“With Opera recently releasing their web browser completely free of Ads, it is a good time to let the truth be told. Not only is Opera faster then Firefox in all performance areas, it is much more secure and more compliant.”
“With Opera recently releasing their web browser completely free of Ads, it is a good time to let the truth be told. Not only is Opera faster then Firefox in all performance areas, it is much more secure and more compliant.”
ignored. I’ve tried Opera at each of its last four releases. I’ve seen nothing that would make me switch from Firefox. Talk about solving a problem that nobody has.
Edited 2006-01-04 18:09
I have to administer some pretty old machines in a small computer lab. With 64Mb of RAM, these machines could only run win98 – which is a nono (for they don’t last longer than a couple of weeks).
So they run FreeBSD, with Blackbox that includes a simple menu: Chat, Messaging (GAIM), Neptun (basically rdesktop to the interface through which students are expected to sign up for courses) – and web browsing. Guess how slow firefox (or Epiphany, Galeon) are on these machines… They are simple horrible. Actually, konqueror starts up faster (from blackbox!) than firefox (or other gecko based renderers). And yes, I tried various about:config settings (slow machine/low memory/high bandwidth settings). Firefox and its relatives just don’t cut it.
Opera on the other hand works pretty well. I am amazed at the speed of its engine… in fact, what really suprises me in Firefox is the slowness/heaviness of gecko. The lower you go hardware-wise, the more you’ll feel the weight of firefox.
I’ve seen nothing that would make me switch from Firefox.
Opera has a faster interface, more features, less memory usage, faster rendering, faster startup time than firefox. That’s pretty compelling, especially for low-end machines or mobile devices for that matter – opera/opera mini is perhaps the most popular browser on mobiles. Why do you think Nokia chose khtml instead of gecko for its new mobile browser? Because gecko is slow, the slowest perhaps among the free alternatives – and khtml/webcore has a very very clean and compact codebase, especially compared to gecko.
I’ve tried Firefox at each of its dozens of releases since it was called Phoenix and have always hated its SLOWNESS!
Slow rendering engine, slow and irresponsive interface, extremely slow startup time.
The most annoying scenario is when you set Firefox as your default web browser (not only for www links but also for HTML documents). The long wait for Firefox to start once you’ve double-clicked a HTML document is a real nightmare for someone that opens scores of local HTML documents in his/her everyday work.
This is the main reason why I didn’t switch to Firefox even back when I wasn’t using Opera, and I still don’t have any plans to do so. Yes, I now use Opera because I have thoroughly tested all popular browsers personally (as part of my job) and I am convinced that this is the best browser nowadays. Of course, this is just my own opinion..
The long wait for Firefox to start once you’ve double-clicked a HTML document is a real nightmare for someone that opens scores of local HTML documents in his/her everyday work.
Someone that opens scores of local HTML documents in his/her everyday work don’t close the browser. That way is faster even if the browser is the fastest loading.
Depends: if the HTML pages includes images, Firefox tends to increase memory and never free it which makes it slower over the time which is annoying..
Also annoying is that it tend to get very slow if it hits the 300 MB+ memory usage even on a box which has 1 GB of RAM: Firefox memory usage suck but Windows XP memory handling suck too.
There is no reason why a 300MB app should be slow on a PC with 1GB of RAM..
It also crashes more often
. At least, for me, it historically always has on Linux.
It’s also not Free.
But hey, it’s a cool browser.
I’ve always wondered about this. How does being Free make a difference? Are you a hard-core hacker (in the traditional sense) who looks at the source code to patch it yourself? How many F/OSS programs have you scanned to make source code changes? If it does make a difference to you, then you have a legit gripe.
I’m not baiting you, I just really want to know. So many people complain about stuff not being “Free” because you can’t look at the source nor “roll your own patch”, but how often does it truly happen?
You’re failing to make the distinction between “free” and “open source.” Opera is free (and now ad-free, as well), but is not open source software.
Firefox is F/OSS all the way.
<em>You’re failing to make the distinction between “free” and “open source.”</em>
No, *you* fail to understand the Free Software Movement and the distinction between free as in *freedom *and free as in price. Open Source Movement != Free Software Movement. Even though they generally refer to the same software, their goals are very different.
I’ve always wondered about this. How does being Free make a difference? Are you a hard-core hacker (in the traditional sense) who looks at the source code to patch it yourself?
I don’t think you need to be a hardcore hacker. I don’t consider myself a hardcore hacker yet I’ve patched source code and in fact I run a patched version of windowmaker that I patched myself. I haven’t messed with firefox’s source code but someone else has the opportunity to. That makes all the difference. Some of the patches I have on windowmaker were just updated patches from previous versions. No one updated them so I took it upon myself to. Non-open source code doesn’t afford you the ability to do that. Maybe you can’t make patches but there are plenty of people who can that wouldn’t be able to if the source was closed. That is what open source is all about.
“Free” software has to do with the rights the end user is entitled to. You should be able to give your friend a copy of the program on a disk. You should be able to change it if you are so inclined. You should be able to understand what the program is going to do to your computer.
Imagine buying a car with it’s hood welded shut and the manufacturer said it was illegal to open the hood of the car to see the engine? I doubt many people would find this acceptable even if most people can’t even work on the engine itself.
Imagine buying a car with it’s hood welded shut and the manufacturer said it was illegal to open the hood of the car to see the engine? I doubt many people would find this acceptable even if most people can’t even work on the engine itself.
I believe high-end marks like Ferrari do not allow tinkering with their engines by anyone else but a professional. Same goes for basically every computer part out there: as soon as you open it, warranty is void.
So it’s not all that uncommon.
AGREE WITH THOM!! VERY GOOD
))
It’d be good if software manufacturers warrantied their software. Thom was totally off the ball.
It’d be good if software manufacturers warrantied their software. Thom was totally off the ball.
No, he wasn’t. Commercial software DOES have a warranty, this is called customer support. With Firefox the only support you have is… The Mozillazine forum, so, good luck
With Opera, the support is qualified as long as you pay.
Same goes for a car. Buy a car from a thief and you have no support. Buy a car from an authorized dealer and you have some one to fix your car if it breaks.
