Opera 9.0 Preview 2 for Windows, Mac, Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris available
Tim Altman
now available.
For complete changelogs and download links see:
- Windows: http://snapshot.opera.com/windows/w90p2.html
- UNIX: http://snapshot.opera.com/unix/u90p2.html
- Mac: http://snapshot.opera.com/mac/m90p2.html
We invite users to discuss the Preview in the Forums and Newsgroups.
When reporting bugs, please refer to our updated bug reporting
guidelines: http://www.opera.com/support/bugs/.
Enjoy!
--
Tim Altman
Core QA
Opera Software
Remove NO SPAM from e-mail address to reply
Klaus Seidenfaden
wrote:
> Opera 9.0 Preview 2 for Windows, Mac, Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris is
> now available.
> [...]
> We invite users to discuss the Preview in the Forums and Newsgroups.
Looks good, from what I've read (I havent played yet), BUT: Please let
*me* decide whether or not there should always be at least one open tab!
Yes, an empty opera background/workspace is probably useless, but leave
that decision to me, thanks. This behavior is a regression to something
that was tried and, rightly, abandoned in an earlier beta or preview in
the 7 or 8 series. Back then, people protested too.
ALMIC. (At Least Make It Configurable)
Struggling to get it out of sight I found some issues with the initial tab
itself. But don't fix them, just ditch the feature! :-)
* When focus is in the address field only ESC seems to unfocus it.
Clicking the empty page does not.
* To minimize it, the address field must be unfocused. Then pressing '4'
will work - or you can "restore" the tab to make the minimize button
appear.
* Once minimized, you have to click the tab to show it again. Ctrl-tab or
right-button+wheel won't work.
--
Venlig hilsen / kind regards
Klaus Seidenfaden
Andrew Cox
> Opera 9.0 Preview 2 for Windows, Mac, Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris is
> now available.
> We invite users to discuss the Preview in the Forums and Newsgroups.
> When reporting bugs, please refer to our updated bug reporting
> guidelines: http://www.opera.com/support/bugs/.
On installing the 5-shared QT version on Mandriva Linux 2006 I get:
Could not find icon installation directory, icons not installed.
File '/usr/share/applications/textdoc2.0.desktop' contains invalid
MIME type 'vnd.oasis.opendocument.text-master' that is missing a slash
On starting Opera, X hung, and I had to kill Opera from the console.
--
Got enough guilt to start
my own religion
Daniel Bleisteiner
wrote:
The new inline find is great... haven't tested any previous v9 so maybe
this isn't new to all others. I really like it!
The new mail headers are also very comfortable and a pleasure to use.
Thanks!
But the tooltips for the tabs take far to long. You'll need to speed this
up by caching or something similar!
I haven't tested torrents yet because I use µTorrent which is quite fast
and good. Maybe you are able to compete... I'll see.
--
Daniel Bleisteiner
Thomas von Frommannshausen
<k...@seidenfaden.net.cut> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 09:28:04 +0100, Tim Altman <do....@spam.me.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Opera 9.0 Preview 2 for Windows, Mac, Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris is
>> now available.
>> [...]
>> We invite users to discuss the Preview in the Forums and Newsgroups.
>
> Looks good, from what I've read (I havent played yet), BUT: Please let
> *me* decide whether or not there should always be at least one open
> tab! Yes, an empty opera background/workspace is probably useless, but
> leave that decision to me, thanks. This behavior is a regression to
> something that was tried and, rightly, abandoned in an earlier beta or
> preview in the 7 or 8 series. Back then, people protested too.
>
> ALMIC. (At Least Make It Configurable)
>
If you are in tabs mode (X on tabs), one tab will always be open.
If you are in Full MDI mode (no X on tabs), you can still close all.
For me, this distinction makes sense.
