4 ms·

> ...which is why Opera's solution is better ;) I think perhaps you've lost sight of the original point you were making? * I asked why I would want this, with

> ...which is why Opera's solution is better ;) I think perhaps you've lost sight of the original point you were making? * I asked why I would want this, with the implication that this a product without value. * You then gave Facebook Messenger and Electron apps as examples that there is a demand for this type of thing, basically saying that they've proven the market for this feature. * I pointed out that the reasons people use those are not because they want to surf and message people at the same time. You saying that Opera is better because it lets people surf and message at the same time in contrast to Facebook Messenger doesn't support what you were just saying. If anything, it undermines your point because you were originally using it as an example because it was the same as Opera's new offering, and now you're trying to say that Opera's different to it. > many people do still use the web interface. Usually just because it's quicker and easier. It's not quicker and easier for messaging-while-surfing because it doesn't actually let you do that. So pointing to it as proving the market for Opera's product that lets you message-while-surfing is a tad silly, don't you think? > To be frank, your complaints sound a lot like "I hate this feature ergo it's stupid and nobody will use it". I don't hate the feature – why would I? I don't have to use it. I just think it's pointless. It's more like "I think this feature doesn't have any compelling use-case and it's stupid for Opera to build it because there isn't a non-negligible market for it". And so far, the only answers I've had are: * Because people do it already (even though the examples given don't show that). * Because it gives better performance. * Because Opera fans are weird. * Because desktop window managers are so bad that having two windows of different applications side-by-side is difficult. So far I remain unconvinced this feature has value.

laumars 10y ago
> I think perhaps you've lost sight of the original point you were making? > * I asked why I would want this, with the implication that this a product without value. > * You then gave Facebook Messenger and Electron apps as examples that there is a demand for this type of thing, basically saying that they've proven the market for this feature. > * I pointed out that the reasons people use those are not because they want to surf and message people at the same time. That's not what happened. I addressed your "Why would I want a messenger application embedded in my web browser?" question with examples of messenger applications that were embedded in a browser while acknowledging that I emphasise with your dislike for the modern day "everything in the browser" mentality. You then raised additional points based off my examples, which I addressed specifically. I never once attempted to answer why you, specifically, would want this. For what it's worth, I could also have raised points about Chrome / Firefox "apps" that install locally into the web browser (many of which have hundreds of thousands of unique installs) and the desktop notifications feature that websites can implement to push notifications to the user. So what Opera is building isn't that far away from what many people are already using in Chrome - albeit Opera are building a better UI/UX around it. > > many people do still use the web interface. Usually just because it's quicker and easier. > It's not quicker and easier for messaging-while-surfing because it doesn't actually let you do that. So pointing to it as proving the market for Opera's product that lets you message-while-surfing is a tad silly, don't you think? If you re-read the point I actually made (rather than selectively quoting it), what I actually said was it's quicker and easier to open up a Facebook tab in a browser than it is to install libpurple or whatever to install Messenger integration on a PC desktop. I could also add to that and said it's also quicker and easier to type something on a PC keyboard than it is to tap your message on smartphone touchscreen (which was also hinted at in my original comment albeit I left the reader to reach that conclusion themselves). > I don't hate the feature – why would I? For someone that doesn't "hate" this feature you put an awful lot of effort into discrediting it :P I acknowledge this feature might not prove popular but am at least open minded enough to let the market decide. Because, and like I said before, it's common for people to dismiss new tech that later gains popularity.

laumars 10y ago

> I think perhaps you've lost sight of the original point you were making? > * I asked why I would want this, with the implication that this a product without value. > * You then gave Facebook Messenger and Electron apps as examples that there is a demand for this type of thing, basically saying that they've proven the market for this feature. > * I pointed out that the reasons people use those are not because they want to surf and message people at the same time. That's not what happened. I addressed your "Why would I want a messenger application embedded in my web browser?" question with examples of messenger applications that were embedded in a browser while acknowledging that I emphasise with your dislike for the modern day "everything in the browser" mentality. You then raised additional points based off my examples, which I addressed specifically. I never once attempted to answer why you, specifically, would want this. For what it's worth, I could also have raised points about Chrome / Firefox "apps" that install locally into the web browser (many of which have hundreds of thousands of unique installs) and the desktop notifications feature that websites can implement to push notifications to the user. So what Opera is building isn't that far away from what many people are already using in Chrome - albeit Opera are building a better UI/UX around it. > > many people do still use the web interface. Usually just because it's quicker and easier. > It's not quicker and easier for messaging-while-surfing because it doesn't actually let you do that. So pointing to it as proving the market for Opera's product that lets you message-while-surfing is a tad silly, don't you think? If you re-read the point I actually made (rather than selectively quoting it), what I actually said was it's quicker and easier to open up a Facebook tab in a browser than it is to install libpurple or whatever to install Messenger integration on a PC desktop. I could also add to that and said it's also quicker and easier to type something on a PC keyboard than it is to tap your message on smartphone touchscreen (which was also hinted at in my original comment albeit I left the reader to reach that conclusion themselves). > I don't hate the feature – why would I? For someone that doesn't "hate" this feature you put an awful lot of effort into discrediting it :P I acknowledge this feature might not prove popular but am at least open minded enough to let the market decide. Because, and like I said before, it's common for people to dismiss new tech that later gains popularity.