Drag from address field to window (or desktop) doesn't label dragged object properly
Note: this is for 1.0.435.48 () (64-bit) which is the last Vivaldi I can run on Mac OS X 10.8.5. When I drag an address field value (via its icon) from Vivaldi to a window (or the desktop) the resulting label of the created link is not "unique" enough to identify what the link actually points to. For example, when I drag from an Amazon page the resultant link label is: www.amazon.com/ If I drag another Amazon page (address field icon) to the same window I get: www.amazon.com/ 2 as the label. In general the label always seems to be just the web site URL. Note that the links work, i.e., they go to the appropriate pages. Their labels just don't provide enough information, that is, they are not are expressive enough to tell me what they actually link to (if I come back to them later). Safari, as a counter example, labels dragged links with as much of their page's URL as it can (given label size restrictions) and tries to be "intelligent" when it has to truncate. The result is usually enough to be informative about where the link goes. Is this a bug? Whatever it is, it is making me (along with a few other issues) strongly consider moving back to Safari. I left Safari because a recent Amazon update made it refuse to play my Amazon Prime music in my OSes' Safari (while it happily accepts Vivaldi) but this and a few other issues are starting to wear on me. Regards, Gary Nunes
NSSynapse last edited by
Yes, this is a bug. It's tracked internally as VB-3716.
On a different note, I would like to strongly encourage you to update your version of OS X. Mountain Lion no longer receives security updates from Apple and for most browsers (including Safari), you can only use outdated versions that are lacking various security fixes when you are on Mountain Lion. Using a setup like that to browse the web is kinda risky.
A nice side effect of updating your operating system would be that you can run the most recent version of Vivaldi. Compared to your version, a number of bugs are fixed (although not the one mentioned above) and it also contains some cool features that your version is missing.
Thanks for your response.
My Mac is an early 2008 MacBook Pro with 6Mb RAM (the max for this system) and an SSD that replaced the original HD. Given its age I'm a bit wary of upgrading it (I fear a "domino effect" that incapacitates features and/or applications that I need or costs me several hundred dollars in upgrade fees). I can only officially upgrade to Mavericks (probably too old) or El Capitan (still too new and buggy in my opinion) because Apple policy prevents a Yosemite upgrade (my preference if I were to upgrade). One of the problems I have with Apple is an upgrade schedule that emphasizes the new and shiny rather than stabilization of the existing (perhaps that's changing … I hope so). I do have an unofficial upgrade route to Yosemite that I may try when I have a free day (not guaranteed to work, again due to Apple policy).
Or maybe I'll eventually buy a new computer which will settle the issue.
NSSynapse last edited by
I see your dilemma.
One thing you could do to is to create a clone of your current SSD on an external hard drive and then do a safe test run to see how well the newer version of OS X works on your machine. If you are not happy with the results, you can just clone back the original system from the external hard drive onto your SSD and you are back to where you started.
SuperDuper has a free mode that allows you to do this without having to purchase the application. If you take this road, just make sure that booting into the cloned system partition on your external drive actually works before you upgrade your system on the internal SSD (never had this not work, but it's always good to be extra sure with these kind of things).
I actually do my backups using SuperDuper so if/when I try the Yosemite (or El Capitan) upgrade that's essentially how I will do it. I will probably have to try something soon as even the recent BBEdit upgrade (an application I've had and used forever) requires at least 10.9. Meanwhile the two non-programming applications I use most (not counting email and browser) are Microsoft Excel 2008 (from Office 2008) and FileMaker Pro Advanced 11. If those don't work on the new OS X then there goes several hundred dollars in upgrade fees (I suppose it had to happen sooner or later but I hope that the Excel formulas and FileMaker scripts will continue to function as expected). Anyway all this will require a day of free time so when will it happen? … who knows.
Again, thanks for the response.