--
Thomas von Frommannshausen
DocInspector 3 Libretto for Opera:
Javascript and DOM inspector with JavaScript console and debugging
http://www.miurasoft.de/opera/docInspector/blog/index.php
Evo2Me
<no...@nowhere.org> wrote:
>If you are in tabs mode (X on tabs), one tab will always be open.
>If you are in Full MDI mode (no X on tabs), you can still close all.
>
>For me, this distinction makes sense.
Which must be the reason it hasn't been like this before.
Like Klaus s. I'd want to be able to have the close button on the tab
and the ability to close all tabs to get a perfectly empty Opera
window (as it has been in 8.x and 9TP1).
Evo2Me
<do....@spam.me.invalid> wrote:
>Enjoy!
As I pointed out every single time when a beta, a preview or
(sometimes) a release version came out: It would be a good idea to
make available an upgrade-install such that the new features and menu
entries are available without losing one's customisation.
To get the Site Preferences entry in the <F12> menu I had to do a
completely new install - into another directory for sure, potentially
playing havoc with many system settings -, and then re-customise
everything.
Whatever people think of separate installs of betas/previews, I don't
want it. There is several reasons to install over an existing version,
not the least of which is to see how an upgrade works (and it doesn't
with Opera).
BTW, even in times when Opera was way more buggy and prone to frequent
crashes, long before the late 6-series, I installed betas over
releases for productive work.
Tim Altman
<ne...@da3x.de> wrote:
>On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 09:28:04 +0100, Tim Altman <do....@spam.me.invalid>
>wrote:
>> - Windows: http://snapshot.opera.com/windows/w90p2.html
[...]
>But the tooltips for the tabs take far to long. You'll need to speed this
>up by caching or something similar!
They probably take the same amount of time as before, you are just
less patient. ;)
Klaus Seidenfaden
> On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:26:27 +0100, Klaus Seidenfaden
> <k...@seidenfaden.net.cut> wrote:
>
>> Looks good, from what I've read (I havent played yet), BUT: Please let
>> *me* decide whether or not there should always be at least one open
>> tab! Yes, an empty opera background/workspace is probably useless, but
>> leave that decision to me, thanks. This behavior is a regression to
>> something that was tried and, rightly, abandoned in an earlier beta or
>> preview in the 7 or 8 series. Back then, people protested too.
>
> If you are in tabs mode (X on tabs), one tab will always be open.
> If you are in Full MDI mode (no X on tabs), you can still close all.
>
> For me, this distinction makes sense.
Thanks!
My apologies for my premature rant then.
Spartanicus
>There is several reasons to install over an existing version,
>not the least of which is to see how an upgrade works (and it doesn't
>with Opera).
Typically the code needed to install reliably over a previous version
isn't added and tested until the later betas or release candidates. We
are currently testing technological previews, so your "testing the
upgrade code" reasoning doesn't apply.
--
Spartanicus
Dave A
wrote:
>
> On installing the 5-shared QT version on Mandriva Linux 2006 I get:
>
> Could not find icon installation directory, icons not installed.
> File '/usr/share/applications/textdoc2.0.desktop' contains invalid
> MIME type 'vnd.oasis.opendocument.text-master' that is missing a slash
>
> On starting Opera, X hung, and I had to kill Opera from the console.
>
>
No problems (yet) here with the 5-shared QT version on Mandriva Linux 2006.
--
Dave A
Andrew Cox
>>
>>
>
> No problems (yet) here with the 5-shared QT version on Mandriva Linux 2006.
A fresh install worked on another box (albeit with the same error
messages). Coulc be because the failing box was running KDE 3.5, and the
working one 3.4.2?
--
Exit this Roman shell
Krzysztof Trybowski
> Opera 9.0 Preview 2 for Windows, Mac, Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris is
> now available.
>
> For complete changelogs and download links see:
>
> - Windows: http://snapshot.opera.com/windows/w90p2.html
It seems to me that adding search engines doesn't work. There's no error,
but the engine doesn't appear anywhere...
