All disagreements aside, I would really like understand why you feel "open in new tab" should not focus the new tab (apart from habit). In my experience Chrome users click "open in new tab" and then click the newly opened tab anyway, which is one extra mouse click and more mouse movement than in Vivaldi/Opera12 where you only have to click 'open in new tab' (fewer clicks and less mouse movement overall, it's obviously more efficient). I'm pretty sure you don't intend to argue that non-power users will employ the ctrl+shift+click shortcut.
And if you don't want to focus the tab then you can simply use the middle mouse button (same results on all browsers), or you can go 15 pixels lower and click 'open in background tab'.
If I want to shift focus to a different page immediately, then I simply click the link. Then use the "back" button when I want to return.
If I'm right-clicking to open in a new tab, then it's usually because I want to open multiple links on a page while scrolling through it. So I want those loaded up in the background, and I want to remain on the original page until I've finished reading the material there.
Yes, you CAN do these things in Vivaldi... by using three-finger keyboard shortcuts, scrolling further down in a context menu, or using a wonky middle mouse button that most non-Solaris users never use.
I'm a bit perplexed by the response, though. This is Hacker News. We nod in approval as people reject text editors over the most obscure and trivial of UX preferences. We anticipate that when a blog link is posted, half of the discussion will revolve around its font kerning rather than its content. Etc.
So here you have a web browser, the application that most of us spend the overwhelming majority of our computer-time using. It's primary marketing pitch is extensive support for customization. It has some UX quirks that are out of step with the other major browsers, and it's baffled that anyone might want to customize that.
Hey, implement the suggestion or not, that's their call. But dismissing a customization out-of-hand as "incorrect" sure does cut against its own marketing. I think that's a bigger deal than my 15 pixels. It's an indication that the real goal is creating the perfect successor for Opera 12 die-hards. Which is awesome for that tiny group of individuals, but I don't think it's going to lead to any serious traction beyond them.
> Yes, you CAN do these things in Vivaldi... by using three-finger keyboard shortcuts, scrolling further down in a context menu, or using a wonky middle mouse button that most non-Solaris users never use.
Ummm, the middle mouse button is the way to open links in a background tab (the right button is for opening up a context menu, with links as with anything else on the computer). AFAIK, every modern mouse comes with a middle mouse button, disguised as the scroll wheel.
What perplexes me is why anyone would want anything else.
> a wonky middle mouse button that most non-Solaris users never use.
I've read through your other comments in this thread, and while most of them contain some form of generalization or another, to me this is the most baffling.
As I read his replies, I was immediately thinking "why not just use middle click"?
Then I saw that line and was just confused. Maybe he has a mouse with a really terrible scroll wheel and has assumed that all scroll wheels are terrible and that no one ever middle clicks?
> or using a wonky middle mouse button that most non-Solaris users never use
.... What?
I've always used windows, OSX and occasionally linux (have never used solaris) and I've always found middle click to open links in the background to be incredibly convenient, and I highly doubt that it's as rarely used as you're implying (especially considering that every single browser I can think of implements that behavior, I doubt they would bother if no one used it).
Middle clicking to close tabs is also incredibly convenient.
> If I want to shift focus to a different page immediately, then I simply click the link. Then use the "back" button when I want to return.
There are lots of cases where you want to keep your original tab and the new tab, e.g. reading an article which contains references to other articles, going through a list of tickets in a bug tracker (the list pattern can be applied to anything - games, amazon items, whatever). I also keep the original tab because I might not be finished reading it or because I want to use it for a later reference, and opening a new page in the same tab might make me forget that I was reading another page to begin with.
> It has some UX quirks that are out of step with the other major browsers, and it's baffled that anyone might want to customize that.
I'm not against customization, just saying that for most people the Vivaldi/Opera way might make more sense. I can see why you in particular would dislike this work flow, and it makes sense there should be a checkbox allowing you to maintain your way of using the browser.
> It's an indication that the real goal is creating the perfect successor for Opera 12 die-hards.
I think it actually might be their official goal, as the browsers on the market don't offer what Opera 12 used to. And it's probably the right thing to do as a business too, since it's unlikely anyone would pay attention to a Chrome/Firefox clone.
> but I don't think it's going to lead to any serious traction beyond them.
It won't, but that has nothing to do with the product's intrinsic quality. Unless Vivaldi's marketing budget matches Google's I don't see their market share getting into double digits. But you know what? That's ok. Opera 12 used to do relatively fine with 3-4%.
Sorry, this turned into a typical 90s flame war. I think you have a valid point that Vivaldi should provide options despite what you and I might think are the correct defaults.
Probably just a coincidence (in my case it might be related to how 14 used to be a common font size in my documents). On my current monitor (2560x1600) the value is more like 25-30 pixels.
