:silly: Hi My first time I used your browser. I have read the story of how you started the browser. NICE, very good idea..... But one thing.... When you finished it will not be fast anymore. Why ? because people asking you to put more and more things in the browser. Where are the good old days where the browser was for browsing. Nothing else, no emails, no fancy graphics, not add on programs. Back then you had only 256 kilobits connection and the browsing was faster (ok not faster, just a bit over the top) than now at 20Megabits speed, but with browsers that are full with adverts, email links etc. Can you actually have a version of the browser that have nothing fancy on it. Just browser. I don't want to import things, see adverts, fancy flash graphics. Just browsing. If I need to go to a page I can type it... (I still have fingers and brain cells, thanks GOD), don't need links to overload the browser with add on stuff just so I don't have to use my brain. And a, nice fancy, link fulled, top of the range Ferrari, version for the people who can not type their email address or a site . So we have the choice of what we want to install. If you look at it from the other point of view.... there are so many people in the world that they afraid of touching the computer because everything seems to them too complicated. Simplified fast browser will be the best for them. I know you can not please everyone but a basic version with only the items that are needed to be compatible with the different web pages. Nothing more - nothing less. Web is already overloaded with java, flash players, etc. But I assume it will be possible to put all these as minimal as possible. Pop-up blocker and protection can be covered from the PC software. Lets see.... or you going to sell it to someone big.... earn the millions and forget the original idea? Thanks for looking at my idea... PS: IT engineer in trade, and hate all the browsers.... outside work only use them when I need them. Not for pleasure anymore like the old days. All of them (browsers) are slow.
Vivaldi team already said they are making this browser for power users, and you are asking them to make simple browser?
But one thing…. When you finished it will not be fast anymore. Why ? because people asking you to put more and more things in the browser.
Where are the good old days where the browser was for browsing. Nothing else, no emails, no fancy graphics, not add on programs.
So, I take it you've never used Opera before (I mean before it became reskinned Chromium)? Because it was exactly that - a lightning-fast browser while still offering tons of features other browsers could only dream of and/or could only offer through extensions and add-ons. And yet it also was one of the slimmest browsers out there.
Have a little faith
There are plenty of simple browsers out there.
Please go away and let this one be different.
Opera was for ages the most feature packed browser and also the faster one.
Features and speed aren't so bound together as the OP thinks.
… Where are the good old days where the browser was for browsing. Nothing else, no emails, no fancy graphics, not add on programs. ... Can you actually have a version of the browser that have nothing fancy on it. Just browser. I don't want to import things, see adverts, fancy flash graphics. Just browsing. ... I know you can not please everyone but a basic version with only the items that are needed to be compatible with the different web pages. Nothing more - nothing less. Web is already overloaded with java, flash players, etc. But I assume it will be possible to put all these as minimal as possible. Pop-up blocker and protection can be covered from the PC software. ...
But if the page to which you choose to browse relies heavily on 'fancy graphics' and your browser doesn't support it, how happy will you be? If you're a user running multiple tabs and a crash in one tab brings down the entire browser and all the other tabs, how happy will you be? If you're using a "simple browser" and you want to block ads (or scripts or images or iFrames or animations or…) on webpages, but you can't add an extension to do that (or activate an internal, code-heavy function to do it), how happy will you be? If you use your browser to download files, software, or images, and because of its "simplicity" and lack of a well-rounded manager, it cannot do that, how happy will you be?
The problem is that one person's "extra" code or "fancy" functionality is somebody else's "necessary" functionality. Every browser (and that means EVERY browser) is to some extent a compromise between conflicting trade-offs, combined with developer interpretation of both what the targeted market really wants and what is reasonable to provide in the product. Much as you may want a "simple" Vivaldi browser, and if the various software review articles and certain of the browser makers are to be believed, the market is already crowded with browsers competing for the "basic" needs of the mass-browsing public coupled with only sufficient "bling" to differentiate one brand from another. What is lacking are new browsers for those wanting greater configurability and built-in capabilities... that is, a browser that can function as a useful tool.
Of course it is probably going to change as it becomes more feature at least some, but the question is how much exactly, but for how it is right Vivaldi I feel is the most simple browser I have used so far.
Simple is such a strange word. I think Vivaldi is aiming to be far from simple—we will offer a myriad of cutomization options, and in that be very complex. At the same time the out-of-the-box experience probably won't change very drastically. You can use it as a "simple" browser if you want, but there are others, like Jon and other power users, who will want to use it for all their Internet needs.
I wouldn't worry too much, instead share with us exactly what you would like to see.
Designer, Vivaldi Technologies
OP has come to a Land Rover dealership to complain that it is not selling Vespa scooters.
2003 called, they want their topic back.
There may be a generational split here - or perhaps it is just a matter of semantics. I suspect old-time Opera users like myself are here because we want the ability to customise our browser. That means the ability to create a browser for our needs. That may include the ability to exclude features we consider to be useless bling and fleeting fashion fads.
The term power user is unhelpful. Power lies in being empowered to get the browser we want to satisfy our particular needs.
No more sneers please from people whose definition of power user is having 30 tabs open at once. :lol:
If you want a "simple browser", why don't you use Chrome? It is as basic as I think is possible. That's why I hate new Opera; in fact I am writing this post from the old Opera 12.x.
As for Mail Client - I want my e-mail checked regularly. It means I would have to keep another application opened. So I prefer having it in browser.
I think Blackbird said it pretty well There are two distinct categories of browser. The first is the one that has the capability to use all of the web's latest technologies, in order to render heavy pages. That's gonna be where Vivaldi sits. The other browser category is the simple browser that tries to perform basic capabilities that are not much past the point of 1999 to render a readable (albeit probably ugly) page for the user.