Daniel Bleisteiner
wrote:
>> But the tooltips for the tabs take far to long. You'll need to speed
>> this up by caching or something similar!
>
> They probably take the same amount of time as before, you are just
> less patient. ;)
You are right... further tests showed that the tooltip itself has the
delay... with the first visible I can quickly see all one after another.
--
Daniel Bleisteiner
Matthew Winn
> It seems to me that adding search engines doesn't work. There's no error,
> but the engine doesn't appear anywhere...
For me it appears in "search.ini" in the profile directory. Works
perfectly.
--
Matthew Winn
[If replying by email remove the "r" from "urk"]
Jan De Luyck
> Opera 9.0 Preview 2 for Windows, Mac, Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris is
> now available.
>
> For complete changelogs and download links see:
>
> - Windows: http://snapshot.opera.com/windows/w90p2.html
> - UNIX: http://snapshot.opera.com/unix/u90p2.html
> - Mac: http://snapshot.opera.com/mac/m90p2.html
>
> We invite users to discuss the Preview in the Forums and Newsgroups.
> When reporting bugs, please refer to our updated bug reporting
> guidelines: http://www.opera.com/support/bugs/.
Looks nice, but on initial install my gui fonts were _tiny_. I had to
manually increase it before the menus became usable.
DPI: 118, 115
Jan
--
Linux precious 2.6.15 #1 PREEMPT Mon Jan 9 16:53:11 CET 2006 i686 GNU/Linux
Must be under 48 inches in height.
Krzysztof Trybowski
> On Tue, 7 Feb 2006 14:54:24 +0100, Krzysztof Trybowski <tryb...@gazeta.pl.invalidd> wrote:
>> It seems to me that adding search engines doesn't work. There's no error,
>> but the engine doesn't appear anywhere...
>
> For me it appears in "search.ini" in the profile directory. Works
> perfectly.
OK, it works, but only when you type a shortcut. if you don't then there's
no error and no action.
Tomek
Looks like automatic adding search engines doesn't work exactly like it should - lines
in this config file are switched.
And Opera doesn't recognize new configuration.
I had to edit search.ini by myself and then everything was ok.
--
Regards, Tom
exclipy
> and the ability to close all tabs to get a perfectly empty Opera
> window (as it has been in 8.x and 9TP1).
I think it'd be most intuitive to close the window if you try to close the
last tab in it.
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Rijk van Geijtenbeek
>> Like Klaus s. I'd want to be able to have the close button on the tab
>> and the ability to close all tabs to get a perfectly empty Opera
>> window (as it has been in 8.x and 9TP1).
Apart from nostalgic concerns (which can be valid), are there any specific
use cases that have become impossible now?
> I think it'd be most intuitive to close the window if you try to close
> the last tab in it.
That's what Firefox does (and Opera on Mac) and I don't like it. It is
unexpected for me, because I'm used to the possibility of a no-page Opera,
and restarting takes too much time. My ideal would be that the second,
third etc Opera application window closes when closing the last tab, like
Exclipy describes, but in the last (only) app Window, an empty tab is
always present.
--
Get Opera 8 now! Speed, Security and Simplicity.
http://my.opera.com/Rijk/affiliate/
Rijk van Geijtenbeek
Opera Software ASA, Documentation & QA
Tweak: http://my.opera.com/Rijk/blog/
exclipy
>> the last tab in it.
>
> That's what Firefox does (and Opera on Mac) and I don't like it. It is
> unexpected for me,
I think in Tab mode (as opposed to MDI mode), this is the expected
behaviour. I know I have already tried closing the window a few times
with Ctrl-W. I don't think doing nothing is what most people expect.
Anyway, I'll probably switch back to MDI mode when I use Opera 9 properly
so it won't matter me.
> My ideal would be that the second, third etc Opera application window
> closes when closing the last tab, like Exclipy describes, but in the
> last (only) app Window, an empty tab is always present.
That's a good idea and was actually exactly what I was going to suggest.
