Talk:Opera (web browser)/Archive 1

message: The body of this article is full of extlink spam. I'm going to clean it up, and cut down greatly on the extlinks section as well, unless someone beats me to it. Arvindn 06:42, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Extlinks

message: Is a list of the latest releases of the browser really something that belongs in an encyclopedia entry?  I'm a huge Opera zealot, but people can find the download links on their own--I don't think this is something that belongs here. Zaxxon 21:59, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question. I just cleaned it up a lot, removing loads of overlapping, self-promoting links serving no purpose in getting to know Opera better from an encyclopedic point of view. TomAnd 07:28, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latest releases? 

message: Uh, is it only me or is this a serious POV? I'm one of bigger Opera fans around, but the entire swim thing was pretty obviously a marketing spoof. Can someone rewrite this so it doesn't contain solely marketing-speak? --qviri 23:34, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know that it would have encyclopaedic merit even when re-written. It was, as you say, just a silly marketing spoof. I'm going to remove it, although if anyone wants to make a case for reverting or rewriting, I'll not re-revert. KeithD (talk) 08:28, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 1 million download challenge 

message: It appears the full version is available for free download! opera download Smautf 10:36, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Already much of their income does not come from the Desktop. Much of their advantage is in the mobile/small-screen market where they have corporate arangements; also integrating their rendering engine such as in their Adobe deal. See the market adoption section for a little detail. --jnothman talk 08:22, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

text: This article from The Register claims that 45% of their income was from Google advertising. ~~helix84 11:33, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  opera download free 

message: As per discussion on the software infobox page, this is a trial of the new template for proprietary software. The old infobox contains an entry for "license" -- which is an important attribute for Free/Open Source software... but not when using an infobox for proprietary applications, such as Opera. For example: OpenOffice (license=LGPL) is important information. Microsoft Word (license=Microsoft EULA V6) is pointless -- though that doesn't mean "unimportant", it just means "a complex subject not suitable for quick delivery in an infobox". I have used the old infobox as a template for this new one... which means the removal of the complex and unwieldy template-based versioning. This one only tracks the stable release version -- on the grounds that it is simpler, more friendly to newbies and preview releases are not appropriate information in an infobox. - Motor (talk) 19:55, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to make myself absolutely clear: I deliberately did not based this new infobox on "infobox software 2". For two reasons: 
# Preview releases don't belong in an infobox. Infoboxes are there to provide the basic information as a summary. I don't personally think Wikipedia should be tracking preview releases anyway, but lots of people want to -- and there's nothing stopping them doing that within the article itself.
# The "Infobox Software 2" template solves no real problems while making editing more confusing and difficult for newbies and completely different from normal wikipedia editing. - Motor (talk) 07:53, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The only difference between Template:Infobox software and Template:Infobox Software2 is the preview release. What's the use of software2, if preview releases don't belong in an infobox? Also who else says preview releases don't belong in an infobox? We must come up with a consensus before we go further with this. I believe preview releases are valid, because it shows the developer is actually doing some work with the app. I've seen infoboxes which use special WP templates in order to optionally display information, such as Template:pwstatbox. Maybe we should bring the idea of using a template similar to it software, so we don't need 5 or so templates which serve generally the same purpose. --LBMixPro(Speak on it!) 08:12, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "Infobox Software2" uses templates within templates to create an awkward and complicated scheme for editing the version number that solves no problems and makes the simple act of updating a version number radically different from editing anything else in the article. I've expressed my concerns several times about this (and its effect on newbies... as if templates weren't confusing enough for them already), and I reverted the addition of "Infobox Software2" from the OpenOffice.org article a while back. As for the "preview release" field, I'm willing to be convinced, but I don't see why a preview release is important enough to be in the infobox. The infobox is not for "showing that the developer is still working on an app"... it is just to give a very short and standardised version of the most important and relevant information across a block of related articles. There's nothing stopping anyone from discussing preview releases, forthcoming uber-technologies, or how fast the developers of the application can code... or, in fact, anything else at all, in the article itself. - Motor (talk) 08:46, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason for another template to be edited for the version numbers is because that template is being used on other articles such as Comparison of web browsers. In contrast, the template simplifies matters, so one doesn't have to update both the article's infobox and the other articles which depend on an accurate version number for the app. If we are to scrap the preview release, we should scrap the stable release as well.--LBMixPro(Speak on it!) 20:02, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I agree with Motor. That template is getting "template bloat". --minghong 12:30, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New Infobox