Hypothesis put forward: Opera > Firefox
Debate plz
I've used Opera since 3.50. While I think the transition from Opera6 to Opera7 was a huge step down, I still can't stand using other browsers. Every time I sit in front of another browser I have the strangest sensation that I have one arm tied behind my back.
If someone made an Opera6 frontend for gecko, I'd probably be all over it.
DRAMA
u IE and FF guys all suk lol
I used to use Opera... but it did seem to be getting more bloated with each version. Firefox sure wins on that front, a bare-essentials browser and then choose-your-own-features by way of extensions is an excellent way to handle things.
also: LOL ADWARE
Opera's default interface is too cluttered. I happen to like using 800x600 windows so I can see what's going on in other apps as I work. Do you know how little space that leaves for Opera for showing Web pages? zOMG forced horizontal scrolling.
Even after spending time cleaning up the interface and ditching all the bookmarks and toolbars, I'm constantly reminded that there's something I'd like to do that isn't being done.
Why can't the Transfer window automatically delete all completed downloads from its history?
Why can't a view the source code of only a selected part of a page?
Why can't I write my own custom search engine shortcuts for the URL bar?
Why does it not cache images that have been scrolled offscreen but are still on the same page (they're rerendered each time I scroll them back on screen)?
Why can't I do a right-click Show Image on images that failed to download without refreshing the whole page?
Why am I forced to arrange my bookmarks in alphabetical order?
Why can't I use UTF-8 characters in my bookmark titles?
Why can't I use native Qt widgets with "native" skins? Come on, even Firefox, a GTK lookalike, does a better job!
Why can't I select certain font sizes? I want 11px fonts to be consistent with the rest of my apps.
Firefox does it all and does it well. Anything it doesn't do, I can make it do with Extensions. What's not to like?
>>3
I hate the fact it's getting more bloated. I really wish they'd stuck with an older interface instead of LOL SKINNABLE AND LESS RESPONSIVE. What are they thinking? ;_;
However, using Firefox as an example of lack of bloat is a bit odd; it's both larger and slower than Opera.
That said, I think the Qt port of Opera sucks. Which is >>4's problem, I think...
> Why can't the Transfer window automatically delete all completed downloads from its history?
I happen to like them staying there. It's easy then to double-click and open something later on.
> Why can't a view the source code of only a selected part of a page?
What, frames? Or hilighted parts of page? Frames are alt-f3. Hilights would be a nice feature.
> Why does it not cache images that have been scrolled offscreen but are still on the same page (they're rerendered each time I scroll them back on screen)?
Probably a Qt-port problem. I've never seen this in windows.
>Why can't I do a right-click Show Image on images that failed to download without refreshing the whole page?
Have that problem too, on occasion. Damn annoying.
> Why am I forced to arrange my bookmarks in alphabetical order?
F4, right-click>View>Sort by my Order
> Why can't I use UTF-8 characters in my bookmark titles?
How odd. I can.
> Why can't I select certain font sizes? I want 11px fonts to be consistent with the rest of my apps.
Preferences>Fonts
>What, frames? Or hilighted parts of page? Frames are alt-f3. Hilights would be a nice feature.
I meant highlighted parts of a page.
> > Why can't I use UTF-8 characters in my bookmark titles?
>How odd. I can.
Apparently, it's a problem with importing bookmarks (http://paracelsus.hollosite.com/src/1110779157640.png). Bookmarks added with Opera work, mostly. The menu doesn't automatically select a font that can display all characters (http://paracelsus.hollosite.com/src/1110779235593.png).
>Preferences>Fonts
Missing 11px size between 10 and 12. See http://paracelsus.hollosite.com/src/1110779093801.png
> I meant highlighted parts of a page.
Ah. I'd love a feature like that. ;_;
As for the other two points: none of those images is rendering for me, so I'll go with the default answer that neither issue seems to affect the windows version.
The qt port needs a large amount of work. I can completely understand people not wanting to use it.
You aren't being terribly dogmatic about the whole DRAMA thing, you know. ;)
You're probably right about most of my problems being specific to the Qt port. I thought it'd share the same codebase as the Windows version, Qt being cross-platform and all. It seems that I am mistaken, so I'll stop bashing odd UI quirks. The Opera people should still get it fixed some time.
As for the images not rendering, it looks as though 100webspace is doing unpleasant stuff to HTTP Referer. Try pasting the URLs into a blank tab?
I tried that. No go. Wait, now it works. >.>
Things are happier in windows land:
http://paracelsus.hollosite.com/src/1110783699555.png
http://paracelsus.hollosite.com/src/1110783849362.png
DRAMA:
／￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣ ／￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣
| FIREFOX? | THATS LIKE IE!