Or maybe one of those pesky popup boxes asking if you really want to quit
Opera entirely.
exclipy
team for doing such a good job on this preview. We were told by various
staff at Opera before the release that they were working hard on it and
that we were going to be impressed with this preview. They were dead
right!
Hip hip hooray!
Christian Hesse
>> Like Klaus s. I'd want to be able to have the close button on the tab
>> and the ability to close all tabs to get a perfectly empty Opera
>> window (as it has been in 8.x and 9TP1).
>
> I think it'd be most intuitive to close the window if you try to close the
> last tab in it.
Firefox does it this way and it is one of the reasons I do not use it. If I
want to visit a web page I don't want to start a new browser instance every
time, it just has to be there.
Evo2Me
<ri...@opera-dot-com.invalid> wrote:
>Apart from nostalgic concerns (which can be valid), are there any specific
>use cases that have become impossible now?
[I was the one you cited, so I answer]
Apart from me double-clicking to get a new blank window: No.
It just looks untidy to me.
Brian L Johnson
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 00:19:29 +0100, exclipy wrote:
>
>>> Like Klaus s. I'd want to be able to have the close button on the tab
>>> and the ability to close all tabs to get a perfectly empty Opera
>>> window (as it has been in 8.x and 9TP1).
>
> Apart from nostalgic concerns (which can be valid), are there any
> specific use cases that have become impossible now?
The problem (for me) with having a 'Blank page x' tab is that it sits
there doing nothing for the entirety of my browsing session.
I suppose I could get used to using F8 for the first site of the day *just
to use that first blank tab* but as I always use F2 to enter new URLs, why
do I *have to* remember to use F8 for that first one?
<snip>
--
-blj-
Klaus Seidenfaden
<no.e...@address.invalid> wrote:
> I suppose I could get used to using F8 for the first site of the day
> *just to use that first blank tab* but as I always use F2 to enter new
> URLs, why do I *have to* remember to use F8 for that first one?
It already has focus in the address field, so you'd only need to remember
not to use anything for the first tab :-)
Brian L Johnson
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 12:36:29 -0000, Brian L Johnson
> <no.e...@address.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I suppose I could get used to using F8 for the first site of the day
>> *just to use that first blank tab* but as I always use F2 to enter new
>> URLs, why do I *have to* remember to use F8 for that first one?
>
> It already has focus in the address field, so you'd only need to
> remember not to use anything for the first tab :-)
Well, it's the first *and* subsequent 'firsts'.
That is, when I've closed all the tabs, left Opera open (does anyone
*ever* close their browser?) and gone away to do something else. I come
back, press F2, and... it's too late. :)
--
-blj-
rek...@gmail.com
Widgets. This is exactly what's needed.
I had been preparing a letter to the opera forums to beg for autonomous
web apps, for something exactly like widgets. We need a good SVG
application platform, I'm glad developers finally have one, even if its
browser based.
Its kind of silly, I really just want to program with SVG. Javascript
is rediculously convenient as well, it integrates flawlessly. But SVG
canvas software is really primitive. Most of it is simple
rasterization, nothing more. I havent checked that far, but I'm not
aware of any that integrate a javascript engine. The web browsers are
way ahead of the game. Until now though, the webapp would have to come
with all sorts of chrome. I'm still reluctant to incur the extra heft
of the web browser, and I worry about tying myself to a particular
browser, but at least I have something to start with.
Congradulations on your new platform endeavour. Best of luck! Its
truly a new horizon.
P.S.: I'm getting 502 errors for most of the widget docks. Running
Opera 8.51 on a windows platform at the moment.
P.S.S.: it might be in the docs (that i cant access) but one of my big
concerns is keyboard shortcuts, wondering if there is support.
Love,
rektide
James Howe
> I just want to thank you a couple hundred million times for writing
> Widgets. This is exactly what's needed.
>
> [...]
