The Netflix fix – Vivaldi Browser Snapshot 1.12.936.3



  • @kitsura said:

    Will Amazon Prime ever be supported?

    What do you mean? I watch videos on Amazon Prime in Vivaldi every day.



  • Why does the User Agent string in Vivaldi identify it as version "1.93.936.3":
    https://www.gt500.org/headers/


  • Moderator

    @GT500 Because of stupid browser-sniffing websites that believe 1.9.1 is a larger version number than 1.10.3, 1.11.463, and 1.12.22, and thus either warn a user they have an obsolete browser and they should update, or even simply refuse to load.



  • @Ayespy To be fair, 1.90 is larger than 1.10/11/12. Maybe the devs should think about changing the version system to something that makes mathematically more sense. Going to 2.0 after 1.9 wouldn't have hurt anyone. There are infinite numbers ahead.


  • Vivaldi Translator

    Nice Windows Panel - finally! 🙂
    First impressions: expanding "folders" (windows, stacks) is not so smooth as in bookmarks - clicking on arrow only selects a row.



  • @mozzer "Windows Panel".

    Huh, where, how?


  • Vivaldi Translator

    @steffie: vivaldi://experiments 🙂



  • @Steffie As above poster said, enable it in experiments, it will probably be a tree view for tabs in the long run.



  • @mozzer Thank you to you & luetage. 🙂

    After a struggle [caused chiefly by me being an idiot; you both clearly said experiments yet i somehow thought you must have meant flags, wherein i fruitlessly searched, sigh], i finally found it [& therein also the Calendar; cool]. Then, for at least a solid minute, i couldn't actually do anything with the Windows Panel, ie, could not expand it. Finally realised i had to double-click the arrow, whereas like with Notes & Bookmarks i had been hitherto single-clicking. Anyway, this is quite cool... more & more the unique things i loved in O12 are coming to our mighty V.



  • I'm unsure if anyone's already mentioned this [either the bug, or the fix], but i'm delighted to have just discovered that this SS, after several [or at least a couple of] months of breakage, has restored the ability of streaming websites to play in Web Panels. I'm so happy about this, as ever since it broke so many months ago i've had to open a 2nd window [which i know lots of users happily do, but i always prefer to constrain myself to a single V window wherever possible].

    Thanks Devs!!



  • @Steffie still you have to re-download the plugin via the script sometime...i'm asking for real netflix implementation like windows 🙂



  • @luetage I think because of the impression that a large version jump would have given thye want to keep that for a really big new feature (mail? or sync?). But yeah, a better numbering system could have been chosen if that's what they wanted to do.

    What about 1.01.001: <major features>.<minor features>.<bugfixes>. Giving yourself 99 minor update increments should be ample time for you to eventually bump up after a major feature.

    Alternatively they could just do what windows 10 does and do away with versioning altogether and just use build numbers.



  • @LonM I agree, they only needed to number it with a zero ahead in the first place, so we would have gone from 1.09 to 1.10 without issues.



  • @luca247 Oh, now i see. OK. Not wanting to be argumentative, but though the following seems inapplicable for you with Fedora, for me previously in Maui, & currently in oS TW, the fact that it's only every ~7th circuit of Halleys Comet that i have needed to do any manual intervention, is not really that far removed from it being "permanent". I mean, maybe since i left Windows in 2014, i've just grown kinda used to having to do manual stuff sometimes in Linux, but for me, so far, this doesn't seem burdensome at all. However i do take your point; if i also had to do it manually every new SS, maybe i'd also be dissatisfied that it's not a "baked in" solution. I guess i have just been a bit lucky, for once.



  • @steffie: don't get me wrong...love fedora and prefer it over windows, weirdly enough is giving me less problems than windows 10, i perfectly know i should adapt to some little tweaks manually (like you switching from windows to linux) and i am fine with that...simply asking this because firefox and it's relatives done it (in fact i have waterfox as a backup wich works out of the box) so maybe vivaldi technologies can do it too someday...


  • Moderator

    @luetage That said, the versioning system of numbers-divided-by-dots is not misunderstood by the vast majority of websites as being some kind of wild-ass decimal system. I mean in what conventional base-anything system, either European (using commas) or English (using periods) is there such a real-value number as 1.12.936.11? That's right. None. Everyone understands that in IP addresses, versioning systems, calendar dates, etc. that where you have multiple groups of numbers separated by dots, the value of each grouping is considered alone - not as though it were a value following a decimal point.



  • @Ayespy said in The Netflix fix – Vivaldi Browser Snapshot 1.12.936.3:

    versioning systems

    Sadly, most people don't actually seem to understand that software versions are not decimals. 😕 It happens to be one of my pet peeves when people think that they are. xD



  • @lonm: The company I work for decided to drop that sort of version numbering scheme, and go with one in the following format:
    YYYY.<version>.0.<build>

    That way we can introduce new features whenever we want, and it eliminates that expectation that a new major version number should have some special new features.

    Granted, that doesn't solve the issue with the XXXX.10 being mathematically a lower number than XXXX.9...



  • @ayespy: I've always hated those stupid browser version warnings...

    A simple (but perhaps atypical) solution would be to do version numbers in a format like this:
    X.01.X
    X.02.X
    ...
    X.09.X
    X.10.X
    etc.

    And thus developers writing scripts that check version numbers can use simple mathematics to check if your browser meets their nonsensical requirements without version numbers above X.9 breaking their poorly-written scripts.

    Obviously it's too late to make such a change in version 1.X, however it might be worth considering for version 2 (whenever we end up getting there).



  • @Ayespy You are absolutely correct. But is it really worth it? Writing the version number in a way that even the dumbest server software can't possibly misinterpret it would be the logical way to go about it. Of course it's the fault of others but who cares? This could be easily avoided.

    And effectively the jump to the new version system has already happened. My Vivaldi snapshot is currently at version 1.93. That the blog post says 1.12 is another story.


Locked
 

Looks like your connection to Vivaldi Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.