＼ ＼ ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿_＿＿
￣∨￣￣￣￣￣￣ ∨ ／
∧＿∧ | YOU SECRETLY LIKE IE DONT U?
∧＿∧ （ ´Д｀） ＼＿ ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿
（ ´Д｀） ／⌒ ⌒ヽ ∨ ／
／, | ／_／| へ ＼ | BILL GATES BITCH
(ぃ９ | （ぃ９ ./ / ＼ ＼∧＿∧ ＼＿ ＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿
| 丶、 / ./ ヽ （ ´Д｀ ） ∨ ／
| ∧_二つ （ ( ∪ , / | OSS IS FOR COPYCATS
| ／ ＼ .＼＼ (ぃ９ | ∧＿∧ ＼ ＿＿＿＿＿＿ ∩＿＿
/ （ ＼ .＼＼ / / ,、 （ ´Д｀ ） ∨ ∩ / /
/ /~＼＼ > ） ） ./ ∧_二∃ (ぃ９／ ∧＿∧ ＿＿ | |/ /
/ / > ） / ／／ ./ ￣￣ ヽ | |ヽ∩ （ ´Д｀ ）ヾ ＼ | |
/ノ /／ / / / .＿/ /~￣￣/ ／ / __/ヽ/ (ぃ９ / /￣ ） γ ）∧＿∧ WAROTA
/／ . //. / / / )⌒ ＿ ノ /./ / / ヽ ヽ / / ／／／ （ ´Д｀ ）
// （ ヽ､ （ ヽ ヽ | / （ ヽ､ / ///＼＼＼ ／／ ／／／ (ぃ９ | |
（ _) ＼つ ＼つ). し ＼__つ（＿// ＼つつ 巛< (＿二二二へ ∪
...or something. lolocaust is better at amusing ascii...
the shared library version of opera for freebsd was compiled on fbsd4.6 and is thus useless on 5.x unless you compile qt with gcc 2.x ._.
and yeah, those font issues are annoying. some postscript fonts look somewhat strange whereas they look fine in mozilla, but that could be freetype's fault. another thing is that at 1280x1024, i can set fontsizes to either "too small" or "too big for my tastes" inside opera, so i have to adjust dpi values directly in my fonts.conf... same goes for individual fonts, eg. times new roman, which are just too damn small.
Opera hammers servers and doesn't support XSL. That's enough reason for me to like Firefox better.
> Opera hammers servers
How?
Client-side XSL is rather esoteric. Can someone point out a non-toy site that actually uses it (honest question)?
I know this is a chicken-and-egg problem, but if IE and FF/Moz are the largest players, what's the point of Opera being an early adopter?
I used to hate Opera because it used an MDI interface, which is about the most retarded thing you could do with a web browser. It finally stopped doing that, but instead it's just crammed too full of useless feautes and clutter. I want my interfaces streamlined.
Does Opera still choke horribly and slow to a crawl when viewing large images?
>>13
IE and FF maintain about 5-10 connections with one server at a time. Opera about 25-30.
>>16
I haven't seen it happen with Opera 7.54. I haven't visited any sites containing very large images, but I can load a 3989x4857 image from disk without making it freeze for minutes.
>>18
Yes, but I wouldn't have thought of adjusting those settings until >>17 pointed out a problem. Lowering the defaults would correct the problem more effectively.
>>17
Opera's default max connection limit to a server has been 8 for as long as I can remember, the exact same as Firefox (network.http.max-connections-per-server). Until someone can prove otherwise this has to be urban legend.
>>16
I've had 10 ~4000*3000 images open at once before, leeched off some website. No lag, no problems.
> I've had 10 ~4000*3000 images open at once before, leeched off some website. No lag, no problems.
Opera 6.x used to lag badly when it tried to render large images. As long as the entire image fit on one screen, it wasn't a major problem.
It's related to a problem pointed I out in >>4, the one where images that were partially or completely scrolled offscreen had to be re-rendered when they were scrolled back on. Since large images don't lag horribly anymore, it's less of a problem as it used to be.
I've been opera user since 3.x or something. They had some funnies now and then but never so distracting i'd switch to another browser.
Tried ff recently and god was it a bad expirience. I'm used to more snappy interface response.
Oh and there's opera 8 beta available. It's simply amazing ... when you think there's no more that can be done to improve UI, they suprise you with a bunch of really neat features. They're light years ahead of competition with their tabbed browsing (since they invented it, no wonder).
Tell us more about Opera 8's light-years-ahead features
>since they invented it,
NETCAPTOR, FUCKERS.
>>23
I like Opera 8's fit to window width feature a lot. Begone forever, horizontal scrollbars!! :makes banishing gestures:
That alone may get me to switch... Were it not for the fact that the same feature breaks named anchors on sites that use frames, like 4-ch. The links in the table of contents that auto-scroll the page don't work.
firefox and I lead a very dramatic love-hate relationship.
at this moment it's more of a hate-relationship.