>
I'm curious, how are Opera's widgets better than Konfabulator (now Yahoo!
Widgets) widgets? I assume that Opera's widgets require an installation
of Opera. Do they require that Opera be running for the widgets to work?
There are many uses for desktop widgets but I'm wondering about the
utility of widgets which are associated with a particular browser.
Personally I would prefer to have something more like Firefox extensions
available instead of widgets. Of course, what I *really* want is for M2
to work correctly. :-(
--
James Howe
Rijk van Geijtenbeek
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 01:14:50 +0100, "Rijk van Geijtenbeek"
> <ri...@opera-dot-com.invalid> wrote:
[about the always-show-a-blank syndrome in tabbed browsing mode]
>> Apart from nostalgic concerns (which can be valid), are there any
>> specific use cases that have become impossible now?
>
> [I was the one you cited, so I answer]
> Apart from me double-clicking to get a new blank window: No.
> It just looks untidy to me.
OK, so we just saved you a double-click :)
And Brian an F2 press. For now, let's see if you can get used to it.
Remember, providing options always come at a cost. Often it is worth it,
if only to keep existing users happy while still angling for the great
masses that don't yet use Opera. But in this case I really doubt this... I
know some old-time users spend the first half hour to make Opea look and
work as much as possible as the Opera incarnation they happened to learn
first. It is great this is possible - but you really have to wonder if you
couldn't get used to the new ways, which are often better with regard to
ergonomics etc.
See also <http://my.opera.com/Rijk/blog/show.dml/122129> for some of my
thoughts on this, and the difference between FF and Opera.
Matthew Winn
> [about the always-show-a-blank syndrome in tabbed browsing mode]
>
> if only to keep existing users happy while still angling for the great
> masses that don't yet use Opera. But in this case I really doubt this... I
> know some old-time users spend the first half hour to make Opea look and
> work as much as possible as the Opera incarnation they happened to learn
> first. It is great this is possible - but you really have to wonder if you
> couldn't get used to the new ways, which are often better with regard to
> ergonomics etc.
I remember the discussion when this first happened with MDI mode
(where it was even worse, as the enforced window was maximised IIRC).
The main problem wasn't just getting used to a different way of
working, but that people actually used the difference between the
background of an Opera window and a blank workspace as a quick and
obvious way of seeing when they'd finished dealing with all the pages
they had open. I often use that feature. I never run with all tabs
maximised so I don't know if the difference is as important there, but
for MDI mode an enforced window would be very unpleasant indeed.
On a positive note, I noticed yesterday that when I closed Opera it
disappeared almost immediately but I thought I might be imagining it.
I've just confirmed it: no more two-minute wait while it closes down.
Yippee!
Evo2Me
<ri...@opera-dot-com.invalid> wrote:
>OK, so we just saved you a double-click :)
Ha, I found one annoyance:
Whenever I call Opera through a link in another program (say an
e-mail, or a Word document, or a Usenet post, or IM) I get the page
called - and the default blank page.
Rijk van Geijtenbeek
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 17:17:12 +0100, Rijk van Geijtenbeek wrote:
>> [about the always-show-a-blank syndrome in tabbed browsing mode]
..
> I remember the discussion when this first happened with MDI mode
> (where it was even worse, as the enforced window was maximised IIRC).
> The main problem wasn't just getting used to a different way of
> working, but that people actually used the difference between the
> background of an Opera window and a blank workspace as a quick and
> obvious way of seeing when they'd finished dealing with all the pages
> they had open. I often use that feature. I never run with all tabs
> maximised so I don't know if the difference is as important there, but
> for MDI mode an enforced window would be very unpleasant indeed.
You are of course happy that the blank page doesn't show in MDI mode :)
> On a positive note, I noticed yesterday that when I closed Opera it
> disappeared almost immediately but I thought I might be imagining it.
> I've just confirmed it: no more two-minute wait while it closes down.
> Yippee!
Indeed, there have been improvements there.