You really have what you pay for in this world.
Sorry man. The car company _has_ to fix your problems if your car doesn’t work as advertised. If I goto a standards based webpage that opera say it supports and opera doesn’t work correctly there is no obligation that they have to give you a patched version of their software to make it work. If you find anything different in their documentation, i’ll stand corrected.
Also
from http://www.mozilla.org/support/
Third-party Support Options
Paid support is also available from the following independent provider:
* InfoSpan – Telephone support at 1-888-586-4539 is available for Firefox 0.9 and above, Thunderbird 0.8 and above, and final Mozilla release versions 1.5, 1.6, and above. $39.95 per incident.
So if support is your idea of warranty firefox does have it.
Edited 2006-01-04 19:29
$39.95 per incident. So if support is your idea of warranty firefox does have it.
Why not. But think about it:
Firefox $39/incident
Opera $39/year
I can give away 100000 copies of firefox to my friends, that would cost approx 39X100000-bulk savings for opera. Still looking good?
I can give away 100000 copies of firefox to my friends, that would cost approx 39X100000-bulk savings for opera. Still looking good?
Yes you can. Do you have 100000 friends? If so, will you do it? In my case, I only need one copy of Opera. If I want more than one copy, I download one more at no cost. No point inventing a problem when there ain’t.
No, but i have 10 friends and each of them have 10 friends and each of them have 10 friends and each of them have 10 friends […] and each of them have 2 computers each.
Edited 2006-01-04 19:42
Where did you get that info about Firefox?
http://www.osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=13175&comment_id=81694
Also
from http://www.mozilla.org/support/
Third-party Support Options
Paid support is also available from the following independent provider:
* InfoSpan – Telephone support at 1-888-586-4539 is available for Firefox 0.9 and above, Thunderbird 0.8 and above, and final Mozilla release versions 1.5, 1.6, and above. $39.95 per incident.
So if support is your idea of warranty firefox does have it.
Edited 2006-01-04 19:41
“No, he wasn’t. Commercial software DOES have a warranty, this is called customer support. With Firefox the only support you have is… The Mozillazine forum, so, good luck
”
have you ever tried getting support from microsoft? i’d take the mozillazine forum over that any day.
have you ever tried getting support from microsoft? i’d take the mozillazine forum over that any day.
You’re taking a special case here: Microsoft, you couldn’t have chosen worse. We’re talking about Opera. Opera and Microsoft couldn’t be more different, and they can’t stand each other BTW. So let’s compare Firefox to Opera, shall we? At least on the Opera forum, people are not narrow-minded and arrogant like on Mozillazine. And Opera’s paid support is excellent.
That is a very different scenario. You CAN actually tinker with it but it voids the warranty. There is no warranty on GPL or even most software for that matter. Closed source actually prevents you from even tinkering whether or not you void the warranty.
Learn assembly. It’s not _that_ hard.
I don’t remember ever getting a piece of software with a warranty. Bad analogy man.
In the UK this is illegal, as without opening say a computer case / car hood, i can’t varify what components are inside, in the UK it is perfectly okay to open a PC case, its if you break anything while you’re inside the case your warranty goes up in a poof of smoke, unless there is proven to be an inherent fault with the component.
Well, that part is correct, but completely irrelevant in regard to software, since software comes without a warranty.
software comes without a warranty
As I said, software warranty is called customer support.
No,… a warranty is a contract that guarantees they will fix it if it doesn’t work correctly. If i goto a standards based webpage that opera is supposed to support and it does not work they are not obligated to give you a fixed version of their software. If you find documentation otherwise, i stand corrected.
If i goto a standards based webpage that opera is supposed to support and it does not work they are not obligated to give you a fixed version of their software
Oh, please, every product/service has limitations, this is called “Acceptable Use Policy”.
First, it’s not Opera’s fault if 99% of web sites are not standard complient.
Second, you won’t go back to the car dealer, mad at him, because you weren’t able to cross a river with your car. Although there is a warranty, every warranty has limits. End of the story.
It is not the same.
A warranty also means the company behind the product is legally responsible (at least in Denmark). Customer support does not equal a warranty.
Please look up the term warranty in a legal dictionary.
I am not even slightly familiar with Dutch law, but the voiding of an extended warranty is not comparable to the legal and technical lengths certain software makers engage in here to secure their wares from modification. Contrary to the discussion further-on in the thread, while there are vague similarities between the services provided by an extended warranty and the support offered for free or at a fee by software makers, software licenses are not often sold with a warranty. It is the norm for a software maker to disclaim any guarantee of fitness that it is legally capable of doing so.
Imagine buying a car with it’s hood welded shut and the manufacturer said it was illegal to open the hood of the car to see the engine?
I doubt many people would find this acceptable even if most people can’t even work on the engine itself.
Try calling GM and telling them you want the source code to the OBD ECM firmware that is running in their car(s) and see what they say ? Or how about the blueprints and design specs for the LS1 smallblock ? I’m sure they’ll tell you its anything but an open source free for all when it comes to their software and design work.
As for analogies operating systems do not have a closed hood anymore than a car considering you can swap out hacked system components just as you can change an intake on some cars.
Linux runs on computers with closed firmware, closed chip designs etc. Linux is still “Free” software. Just because you drill down into proprietary components doesn’t invalidate the analogy. Of course, all of this should be “free”, and eventually it will be (hopefully).
That’s terrible. You can still view the source code of any software — the machine code, or even assembly with a disassembler. You just can’t see the original source code used, the tools and the process. Just as you can’t see/use the tools, the process and blueprints for most cars.
Because if it’s RMS’s definition of free, it belongs to you, in as much as you can do anything with it, -except- place further restrictions on it (it’s not just yours, it’s -ours-). An example… if Wordperfect had been made free, we’d still have it and perhaps the world wouldn’t be so polluted with .doc files. Another example, I have onboard sound and a parallel port CD burner that are useless under windows newer than win98 because their respective vendors have chosen not to support them and their windows drivers were proprietary. But on the latest Linux they work perfectly, thanks to free software. (and yes I have done minor tweaks to makefiles, etc to make stuff work even though I’m not a developer). Oh, and a 3rd example… I lost a lot of data by depending on a backup program called “Fastback” some years ago… when my computer finally did totally fail, I found the software would not work on it’s replacement… Fastback had by then disappeared, and the backup format was proprietary.
