Use cases for Unite and Widgets you think should be transferred to other Opera projects

Use cases for Unite and Widgets you think should be transferred to other Opera projects

Today we are announcing the beginning of the end for two of our current Add-on platforms. Starting with the upcoming Opera 12 release, Opera Unite and Opera Widgets will be turned off by default for new users. The two Add-on platforms will be completely removed in a later release expected before the end of this year.

We would love to hear your feedback on use cases for Opera Unite or Opera Widgets you think should be transferred to Opera extensions or other technology.

Definitely people will miss File Sharing, Photo Sharing and Media Player. They could be merged into a single functionality at least...
It's hard to imagine removing Unite apps interface and keeping the APIs, then the users will have to download a extension that will simply re-add the apps in a more sluggish way (if there's no kind of "Extensions panel" ) (and possibly made by third-parties)! Why not simply keep it? =P

Unite is more than a browser feature, it's an unique service "by Opera" you'd be discontinuing...

I too agree with what Nasty wrote. Although I use some widgets and occasionally use the voice controls, I wouldn't miss them as much as I'd miss Unite.

I also like icare's idea to make Unite into standalone software instead of dumping it completely. That way I could close the Opera browser (instead of using Ctrl+Alt+Shift+H to hide it) yet still have Unite running. Perhaps with that standalone software the Widgets could still be run as well.

transfered to other Opera projects... we all know the great uses of Unite but uses of widgets vary widely so, maybe merge widgets capabilities with extensions ?

If removing Unite, please, as many have said, let extensions, or what ever you don't remove or do rename be capable of doing the same functions, they are really useful when needed. Just the same browser installed and BAM ! chat and media sharing functions. Maybe if Unite applications haven't been downloaded this can be improved ? or if not connected and lacking a USB maybe bluetooth or a hotpost capability...

Originally posted by drworm:

Having said that, I'm going to miss Widgets. I have used them to write my own tools using the tools I know (HTML and Javascript). I have a small collection that makes my job much easier. I'm not sure what I'm going to do as an alternative.

I'm not sufficiently familiar with widgets. Because they are like desktop applications they can also have desktop-like custom keyboard shortcuts that go far deeper than you could (or perhaps rather should) achieve in your regular browser?

I cannot understand is it:
>> and Opera Widgets will be turned off by default for new users.
As far as it know, Opera Widgets are separated from Opera Browser and internet navigation process. I mean, I can download any of available widgets and install it even if I have not Opera Browser installed itself. And Opera Browser even does not tries to interact with running instances of widgets.
So I don't understand what means "will be turned off by default" if it is already so: user will never find out about Opera Widgets accidentally - at least he must know about their existence and know where to download them. What is going to be changed?

Originally posted by operanextim:

I too agree with what Nasty wrote

+1

I have an address book csv file converter widget.

The only reason I made it a widget is that Opera didn't support the File API at the time. Now that Opera supports the File API, I can convert that to just a web page that reads the file and produces a data URI of the output file. Of course, it'd be nice if Opera supported content-disposition: attachment for data URIs so Opera pops up a download dialog with the right type. However, I still need the File API FileWriter support if I want to do it the same way as the widget where it creates the output file on disk.

So, once Opera supports FileWriter in web pages, I'll just make a web page out of it. Or, if the extension api supports File reading in addition to writing, I'll just make an extension out of it.

As for the Unite webserver app, I used that the most. But, always kind of hated it that it had bugs and didn't support a lot of things. I could have improved it myself but the Unite API is a pain in the ass to work with. So, the extensions API just needs to improve, a lot.

Does this mean Opera will no longer focus on W3C's widget spec?

Maybe the widget technology - preferably only some - should go toward making a Mozilla Prism equivalent or Chrome's Tools > Create App Shortcut feature. If this were to be, please don't carry over the install-to-use "feature" widgets have; no longer used widget cleanup shouldn't be. The reason to have desktop shortcuts for web apps will, I surmise, be made manifest when more WebGL and WebCL apps are developed.

Good decision.

One way of keeping some of the widget functionality would be to integrate them into speed dial.

- expand the current speed dial extensions to allow interactivity (mouse / touch events / hover). This alone would greatly increase the abilities of the speed dial extension and allow widget-like extensions

- make a seperate screen for widgets on speed dial (like chrome has for apps). This could be used as a holder for widgets.

