Jump to content

Talk:Features of the Opera web browser: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Rafaelluik (talk | contribs)
Rafaelluik (talk | contribs)
→‎Opera 15: new section
Line 110: Line 110:
:Actually, it looks like it was written especially for this article (as there are no other google results). However I agree it's not fitting of an encyclopedia article, and would support the motion to remove it (again). I would point out that a double-revert without a talk section even being created is very poor behaviour, documented in [[WP:EW]] —[[User:WOFall|WOFall]] ([[User talk:WOFall|talk]]) 23:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
:Actually, it looks like it was written especially for this article (as there are no other google results). However I agree it's not fitting of an encyclopedia article, and would support the motion to remove it (again). I would point out that a double-revert without a talk section even being created is very poor behaviour, documented in [[WP:EW]] —[[User:WOFall|WOFall]] ([[User talk:WOFall|talk]]) 23:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
::I was about to write here that it looks insane and need a rework. :P There are great simple pages of programming languages with Hello World examples that could fit the Wikipedia way. --[[User:Rafaelluik|Rafaelluik]] ([[User talk:Rafaelluik|talk]]) 16:53, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
::I was about to write here that it looks insane and need a rework. :P There are great simple pages of programming languages with Hello World examples that could fit the Wikipedia way. --[[User:Rafaelluik|Rafaelluik]] ([[User talk:Rafaelluik|talk]]) 16:53, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

== Opera 15 ==

Wait, what should we do for Opera 15? Many features aren't present anymore and I've already edited the Speed Dial section to include the changes in this new version. A user edited the top of the article to say these features are only pre-15.0 so that's a problem. --[[User:Rafaelluik|Rafaelluik]] ([[User talk:Rafaelluik|talk]]) 12:24, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:24, 9 July 2013

WikiProject iconComputing: Software Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Neutrality

I think there´s an issue with the neutrality, since the article does not present any criticism and really sounds like an ad. I added the advert template, but if you disagree, feel free to discuss.Alvatov (talk) 19:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I really disagree with you on this article sounding like an ad, but I will overhaul it tomorrow and add some criticism. --Andylee Sato (talk) 00:09, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did look over the whole article deleting and reformulating a lot of very favourable parts so they sound more objective and neutral and also updated some contents.... hope this is enough to get rid of the ad-brick.--Andylee Sato (talk) 09:28, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for Organizational Structure

As a listing of features can get extensive and long, it's better to have this page seperate from the Opera (Internet suite) page. On the Talk:Opera_(internet_suite) page of that page, I proposed a more logical structure for the listing of features. But it's a lot of stuff. And needs a whole lot of cleanup.

I've started the process by shortening the entries on the main Opera page, and leaving more details on this page.Applesanity 10:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Few minor modifications to "security" section

I know my changes will show up in the page history, the reason I'm writing this is to explain them. I've modified the information in "security" slightly to show the actual number of vunlerabilities in the browsers. Before the numbers only listed the number of advisories, but if you look at the details for some advisories you'll find a lot of them contain multiple vunlerabilities. Look for either the number of CVE references, or details in the description.

I did start to do the numbers for previous versions of browsers, but my calculator rather conveniently wiped itself when I was near the end of the IE numbers, and didn't want to do them again. If someone wants to add the number of vunlerabilities for older versions, make sure you don't hit delete.

I'm only writing this paragraph for future reference (as I know the changes show up in the history), the number of advisories doesn't necessarily equal the number of actual vunlerabilities. Not a big problem, but in some cases it's best to determine the actual number of reported vunlerabilities.--195.112.40.80 17:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When I wrote that section, i chose to go with their immediate numbers - the advisories. If Secunia feels that number advisories are most important.... It seemed that counting vulnerabilities was a bit obsessive. The implied conclusion is all that really matters - that one of Opera's features is its security. Counting vulnerabilities vs. advisories is like finding new ways to skin cats - it's gonna get skinned either way.
There is a forum that actually did all the counting - operawatch. But that site is fully of fans; citing a fan site, whether they're right or wrong, is just inviting people to challenge your credibility.
For now, I still think listing advisories is good enough. Let's see how others feel.Applesanity 05:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Fixing the Tagline

