Hi all - I'm just curious how many people use (or have used) the Vivaldi web browser? I heard about it recently and decided to install it. I've been using it every so often, along with the browser I've been used to using (Pale Moon). I like that Vivaldi is fast like Google Chrome (I believe it uses the same web engine as Chrome), and Vivaldi has a separate search input like older browsers did. Vivaldi also has a lot of configuration & customization options, which is interesting.
Nightfox wrote to All <=-
Hi all - I'm just curious how many people use (or have used) the
Vivaldi web browser? I heard about it recently and decided to install
it. I've been using it every so often, along with the browser I've
Hi all - I'm just curious how many people use (or have used) the
Vivaldi web browser? I heard about it recently and decided to install
i used it a long time ago, i just installed it and it has some visual changes. i use opera, chrome and firefox(for addons).
Hi all - I'm just curious how many people use (or have used) the
Vivaldi web browser? I heard about it recently and decided to
It's compatible with most chrome extensions, but not all. They are building the infrastructure to allow syncing browser settings, bookmarks, etc, as you can already do in Chrome. Outside of that, it's built on the Chrome engine, so it feels like a Chrome-Opera hybrid. How are they on privacy?
I'd use Firefox, but their Hangouts extension sucks. If Google would build a native Hangouts messenger app for Linux, Mac and Windows, I'd be ecstatic.
i used it a long time ago, i just installed it and it has some visual changes. i use opera, chrome and firefox(for addons).
How long was a long time ago? I thought I read that Vivaldi was introduced in 2016, which was just a couple years ago.
Also, Vivaldi is compatible with Chrome plugins/addons, so you aren't totally left without those if the ones you use are available in a Chrome version.
chrome plugins normally suck ass. firefox has the best plugins.
Nightfox wrote to Chai <=-
I'm not sure why they wouldn't make a native messenger app. Having to
use a browser for a messenger app seems a bit weird..
Re: Vivaldi web browser
By: MRO to Nightfox on Tue Jul 03 2018 10:08 pm
chrome plugins normally suck ass. firefox has the best plugins.
The plugins I've used have generally been available for both browsers and have seemed to work well in both browsers.
Dreamer wrote to Nightfox <=-
@VIA: VERT
@TZ: c1e0
Nightfox wrote to Chai <=-
I'm not sure why they wouldn't make a native messenger app. Having to
use a browser for a messenger app seems a bit weird..
It seems to be the modern thing to do. I'm noticing a lot of apps move
to the web, presumably to make development easier and to reach a
maximum of users. For instance, I can deploy one app and reach users on Linux, Mac, Windows, desktop, and mobile.
One solution would be to develop a desktop wrapper that loads the web interface. github.com/aluxian has "Messenger for Desktop", for
instance. It loads Facebook's Messenger for me, and it can be iconified
to the systray.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.51
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
I'm not sure why they wouldn't make a native messenger app. Having
to use a browser for a messenger app seems a bit weird..
It seems to be the modern thing to do. I'm noticing a lot of apps move to the web, presumably to make development easier and to reach a maximum of users. For instance, I can deploy one app and reach users on Linux, Mac, Windows, desktop, and mobile.
I'm not sure why they wouldn't make a native messenger app. Having
to use a browser for a messenger app seems a bit weird..
They have complete control of the lifecycle of the application. They
don't have to worry about the user upgrading their software. Every time you visit the site to use the app, you are using the latest available version.
On 07-05-18 08:53, Nightfox wrote to Dreamer <=-
That's true.. though still feels a bit weird. And I remember when Apple's iPod Touch first came out, and many apps for it were web-based
in the beginning. But developers quickly moved toward making things as actual apps rather than something running within a web browser.
Nightfox wrote to Jazzy_J <=-
@VIA: VERT/DIGDIST
@TZ: c1e0
Re: Re: Vivaldi web browser
By: Jazzy_J to Dreamer on Wed Jul 04 2018 09:13 am
I'm not sure why they wouldn't make a native messenger app. Having
to use a browser for a messenger app seems a bit weird..
They have complete control of the lifecycle of the application. They
don't have to worry about the user upgrading their software. Every time you visit the site to use the app, you are using the latest available version.
But then the developers have to worry about their web app running
properly in the various browsers that users might use. They're
swapping one set of problems with another..
Also, as a developer, I've tended to find desktop/mobile app
development more intuitive than developing a web-based app. With web-based apps, it seems like you have to jump through hoops and/or add more layers to do some things that you can do more directly in a native app.