Opera is great(yes, it’s absolutely the fastest), but I will not allow myself to become dependent on proprietary software ever again. And for what it’s worth, I respectfully suggest you don’t either.
(to stay on topic… On Linux if I could only have 1 browser it would be Mozilla; but Firefox rules on windows)
“How does being Free make a difference? Are you a hard-core hacker (in the traditional sense) who looks at the source code to patch it yourself?”
Well, as someone who does know how to program with C++ and Qt I could modify it and patch it if it were licensed as open source software. I might even be able to improve on it. Last I heard Opera did use Qt and that would mean the odds are good that the programming language for it is C++. The notion that it takes a “hard-core hacker” to do these kinds of things is as misinformed as the notion that malicious “hackers” are all experienced experts on security when the majority are meere wannaby script kiddies (hackers in training if you want, just like programmers in the making can still understand at least some commercially written code and maybe improve upon it).
“How many F/OSS programs have you scanned to make source code changes?”
Not all OSS developers look at other source code in order to improve it. They tend to if they spot a mistake, but for the most part I’ve known people to look at source code out of curiosity.
There’s other advantages to open source, it’s not always about rolling out your own patches and improving the product yourself. While installing Red Hat once I saw this one quote that basically said “would you buy a car with the hood welded shut”. Would you? Even if you didn’t know how to fix cars? I think it’s a good analogy. Just because you don’t know how to program doesn’t mean there aren’t others out there who (going along with the analogy) could be considered as mechanics for that software, and they could fix it for you at a much better rate (and possibly faster) than if you were to send that car back to the manufacturer, if only the hood could be opened. How about just finding out what’s in your software, it might not be important for you but for governments and organizations with sensitive data it either is or should be. Need an example, how about that third party fix for the WMF vulnerability in Windows. Sure Windows is a closed source product which proves that something doesn’t need to be OSS to benifit from third party patches, but if it were OSS imagine how much easier it could have been to make the patch and possibly how much better the patch could be under the hood.
I wouldn’t claim open source to be the end-all solution to the world’s software problems, but I think using open source over proprietary software is perfectly fine.
i’d like to add here:
if cars where ‘closed source’ you could only go to the original manufacturer for repairs. no-one else could help you. this would increase prices enormously, just as it does with software…
The most common reason for me to have the code, is so that I can recompile it with full optimization for my hardware and turn on and off the features I need.
This is usually not very difficult, just download the SRPMS and rebuild with the options you want. Usually you don’t actually need to look at the code as it is an automated build process.
Now and then, I have also made some minor modifications to software. As an example when I used KDE I always hated the popup menu that shows up over the drop target when you drag and drop files in konquerer.
I changed the popup so that it always did move unless some modifier keys was pressed. I also changed the control panel so that it was possible for my users chose if they wanted mine or the default KDE behavior.
This was surprisingly simple and only took a few hours even though I had no previous experience of QT, and was rather rusty at C++ as I mostly work with usability nowdays.
It is also a good example of a modification I had to do myselef as it is not a politically correct among KDE people to think that my more windows like drag&drop behavior gives better usability. Filing a bug report would never had helped. However, as the code was available we all could have it the way we liked it.
“How does being Free make a difference? Are you a hard-core hacker (in the traditional sense) who looks at the source code to patch it yourself? How many F/OSS programs have you scanned to make source code changes? If it does make a difference to you, then you have a legit gripe. I’m not baiting you, I just really want to know. So many people complain about stuff not being “Free” because you can’t look at the source nor “roll your own patch”, but how often does it truly happen?”
As an end-user and non-programmer, there is only one real benefit of FOSS (Free Open Source Software) to me (or anyone else in my position). The source code is visible to everyone (including actual programmers) and these people who can see the code and understand it use it themselves.
Think about that for just a moment: people who can vet the code use it themselves.
That necessarily means the code is free of any sort of malware.
Guaranteed.
That guarantee is not available for Opera. Indeed, historically, Opera is adware.
Freedom helps you by insuring (not assuring) that the code will remain usable for you.
They can’t suddenly change it back to using ads on you
.
I rarely read other people’s code. It’s quite a bit of work to actually modify a project you’ve never seen before; because you have to get somewhat familiar with it to find what it was you needed to modify anyway.
But the main thing is: It’s as much yours as it is the developers. That’s a powerful thing to have on your side, as a user.
That means that if the person making it dies/goes out of business/gets bored/finds it unprofitable you can fix it yourself (which will likely involve hiring someone to do it as you’re obviously a busy person).
There are good practical reasons why Free software is important and why it is a valuable asset. I’m not saying Free or nothing (I’ve used Opera quite extensively, I swore by it for a long time); but Free should definitely be factored in to your equation.
In much the same way. If a company guaranteed your data but had a tiny feature set (which you could get by with reasonably) you’d want that over their competitors. Why? If their program costs you money, guess who you can sue
. This would be, of course, assuming a perfect legal system (you’ve gotta factor that in too when you have legal concerns).
I realize I should have prefaced my question with the fact that I’m a firm believer in F/OSS. However, I also believe in using the product that works best for you, whether proprietary or not. If a suitable program is available as F/OSS, I’ll use it. If not, then I’ll use proprietary.
I agree w/ most of what Richard Stallman says about Free software, but I’m not as religious about it. In this case, I prefer to use Opera as my web browser even though FF is open-source. I feel Opera gives me a better user-experience, but I still use FF for certain applications when it works better.
I wasn’t saying it was an absolute, that’s what RMS says. I’m saying it’s a practical factor that should be considered and not ignored.
Honestly, in non-creative programs it doesn’t make a whole lot of difference which you use. It takes a mass market using a massively non-compliant program to cause real damage (ie, IE). It’s creative programs where lock-in becomes more dangerous in my opinion.
This is why you won’t see most developers touch a language which isn’t free ($$) and has only one implementation in progress. I don’t think it’s possible to make a language which isn’t open, but I suppose one could make a language which doesn’t allow implementing it; this would probably also cause it to be left unconsidered by most developers.