Rijk van Geijtenbeek
Yes. The blank page can get in the way, when you happen to open the first
content page a different way (like with F2, or following an external link).
Matthew Winn
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 17:36:31 +0100, Matthew Winn wrote:
> > On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 17:17:12 +0100, Rijk van Geijtenbeek wrote:
>
> >> [about the always-show-a-blank syndrome in tabbed browsing mode]
>
> > (where it was even worse, as the enforced window was maximised IIRC).
> > The main problem wasn't just getting used to a different way of
> > working, but that people actually used the difference between the
> > background of an Opera window and a blank workspace as a quick and
> > obvious way of seeing when they'd finished dealing with all the pages
> > they had open. I often use that feature. I never run with all tabs
> > maximised so I don't know if the difference is as important there, but
> > for MDI mode an enforced window would be very unpleasant indeed.
>
> You are of course happy that the blank page doesn't show in MDI mode :)
Very happy. That would be a disaster for MDI mode, and would go
against the behaviour of all other applications. (In an MDI image
editor like Paint Shop Pro, would anyone expect it to create a new
blank image automatically each time the user closed all open images?)
> > On a positive note, I noticed yesterday that when I closed Opera it
> > disappeared almost immediately but I thought I might be imagining it.
> > I've just confirmed it: no more two-minute wait while it closes down.
> > Yippee!
>
> Indeed, there have been improvements there.
Greatly appreciated. O9p1 was a good, reliable browser but I hated
having to remember to quit Opera two minutes before I planned to shut
down the PC. Not the sort of thing I want when I'm rushing to catch
a bus.
Rijk van Geijtenbeek
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 10:03:50 -0500, <rek...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I just want to thank you a couple hundred million times for writing
>> Widgets. This is exactly what's needed.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>
> I'm curious, how are Opera's widgets better than Konfabulator (now
> Yahoo! Widgets) widgets?
For the user or for the widget developer?
> I assume that Opera's widgets require an installation of Opera. Do they
> require that Opera be running for the widgets to work?
Yes. Currently that means an open Opera application window, but that might
change.
> There are many uses for desktop widgets but I'm wondering about the
> utility of widgets which are associated with a particular browser.
> Personally I would prefer to have something more like Firefox extensions
> available instead of widgets.
That would still be tied to a specific browser then, right?
> Of course, what I *really* want is for M2 to work correctly. :-(
--
James Howe
<ri...@opera-dot-com.invalid> wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 16:18:02 +0100, James Howe wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm curious, how are Opera's widgets better than Konfabulator (now
>> Yahoo! Widgets) widgets?
>
> For the user or for the widget developer?
>
Either. I haven't looked at how to develop a widget for Opera. I have
developed Konfabulator widgets and I know they are pretty easy to work
with.
>
>> There are many uses for desktop widgets but I'm wondering about the
>> utility of widgets which are associated with a particular browser.
>> Personally I would prefer to have something more like Firefox
>> extensions available instead of widgets.
>
> That would still be tied to a specific browser then, right?
>
The reason I mentioned extensions is that I can see making use of things
which enhance the features of my browser. I don't see widgets as doing
that, but perhaps I'm just not thinking about them correctly. However,
the current examples provided by Opera don't seem to offer any great new
functionality. The sample widgets all seem to be very similar to
Konfabulator widgets and Konfabulator doesn't require a browser to be
running.
I'm not doubting the utility of having desktop widgets, I have a few that
I use that I find to be quite handy. However, I don't think of any of
them as enhancing a browser. Sure, clicking on parts of widgets often
times opens a new browser window, but that functionality works just fine
without the browser itself providing that functionality. I can click on
an RSS widget and Opera will open the page. I just don't see what new
capability Opera is bringing to the table with this new feature.
Now, if Opera were partnering with Konfabulator (i.e. Yahoo!) to make use
of their widgets without having to explicitly install Konfabulator, that
might be useful since people could access a large number of widgets
without installing another piece of software.
