases sometimes for all the things the WebKit folks refused to implement (and still do) precisely because of such concerns. > accelerate innovation? Innovation and feature addition are not the same thing. Please explain to me…
> Please explain to me how building a rendering engine that scales well to 64 cores would be accelerated by starting with WebKit as a base
I don't know enough about the webkit architecture to say anything, but I guess it wouldn't be any faster if it started with Presto.
Re: Opera moves to WebKit
#196Mixed emotions here. I think it makes every sense for Opera to do this. The cost of maintaining their own rendering engine must have been huge and the advantages it brought were slender. It's also good to have another major player contributing to webkit. On the other hand it's a step closer to an unhealthy monoculture in rendering engines. It's already the case for the mobile web that people are starting to define st…
Unhealthy? I've been longing for the day that all browsers are based on WebKit, because it means a real web programming language will be that much closer to replacing kiddiescript. EDIT -- from http://wtfjs.com : parseInt('06'); // 6 parseInt('08'); // 0 Your language is bad, and you should feel bad.
WebKit maintainers are opposed to replacing JavaScript. See:
https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2011-December/...
Re: Opera moves to WebKit
#197I drive past opera software every morning, if it wasn't for the sign on their building I'd never think about them. They were popular a long while back, but now? Does anyone still use opera. If so why? It was behind in tech and for any serious web development it didn't matter, chrome, Firefox were the two that get used. Safari obviously but mainly for iOS platforms.
The number of comments here surprises me, I would have thought this irrelevant news.
Re: Opera moves to WebKit
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes and no. Less work for frontend guys I believe. More choice for you, because you can get the same decent looking pages (theoretically) with a different UI of the browser. And, IMO, here is where Opera wins - their UI is superior to Chrome's and Safari's.
Its ability to configure basically anything from user interface is far above any other browser. Chrome is a browser that I recommend to parents. It has dumbed down interface, zero options - perfect for average majority. It is still powerful when combined with dozens of extensions, but it still can't compete with Opera in this area. It's like KDE vs Gnome3 if that makes more sense for someone.
My Firefox feels like Vim, I suppose Firefox wins in the configurability department, at least when you include plugins.
Of course, only desktop Firefox.
Re: Opera moves to WebKit
#199Are they going to open source Presto?
Re: Opera moves to WebKit
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are not being downvoted because of Opera devotees. You are getting downvoted because of your passive aggressive tone, similar to every single reddit comment which starts with "I know I'm going to be downvoted for this", nobody like the martyr argument. And assuming your own use case and global world stats to decide what browser to support is not a smart way to do things. Just look at the CIS market and it will te…
That's all in the interpretation. I saw nothing passive aggressive about what he said. He just stated his opinions (and what I believe to be many facts too) in a very mater-of-fact way. There's a difference between that and passive aggressive. As far as Opera goes though, you both have a point. If you really want to drill down into the data then your argument stands but generally speaking, without being oh so concern…
Not passive aggressive?
>the browser that nobody cares about
>Now they see Chrome is going to win
Implies that Opera never innovates or has anything interesting to offer, and implies that instead they follow the market leader like-for-like. They were one of the first browsers to have tabs and supported many CSS3 properties without prefixes first. Just because they didn't support WebSuperFlySpeedySocketRockets the day the draft standard was out doesn't mean they don't innovate.
>copying Chrome
They're standards compliant, Chrome is standards compliant. Not "copying" Chrome.