Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Otter advantages over Vivaldi (Read 35502 times)

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #75 –
Otter opens a new tab by double-clicking tab-bar.  Vivaldi does not have this.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #76 –
Otter has user css - in Settings / Preferences / Advanced / Content.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #77 –
Quote from: PaulHow on

Otter has user css - in Settings / Preferences / Advanced / Content.

Vivaldi has a pre-installed list of styles, like Opera had. The only problem with it is that it seems to be untweakable. Leaving no possibility to configure things is always the wrong way to go.

I was a great fan of the (user) styles list feature in Opera. The old and best set of CSS files can still be obtained here http://www.fredfred.net/download/Opera/styles/user/ Hopefully some equivalent of this gets implemented in Otter.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #78 –
Has anybody read this?
Quote
New in version 1.0.167.2 Snapshot (May 5th, 2015) (Vivaldi)
To be able to serve you, our users and friends, in the best possible way, we need to know a little about you. We need to know how many you are, what HW/OS you have and where in the world and which language you use. This helps us make the right priorities on our resources. Starting with this build, Vivaldi will connect with our servers for this purpose only once per day. We do not collect any usage data. So, on first run Vivaldi generates a unique ID for your installation.


I had great expectations for Vivaldi but since I read the above quoted text I simply stopped using Vivaldi- for me it has turned spyware.

I am new to this forum and I would like to ask (please excuse me of my question has been already answered)- can otter be run in portable mode and shall we expect a portable version which will write all its data and settings inside its own folder? Thanks in advance.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #79 –
@smaragdus
Is the quote from Vivaldi EULA?

Quote from: smaragdus on

I am new to this forum and I would like to ask (please excuse me of my question has been already answered)- can otter be run in portable mode and shall we expect a portable version which will write all its data and settings inside its own folder? Thanks in advance.

There's a corresponding switch to start Otter. In Linux it's otter-browser --portable. In Windows it should be \path\to\otter.exe --portable, I suppose.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #80 –
Quote from: timur dokhnadze on

(For example Vivaldi is the chromium based, Vivaldi is a Qt based (With possible multiple browser engines support) ). And we shoudn't start any kind of war between fans of different browsers. i think it is better to have two (or more) similar and very good browsers than don't have anything at all. So let's make software not war :-) .


1. err WHAT ?
2. their goals are not the same at all, vivaldi goes for modern kids, otter goes for what opera was
3. vivaldi uses shit resource hungry foundation, otter does not

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #82 –
Is it true that there is a single developer behind Otter project? If so this is a mammoth task.
By the way I am at bay with browsers. Before I used mainly Firefox and Opera (before the advent of abominable Australis and ChromeOpera. Since I cannot stand Australis and the removal of customization in Firefox I am still using an outdated version of Firefox. I thought of migrating to Pale Moon but I was unable to integrate it with Free Download Manager. I tested SeaMonkey but not all Firefox add-ons (the main reason I still stick to Firefox) are compatible with SeaMnkey. I also tested several Chrome clones (SRWare Iron, Slimjet, Maxthon) but I liked none of them. Then I reverted to resurrected K-Meleon but it lacks many features I need. Since I consider Vivaldi to be spyware it is no longer an option for me. I had a look at Midori but I wasn't impressed. I then tested Otter and besides the several crashes I experienced it still lacks manu features too. I suppose that one day all old (real) Opera features will be re-created but the problem is the engine- for me Presto was the best engine and it cannot be re-created. It would be great if Presto was open-sourced but unfortunately this will never happen. With few exceptions (SeaMonkey, Pale Moon, K-Meleon, Otter) all browsers have been dumbed town beyond usability. I dream of a browser that doesn't suck.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #84 –
Otter uses QTWebkit
but unlike stupid chromium clones, it is single process application
and doesn't make plugins to choke on sys resources

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #85 –
Quote from: timur dokhnadze on

2. When all sites will  use HTML 5, plugins will be useless.


do you even know what plugin is ?

browsers use either external plugins (flash, silverlight...whatever else)
or internal (html5 video which is actually H264 plugin, ogg support)

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #86 –
ah debate can go on and on
to me its all plugins, a set of code that processes its own BS
the fact that HTML5 video (onVP H264 compressed variant) is better than flash is debatable

first because most sites especially Youtube still didn't convert all "HD" videos to HTML5
mostly switching to HTML5 you'll end up on 320p or if lucky 480p video

flash is also dominant because of its scripting, tho many pages abused it and people
frown now about it

in any case if a browser can SANDBOX any plugin, then there is no problem in either way,
Java claims to have its own sandbox, but its a lie
Flash at least on Opera 11 is sandboxed, if plugin crashes, it gets error within its own frame
SIlverlight... dunno who sane uses that crap but whatever lol

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #87 –
@smaragdus, creating portable version become much easier recently:
Quote
To create a portable version, create a file named "arguments.txt" with this line:
--portable


We have more than one developer, although not all of them have enough free time to be active every week.