I'm not opposed to Opera offering new features, but I really wish they
would fix their current stuff before offering new features of seemingly
dubious merit.
--
James Howe
Contact: http://public.xdi.org/=James.Howe
Evo2Me
<ri...@opera-dot-com.invalid> wrote:
>Yes. The blank page can get in the way, when you happen to open the first
>content page a different way (like with F2, or following an external link).
BTW, to me Tabs with close buttons on them (which I always found a
good addition) still is MDI paradigm, hence I don't quite understand
why it is treated other than the "traditional" MDI mode with closing
buttons just underneath the closing button for the program.
exclipy
> great new functionality.
I think the main reason that Opera put a widget engine in their browser
was simply because they could do so easily. It wasn't a big leap to make
an web page rendering engine to display pages so they look like widgets.
I do hope that by the final, they'll have a standalone widget program so
it can provide some competition to Yahoo Widgets.
Tim Altman
<ri...@opera-dot-com.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 10:39:25 +0100, Evo2Me wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 17:17:12 +0100, "Rijk van Geijtenbeek"
>> <ri...@opera-dot-com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> OK, so we just saved you a double-click :)
>>
>> Ha, I found one annoyance:
>>
>> Whenever I call Opera through a link in another program (say an
>> e-mail, or a Word document, or a Usenet post, or IM) I get the page
>> called - and the default blank page.
>
>Yes. The blank page can get in the way, when you happen to open the first
>content page a different way (like with F2, or following an external link).
And in those cases, the blank page should be used instead of a new
page. I'd say thing is just a bug that needs to be reported.
--
Tim Altman
Core QA
Opera Software
Remove NO SPAM from e-mail address to reply
Tim Altman
<no.e...@address.invalid> wrote:
So, the problem would automatically go away if F2 used focused blank
pages?
Brian L Johnson
>> That is, when I've closed all the tabs, left Opera open (does anyone
>> *ever* close their browser?) and gone away to do something else. I come
>> back, press F2, and... it's too late. :)
>
> So, the problem would automatically go away if F2 used focused blank
> pages?
Yes, that would work. :)
--
-blj-
Rijk van Geijtenbeek
> On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 11:35:42 -0500, Rijk van Geijtenbeek wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 16:18:02 +0100, James Howe wrote:
>>> I'm curious, how are Opera's widgets better than Konfabulator (now
>>> Yahoo! Widgets) widgets?
>>
>> For the user or for the widget developer?
> Either. I haven't looked at how to develop a widget for Opera. I have
> developed Konfabulator widgets and I know they are pretty easy to work
> with.
Opera's widgets use exactly the same techonology as can be used in the
browser, together with a few enhancements (to store data). Konfabulator
uses its own dialects, AFAIK. So developing widgets for Opera should be
alittle bit easier for seasoned web developers.
>>> There are many uses for desktop widgets but I'm wondering about the
>>> utility of widgets which are associated with a particular browser.
>>> Personally I would prefer to have something more like Firefox
>>> extensions available instead of widgets.
>>
>> That would still be tied to a specific browser then, right?
>
> The reason I mentioned extensions is that I can see making use of things
> which enhance the features of my browser. I don't see widgets as doing
> that, but perhaps I'm just not thinking about them correctly. However,
> the current examples provided by Opera don't seem to offer any great new
> functionality. The sample widgets all seem to be very similar to
> Konfabulator widgets and Konfabulator doesn't require a browser to be
> running.
>
> I'm not doubting the utility of having desktop widgets, I have a few
> that I use that I find to be quite handy. However, I don't think of any
> of them as enhancing a browser.
Think of it this way: with Opera, you get a widget engine for free. You
don't have to download a 10MB konfabulator that comes with yet another
rendering engine. In theory it should also be easier on resources etc, but
the example widgets are apparently trying hard to run slowly on make older
systems, by using lots of fancy transparency effects and slideouts etc.