So why do developers do this? Because they don’t want to spend 2,000 hours writing something which can immediately become useless.
Yes, you can write your own Java. See gjc.
Non-developers seem to be much more trusting that their technology will continue working until they no longer care about their work they did with it. Maybe it’s because developers are more aware of the complications of creating even simple systems.
You bring up an interesting point, which I agree with but doesn’t seem to appear in real life. If most developers won’t touch a free language, then why is VB so popular, not to mention the other “MS-only” languages?
I remember when VB6 support was dropped and MS pushed everyone to VB.NET. Developers cried loud and long about having to learn essentially a new language. A perfect example of proprietary language lock-in yet it’s an extremely popular one. Me, I use standard or open-source languages like Python, PHP, or C/C++.
I guess the big question is, if Opera were opened up, how much of a difference would it make?
But hey, it’s a cool browser.
It’s not a browser, it’s an internet suite. If you only use the browser, there’s no point.
“It’s also not Free.”
im guessing your going for free as in freedom.
why? because it have been free (as in beer) for years now. first it was addware, and now its freeware (no adds or anything like that).
It’s also not Free.
Yes it is.
err, i put it in quotes. as in, i got it from the post i replyed to.
ok. so maybe the socialy acceptable way on this page is to put quotes in italic?
That’s why I capitalized the ‘F’, I hoped that’d make the statement more clear. Also, I’m not a complete idiot; I am aware that they’ve stopped charging for it as I do read OSNews
.
I also said that I’ve used several versions, which indicates that I must be somewhat familiar with the product. I think I’d know if I paid for it.
But I’m guessing you were just clarifying that for the Peanut Gallery
.
yep, there is allways a problem with that free word…
just making sure i understood the reason for the post before attacking it as a potential ignition spark
in my subjective tests, Opera is faster.
But had the article had a section on stability, Firefox would have won.
“With Opera recently releasing their web browser completely free of Ads,”
“recently”? i don’t think so… that happened months ago… http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2005/09/20/
“more compliant.”
hello? xslt? not supported in 8.x, horribly broken in 9.0 preview. xmlhttprequest? horribly broken (ever try setting headers?)… need i continue?
i think i’ll stick with konqueror, which is even faster and more standards compliant (acid2 test, anyone?)…
acid2 is really far from real life and far from really badly needed standards.
have you even looked at what the acid2 test is designed to test? css, png transparency, data urls… all very useful and definitely not “far from real life and far from really badly needed standards”.
I agree about the acid tests being far from reality however, firefox fans continually use this “Standards compliant” argument when comparing Firefox to IE.
xmlhttprequest
xmlhttprequest is everything but a standard. Maybe a Google standard?
XMLHTTPRequest is a Microsoft “standard.” Google is so innovative it even gets credit for Microsoft’s work now.
*cough* ECMA standard. There is a reason that IE + gecko based browsers have supported it for so long.
i think i’ll stick with konqueror
Ok, fine, open Gmail in Opera and in Konqueror, then we talk.
“Ok, fine, open Gmail in Opera and in Konqueror, then we talk.”
i don’t use gmail’s web interface at all, so i don’t really care…
actually, now that i look at it, i like the plain interface much better than the slow, buggy “normal” one…
Ok, fine, open Gmail in Opera and in Konqueror, then we talk.
Neither have much room for bragging. I gave opera a try a couple weeks back, and composing an email could crash it about %20 of the time. I checked opera’s site, saw they knew about it, and then saw they have no intention of offering a fix until the next official release.
On a technical level I think opera wins the prize for the most part, especially in the gui. But that’s just way too slow a response to something I consider critical for a browser to support.
It’s been a long time I’ve told it. Opera uses less memory, is faster, loads faster, is more feature-rich that firefox-base.
In other words, it’s better.
funny though, that all browsers on my windows system have pretty much the same load time from cold boot, and the same low memory usage: Below 30 MB of ram with 10+ tabs opened with heavy pages loaded in all tabs though FF has some issues after a longer period of use (not freeing the memory).
IE, Opera, FF, Mozilla, Netscape 7.2 and K-Meleon all starts in around than 5 seconds. And IE, Mozilla, Netscape 7.2 and K-Meleon all benefits from preloading when starting new instance (just remember to click on the icon in the systray – especially for K-meleon. Otherwise it’ll ruin the menues in K-Meleon).
I’ve tried Opera several times, and it’s okay but doesn’t really give me anything special. And it lacks several elements from Firefox. I have a nice little collection of extensions I can’t get for Opera. But Mozilla/Netscape with preloading is great too, and K-Meleon is the ruler – don’t need links2 for sure
I have no idea why but on my computer opera takes ages to load whereas galeon is lightning fast. probably because qt has to be loaded everytime.
I don’t have any problems about standard compliance or anything with galeon/firefox so I see no reason to change to opera.
“qt has to be loaded everytime”
Lets not jump the gun and blame Qt yet, KDE programs may start slow outside of KDE, but that is because KDE is so tied together that more than just the program needs to be loaded. Qt itself doesn’t have that limitation.
There are different possibilities for why it could be slower, it may simply be that GTK is preloaded if you use a GTK based desktop, and so GTK based software will start faster for you than Qt. There’s also the possibility that Galleon itself gets preloaded, I’ve seen it done. Also being a proprietary program means that Opera cannot always be fully otimized for the distribution it’s going to run on, or since there’s really a lot of code that goes into making a web browser, who’s to say that it isn’t any other part of the code that makes it start slower.
There are far too many variables involved to base the speed of Qt off one program that uses it. That would be like me basing the speed of GTK on how long it takes for Evolution or if you preffer FireFox to fully load as compared to KMail or Konqueror, all under KDE.
Every time Opera releases a new version, I put it on my machine and usually remove it within an hour. It consistently has problems rendering (sometimes simple) pages and generally feels weird.
I’ll stick with Firefox but for those who use and like Opera, enjoy!
Edited 2006-01-04 18:23
I had the same experience. I loaded opera on linux (with the free licenses they gave away) and also on windows. It rendered half of news.google.com and then stopped. Very disappointing. I had high hopes.