Each have their merits. The heavy browser has to be very carefully crafted to avoid security issues, and requires much more manpower to do so. The simple browser may be more secure simply by having few parts to go wrong. Unfortunately, the simple browser (in some cases more secure) sometimes is not adequate for heavy sites, some of which are secure sites (banks), and we have no choice. We have to trust some not-so-simple browser, or walk to the bank.
There are two ways to be simple. The size of the code base (small=simple), and the simplicity of the interface (often big = simple). Anyone who's ever tried to compile Chromium or Webkit knows that those are not small=simple code bases. They-re gargantuan. But, Vivaldi may be simple in the second way. I think Vivaldi is simple in terms of its interface being intuitive, and easy to use, simply. It can present a lot of information at one time on the screen, but manipulate it in the most simple way possible. That's the mark of a nicely done browser. So far, so good. Interesting at least. As far as the security of the browser goes, time will tell us that.
There are browsers for everyone.
You can download simple browsers when you want or browsers that can do everything (except making the coffee…).
Vivaldi will be - as Opera was - a browser of that will give users the ability to make everything they want without using many extensions.
I'm not a fan of 'simple browsers' but if that's what you're looking for you may want to look into Maxthon Nitro. It's just a browser. No extensions, no addons, no unnecessary features.
I might be totally wrong, but I think the original Opera had the problem of vast functionality. Maybe it took away too much resources from updating the Presto engine itself.
From my point of view, browser can have lots of functionality. That's not the problem. Problem is, that those millions of little things need to be developed and updated constantly. And when you focus on million things, there's a major chance that you don't focus on the most important things enough.
I also loved original Opera's extensions. They were really good. Compare them to Chrome extensions and they are just… Pretty much crap.
Maybe extensions could be answer to all those who want everything from their browsers? Do some things properly in the browsers extension APIs (or whatever, heck, I'm no software engineer) etc, and let developers create useful apps to your browser?
Well, there are good points on both sides. Obviously, many functions take lots of time to update and this might result in falling behind other browsers, which basically "outsource" any additional features to the addon makers, so they can concentrate on improving the core things: speed and good rendering of the webpages.
However, Opera has always been the "power browser" for me. I liked that it had lots of innovative features and many of them were really revolutionizing the browsing. Back in the days, while others were still using firefox'es (basically IE with different design) and other browsers, I enjoyed tabs, mouse gestures and convenient bookmarks. And all these features and customization were things that made me keep using 12.x version till the very end, despite the slow speed. But then most of the pages just didn't open anymore. So recently I had to switch to the new Opera just to find out that it is basically Chrome with more bugs and all the good features are gone.
So I believe that Vivaldi should implement lots of features. It is refreshing for me to finally open a normal, separate settings window and really customize my browser :whistle: . I hope the good old days will be back.
However, people who are talking about simple browser also have good points. I always liked as minimalistic look as possible. And when you have to fit the page in your 15'' laptop screen it matters even more. So usually the first thing I do when I install new browser is turning off unnecessary things that take up too much of the screen space and leave the basic functions. While I can always go back and turn on what I need later.
Things like tab colors depending on the webpage should be removed (people will turn them off anyway), the looks should stay minimalistic and intuitive (I really like the direction you are going now) but the functions should be numerous, as this is where the power of (old) Opera and Vivaldi lies.
I might be totally wrong, but I think the original Opera had the problem of vast functionality.
I agree. You might be totally wrong.
The most likely culprit for original Opera's ongoing struggle was the Presto engine itself. Maintaining its vast functionality actually seems to have been fairly trivial in comparison to its inability to snare market share due to site incompatibility brought on by the fact that Presto was written for a standards-compliant web, and the web was not written for standards compliance, but rather for Trident and Gecko.
There was some manpower eaten up in keeping the UI and features up to date with the continual changes in Presto in search of speed, and up to date with changes in user habits. But had Opera ever grabbed the market share it deserved, it could have afforded double its development staff or more, and that manpower would have been as nothing against all of the staff necessary to take care of sales and partnering deals and contracts, and all the accountants to track the money and the lawyers to fight off patent infringement.
… Maybe extensions could be answer to all those who want everything from their browsers? Do some things properly in the browsers extension APIs (or whatever, heck, I'm no software engineer) etc, and let developers create useful apps to your browser?
One issue with that is not all developers are created equal, and certainly not all developers will be equally skilled at intimately interfacing another program (what is termed an extension) with the browser's own code and API's. Moreover, once one separates intimately-associated code into a separately-maintained package, there also arises the question of what happens when the browser code itself has to be updated and how that will affect any number of "somebody elses' " extensions. Certain extensions for Firefox and Chrome are frequently found to be defective or unusable after a significant browser update. I'd much rather the browser developers test the particular functionality as part of the browser update development, rather than it being left to chance in the hands of some third party.
Which raises another related issue: trust or security. When I install Vivaldi or any other browser, I am trusting in the skill and competency of its developers with my system and browsing security. When I must rely on extensions, I am also forced to extend that trust to a host of other developers, most of whom I may never have heard of or have no practical way of vetting. There's a solid reason behind the disclaimers when loading extensions from the various FF and Chrome extension repositories that state the user should be careful about trusting a given extension or its author(s).
I realize extensions are all the rage currently for browser customization, but it should be kept in mind that such extensions come at the price of possible performance, quality, maintenance, and security problems.
You are joking right? I think you got the wrong forums and wrong browser.
The browser you are looking for is called Lynx.
You will like it. Its slim, no images, nothing, just a pure fast text web browser:
Just like the good old days :woohoo: