What do u think of pic related?
>testing it rightnow
>>53225034
It's shit.
>>53225034
Better than Opera.
>>53225034
For me it always had terrible user experience. Like the fact that months after release it still does not close tabs in the right order, or how generally slow and choppy it is. It's really a shame because I liked the ideas behind it.
>>53225034
>Willingly using a proprietary software
Tried it but the UI is atrocious.
Not light enough for my machine.
>1gb ram
>old core duo
>no gpu
it's laggier than firefox on my end
It uses no memory
>>53225529
this
>>53225506
There's been a free software release of Vivaldi. I'm not sure that all versions of Vivaldi are free.
>>53225034
>We use JavaScript and React to create the user interface with the help of Node.js and a long list of NPM modules.
>Vivaldi is the web built with the web.
So it's the Atom of web browsers? No wonder no one uses it.
3 of the main guys at opera came out saying they are working on a new browser.
http://www.digi.no/bedriftsteknologi/2016/02/25/opera-lager-ny-nettleser-til-desktop
key features : preformance,optimized for larger screens and tab management.
Could be interesting
>>53225034
I like it.
Only one issue though.
WHY THE FUCK DOESNT IT TELL ME WHEN A DOWNLOAD WILL BE COMPLETED OR MY DOWNLOAD SPEED???
>>53225034
It's another useless browser when compared to Chrome/Chromium/Canary, also I wouldn't ever trust someone like in pic related with my privacy.
>>53227289
And you trust google?
>>53225529
Try midori
>>53227316
Not really, but there are no better alternatives so I have no other choice.
Tried it for one day, it's just full of useless annoying shit.
>>53227316
I use Iron.
>>53225034
i think you should stop trying to shill your shitty product
>>53227336
Bait
>>53225034
Shit
>>53227107
Firefox with XUL uses Javascript as the UI programming language.
>>53225034
I was excited when it first came out, then found out about the Node.JS bullshit and the few times I tried it out the GUI had massive problems that turned me off the project. I'll stick with Opera 12.16
>>53225034
The tab grouping thing gets close but it still isn't right. Why if firefox the only browser that does tabs correctly, with Tree Style Tab?
>>53227841
Firefox does not do tabs correctly. It's a user created addon that does tabs correctly which also brings us to the core issue. All browsers are sealed monoliths that prevent users from modifying them easily. To make the situation better, firefox will soon join that pack, so fuck you. Ironically that one browser that is Vivaldi, being made in nodejs and shit is the glimmer of hope. It may be possible to modify it due to the technologies used.
>>53228341
Everything's open source. That's the ultimate of modifying them easily.
>>53228385
Then why is there no tree style tabs for chrome? Well, maybe because writing an extension using simple api is easier then modifying the interface of an extremely complicated peace of software, compiling it, shipping it to users and then keeping it updated with all the changes happening in base code?
>>53228445
It's not hard to modify Chrome to integrate new functions. There is no need to get into the C++ source code to get this done, you can do this by modifying the UI code that's implemented as UI manifests.
>>53225034
looks like a shitty youtube themed browser
>>53228498
Then I'm sure that tree tab is coming to chromium soon.
>Didn't function correctly with App Chan X (would not mark my posts, replies to my posts, or notify me of replies in the tab)
>Doesn't open up AJAX links in a new tab (needed for a userscript for another site)
>Doesn't allow for middle-click to close tab
>Doesn't all for pan scrolling on middle-click in Linux
>Doesn't allow for custom mouse gestures
>Doesn't allow you to change font style, or control webpage and UX fonts separately
>Have 8gb of RAM, it uses 1gb with 3 tabs
I really wanted to like it but it's just not usable in this state.
>>53229919
Yup, that's Vivaldi for you. It has so many small issues that you never feel at home with it. Unfortunately devs focused more on features then those papercuts as of late. It just hurts to use it.
>>53225034
Laggy, slow interface. Too many bugs. I don't see any reason to use it over Chromium.
>>53227102
No there hasn't. The "source code" Vivaldi offer is literally just the Chromium source code. Vivaldi itself is basically a giant extension for Chromium.
>>53227151
>http://www.digi.no/bedriftsteknologi/2016/02/25/opera-lager-ny-nettleser-til-desktop
i'm so happy
>>53230613
tldr translation?
No tree style tabs = no use shitty browser
Reminder all Vivaldi posts are, and always have been, paid advertisements
>>53225034
It's pretty shitty, but at the same time it's very lightweight
I'm using it on my piece of shit netbook (asus x205ta, big mistake buying it) and it's the only browser that doesn't crash. Chromium/Chrome work, but I can't have more than 2-3 tabs open.
The only problem with Vivaldi is that it's a major step-back in terms of features/how it look and what it actually can do is ok at best, so anyone on a decent machine should just skip using it.
Microsoft Edge is a more pleasant experience than Vivaldi is. How did they fuck up a browser that badly? Why are there so many useless features? I know they were going for more = better, but you have to be very selective when doing that because the program very quickly becomes a huge mess.
Brave Browser is the only one I'm looking forward to now. Had high hopes for Vivaldi but man what a fucking hog.