- think about constricting widgets to standard grid sizes like on android (1x1, 2x2, 4x4, 1x2 etc.), so they could fit on the speed dial grid.

- make an API for an extension UI overlay (transparent window over the current tab) that would only be accessible to the extension in the current tab. This would allow things like: notification toasts, in-page popups, settings dropdown, etc. that is currently only possible by embedding stuff into the page and can have style conflicts and security implications.


On the Unite side:

- you need to expose the File API to extensions to even allow anything close to its functionality.
- the server api could be exposed to extensions as well

- if you decide against it, you should consider adding some sort of cloud storage API for my.opera accounts that would be accessible to extensions. This would allow many things like syncing extension data between browsers, permanent data storage etc, without the hassle of having to implement your own backend.

One very popular use of Unite was panel apps and editing / managing files (UJS manager)

This use case could easily be transfered to extensions if you allowed extensions to show up in panels and access to files.

Originally posted by Gemorroj:

If the possibility of extensions will expand up to the possibilities widgets / unite, then everything is fine. If, however, extension api will not develop (and it is not active anymore for some reason), this is a hasty decision.

+1
Widgets was very strange feature. On the one hand, independent of the browser, on the other - there is no. Extensions is much more solid solution for browser.
Unite was just not fully integrated in browser. Just addition function, like Mail client and IRC client. But if Mail client and IRC logically are separate applications, Unite is still web applications, but was separated as Mail client and IRC client. Can't describe more clear This is how I feel it.

Both of them can be joined with extensions. In result we will have very rich API for extensions!
Extensions with functions of "The Lounge", "UJS Manager" or "File Sharing" will be great!
For widgets, may be, you or someone else will write some kind of converter to extensions, when API of extensions will have similar functions. (May be they already similar? Didn't wrote any widget.)

My thoughts about remaining features:
- Opera Mail/Feed - very good solution. But for business users it still require Calendar...
- Opera Notes - very simple solutions. May be require add labels for them? Can be used as TODO-list.
- Supporting of torrent - very transparent solution for plain user.
- Opera Link - very good, but we need synchronize almost all profile, including extensions, skins and UI (based on comments information)
- Opera Chat - don't know about it, because of don't need IRC. Waiting supporting of Jabber protocol (Google chat).
- Opera Turbo - very good solution. In my case as additional IP address...
- Opera Dragonfly - is better and better with every new version!

Hope remaining features will stay inside

I think some people are confused by how extensions differ from widgets.

The purpose of an "Extension" is to "extend" the functionality of the browser--in many cases it just extends the functionality of a single site.

Widgets do not extend the functionality of the browser, nor a single website. They provide functionality separate from the browser. But they need the browsers ability to execute JS and display HTML to work.

A widget is no different to any other application except it's written using HTML and JavaScript, instead of C++ or Java, and therefore requires a browser to make it work.

Originally posted by FeyFre:

I mean, I can download any of available widgets and install it even if I have not Opera Browser installed itself.

You can download it, but you can't install it or run it.

Originally posted by drworm:

Widgets do not extend the functionality of the browser, nor a single website.

But widgets are often used as a GUI around a web service (weather etc.), or as a standalone self-contained gadget (games etc.)

Their API was always too limited to really make them compete with other desktop applications or widgets.

That's why I think they have a natural place inside the speed dial.

We need more control of keyboard shortcuts in applications. Right now many HTML5 games are unusable, for example where space is used as a shortcut or WASD keys. In widgets many browser shortcuts were unoccupied, but if we are going to move widgets back inside the browser (in a way) then more keyboard control will definitely make a lot of sense. Keyboard control together with extended file system access of widgets will make extensions an extremely capable platform for web applications!

No one cry for the death of the Voice function that Opera introduced pioneering many years ago but that were never developed in a really usable way for all the Opera users?
I cry for it because i ever hoped to get it working good and, sure, in italian. A piece of story that disappear.

Ciao, Igor

Originally posted by igorditerni:

No one cry for the death of the Voice function that Opera introduced pioneering many years ago but that were never developed in a really usable way for all the Opera users?

Voice hasn't worked for me in probably over three years. I believe that has more to do with IBM than with Opera, for didn't IBM cease development? The ecosystem around the browser has also changed: semi-decent accessibility technologies can now usually be had either built-in to the OS or by third-party applications, and Opera has provided relevant APIs to such applications since 2007 or so iirc.

Originally posted by igorditerni:

No one cry for the death of the Voice function that Opera introduced pioneering many years ago

This still works for me, though it often breaks on upgrading. Usually all it needs is to disable and enable it again to get it working. I think it is a great loss for those for whom English is not their first language, and obviously for those with visual impairments.

It is the kind of application that is better suited to Extensions, and then there is scope for adding more languages, but Voice should not be removed until there is something to replace it.

Oh, no not Unite!

I can understand dropping Widgets in favor of Extensions. Both systems provide the same services. I'll miss my weather widget, but there are any number of extensions available to replace it.

Not so with Unite's P2P music, photo and file sharing. My friends and I use these all the time and there is no easy replacement. And, as far as I know, no other browser has this capability. I really do not understand why you would choose to sacrifice this competitive advantage.

I do hope you will reconsider your decision or at the very least not pull the plug on Unite until you have reliable extensions to replace it.

Incidentally, I have been an Opera user since ver. 3.75 and have stayed on board through all the ups and downs. The decision to drop Unite is definitely one of the downs.

Originally posted by drworm:

You can download it, but you can't install it or run it.

Why I cannot Install? I can! Is it so hard to make a copy of Opera.exe/.dll and some other stuff to new directory, rename Opera.exe to desired name add extract/copy widget archive/content to special subdirectory and some more trivial operations? I did that more than once and no issues appeared yet.

Why removing good features from opera? Opera Unite is a useful tool that no other browser offer this.
From this forum and blogs seems a lot of users use unite.Bad move for opera if you remove this.

My opinion/use cases:
- provide APIs for file management (Unite Apps: UJS Manager, eBook Reader, FileSharing, Media Stream, Media Player, Photo Sharing, etc.) to extensions - I think HTML5 defines pretty many of them (File API, File Writer, FileSystem API etc. I know they are still drafts but better draft than nothing) not yet implemented in Opera,
- provide APIs for serving contents (most of Unite Apps not used locally, also external like in Web Proxy - code is already ready, just reuse it) to extensions,
- provide simple converter (doesn't have to be automatic - it must point code to be replaced) and/or API references showing similarities so developers can convert them one way or another (95% of widgets doesn't seem to need any API modification just few of them - may look nasty in pop-up/on page but no big deal here - and Unite apps),
- leave widgets/apps repositories somewhere on the web so devs (also other if license permits; if not, I think some users may leave portable "installation" of last Opera version supporting this stuff) can do all the work,
- give us some more time (half a year is pretty short) to do the hard work if you can't.
I think giving up support sooner than 4-6 months BEFORE EXTENSIONS CAN DO SIMILAR WORK is stupid as devs won't have enough time for upgrades to go live. Removing stuff noone else provides (Unite) seems bad as well...

In my opinion stuff to be converted/replaced should be:
- widgets: Functions 2D/3D, eBook Reader, SimAquarium, Unite Media Player, RMF RDS, maybe some of games (part of them is already replaced/or have similar stuff available),
- applications: UJS Manager, Bookmarks, File Sharing, Media Stream, Media Player, Photo Sharing (all of those useful for fast sharing), Math Session (collaboration), Web Proxy (very important for me), UJS Manager, Opera Action Manager (unless replaced by Opera config dialogs), maybe some other but not as much for me as those.

I can't believe my luck. I've been looking a solution for a low-cost, middle of the road, easy to maintain solution for my current needs. A little file sharing, a little web hosting, and messaging service. On Wednesday, I found the answer to all of them - Opera Unite.

Imagine my surprise when I read the statement from yesterday! This is so easy to manage and control that I planned to use it myself. Even encourage new users to experiment with it too. It would be a huge shame to end this because it actually empowers the user. A growing number of people I know want features that are selling points for Facebook, but without risking having their details being trawled and traded.

The applications I'm working with currently are:

• Web Server
• Photo Sharing
• File Sharing
• Fridge
• Media Player
• Messenger
• The Lounge

I want to use Unite to keep friends and family updated with progress of my linux-based project work. I know a friend who would benefit from being able to share information about a club she belongs to. And I'm convinced that many other people I know could benefit from it too.

There's a lot that baffles people on the Internet. This makes a lot of things a lot easier, and I believe would open Internet use to people who those who up until now thought being able to manage file sharing, web hosting or web chatrooms were for those who were either more affluent, or more computer literate.

If it does to go, please, please make its replacement as useful, simple and attractive as that which it replaced.

Cross-post from Desktop Team blog:

Sharing and remote-control capabilities of Unite apps is precious. I use this from time to time. If I have better outbound connection I would use it much more often.
UserJS manager is nice, but can be substituted by improved Extensions manager.

Widgets are web-based apps, why to remove those? Desktop web-apps just start gaining popularity, so they have potential IMO. Personally, I stopped discovering new widgets because of lack of "preview before install" feature (that one was incredible).

I'm using voice couple times a year to listen to blog posts or articles while doing something else.

All in all I'm not happy with direction on ceasing not very popular but still used by many features.

Originally posted by d4n3:

- expand the current speed dial extensions to allow interactivity (mouse / touch events / hover). This alone would greatly increase the abilities of the speed dial extension and allow widget-like extensions

nice idea +1

Originally posted by Pesala:

This still works for me, though it often breaks on upgrading. Usually all it needs is to disable and enable it again to get it working. I think it is a great loss for those for whom English is not their first language, and obviously for those with visual impairments.

It's my case. I used the Voice to improve my English speaking/listening and that was good. I was waiting for future news languages for it.

Originally posted by FeyFre:

Originally posted by drworm:

You can download it, but you can't install it or run it.

Why I cannot Install? I can! Is it so hard to make a copy of Opera.exe/.dll and some other stuff to new directory, rename Opera.exe to desired name add extract/copy widget archive/content to special subdirectory and some more trivial operations? I did that more than once and no issues appeared yet.

That's my point. Opera must be present on your system, in some shape or form, as you've just described. And, yes, you can mnaully extract it, manually create shortcuts, manually do everything, but manually doing all this is not comparable to the self-installer when Opera is present.

Originally posted by Pesala:

Originally posted by igorditerni:

No one cry for the death of the Voice function that Opera introduced pioneering many years ago

This still works for me, though it often breaks on upgrading. Usually all it needs is to disable and enable it again to get it working. I think it is a great loss for those for whom English is not their first language, and obviously for those with visual impairments.

It is the kind of application that is better suited to Extensions, and then there is scope for adding more languages, but Voice should not be removed until there is something to replace it.

I might be wrong but isn't there specific software for that that they call screen readers? Screen readers go beyond working only in Opera and work on any browser / app so I think it's already replaceable.

I use the Unite web server app frequently for cross-device web testing, and recommend it in talks and presentations I do.

It's wonderful working on some web files, and then opening the working directory in the Unite web server with a couple of clicks.
All I then need to do is open the operaunite.com address on my mobile devices or TV, and just reload when I make changes on the original files.
No local server (Apache or whatever) to set up, and no FTPing necessary.

Please please please - web server functionality in extensions. Please!

NO! Everything but Opera Unite!
I've discovered its functionalities not long ago and it's just... perfect!
You CAN'T drop this. I use as Web Server, as File Sharing, as Media Sharing... c'mon! It has so much potential
I doubt devs are going to gain something from taking out Unite as they were if they maintained it.

Another useful suggestion (for me).
I use this and i like...

Widgets icon in the address bar is useful to find widgets in websites and i have used from the beginning on my website (Radioigor) and when appeared extensions i also used it for my extension so that appear in list the extension and the widgets.

So, why not to leave the icon working for extensions too, like i'm using it now? So people entering a website with Opera can know immediately if it give you the possibility to install some extensions.

Ciao, Igor

In related news, Opera 12 Beta has new Tab APIs

Sad for Opera Unite... it's one of the features that made Opera the best browser...

Originally posted by tagawa:

Please please please - web server functionality in extensions. Please!

Even the staff of Opera Software is required Unite! I hope its API will be joined with Extensions API.