@exley, I have bad news, Qt is deprecating QtWebKit and after Qt 5.6 it won't get much care, they won't even ship it in binary form...
http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2015-June/022090.html
I guess that we need to again start thinking about Gecko backend (initial research was done long time ago).
BTW, AFAIK there is a way to force Blink to use single process, but I'm not sure if it is possible with QtWebEngine.

Nadszedł już czas, najwyższy czas, nienawiść zniszczyć w sobie.
The time has come, the high time, to destroy hatred in oneself.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #88 –
oh hell oh damnit
otter was my only hope :(

and while that may stay, but engines differ
at least some sites done in STRICT HTML 4 //css 2.1
they render different in Gecko and Webkit

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #89 –
@exley, we can keep QtWebKit, although there will be almost zero upstream support...
Nadszedł już czas, najwyższy czas, nienawiść zniszczyć w sobie.
The time has come, the high time, to destroy hatred in oneself.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #90 –
but main question is why, did those people drop most compatible layout engine ?

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #91 –
@exley, maintenance costs, use of Blink requires less work, even when their APIs are unstable.
Nadszedł już czas, najwyższy czas, nienawiść zniszczyć w sobie.
The time has come, the high time, to destroy hatred in oneself.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #92 –
thats weird to me...

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #93 –
Quote from: Emdek on

@exley, we can keep QtWebKit, although there will be almost zero upstream support...

What about KHTML or some alternate Webkit forks?
What are the advantages of Gecko over Blink?
Doesn't Gecko kill the CPU?
Any other sane engine choices(that compile on Linux)?
Honestly I would not mind it if you just implemented Blink.

Why do I prefer Otter over Vivaldi?
Vivaldi is not open source.
It simply feels dirty to not use an open source browser on an open source system.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #94 –
@bluedragon77, QtWebKit almost killed KHTML (or maybe managed to do that, I'm not sure if it is still available in kdelibs frameworks of KDE5 or it is still used by someone) before getting deprecated itself, so no, it is not really an option nowadays (and QtWebEngine is kind of a descendant of KHTML anyway)...
Currently Gecko is the only viable alternative, there are Qt bindings (although I'm not 100% sure if it is cross-platform in that form) ans soon Servo should be finally usable.
I would like to try the latter, but we would need someone to help with bindings.
Nadszedł już czas, najwyższy czas, nienawiść zniszczyć w sobie.
The time has come, the high time, to destroy hatred in oneself.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #95 –
Konqueror still uses KHTML and apparently it does support HTML5 and CSS3.AFAIK WebKit is a fork of KHTML.

But servo is certainly an interesting option.
Edit:I have checked just now, KHTML's HTML5 support on html5test.com is 83...so rather bad. And their Css3test score is 21%.

It is too bad that there are such few choices now when it comes to browser engines.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #96 –
@bluedragon77, Konqueror could be considered dead already in KDE4. ;-)
And history of KHTML and WebKit is quite complex, some of changes from WebKit were merged back to KHTML.
Also KHTML used to have own set of issues and quite incomplete support for both HTML5 and CSS3...
Nadszedł już czas, najwyższy czas, nienawiść zniszczyć w sobie.
The time has come, the high time, to destroy hatred in oneself.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #97 –
Too bad.

Hopefully if one day Otter browser will become big enough and have enough open source development power behind it, it will make its own or fork another layout engine.

Re: Otter advantages over Vivaldi

Reply #98 –
@bluedragon77, forking is bad, better way is to cooperate with others, as WebKit used to do in the past (Qt integration used to be part of upstream repos, but got removed for some reason).
Nadszedł już czas, najwyższy czas, nienawiść zniszczyć w sobie.
The time has come, the high time, to destroy hatred in oneself.