Also, the user interface is not something i find very appealing. I’ll stick to firefox on windows and konqueror on linux. Opera just doesn’t float my boat.
… because Firefox has all the plugins and Opera has none! ( Adblock kicks a$% )
Firefox plugins just poorly emulate functionality that was in Opera a decade ago.
GreaseMonkey
IETab
Platypus
Aardvark
AdBlock
Web Developer-toolbar
FlashGot
BugMeNot
Need I continue? All great extensions. Opera doesn’t provide an equivalent functionality for most of (/all?) these plug-ins.
Quote: Need I continue? All great extensions. Opera doesn’t provide an equivalent functionality for most of (/all?) these plug-ins.
Horse Hockey. Prarie pies. Manure. Bullshit even.
GreaseMonkey – BUILT IN… This one in particular pisses me off every time someone says it, because AGAIN opera had this FIRST – in fact Opera was doing realtime site-based javascripts before greasemonkey was a twinkle in some OSS fanboys eye; that it runs greasemonkey scripts with little or no modifications “out of the box” yet people STILL say this is very special… In the same way some olympics are special.
AdBlock – see my previous post, where I forgot to mention there’s a file you can enable called ‘filters.ini’ that you can add urls to that opera will never access (see the virtuelvis.com link below). You can also always fall back on Privoxy, which is also very good. http://www.privoxy.org
IETab – Wow, a firefox user complaining about not being able to use IE without starting IE. Cute development tool but in that case just start IE (if it’s available… I’m sure linux and OS X users care a whole lot about this one…) I can semi-get the same functionality out of using the ‘open page in ______’ buttons which are easy enough to create (or drag and drop from the opera wiki on nontroppo) although those actually spawn the browser in question (but have the advantage you can make it launch ANY browser including safari on OS X, Konqueror under linux, amana, whatever floats your boat)
Flashgot – Unlike Firefox, Opera’s download manager WORKS meaning the only thing missing is the ‘get all’… but I’ll stack opera’s ‘quick download’ and tasking model that doesn’t freeze up every time you grab a file over the nightmare that is downloading files from firefox.
BugMeNot – There is a bugmenot button available for Opera, though it will not auto-fill in the password fields for you it does pull up passwords for the current site. (I’m playing with making a .js that will turn it into a auto-fill). Of course since you only need to copy them once, then can have ‘the wand’ autofill them for you it’s almost as good. Have a look at:
http://nontroppo.org/wiki/CustomButtons
The bugmenot button is on that page. In fact, people complaining about the lack of opera extensions should take a good hard look at that site… Yes, you can drag and drop ANY of those from that page into opera’s toolbars and have them work.
Web Developer Toolbar – http://nontroppo.org/wiki/WebDevToolbar – which works WAY better than the FF one. (installation is simpler too)
Platypus and Aardvark are cute tools if you are editing other peoples sites. 99% of the world could give a {censored}. Hell, I’m a site developer and generally I find them more hindrance than help (just like FF itself)
Aardvark in particular is one I never quite grasp, since if I’m editing the page source I should ALREADY know what every damned element on the page IS. Never quite understood it’s purpose.
You should also have a look at:
http://virtuelvis.com/archives/2005/01/opera-and-firefox-extensions
Which has some instructions for many of the things you complain are ‘missing’ and does a pretty good job at debunking this ‘no extensions’ nonsense. Opera doesn’t need as many extensions mostly because most of the things people are adding to Firefox… Opera ALREADY HAS.
Edited 2006-01-05 19:50
I don’t voluntarily use IE, except at work where I can’t use anything else. I like FF for some of the extensions, especially Turbo dTa for mass media downloads. But my main browser is Opera. I have it installed on all three of my computers and I’ve occasionally snuck it onto office computers when I can.
I have to agree that having extensions would be nice, but I think Opera may be like Apple. They probably want to control the program so they can guarantee it works. I’ve used several FF extensions that caused FF to crash.
I do think Opera has a faster browser, especially compared to IE. The Acid2 test doesn’t matter to me, since many web sites aren’t W3C compliant anyway.
I do think Opera has a faster browser, especially compared to IE
Hit “Back” in IE and Firefox: they reload the page and it takes 5-10 seconds.
Hit “Back” in Opera: it shows the page instantly without reloading the content.
Same goes for closing and re-opening. You load content just once in Opera.
Not to mention the “fast-rewind” and “fast-forward” buttons. Makes it easy to browse multi-page articles and get back to the main page quickly.
Firefox 1.5 caches the page structure, back and forward are instant.
This has been fixed in Firefox 1.5. When I hit back the page loads instantly. In fact the only annoyances I had with firefox are now gone in the newest version (like the strange mouseover highlight problem with firefox menus). It did break some extensions but now I’m only waiting on the wizz bookmarks extension to be updated.
I have tried Opera at numerous times, but I always end up going back to Firefox. Even with my recent dissapointment in FF 1.5 (unstable + memory hog) I haven´t changed browser.
Its not that Opera is not a great browser – it certainly is. It has more to do with the fact, that FF has become a platform itself, with all its great extensions.
That is IMHO why FF is getting harder and harder to beat.
That is IMHO why FF is getting harder and harder to beat.
What extensions do you use that provide features that Opera doesn’t have out of the box?
FYI, in Firefox I only use sessionsaver and mousegestures extensions. It would be nice if this came by default in Firefox.
“What extensions do you use that provide features that Opera doesn’t have out of the box?”
Adblock and noscript over here. Opera might be able to provide a blunt “block all such content” option, but in Firefox using these plugins I can block only certain graphics based on filters (no more annoying flashing graphic/flash player ads for me), and using noscript I can block specific domains without blocking Javascript altogether, and all with very convenient access to both options.
Try using Webwasher – http://www.cyberguard.com/products/webwasher/webwasher_products/cla… – with Opera to block ads and other undesired content. It works perfectly with Opera (and FF as well). It allows you to set up filters, block images/plugins/applets and so on.
I’ve used Opera for ages (can’t remember which version – 3? 4?) and have periodically tried Firefox but have always gone back to Opera quickly. I don’t have to faff around with myriad extensions that provide functionality that Opera has built-in and Opera has always been faster for me (dual 1.8Ghz HT Xeons).
There’s a problem with that and what you’re saying though.
You’re saying that Opera has the functionality built in, I mentioned two plugins which Opera doesn’t have the functionality of and you pointed out a 3rd party product.
That third party product is not built into Opera, and it’s a Windows application which means it doesn’t help Mac Opera users or Linux Opera users.
FireFox plugins generally work with FireFox on any platform.
Adblock and noscript over here. Opera might be able to provide a blunt “block all such content” option, but in Firefox using these plugins I can block only certain graphics based on filters (no more annoying flashing graphic/flash player ads for me), and using noscript I can block specific domains without blocking Javascript altogether, and all with very convenient access to both options.
Opera has these right out of the box.
Could you tell me where? I’ve used the most recent Opera release and I didn’t see that anywhere. I’m not simply talking about being able to block out all animations and javascript, but blocking particular ones using rules to target specific domains (and in the case of images it can be as simple as a small part of the url) that can be be adapted and applied without even having to click or press a reload button/key.
I love noscript. Amazingly enough, ha ha, it ends up blocking most ads!
And I even get to notice which sites are using way too much javascript (only something a geek would care about, but I’m allowed to be a geek ok?).
Whitelisting is nice when you’ve got a really easy way to do it.
The plug-in architecture is great, but if and if only not too excessive.
The problem with it: incompatibilities between version (and minor version!) and with other plug-ins.
Another example: Eclipse, which has a great architecture that allows everyone to extend easily but try it if you need some features that are only as plugins, than you will understand what I mean. And it is worse if you work in a team which everyone do not has exactly plugins what you have. Even a small different can result that a project can’t be opened on other systems! It is really a nightmare!
I myself prefer an integrated monolithic system which has some interfaces for plugins to extend it but guarantee that no plugins can bring it down (stable).
Jup, I agree completely.
I am a long time Opera user. I have been using it since v. 4 and it is indeed the only browser that can assure me to (almost) completely not to use IE.
It is slim, elegance, agile, and solid…just like a worthy beautiful lady
)
I would define “solid”: I open browser when I wake up in the morning and close it when I wanna go to sleep and shut down the computer in the night. And it never and ever hangup. For example now there are 35 tabs. Try it with Firefox, and you will see either it brings your system down or it shuts down itself.
It render very fast too. And of course full of feature in just 3,5 MB setup file.
In my opinion, Firefox or Mozilla is slower than IE.
No…I dont care with Open Source or Close Source. What I care is: how to do and finish my job faster and exactly what I want. And I have no problem at all to pay some $$$ for a really good software.
——————————–
<a href=”http://www.bcm.fh-furtwangen.de“>IT Business Consulting BCM – Faculty of BIT – Furtwangen University
I’ll generally take Opera now that it’s free… which was the ONLY thing preventing my using it daily. Closed/Open source means NOTHING to me, for me it’s a matter of what works.
Generally speaking I’ve found it completely stable (especially compared to that flaky piece of crap gecko engine). Firefox (and all other gecko browsers) have consistantly locked up to the point I have to kill them in task manager (or the *nix equivalent) chewing max cpu and absurd amounts of memory in EVERY release I’ve tried over the past year and a half. I wouldn’t even have gecko based browsers installed if I didn’t have to bother with them for site compatability testing.
Opera on the other hand has become my primary browser since it went free on all three OS platforms I use regularly (XP, Linux, OS X)… In fact I’m running the 9.0 beta and finding it more stable than ANY firefox ‘stable’ I’ve ever tried. Generally I can crash Firefox after less than 20 minutes of use – consistantly on ANY OS or machine…
and anyone who comes across ‘simple sites’ that don’t render right probably haven’t tried opera since version 6. Seriously, give 8.5 a shot, it’s just better. It has javascripting (akin to greasemonkey or trixie) BUILT IN, to the point many greasemonkey scripts run out of the box. Don’t like it’s behavior? Change it. You can make your own buttons on the bar by simply typing in english what you want it to do! (close page, go to next page)… all keyboard combinations (ctrl-alt-click to open new page in background for example) work with ALL links inside it, even in the bookmarks menu. Drag and drop a websites favicon onto a toolbar, and boom, button on the toolbar that takes you to that url.
Hell, half the crap people add on to firefox as extensions are already BUILT INTO Opera. Given that 90% of firefox’s innovations were just copied from Opera, and that of the companies/groups still making browsers Opera has been around the longest, the choice doesn’t seem that hard.
At least until IE7 shows up and slaps Firefox down as the amaturish incomplete unpolished mess it is.
At least until IE7 shows up and slaps Firefox down as the amaturish incomplete unpolished mess it is.
Puh-lease. I really hope that IE7 gets a lot better but I doubt there will be much change. I’m looking forward to png transparency but it’s going to take a lot more than that “slap Firefox down”. As it stands IE is the unpolished mess and Firefox is getting more polished all the time. I use it on a daily basis and the only trouble I ever run into are crashes on certain pages that contain multimedia. I beleive that is an issue with a plugin though, not Firefox itself.
Personally I stuck with Firefox for ages because it’s open source and deserves to be promoted.
However, eventually it just became too slow and impossible to use. Partly this is Windows fault I suspect, but even so, Firefox really is a big program and doesn’t run very fast at the best of times. The fact that it’s a platform probably has a lot to do with this.
It’s been quite a relief to use Opera since it became ad-free. In my opinion it has a lot going for it, including the excellent embedded/mobile versions.
FF runs slow on any OS. I’ve got on Linux, Windows, and OS X and it’s almost as slow as IE. It’s also a major resource hog. Many times I’ll download something and try to continue browsing but have to wait 5-10 seconds for a mouse click to register. This happens on every OS so I would guess that it’s something in FF. Even upgrading it doesn’t help.
Opera is /defaintely/ faster. My 800 mhz 256mb ram laptop crawls under firefox. Tabs take AGES to open, forms react very slowly. Opera takes ~1 minute to open the 70 or so windows I have and then remains insanely responsive. Every now and then it’ll take the GUI time to catch up, but even then I can queuing up keyboard commands and mouse clicks like crazy and within 4 seconds the queue will clear out. Firefox just blocks, stops responding, doesnt queue anything, freezes.
Opera is the only way I can web browse, literally.
Opera 1 out of 13 unpatched.
Firefox 3 out of 26 unpatched.
Now it is posible to have 1 security hole thats worse then 3 other holes. Not all mistakes are created equally.
I’m not saying that this single hole is worse then firefox’s 3 holes, I’m just saying that number of security holes in two different products doesn’t prove the one with the least holes safer.
Opera is a nice browser
Opera is a nice browser
I repeat: Opera is NOT a browser, it’s an Internet Suite. The whole point of Opera is having integrated E-Mail, Chat client, Usenet, Browser, Notes, etc…!
And yet the component that most people use is the web browser, thus when they reffer to the part they use, saying the Opera web browser is in fact accurate. After all, you yourself said that part of the Opera suite is the browser component.
While true, I only use the browser part.
Perhaps it’s more correct to say “Opera has a nice browser”…?
By the way: Netscape and Mozilla were suites as well, but folks have called them “browsers” for as long as I can remember…
It’s possible, but it’s easy to check on Secunia to find out for sure. It’s rated “not critical” — a 1 on a scale of 1 to 5. You can also see that’s it’s relatively recent, dating from November 16, 2005.
Firefox has one from December with the same rating, but the other two are “less critical” — a 2 on their scale, and date from August and September of 2004. There’s actually a 4th rated “moderately critical” (a 3) from May ’05 that’s listed as being partly fixed.
Of course, both are far better than IE and don’t let the current nasty WMF Windows exploit work without requiring at least some user interaction.
Edited 2006-01-04 21:33
I don’t give a f#ck whether it’s open or closed source, I just use the best product, and I also don’t care to have paid $39 a year. This is what I spend a week-end in food!
For years I wanted to like Opera (it is good after all to have alternatives). Every new release I was hoping it would get better, but if anything it kept getting worse, especially the linux version.
The reasons? Many. It is unintuitive, it has fewer features than Firefox, it is slow (yes), it crashes…
I have just reinstalled it to try the Acid2 test and, guess what? It failed.
It is unintuitive, it has fewer features than Firefox, it is slow (yes), it crashes…
I have just reinstalled it to try the Acid2 test and, guess what? It failed.
None of this is true. You’re inventing. You’re a miserable troll.
If anybody is a well known troll that is you.
But in the crazy world of OSNews apparently you don’t deserve to be modded down for insulting people, while I deserve to be modded down just for expressing an opinion.
I don’t use Opera on my desktop, but I must say Opera Mini is an awesome piece of software on my mobile phone. It has changed the way I browse the internet, and comparing it with the built-in mobile browser is like comparing Firefox 1.5 with Internet Explorer 4.0.
http://www.opera.com/download/operamini/
I find the issue of how fast browsers are interesting. In most of the sites I visit I find Firefox is faster then Opera, so it hits a nerve when Opera claims to be faster. But, on massive sites with many images, the crown seems to go to Opera.
Anyways, test for yourself what’s “faster”:
http://www.numion.com/Stopwatch/
(Yahoo is 2x as fast for me on FF 1.5 vs Opera 8.5 in Windows, Exite is slightly faster, so is infoseek, but OSnews is faster in Opera)(and yes I cleared my cache)
I’ve since moved to Opera on all of my Windows boxes, after I found Firefox using 500 MB of physical RAM. I just said to myself “This is bullshit, I’m not going to take it anymore, because I have a choice.”
I found Firefox using 500 MB of physical RAM.
Jeez… Firefox is worse than I thought!!!
Nonsense. Perhaps if you count whatever was cached or paged out it totalled 500 megs, but being that I run firefox myself under Windows I find it real hard to believe that firefox was using 500 megs of actual physical memory. Firefox runs just fine for me on an xp system with a mere 256 megs of ram.
At any rate, after reading this article, I decided to give opera a spin today on my imac. All I can say, I don’t know what the heck these people are talking about when they say opera is faster than firefox. Opera takes ages to load a page.
When you have 2 GB of RAM, and you reboot maybe once every two months, Firefox’s massive memory leaks would bring it to 500 MB of physical RAM usage too.
Have you considered it could be something to do with your plugins? Or something to do with your extensions?
And if it was, does that somehow take fault away from Firefox? After all, most extensions are written with purely XUL and javascript (though it is possible to use C++). javascript is supposed to be garbage collected.
In the end, people care about (a) having the features they want (b) an acceptable footprint, not one or the other. They don’t care that it’s an extension causing a problem, it should just work.
Just because it’s garbage collected doesn’t mean you can’t suck up memory over time. An example in python:
list = []
def functionICallALot(x):
list.append(x)
def functionThatCleansThisUp(x):
list.remove(x)
A note: Remove removes the first value of x, if there’s more they won’t be removed.
See how this list could build up forever, with even a small mistake where I appent twice. The garbage collector won’t fix it either.
There may also be some odd things you could ask firefox to do that you shouldn’t. Libraries tend to not be foolproof.
Of course. But the memory issue seems to be so widespread, that the chances of it all being badly coded extensions are slim. At least, that’s my guess, but I could be wrong.
No extensions, no plugins, except what comes in a stock install.
I hate extensions. I don’t need more bloat.
You seriously don’t have any plugins? You never view pdf’s, video, audio, or flash?
Edited 2006-01-05 06:34
I don’t have Flash because Flash is only good for CPU-eating annoying-as-frick ads. PDFs … I have a Mac. I don’t do PDF on my PC. Acrobat is a pig. Video and audio … well, beyond the stock Firefox configuration (and WMP capabilities), no.
“Every time Opera releases a new version, I put it on my machine and usually remove it within an hour. It consistently has problems rendering (sometimes simple) pages and generally feels weird.”
“Every time Opera releases a new version, I put it on my machine and usually remove it within an hour. It consistently has problems rendering (sometimes simple) pages and generally feels weird.”
Absolutely. Apparently Opera users don’t do much surfing. I can’t begin to say how many pages have either been rendered wrong or simply hung up when they were 90something percent loaded, and this is the newest release. Opera still needs lots of work.