Originally posted by drworm:

And, yes, you can mnaully extract it, manually create shortcuts, manually do everything, but manually doing all this is not comparable to the self-installer when Opera is present.

And I can write simple .bat|.cmd/.sh/{whatever-for-MacOSX}/etc or even binary which will do that for me automatically(7zSDK is free open source), and attach mime type handler of any other browser to my installer.

Unite was a killer feature. Slow to catch on maybe, but because people for whatever reason didn't realize how great it was. It's one of the remaining things tying me to Opera and when it's gone, well it's back to being just another browser That some pages aren't friendly with

So what functionality or part of Unite-API should be ported or integrated into the Extension-API-set?

• Most uniqueness, but also most potential has the server-API as Unite implemented it on opera.io.webserver. But exposing such an API to the UserScript, ie embeddable part of the Extension framework would lead to security risks or yet another confirmation to (often too quickly and without knowing, what it's all about) click-grant. Restricting access to such an API to the background process doesn't really help - a per-extension (rather than per connection or session/instantiation) authorization does not allow fine enough a tuning. → So the idea of a stand-alone API for such services rises… Unite!

• In a time where the cloud is hyped, skeptical voices rise, that want more control of their own data, who -- out of paranoia od not -- distrust the major players on the market. Those people would love means to easily steam up their own little clouds: maybe just one cloud per purpose, eg photo sharing or media streaming. A little web server run by the browser, a File-API to access local data and nice applications around it would be just that. → But wait, that's Unite!

• Until IP4 NAT is a thing of yesterday, under many instances there will be the need for a relaying, internet reachable and reliable proxy server. → Infrastructure just like Opera's Unite proxy service offers!

• Server-client, sharing, backend-for-something -- all those applications then would best be managed from a nice and easy interface. May be something just like → the Unite management panel!

(tl;dr)
So abolish Unite, mix its API into Extensions-API, adapt for reality → create Unite!

Originally posted by XAntares:

ie embeddable part of the Extension framework would lead to security risks or yet another confirmation to (often too quickly and without knowing, what it's all about) click-grant.

How is it any more of a security risk than it is now? They could always make the server API permissions exclusive to other permissions and make it exactly like it is now. Or they could only allow downloading server extensions from addons.opera.com which are reviewed by Opera staff.

I still feel stunned by the decision of ending Unite support.

I agree 100% with what Nasty said.

+1

Originally posted by darklink88:

It' a good decision. I don't care about widgets but I'm sorry for Unite, the idea to create an user-centered web, instead of a server-centered one...it was a real ambitious and revolutionary project!
I hope that you will be able to re-use some of the Unite technology to improve extensions API!

Speaking about removing features, what about bit-torrent? I think that if you want to keep it, you should improve it drammatically.

Fully agree. I`m sorry for Unite! I wasn`t using it lately, but I did for playing music from my home computer, quick sharing pictures and files with my family and colleagues. I`m not sure if this ability can be somehow fully replaced by extensions (looks technically impossible).
Unite doesn`t need any more upgrades and with strong hw background for Turbo feature you can leave it for ocassional use, don`t you think?

Speaking about torrent download support, I`d like to see big improvements too. It is quite useless even for basic Linx. distr. downloading.

Originally posted by d4n3:

Originally posted by chocimir:

File Sharing is sometimes irreplaceable. Please, make possible to do similar extension, if you must drop Unite.

It's impossible with current API, no support for File or Server APIs.

If it's impossible to do, why on earth are they dropping this fantastic feature. Opera is the only browser that allows users to easily share their files without the hassle of setting up/knowing port forwarding and they want to kill this feature. It doesn't make sense. Please keep unite!

Unite is Unique feature of Opera that non it's competitors have yet they want to remove it. Unite makes opera stand out among everyone else, file, music & photo sharing made easy. THIS IS A TERRIBLE MOVE BY OPERA!

Why sacrifice widgets when they are starting to become more a norm in Win 8? Metro apps are nothing but widgets....

The great thing about Unite is that it brings sharing stuff with others in control of the user. It decentralizes cloud and power; it is power to the people in a great interpretation of that principle. I strongly urge Opera to reconsider keeping Unite functionality alive. It is too important for a free and decentralized world wide web.

