Author Topic: Opera to move to webkit/chromium rendering engines (Read 42,813 times)

Josh · « **on:** February 13, 2013, 08:34 PM »

Quote

The Opera web browser has always been something of an also-ran in terms of its popularity on Windows PCs. Net Applications shows the current version of the desktop browser, Opera 12, has just a 1.47 percent market share, well behind Internet Explorer, Chrome, Firefox and Safari. However, Opera has gained more users as a browser for mobile phones and smartphones.

Today, Opera Software announced both a major milestone as well as a huge change for the rendering engine that the browser uses. First, the company revealed that the various versions of the Opera web browser have now collected a total of 300 million users. Jars Boilesen, the CEO of Opera Software, added, "On the final stretch up to 300 million users, we have experienced the fastest acceleration in user growth we have ever seen."

Opera Software also announced that future versions of the browser will make the transition to the WebKit and Chromium engine, which is used for Google's Chrome browser and Apple's Safari program. Opera Software had previously been using its own Presto rendering engine for its browser.

Neowin.net Source

Opera press release

Does this mean opera will actually work now?!? No more broken pages?

wraith808 · « **Reply #1 on:** February 13, 2013, 08:35 PM »

More discussion going on here.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 13, 2013, 08:46 PM »

Quote

Does this mean opera will actually work now?!? No more broken pages?

Honestly dunno wtf pages you visit, but the only pages I see break are those from web devs who don't f&$king check their code on different browsers.

Quote

Opera Software also announced that future versions of the browser will make the transition to the WebKit and Chromium engine, which is used for Google's Chrome browser and Apple's Safari program. Opera Software had previously been using its own Presto rendering engine for its browser.

The reason I use Opera, is because Chrome just constantly dies, and if it smells any flash plugins on a page, it runs away and breaks. I have never really had problems with Safari, but there-again, I have barely ever used it, and unlikely to because of my immense hatred for Apple (As a business).

As many of you know, I have always been nothing but positive about Opera, and would generally mock others (for fun) that don't use it...but now...I just don't know...Maybe it is time to finally knuckle under and work on my own rendering engine...not a simple task...but, there again...I know what I want, I know what I like, I know what I use, and I know I won't release it to the general public.

dantheman · « **Reply #3 on:** February 14, 2013, 12:52 PM »

If it's anything like Maxthon, it's going to take Opera another three years before they get everything into place (extensions, skins, sync etc.). I don't like Chrome. It's just not as customizable as Firefox (and what was left to hope for in Opera).

All eyes now on Firefox as the only real alternative.

Renegade · « **Reply #4 on:** February 14, 2013, 12:59 PM »

Quote from: dantheman on February 14, 2013, 12:52 PM

All eyes now on Firefox as the only real alternative.

I think you may well be right there.

Chrome is a *&^(*& when it comes to trying to scroll on long pages, and especially if you zoom in a bit. It's just *&%^% horrible. That's the engine there. Opera is much kinder. I've not been using Firefox as a main browser for a while, but I have a feeling that I'll be returning to it shortly.

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #5 on:** February 14, 2013, 05:44 PM »

Quote from: Stephen66515 on February 13, 2013, 08:46 PM

As many of you know, I have always been nothing but positive about Opera, and would generally mock others (for fun) that don't use it...but now...I just don't know...Maybe it is time to finally knuckle under and work on my own rendering engine...not a simple task...but, there again...I know what I want, I know what I like, I know what I use, and I know I won't release it to the general public.

Is writing a rendering engine even possible for one man? I thought it was up there with the hardest code alive.

Does it make sense to just borrow the FF Gecko codebase for the basics and doing your own "Stephen-Moon" spinoff to just tweak the things you want?

40hz · « **Reply #6 on:** February 14, 2013, 07:58 PM »

Quote from: TaoPhoenix on February 14, 2013, 05:44 PM

Does it make sense to just borrow the FF Gecko codebase for the basics

Makes sense as long as you plan on releasing your own engine under the terms allowed by the MPL/GPL/LGPL the various Gecko components are licensed under - which is to say under some form of F/OSS license.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 14, 2013, 08:16 PM »

Quote from: TaoPhoenix on February 14, 2013, 05:44 PM

Quote from: Stephen66515 on February 13, 2013, 08:46 PM
As many of you know, I have always been nothing but positive about Opera, and would generally mock others (for fun) that don't use it...but now...I just don't know...Maybe it is time to finally knuckle under and work on my own rendering engine...not a simple task...but, there again...I know what I want, I know what I like, I know what I use, and I know I won't release it to the general public.

Is writing a rendering engine even possible for one man? I thought it was up there with the hardest code alive.

Does it make sense to just borrow the FF Gecko codebase for the basics and doing your own "Stephen-Moon" spinoff to just tweak the things you want?

Heh, I said that in the heat of the moment without really looking into it...turns out...not writing my own rendering engine...rather difficult it seems...not impossible, just, would be bloody stupid to try. - I think I will probably just build something in C# using Gecko or something else already built (Engine wise) and ONLY add features I want.

It won't ever be released so, licensing is no real issue for me

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #8 on:** February 14, 2013, 08:57 PM »

Quote from: Stephen66515 on February 14, 2013, 08:16 PM

Heh, I said that in the heat of the moment without really looking into it...turns out...not writing my own rendering engine...rather difficult it seems...not impossible, just, would be bloody stupid to try. - I think I will probably just build something in C# using Gecko or something else already built (Engine wise) and ONLY add features I want.

It won't ever be released so, licensing is no real issue for me

Make it a DC special! Then we can bug you for features!

Though from the tech side I'm interested why merely a plugin won't do what you need, and that it needs to be a full app. And what kinds of things do you need it to do that the vanilla browser even with the plugin-verse doesn't already cover?

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 14, 2013, 10:45 PM »

Because, if I make it myself, if I want a feature, I can just make it, and I can make it do exactly what I want, rather than risking getting things I don't need.

Josh · « **Reply #10 on:** February 14, 2013, 10:47 PM »

Quote from: Stephen66515 on February 14, 2013, 10:45 PM

Because, if I make it myself, if I want a feature, I can just make it, and I can make it do exactly what I want, rather than risking getting things I don't need.

But that still begs the question...What exactly would you need now that most modern browsers cannot provide that only Opera does?

Is it the ever-useful Unite feature?

Lashiec · « **Reply #11 on:** February 14, 2013, 11:07 PM »

Unite was killed months ago. An interesting idea for sure, but there really wasn't a market for it.

Quote from: Josh on February 13, 2013, 08:34 PM

Does this mean opera will actually work now?!? No more broken pages?

What? Still having those problems?

fenixproductions · « **Reply #12 on:** February 19, 2013, 12:28 PM »

Hm…
http://www.digi.no/911787/opera-sendte-90-paa-doren

Renegade · « **Reply #13 on:** February 19, 2013, 12:40 PM »

Quote from: Josh on February 14, 2013, 10:47 PM

What exactly would you need now that most modern browsers cannot provide that only Opera does?

Ah! I know of 1 thing that only Opera does... Copying a web page only copies text in Opera, and not rich text. It is useful sometimes. e.g. The following shows text from the DC site copied into MS Word:

[attachthumb=#]

fenixproductions · « **Reply #14 on:** February 19, 2013, 12:45 PM »

@Renegade
Rich copy is Opera's 10 year old wish:
http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=1257

Maybe it's even older

dr_andus · « **Reply #15 on:** February 19, 2013, 04:00 PM »

Quote from: Renegade on February 19, 2013, 12:40 PM

Ah! I know of 1 thing that only Opera does... Copying a web page only copies text in Opera, and not rich text. It is useful sometimes.

Check out PureText (free) for that.

wraith808 · « **Reply #16 on:** February 19, 2013, 04:15 PM »

PureText doesn't do exactly that. Opera strips out the tags. Puretext is pasting the literal text of the page, i.e. in the case of HTML, it is the HTML source.

kalos · « **Reply #17 on:** February 19, 2013, 04:18 PM »

it was about time

f0dder · « **Reply #18 on:** February 19, 2013, 08:02 PM »

Quote from: fenixproductions on February 19, 2013, 12:28 PM

Hm…
http://www.digi.no/911787/opera-sendte-90-paa-doren

So, Opera fires 90 people, basically most of the Core engineers. Even if switching to webkit, that seems... somewhat short-sighted.

Edvard · « **Reply #19 on:** February 20, 2013, 01:19 AM »

What the hell, is Webkit just that effbombing awesome that it really would be cheaper to re-tool around it than continue with Core when Core has had this many years to mature? Really? I mean, I use Chromium as my default browser now, because for the most part is just works and stays out of my way, but the rendering isn't THAT awesome, or am I missing something?

wraith808 · « **Reply #20 on:** February 20, 2013, 01:41 AM »

Compatibility. Market-share. Profit. Those are most likely the three things that drove this, rather than the superiority of the technology.

Renegade · « **Reply #21 on:** February 20, 2013, 02:05 AM »

Quote from: wraith808 on February 20, 2013, 01:41 AM

Compatibility. Market-share. Profit. Those are most likely the three things that drove this, rather than the superiority of the technology.

+1

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #22 on:** February 20, 2013, 03:36 AM »

Sorry, I'm growing weary of a "+1" which is a Google invention applied to everything.

Did they make it THAT easy?

Renegade · « **Reply #23 on:** February 20, 2013, 04:49 AM »

Quote from: TaoPhoenix on February 20, 2013, 03:36 AM

Sorry, I'm growing weary of a "+1" which is a Google invention applied to everything.

Did they make it THAT easy?

It's a lot older than that. Google simply used it. It has been popular in the developer community for forever +1 day.

allen · « **Reply #24 on:** February 20, 2013, 05:11 AM »

Quote from: Renegade on February 20, 2013, 04:49 AM

Quote from: TaoPhoenix on February 20, 2013, 03:36 AM
Sorry, I'm growing weary of a "+1" which is a Google invention applied to everything.

Did they make it THAT easy?

It's a lot older than that. Google simply used it. It has been popular in the developer community for forever +1 day.

I grow weary of it being "a Google thing". Feels like putting a patent on water.