Nightfox
---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
Nightfox wrote to Dreamer <=-
That's true.. though still feels a bit weird. And I remember when Apple's iPod Touch first came out, and many apps for it were web-based
in the beginning. But developers quickly moved toward making things as actual apps rather than something running within a web browser.
Funny you should mention that; while I haven't tried developing anything yet, I have watched a few videos in the past on making Windows Store apps, and I seem to recall many of them utilizing HTML5 and Javascript for the desktop UI.
It took me some time to get used to the concept, but eventually I realized that this is actually not a bad idea for quite a few apps out there.
Unless your app is very complicated, and especially if it's quite focused on a particular concept, you don't really need to use Windows Forms. Plus, using HTML5 makes porting a lot easier.
Nightfox wrote to Dreamer <=-
Re: Re: Vivaldi web browser
By: Dreamer to Nightfox on Wed Jul 18 2018 11:11 am
Funny you should mention that; while I haven't tried developing anything yet, I have watched a few videos in the past on making Windows Store apps, and I seem to recall many of them utilizing HTML5 and Javascript for the desktop UI.
It took me some time to get used to the concept, but eventually I realized that this is actually not a bad idea for quite a few apps out there.
Yeah, I've heard of desktop apps being developed with HTML and
JavaScript. It seems a little weird to me though, because normally I think you'd have to jump through hoops to do things in a web-based app that you could do more easily or directly with native code. For
instance, I think JavaScript in a web page normally can't read/write
files on the user's hard drive for security reasons. Or if you want to access devices on the PC such as a webcam (for face recognition login
to something, for instance), I thought things like that might be harder
to do with HTML/JavaScript than in a desktop app written with C#, C++,
or something.
Unless your app is very complicated, and especially if it's quite focused on a particular concept, you don't really need to use Windows Forms. Plus, using HTML5 makes porting a lot easier.
Windows Forms is just one toolkit for making a GUI. You could make an argument that you don't "need" Windows Forms when there are others to choose from. And some would argue that Windows Forms is outdated now
and would prefer Microsoft's WPF, since WPF is newer. And those are
just the Microsoft tools, for .NET.. There are many other tools for making a GUI for many programming languages.
Yeah, I've heard of desktop apps being developed with HTML and
JavaScript. It seems a little weird to me though, because normally
There's a Windows API that you would code for. The HTML/Javascript/CSS would be rendered via a DLL rather than Edge or other browser engine. So, you would be able to do things that you couldn't on a client browser.
You could compare this to Synchronet's Javascript API.
It took me some time to get used to the concept, but eventually I realized that this is actually not a bad idea for quite a few apps out there.
Yeah, I've heard of desktop apps being developed with HTML and JavaScript. It seems a little weird to me though, because normally I think you'd have to jump through hoops to do things in a web-based app that you could do more easily or directly with native code. For instance, I think JavaScript in a web page normally can't read/write files on the user's hard drive for security reasons. Or if you want to access devices on the PC such as a webcam (for face recognition login to something, for instance), I thought things like that might be harder to do with HTML/JavaScript than in a desktop app written with C#, C++, or something.
Hi all - I'm just curious how many people use (or have used) the Vivaldi web browser? I heard about it recently and decided to install it. I've been us it every so often, along with the browser I've been used to using (Pale MoonI've personally been using and recommending it for years. It's my honest to god daily driver for every machine I run daily (outside of my BBS server, it's a old iMac that has a stroke when I ask it to run firefox on Linux Mint 18.
I've personally been using and recommending it for years. It's my honest to god daily driver for every machine I run daily (outside of my BBS server, it's a old iMac that has a stroke when I ask it to run firefox on Linux Mint 18.
The AHK Gang! Live on Riot.im. When we feel like it.
But they just pushed the Android beta of Vivaldi out...it's good, but it really needs an ad blocker. I'm hooked on Brave for this reason, and Firefox Android actually allows extensions.
I have Vivaldi as well, and just discovered yesterday that it is really a Chrome clone. I tried using it to access a site for work that won't work with Chrome, and was told the exact same thing I got in Chrome, in fact the site even said I was in a Chrome browser. I finally ended up having to go with an older version of Opera to be able to access the service.
I keep meaning to check and see if they have developed a linux version.
| Sysop: | Coz |
|---|---|
| Location: | Anoka, MN |
| Users: | 2 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 139:18:28 |
| Calls: | 166 |
| Files: | 5,389 |
| Messages: | 223,229 |