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

Vivaldi 8.0

vivaldi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 257 posts

Re: Vivaldi 8.0

#221

Post by thesuitonym »

ktm5j wrote: post #163
OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me, it's a privacy concern. Closed source means only one company is fixing vulnerabilities, whereas open source invites security researchers to find and fix issues quicker. Fewer security gaps == less privacy risk.

I've heard that argument before, but has that actually been demonstrated? Ability to look at the code (especially in the age of AI) means that security researchers aren't the only ones who can look for bugs. For example, look at the bugs like copyfail that AI has recently uncovered in the Linux kernel.

If an AI can find a vulnerability for a hacker, it will also find that vulnerability for a security researcher, so that point is moot.

There exists a danger that very good hackers will be able to find vulnerabilities by looking through the source code, but very good hackers find vulnerabilities without source code anyway.

Consider the following: Would you rather walk down a busy street hundreds of other people walking by, including police officers, good samaritans, and maybe people who want to do you harm, or would you rather walk down a dark ally with only four people in it?

Re: Vivaldi 8.0

#222

Post by thesuitonym »

bityard wrote: post #157
MaXtreeM wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always see these kind of comments, that many sites don't work in Firefox while they do in Chrome. When I encounter a broken site I always also check it in Chrome but the times where it is actually a browser's fault is like once a year. Usually it is some blocking of cookies or something that I have enabled in Firefox. Even sites from Google which everyone seems to describe that they are specifically made to work on…

It's crazy, but in 2026, websites still check the user agent string and will simply refuse to work if it's not one that they like. Financial and enterprise software is the worst for this. It's one of the reasons Vivaldi switched to simply copying the Chrome user agent string instead of their own. Some sites also simply to not test their stuff on Firefox since it has such a small market share, and Firefox _does_ have…

> Firefox _does_ have minor incompatibilities that only tend to show up when using overly fancy Javascript or CSS frameworks.

In my mind this is actually a feature of Firefox, because those overly fancy Javascripts or CSS frameworks tend to be used for obnoxious purposes.

Re: Vivaldi 8.0

#223

Post by sunrunner »

sys_64738 wrote: post #210
spinningarrow wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll try to take your comment in good faith. And of course - that’s the trouble with issues like these isn’t it? I did find some reports online of the same but when there’s no consistent way of making it happen, there’s no simple solution either. I ran it with no extensions and out of the other chromium-based browsers I’ve tried it’s the only one where I’ve had crash issues.

I run on multiple machines without issue.

Really upping the stakes of "It works on my machine" with an escalation to "It works on multiple of my machines".

Re: Vivaldi 8.0

#225

Post by rfrey »

sys_64738 wrote: post #113
spinningarrow wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actively used Vivaldi for several months until recently - on my Mac it would intermittently crash for no reason I could find. I’ve since switched to ungoogled-chromium - it’s only a couple of weeks so it’s early days but so far it’s been very stable.

Sounds like a you problem. It never crashes on me.

What would that "you problem" look like? Bought the wrong laptop? Bad aura? Clicking links wrong?

Re: Vivaldi 8.0

#226

Post by colordrops »

beepbooptheory wrote: post #168
colordrops wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are grasping for straws. No one said open source is perfect. But it's just an obvious fact that open source is going to be easier to audit than closed source.

But isn't that their point? In the age of AI, maybe being "easier to audit" is as much a risk than an assurance? I'm not sure I agree, but it is interesting to mull over. Further, either way, your tone and response is not very charitable, to say the least. From the outside, you are the only one blustering and grasping here. Not everything needs to be so antagonistic maybe?

Reverse uno. The same AI can be used to fix the holes in the open source code. And a LOT more AI review by benevolent parties is gonna hit that open source code than the closed source.

Re: Vivaldi 8.0

#228

Post by iza »

bityard wrote: post #162

Well, fuck. One of the main reasons I switched to Vivaldi a few years ago was that it allowed and even advertised a "classic" browser experience. By which I mean: tabs that behaved like tabs, visual separation, not a lot of useless whitespace and corner-radius-maxxed borders everywhere. Looks like that's all gone now and Vivaldi is just yet another generic "flat design" browser. Time to look for something else...

The old look is still available. Settings > Themes > Editor > Coloring Mode

You can also adjust density, rounded corners, transparency, blur, etc.

Re: Vivaldi 8.0

#229

Post by hvis »

adrian_b wrote: post #102
RedShift1 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is not Firefox's fault. It's up to the operating system to provide a stable API to make things like this work.

For the kind of things needed by Firefox, the Linux APIs have been stable for decades. The problem is not stability, but the fact that there are multiple APIs, and it is unknown which of them will be available on the user system, so a browser may need to support all of them. For instance, for video decoding on a GPU, the Linux APIs differ depending on the GPU vendor, unless you use Vulkan, but Vulkan video decoding i…

The usual explanation by Firefox team is that the drivers are not uniformly compliant and/or working well. There had been progress, though.

For your specific system, you can open about:support and search the page for the word "Blocklisted" - that section of the page includes failure codes that can be then passed to web search (or interpreted by name).

I don't know all the details of what works well or not, but the Chrome team logically should have more manpower to implement workarounds for driver problems, and Vivaldi reuses the engine.

Speaking of the other applications though, most of them don't have to use the dma-buf subsystem, to embed hardware rendered content inside a "regular" application. That imposes a certain limitation on the driver capabilities.

Re: Vivaldi 8.0

#230

Post by daniel_iversen »

miroljub wrote: post #119

Why should I use it instead of, for example, Brave?

I’d love to know that as well. Long time Brave user that was curious about Vivaldi a long time ago and can’t remember why I went in the other direction. I want privacy and battery life on macOS
Post reply on HN