> Sure, clicking on parts of widgets often times opens a new browser
> window, but that functionality works just fine without the browser
> itself providing that functionality. I can click on an RSS widget and
> Opera will open the page. I just don't see what new capability Opera is
> bringing to the table with this new feature.
>
> Now, if Opera were partnering with Konfabulator (i.e. Yahoo!) to make
> use of their widgets without having to explicitly install Konfabulator,
> that might be useful since people could access a large number of widgets
> without installing another piece of software.
I've been told that there are major differences between the javascript etc
used by Konfabulator and the standards, so simply supporting such widgets
out of the box was not feasable.
> I'm not opposed to Opera offering new features, but I really wish they
> would fix their current stuff before offering new features of seemingly
> dubious merit.
Ah well, not *all* developers are working on widgets. In fact, I don't
think any core developers are spending much time on this.
Rijk van Geijtenbeek
>> However, the current examples provided by Opera don't seem to offer any
>> great new functionality.
>
> I think the main reason that Opera put a widget engine in their browser
> was simply because they could do so easily. It wasn't a big leap to
> make an web page rendering engine to display pages so they look like
> widgets.
Not after supporting transparency. That was the big deal.
> I do hope that by the final, they'll have a standalone widget program so
> it can provide some competition to Yahoo Widgets.
In what way standalone?
exclipy
>> pages so they look like widgets.
>
> Not after supporting transparency. That was the big deal.
I'm envisioning that they're going to have some problems with getting the
transparency to work in Linux though... At the moment, any transparency
in Linux is fake - ie. take a screenshot of what's below and paint that in
the window. It'd look a little better if they were kept below all windows.
>> I do hope that by the final, they'll have a standalone widget program
>> so it can provide some competition to Yahoo Widgets.
>
> In what way standalone?
Well just the rendering engine and the widget interface. In say a < 1MB
package so people don't have the download the entire browser, mail client,
chat client, download manager, RSS reader and kitchen sink just to get
pretty widgets on their desktop.
Oh hang on... I just checked. Yahoo Widgets is 11MB!!!
OK, I'll take that back. Umm... so people don't have to always have Opera
open and taking up task bar space to have the widgets on their desktop.
Maybe it already works well in Windows, but perhaps the Linux crew need to
give Opera system tray support in the Linux version so I can viably keep
Opera always open just for the widgets.
But the thing is, I view desktop widgets and web browsers as completely
different things. I want to be able to close one without closing the
other.
Evo2Me
<do....@spam.me.invalid> wrote:
>And in those cases, the blank page should be used instead of a new
>page. I'd say thing is just a bug that needs to be reported.
I concur.
Lauri Raittila
> > I think it'd be most intuitive to close the window if you try to close
> > the last tab in it.
>
> That's what Firefox does (and Opera on Mac) and I don't like it. It is
> unexpected for me, because I'm used to the possibility of a no-page Opera,
> and restarting takes too much time.
> My ideal would be that the second,
> third etc Opera application window closes when closing the last tab, like
> Exclipy describes, but in the last (only) app Window, an empty tab is
> always present.
And I do have one opera that is customized to fit 1024*768 and other to
fit 1450*x screen. Closing window would require lots of work, as new
window would certainly be wrongly customized. (fortunately I have not
closed last tab yet. (using Mac.))
I don't need empty tab either, as I often use windows panel.
--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
Tim Altman
Please feel free to be the reporter. :)
Gunnar
<k...@seidenfaden.net.cut> wrote:
> * Once minimized, you have to click the tab to show it again. Ctrl-tab
> or right-button+wheel won't work.
This is normal behaviour in MDI applications. It's not a bug it's a
feature.
--
Gunnar
ankitgu...@gmail.com
to do the same.
--
Ankit
Gunnar
> Is there anyway to minimize opera to task bar
Ctrl+H
> and change close button to do the same.
No.
--
Gunnar