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

Vivaldi 1.2 release

vivaldi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 134 posts

Re: Vivaldi 1.2 release

#71

Post by nhumrich »

castell wrote: post #28
JasonSage wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The biggest features we are working on are sync and mail Okay, I have to question this. Why is a browser vendor spending precious time and money adding a mailbox to their browser? I used Vivaldi a little bit ago during the beta/1.0 period for a few months—at that time at least, the UX needed more polish and there were bugs and usability issues that were daily pain points. So I find this it concerning that they're b…

It's awesome that they implement an email client. (hopefully open source) Opera Mail and Thunderbird were good free email clients, but now discontinued. What options are there (PC)? Outlook, Windows 10 Mail, Windows Live Mail/Outlook Express, Thunderbird, IBM Notes, OSX Mail. Ideally, I would like an email client that is as powerful as Outlook, has the UI of Google mail (especially the conversation view), has superb…

Nylas N1. Open source and runs on any platform.

Re: Vivaldi 1.2 release

#72

Post by naasking »

StevePerkins wrote: post #46

It feels like they're trying to serve two competing goals with this: 1) Be a faster, lighter, more customizable competitor to Chrome 2) Be a full "Internet suite" with browser and email client I'm sure how well you can accomplish #1 while pouring resources into #2. Moreover, I'm not sure how much of an audience there even is for #2. The minority who want a desktop email client are very vocal about it, but most of us…

> faster, lighter, more customizable

Pick any two.

Re: Vivaldi 1.2 release

#73

Post by jeffreyjflim »

oblio wrote: post #30
badminton1 wrote: post #26

There is a lot of security considerations to make a browser. JavaScript based technologies are not well known for their security.

In practice any kind of technology is only as good as its developers. And I doubt that the security record of "Javascript based technologies" is better or worse than the security record of "C/C++ based technologies", for that matter. As a purely theoretical point, "Javascript based technologies" have the advantage of automatic memory management, which, again, theoretically, removes an attack vector almost entirely. G…

I am waiting for the Rust-based Firefox :}

Re: Vivaldi 1.2 release

#75

Post by 102030485868 »

nhumrich wrote: post #71
castell wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's awesome that they implement an email client. (hopefully open source) Opera Mail and Thunderbird were good free email clients, but now discontinued. What options are there (PC)? Outlook, Windows 10 Mail, Windows Live Mail/Outlook Express, Thunderbird, IBM Notes, OSX Mail. Ideally, I would like an email client that is as powerful as Outlook, has the UI of Google mail (especially the conversation view), has superb…

Nylas N1. Open source and runs on any platform.

Given that you use/run a sync node.

Re: Vivaldi 1.2 release

#77

Post by feld »

StevePerkins wrote: post #46

It feels like they're trying to serve two competing goals with this: 1) Be a faster, lighter, more customizable competitor to Chrome 2) Be a full "Internet suite" with browser and email client I'm sure how well you can accomplish #1 while pouring resources into #2. Moreover, I'm not sure how much of an audience there even is for #2. The minority who want a desktop email client are very vocal about it, but most of us…

Opera's mail client was awesome. It was much faster than Thunderbird or Outlook. Those would blow up with my inboxes of 500,000+ emails but Opera just chugged right along and worked without any problems.

It also synced IMAP from scratch way faster, too.

edit: The search was incredible as well

Re: Vivaldi 1.2 release

#78

Post by StevePerkins »

scholia wrote: post #69
StevePerkins wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's open source. you cannot use the code Umm... that's "visible source", not "open source". I'm not sure if it needs to be open source to accomplish their goals (Opera isn't). But much of the tech crowd they're trying to reach won't use proprietary software. Come to think of it, I can't really tell what their business model is supposed to be.

The business model is the same as every other browser: monetized search, plus a small number of paid-for bookmarks. However, Vivaldi is a small operation so it doesn't need many users. Also, it's self-financed so there are no outside investors and the founder can do whatever he wants. > much of the tech crowd they're trying to reach won't use proprietary software You do realize that Chrome is proprietary, as are Safa…

> You do realize that Chrome is proprietary

Chrome is a build of the (completely open-source) Chromium browser, with some additional media codecs and a different logo slapped on it.

Re: Vivaldi 1.2 release

#79

Post by gsnedders »

nacs wrote: post #76
kevinSuttle wrote: post #74

A closed-source browser that's built on Chromium. In 2016. Why.

I see the source here: https://vivaldi.com/source/

That's only the partly LGPL Chromium code.

From https://vivaldi.net/userblogs/entry/a-few-words-about-open-s...

> Our source code package is available here: vivaldi.com/source. This links to a copy of the Chromium source code with the changes we made to allow our HTML/CSS/JS UI to run.

> All our changes to Chromium source code are under a BSD license and hence can read by anyone. The details are explained in the the README and LICENSE files, within that package.

> In addition, all of our UI code (included in normal packages) is written in plain, readable text. This means that all parts of Vivaldi are full audit-able and open from that perspective.

Re: Vivaldi 1.2 release

#80

Post by dvdgsng »

bob8 wrote: post #36
oblio wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's so wrong about that? All the heavy browser lifting is done by the browser engine, which is native, and everything else is just... chrome. Which doesn't really have huge performance requirements.

UI is very latency sensitive, even a couple of frames of delay can be detrimental to the feel of a UI.

Comparing the delay of the UI with many tabs (30+) Vivaldi wins easily over Firefox and Chrome.
Post reply on HN