The most obvious and pretty amazing little feature is that now every tab has its own [x] button and on the right you have a trash for tabs. It happened many times that I closed a particular tab and came up with a need for it minutes later; so I had to open new tab and repeat all the clicks to end at the page I had open. Now I just pick it up from trash :)
>>27
Firefox with the Tabbrowser Extensions extension can do the same things. Close button on each tab and an Undo Close Tab entry in the Edit menu. It even restores the tab's back history.
I don't think Firefox's Undo Close Tab goes as far back as Opera's trash, though, and you can't pick the specific entry you want without undoing multiple levels...
OPERA SUCKS, YOUR OPINION SUCKS
>>27
Opera7 and (IIRC) Opera6 could do the same thing, but it involved keys.
> when you think there's no more that can be done to improve UI
Do I think that, now? Opera's interface started out horrid - MDI in a web browser, what the hell? - and has slowly progressed to being merely dismal - it's a huge and cluttered mess at this point. Feature-wise, I'm sure there's a lot to like, but the presentation leaves much to be desired still.
Firefox is definitely on the right track with the less is more approach.
I always found MDI a boon, not a bane. Explorer doesn't support virtual shells.
Before we had tabbed browsing, some of us used the Windows taskbar for that purpose. MDI stopped you from doing that.
Being able to group related tabs into different browser windows is a boon. Being able to reorder tabs is a boon. Even keeping all 10+ tabs in the same window to keep the taskbar uncluttered is a boon.
I think you just like saying boon.
I boon don't boon know boon what boon you're boon talking boon about boon.
http://4-ch.net/dqn/kareha.pl/1112314147
／⌒ヽ
⊂二二二（ ＾ω＾）二⊃
| / BU-N
（ ヽノ
ノ>ノ
三 レレ
Firefox > Opera > Safari > IE
Opera faster than anything else.
That's enough for me
Lynx is significantly faster. Maybe you should use that instead.
>>41
links-hacked is also significantly faster than opera, and is a lot nicer to use than lynx (links -g for teh win)
>>42
also, lol @ me fucking up that tripcode
Firefox on my poor 1 GHz box hurts. I rarely see it take less than 3 seconds to load any page, even when clicking Back. Opera can load pages, uh, instantly.
It's a shame that so many sites look better with Firefox. It's a further shame that Firefox obeys fontconfig rules for font substitution where Opera doesn't (AA in Opera is teh suck). It's another shame that Firefox looks consistent with the rest of my apps whereas Opera still can't handle a Qt style like every other Qt-based program does.
So much stuff is broken. I can't even click a Delete link on 4-ch with Opera!
But you know what? I'm sick of waiting for pages to load, so I'm going to play with Opera for a bit.
The Pseud0ch CSS doesn't play well with Opera, althought the others work fine. There's also User mode.
The linux port of Opera sucks though. I use it when I'm in linux, and I've always disliked it. They're trying, but it sorely needs work. Maybe 8 improved that (or maybe not). :/
Firefox on Windows loads much faster than Linux for me. :(
mozilla is slow like godzilla
age
I retract my negative statements about Firefox in >>44. The Firefox nightly builds that will become Firefox 1.1 are impressively fast. Perhaps not quite as fast as Opera, but the difference between them has become negligible on my computer. Way to go!
In my update to 1.0.6. I learned the hard way that it's absolutely neccessary to backup your profile with all of your sensible data before you fuck up your old profile and then delete that one in a fit of rage.... orz
I thought they renamed Firefox 1.1 to Firefox 1.5.
This annoys me a bit because I thought open source was supposed to be above pathetic marketing idiocy. Whatever happened to consistent numbering schemes?
Say what? I don't see a version 1.1/1.5 out yet, so until we see it, it's kinda pointless worrying about it, isn't it?
To tell the truth, I always thought "Firefox 1.1" sounded pretty pathetic for a project that's been in the works for a year or so, and adds as much as it will.
I tend to like the x.y.z scheme, where x are rewrites or major architecture alterations, y are revisions, and z are bugfixes. Even ignoring that, there are plenty of pieces of software in the OSS world that have had major alterations several times yet haven't hit 1.0 yet. Or look at the linux kernel.
It's their choice, but it's still pure marketing. It annoyed me when Lightwave, Microsoft, Opera, Adobe, etc. did it, and it annoys me when the Mozilla Foundation does it. It's pure pandering to the masses, assuming they lack critical thought and are wowed by numbers.
Well, maybe they are, but the implicit assumption is repugnant to me. I'm not going to smile and nod wanely just because they're OSS.