A suggestion - since this page has grown considerably since the original tagline was written. I think it needs to mention "panels," and the tools that come with it, as well as Opera's security and customization features. Of course, this may be asking to much out of a couple of sentences. I'm not too good at writing these things. Applesanity 18:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree (on both counts): panels are one of the few ways that I have experienced that O has had for a while yet hasn't spread to other browsers. Arguably Moz's lot have their sidebars & IE has...something incredibly similar; Panels certainly appear to be much more flexible and have more obvious capabilities, and a more in-depth UI as a result. Go panels! :D _> MonstaPro:Talk 14:42, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Date Issue

Under Download Manager the Page says

Since: Opera 9 (2000) - BitTorrent support

This makes no sense since the version of Opera in 2000 wasn't version 9. Kc4 00:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tor [Opera]-bility & SOCKS-able

I have been making minor edits to the Tor (anonymity network) article, where it mentions that O can come preconfigured for and bundled with Tor and its (sort of) self-establishing proxy Privoxy. Since not all browsers are SOCKS compatible, which is required to use Tor, I thought that this item could be added to The List... I am very available for comments/suggestions/reasons-why-I-shouldn't've-said-this/(etc) on this item _> MonstaPro:Talk 14:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Opera Screenshot01.png

Image:Opera Screenshot01.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Zoom screenshot Opera.png

Image:Zoom screenshot Opera.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 19:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Opera Download Manager.png

Image:Opera Download Manager.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Opera fraud protection.png

Image:Opera fraud protection.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Out of date (or obsolete) information

The article doesn't mention anything newer than 9.2, and the screenshots have become visibly dated with the release of version 9.5. Among other issues, the compatibility information section leaves out mention of the Acid3 test. Shouldn't this be included? CarVac (talk) 23:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Please feel free to expand and improve this article. —Remember the dot (talk) 02:28, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MDI interface

I am currently using opera 10 alpha, and there doesn't seem to be an MDI interface (or I have forgotten how to activate it). Can anyone help me verify this? 123.176.7.148 (talk) 15:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tools->Prefs->Advanced->Browsing->Show window menu. Then, from this menu, you can "Cascade", "Tile", etc... (I like to tile two tabs vertically) You can also tear the tabs out of the window. Or from one to another. But hey this WP talk page is not a forum ! cheers --81.243.212.122 (talk) 22:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Opera Turbo

Should Opera Turbo add in it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by C933103 (talkcontribs) 08:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably, though I'm surprised there's no Unite section - that's a far more major feature than Turbo as far as I can tell. ɹəəpıɔnı 22:32, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Out of date and badly written

Since Opera has many features, I think it was sensible to create the page "Features of the Opera web browser" to avoid making the page about Opera too long.

The problem is, the information on the Features of the Opera web browser page is outdated and written like an advertisement. Yes, Opera has great features and these deserve praise, but not on Wikipedia, as the rules insist articles are written from "a neutral point of view".

The page needs updating also, as it fails to mention that Opera has a spell checker for instance. TurboForce (talk) 13:24, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Security part

If nobody requests to keep it, I will delete the part on the security chapter talking about secunia. This is because those numbers are always just a temporary screenshot of the current situation and can change dramatically when a new version of a browser comes available and therefore don't provide any objective view on the subject of security. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andylee Sato (talkcontribs) 09:30, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Widget Section

The section about Widgets under Customization looks like it was copy-pasted straight from a tutorial! I would rewrite it myself, but not being an Opera user, I don't have a clue. --92.8.182.216 (talk) 21:00, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it looks like it was written especially for this article (as there are no other google results). However I agree it's not fitting of an encyclopedia article, and would support the motion to remove it (again). I would point out that a double-revert without a talk section even being created is very poor behaviour, documented in WP:EWWOFall (talk) 23:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was about to write here that it looks insane and need a rework. :P There are great simple pages of programming languages with Hello World examples that could fit the Wikipedia way. --Rafaelluik (talk) 16:53, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Opera 15

Wait, what should we do for Opera 15? Many features aren't present anymore and I've already edited the Speed Dial section to include the changes in this new version. A user edited the top of the article to say these features are only pre-15.0 so that's a problem. --Rafaelluik (talk) 12:24, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]