[1085] The coming of Ragnarök

Finally, we get the HTML5 parser (aka Ragnarök) in a mainline build. Now a lot more of that bad code out there should actually work in Opera (as long as browser sniffing isn't involved).

Not only that, we have more CSS3 goodness, more bugfixes, more Core improvemnts ... what's not to love

Okay, maybe this, if you use FreeBSD:

Known issues
No 64-bit FreeBSD packages this time (they will return in a future snapshot)
Known issues from the last snapshot

http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2011/10/07/ragnarok-css3-radial-gradients

Since Ragnarök has been implemented, there will be a huge memory usage improvement. Because if you look at some of the comments on http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2011/07/21/updated-ragnarok-html5-parser-labs-build , then you will see that some users are reporting a very low memory usage.

EDIT: Looks like I am wrong. Only the Labs build was better at memory usage. Build 1085 is like build 1076 in memory usage.

Originally posted by Swapnil99pro:

Since Ragnarök has been implemented, there will be a huge memory usage improvement. Because if you look at some of the comments on http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2011/07/21/updated-ragnarok-html5-parser-labs-build , then you will see that some users are reporting a very low memory usage.

Hm. I have 609 MB right now (Debian 32-bit) with 8 tabs open. In previous versions i had 300-400 (which is still high).

Originally posted by Swapnil99pro:

EDIT: Looks like I am wrong. Only the Labs build was better at memory usage. Build 1085 is like build 1076 in memory usage.

In my experience memory footprint encreased compared to 1076. However memory consumption has a low priority if any compared to other things I already gave up to complain about.

Hi Opera Developers, I would like to ask you guys two question:

1. Is it too difficult to add an option in the installer which can prevent the launching the browser at the end of the installer?
2. Is it too difficult to add an option in the installer which will prevent automatic importing of bookmarks from Internet Explorer? Why can't this be done at the very first start of the browser as other browser do?

Thanks

1. You could also interrupt your connection during install.
2. I don't have Internet Explorer bookmarks so I can't tell for sure if they get imported automatically but you can delete all your bookmarks after install and import only those you want. It's a matter of a minute.

Originally posted by psychedelic_fur:

1. Is it too difficult to add an option in the installer which can prevent the launching the browser at the end of the installer?

The option was there before but removed. I would like it back, too.

Originally posted by Krake:

1. You could also interrupt your connection during install.

And that will prevent creation of profile in the user account in which the installer has been run?

I'm on limited user accounts for my everyday use but I prefer to install my apps for all users (which is me, basically). "Install for all users" has to be done on an administrator account. I normally get away with running an installer "as admin". But because of test build installer's insistence in creating an unwanted profile, I have to switch to the admin account after installation and delete the unwanted profile folders.

PS
My apology for being off-topic.

Originally posted by mimi_s_mum:

Originally posted by Krake:

1. You could also interrupt your connection during install.

And that will prevent creation of profile in the user account in which the installer has been run?

What has an internet connection to do with the way you want to install Opera as soon as the install package has already been saved to your HD?

While Opera is making Core updates frequently, I wonder whether HTML5 Microdata will be included in Opera 12 for Mac and Linux/FreeBSD platforms. The 27 July 2011 snapshot changelog said that HTML5 Microdata on Mac and Linux/FreeBSD is incomplete. I never heard anything after that. EDIT: Somebody running a Mac said that Opera 12 supports HTML5 Microdata on Mac and Linux, I wonder why Opera did not announce in the next snapshot that they have included it.

Originally posted by Krake:

...but you can delete all your bookmarks after install and import only those you want. It's a matter of a minute.

Yes I can do that, but it is a question of usability and user experience. I think it is an interactive action that should be executed by the installer during the install process or by the browser at it first launch and it is a basic operation which other browsers installer does or done at the first launch of the browser.

Thanks

We don't want to ask the user questions during first setup, but just give them an Opera that's ready to use. That includes importing bookmarks from the default browser on first run (I think it imports from Firefox if that's the default). What's the harm in importing your default bookmarks?

It's a separate issue whether run-after-install needs a checkbox in the installer wizard. I install a lot of test builds in separate folders, but usually just by unzipping them; using my file explorer is quicker for me than using the folder picker from the installation wizard.

Has anyone got problems changing the skin. When I try to find more skins, opera (12.00, 1085) opens a new page giving me a 404 error. Opera 11.51 works okay

Originally posted by Rijk:

What's the harm in importing your default bookmarks?

There is no harm in importing default bookmarks, it is more of inconvenience. Consider for example a person is working from so s/he logs into the office network and also assuming their office supports only say IE or Firefox on a remote connection. So they have created bookmarks for various links on the office portal. Since the person is working from home it is quite likely that they may use their personal desktops or laptop since it is more powerful machine and to the office it doesn't matter as long as connection is secure. If the person now installs Opera they may not want bookmarks from IE or Firefox to be imported automatically.

Unzipping the installer is option but it is not a solution.

Apple succeed because it gave user's what they want and not what the developer or the management wants.

Thanks

Originally posted by Rijk:

It's a separate issue whether run-after-install needs a checkbox in the installer wizard. I install a lot of test builds in separate folders, but usually just by unzipping them; using my file explorer is quicker for me than using the folder picker from the installation wizard.

You'd still need to have admin privilege to install for all users, though, do you not? So in my scenario, I'd still have log out of my every day account and log in to my admin to perform installation, log out admin and log back in to my every day limited user account. Returning the checkbox would save me those extra steps and time.

I think it is important testing is done in the same way stable build is used. I have come across bugs that only affected limited privilege account users before. I question whether not installing using the installer, only installing and using admin user or only installing locally would constitute proper testing. Because those are not normal ways end users install and use their applications, is it?

@Krake
I thought your "1." was in response to psychedelic_fur's suggestion "1". Was it not so? Then I apologise for the confusion. BTW In future could you kindly quote all the relevant part (in this case psychedelic_fur's comment I quoted), so that the context of discussion is clear. Thank you.

@mimi_s_mum: what I'm describing is a not a way to test the installer, of course I've no need to install my test builds for all users, but then, I don't put all those builds in C:\Program Files\ anyway. I've no idea what your use case is; @psychedelic_fur describes one that is very specific, and I still don't see why it would be a problem to get those bookmarks then.

Originally posted by psychedelic_fur:

Apple succeed because it gave user's what they want

Apple is not well known for offering unlimited freedom and options, from what I've heard it more often succeeds by carefully figuring out what the overwhelming majority of users need and then just giving it to them. But I'll admit I'm not an Apple user myself.

Originally posted by Rijk:

@mimi_s_mum: what I'm describing is a not a way to test the installer, of course I've no need to install my test builds for all users, but then, I don't put all those builds in C:\Program Files\ anyway.

Thanks for your reply, Rijk. I see your approach to testing is completely different to mine. I think it might be more appropriate if a new topic were created to discuss pros and cons of different testing approaches. Would you participate if I created such a topic?