Now, the only really annoying thing would be if they decided to go for version LETTERS, e.g. Firefox FX or Firefox CP
I am using the Deer Park Alpha 2(is this firefox or not? I sure as heck hope they don't rename it to that, Deer Park is not a very good name)and I must say that it is impressive speed wise
But is a version number a tool for the developers to track the progress of their work, or is it a hint to the user where the software stands in relation to its earlier incarnations? If the first, why is it being told to the user? If the second, why would it be wrong to select it to impart the right connotations to the user?
isn't writing a program that you expect other people to use "pandering to the masses" in the first place. I mean you are making something for many people to use. Grow up man squabling over the version number of software is imature and makes you look like a complete looser. A program is a program is a program no matter the name/number
>>56
Bonus points if the letters don't mean, represent, or otherwise stand for anything. Extra bonus if they're also inconsistent and/or contradictory with everything that's been used up to this point.
> imature and makes you look like a complete looser
Oh, no. Someone, please save me! Someone who can't even spell is calling me a looser!
Woe is me!
>>58
Why not just call it Firefox 2009 then?
This is a trivial issue, but it's a stupid pet peeve of mine. Inevitably, when a program hops several versions, I often ask myself where they went, simply because the newest isn't always the greatest.
Take a look at the recent hop XChat did (2.0.10->2.4.0). Given my conservative nature on software, that threw me for a loop.
Forgot the quotes on >>62, BTW. snicker
Using the year for the version number isn't a half-bad idea, overall, but it locks you down into a yearly release schedule, which might be more seldom than you want.
You could always tack the month at the end too.
Or do it car-manufacturer style: 2005i
_The all-new 2007 Firefox from Mozilla Foundation! Sporting a new and improved gecko engine, as well as an advanced interface to help you browse faster! You'll be king of the internets! Get it now (while supplies last)!_
Free Opera giveaway: http://my.opera.com/community/party/reg.dml
I think it's only for a few hours, so if you like opera and want several registration codes, now is the time to get it. The only thing they want is your email address.
>>67
Free registration GET!
The window looks so much cleaner now.
>>67
Thanks! (・∀・)
Say, did Opera stop spoofing IE's User-Agent: string by default yet? I remember reading a story about how it will, but I haven't had a fresh, Opera-less machine to test the latest Opera on to find out.
>>70
Interestingly, it doesn't spoof it entirely. This is a standard one:
"Opera/8.01 (Windows NT 5.1; U; ja)"Very obvious. And this is the "IE Spoofing":
"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1) Opera 7.51 [en]">>71
Aye, and indeed Opera's been like that for a few versions now. I just remember that an upcoming version was supposed to use the "Identify as Opera" string by default, the one without MSIE in the string at all.
When Opera's configured to identify as Internet Explorer (the default), my UA string is:
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; X11; Linux i686; en) Opera 8.01Yet when configured to identify as Opera (what Opera the company promised would be the default), my UA string is:
Opera/8.01 (X11; Linux i686; U; en)It's just that they started out the IE way to fool IE-only sites into letting Opera users go where Netscape, Mozilla, and Firefox users can't.
http://opera.com/free/
Opera has removed the banners, found within our browser, and the licensing fee.
http://operawatch.blogspot.com/
What finally made this possible is the increase in revenues from search and service partners. We can now go free and still increase our revenues.
An unexpected move. Will Opera benefit from this, or is this the beginning of the end?
Opera sucks for sjis art, since I can only globally define fonts for Normal/Monospace while Firefox allows a much more detailed set of specification for each language/encoding.
Clarification why Opera sucks of that: Because I cannot select Mona font to only appear on sjis encoded sites and having to browse all sites in Mona simply sucks. But looking at sjis art in the generic Windows font for Japanese sucks just as much.
tools->preferences->advanced->fonts->international fonts
>>76
And what do I select there? I don't see any "Japanese".
>>77
"Hiragana", "Katakana" and "Kanji". These aren't the only glyphs used in SJIS art though, so it won't help much. Someone please prove me wrong.
I forgot to mention that a workaround for this is to create a special SJIS user css file and activate it as needed. Something like:
* {
font-family: mona;
}>>78
There's also CJK Symbols and the Fullwidth Halfwidth forms.
I see the stuff in /ascii/ just fine.
Opera? Firefox? Bleh, neither of those can pass the only test that matters right now, http://www.webstandards.org/act/acid2/
Its all about Konqueror now! (and maybe safari and icab ~_~) But seriously, when will Firefox step up to the plate and deliver us that smiley face!
To think of it, I might start using data urls in some mock websites and play around with it, its fun stuff.
"The only test that matters", more like "the only test my pet browser can shine on", am I rite?
>Opera? Firefox? Bleh, neither of those can pass the only test that matters right now, http://www.webstandards.org/act/acid2/
I thought how they worked in the real world mattered, but maybe that's just me. ; )