Opera browser has always been an innovative product and as a company has always been an influential yet somewhat obnoxious relative outsider. Please dare to maintain that position and help to keep the web a free and decentralized place.....

File sharing
Media Player
photo Sharing
messenger
web server
Stream media
File Inbox
The Lounge

Please keep the above

poll (from spanish forum)
http://my.opera.com/espanol/forums/topic.dml?id=1375262

Some use cases that are important to me:

Extensions should be able to run without the main Opera window open. Just a small, chromeless extension "window" open, that can be put in foreground or background of any other application so that I can see for example a news ticker or other changing content while working with other programs like e.g. Notepad. Chromeless extensions should not crash when the main Opera window crashes.

Extensions should be able to listen to a port and answer if a request comes in (TCP/UDP socket API) - without having to contact to an external server and all traffic passing this server. That way chat extensions could be built, or sharing contents of any kind would be possible.

Extensions should be able to interact with panels or to work in panels too.

Extensions should have an API for web handlers.

Extensions should be able to interact with the OS clipboard (with restrictions)

Based on what I have read of the announcement and the above posts, it seems to me that Opera Software, and Opera users in general, differ in the foci of their understanding of what Unite is.

From the announcement, I gather that Opera Software staff primarily see Unite as an Add-on platform for which not many people have bothered to write add-ons.

In contrast, the Opera users who use Unite like the functionality of the add-ons that Opera Software staff created to accompany Unite's launch and primarily see Unite as a complete product suite as it stands, albeit with a bug or two to be ironed out. Although those users are not interested in developing more add-ons to run on the Unite Add-on platform, those users are none-the-less not impressed that the functionality that they have been using---functionality that is claimed to be unique to Opera---is going to be removed.

Whereas there seemed to be sound reasoning behind the transfer of widget functionality to extensions, I saw, in the announcement, no reasonable "excuse" for Unite being dropped.

The approach Opera Software have taken with this announcement reminds me of the removal of Multiple Document Interface functionality a few years back. There was an announcement, and that was that. The claim was that the new engine did not have the functionality built into it, or something like that. Despite the facts that Opera Software create the engines used, and that many Opera users very much liked the MDI functionality, and that it was yet another excellent and unique feature of Opera; Opera Software dropped MDI and apparently didn't look back. Even posts in forums were censored.

Although I have not yet used Unite, I agree with the others who suggest that it be kept until a viable alternative is created, if in fact Unite has to be dropped at all.

I remember reading about bugs in some of the Unite apps just after Unite's launch. Reading, in the posts above, mention of there still being bugs in Unite, I wonder why Opera Software don't just keep the suite that has already been created, clean up the relevant code, drop the ability for others to add new apps to the platform, and perhaps incorporate the functionality in an alternative way. Would that not keep both the developers and the users content with a workable solution for both?

Originally posted by FeyFre:

Originally posted by drworm:

And, yes, you can mnaully extract it, manually create shortcuts, manually do everything, but manually doing all this is not comparable to the self-installer when Opera is present.

And I can write simple .bat|.cmd/.sh/{whatever-for-MacOSX}/etc or even binary which will do that for me automatically(7zSDK is free open source), and attach mime type handler of any other browser to my installer.

*groan* yes, you're correct. You can do that. You could also just write your widget in Java. Or you stand on your head and type with your toes. It's all possible. Why should we expect things to be as simple as they can be when we have so many other difficult ways to perform a task.

Originally posted by d4rkn1ght:

I still feel stunned by the decision of ending Unite support.

I agree 100% with what Nasty said.

+1 I hope the decision on unite is reversed I use UJS manager and file sharing regularly

Originally posted by Johann-7:

poll (from spanish forum)
http://my.opera.com/espanol/forums/topic.dml?id=1375262

in english
http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?from=&to=en&a=http://my.opera.com/espanol/forums/topic.dml?id=1375262

Originally posted by d4rkn1ght:

I still feel stunned by the decision of ending Unite support.

I agree 100% with what Nasty said. up

+1 I hope the decision on unite is reversed I use UJS manager and file sharing regularly

+1
In fact, it was first and foremost for Unite that I came to use Opera.

Originally posted by kapsi:

Media player from Unite - leave computer on at home, listen to every mp3 at work.

same user here
i love opera unite, please dont remove it :c