I’ve used Opera since 3.6, and these days, I often go days without seeing a single page incompatible. There aren’t many pages I see anymore in the latest version that don’t work in Opera but work in FF.
Same here. Of the few would be: webct.
Unfortunately, this one was annoying for me as I’m one of the unfortunate few who has a school with administrators and professors insane enough to think that webct helps us learn.
Thankfully most of my professors have known better.
Why is it I knew you where going to make a statement like that, and why is it that browsers in Windows use tons of CPU% just to scroll.
Opera is multiplatform like firefox and more secure than IE like Firefox but it is not free (as freedom) software.
Where can I get Opera source code ?
Opera software, open the code and may be you have some chance in PC browser market.
Where can I get Opera source code ?
Who cares? Do you ask your PC manufacturer for the source code of the drivers of the graphics card, sata controller and NIC before buying? No, you buy the damn “closed proprietary driver” computer and shut the f–k up.
Who cares? Do you ask your PC manufacturer for the source code of the drivers of the graphics card, sata controller and NIC before buying? No, you buy the damn “closed proprietary driver” computer and shut the f–k up.
I care because I use linux and no proprietary drivers. Only typical lazzy and stupid windows users don care about source code openess and freedom.
I care because I use linux and no proprietary drivers.
That’s your problem.
Only typical lazzy and stupid windows users don care about source code openess and freedom.
The above should read:
Only typical straight-forward, pragmatic windows users don care about source code openess and freedom.
Your source code philosophy doesn’t stand, sorry. It is non-sense unless you’re a programmer, which is not true for 99,9% of people, so gimme a break.
I care because I use linux and no proprietary drivers. Only typical lazzy and stupid windows users don care about source code openess and freedom.
And what about your BIOS? That’s probably as closed source as something’s ever gonna get… So no matter how hard you try, your x86 computer will never be 100% OSS.
Sad, really.
>> And what about your BIOS?
>> That’s probably as closed source as
>> something’s ever gonna get…
>> So no matter how hard you try,
>> your x86 computer will never be 100% OSS.
Your tax dollars hard at work fixing this problem
LinuxBIOS is a Free Software project aimed at replacing the normal BIOS with a little bit of hardware initialization and a compressed Linux kernel that can be booted from a cold start. The project was started as part of clustering research work in the Cluster Reseach Lab at the Advanced Computing Laboratory at Los Alamos National Laboratory. The primary motivation behind the project was the desire to have the operating system gain control of a cluster node from power on. Other beneficial consequences of using LinuxBIOS include needing only two working motors to boot (cpu fan and power supply), fast boot times (current fastest is 3 seconds), and freedom from proprietary (buggy) BIOS code, to name a few. These secondary benefits are numerous and have helped gain support from many vendors in both the high performance computing as well as embedded computing markets.
http://www.linuxbios.org/index.php/Main_Page
The patent office pretty much does (not the code, just the way to make the hardware).
Why shouldn’t we?
Would it be so harmful for Nic company A to tell us how the device they’re selling us works?
Would it be so harmful for Nvidia or ATI to function like other high-end chip companies (Intel and AMD) and release good documentation?
Would this all be so bad?
If not, why are you so angry?
His comment was pretty silly, I don’t think opening the source is going to make Opera popular; but that’s no reason why it isn’t his perrogative to ask for it anyway. If they’ve the right to close it, we’ve the right to ask they open it.
Nobody’s forcing anyones hand except you buddy.
Because it gives their competition a very good idea on how they do things and an advantage, and that hurts business.
You obviously didn’t read the part where I pointed out two fabulously successful companies which tell how to program for their chips in explicit detail.
No, it doesn’t give their competition a leg up. It gives them a leg up by not doing the job properly and finishing it with documentation (ie, lower devel costs when you don’t have to document it well).
I’m not saying that is always the case, simply giving the reasoning why most companies won’t do it. Because, yes, it can help the competition. There will be companies who can properly do it, and a business doesn’t want to take the chance.
The facts:
Firefox starts in 5 seconds on my Gentoo box.
Opera starts in 7, yes really faster.
All tested in KDE, this means QT environment.
Firefox is compiled, because it’s OpenSource. I can’t compile Opera, because it isn’t OSS. Why is Opensource good. With release of Firefox 1.5 a bug with too long titles appeared, some hours later i ran, a fixed version of Firefox, with patch from some user.
With Stopwatch its one second slower than Firefox on Slo-tech. On slo-tech it loads alternate stysheets after 3 refreshes. Maybe it is faster on your system, but on mine it is slower. If Opera is so fast why does it take so loooong that if I type “Večer” for example tells me that http://večer doesn’t exist, but Firefox opens http://www.vecer.si in fraction of a second. Another example is if I type KDE in opera after 15 seconds I get http://www.kde.com which is only placeholder page, in Firefox I get http://www.kde.org. Why? I know that in Firefox I get “I am lucky” result from Google, but what magic is Opera doing is unknown to me.
For me it is very unintuitive, because it is the only browser I ever used that has very different shortcuts (shortcut for new tab in Ctrl+N instead Ctrl+T for example).
And about standard compliant. It’s position fixed finally supported whitout glitches? In Opera 8.51 no. In Firefox 1.x yes. And what about :target which is not even out yet. And will be in CSS 3 is supported in FF.
What I like with FF is extension, show me webdeveloper toolbar for Opera, FoxyTunes, WML browser, or Adblocker.
I’d use Opera if I could, but the one thing that turns me off every time (at least, other than the mouse gestures that never seem to work quite right) is that I can’t open my webmail account with it unless I pretend to be Internet Explorer (which is odd, since Mozilla/Firefox will open it and the system appears to have been made by Netscape Communications) and even then it periodically won’t work.
If it worked with Opera, I’d use Opera. It opens very fast, scrolls very fast, and does pretty much everything I need a browser to do, and a lot I don’t. It’s amazing that it does more in 4 MB (compressed) than Firefox can do in 5 MB (compressed)… And they seem to be pretty good about Linux support, seeing all those formatted download choices.
IE identifies as “Mozilla/4.0 compatible”, just like Firefox registers as Mozilla/5.0. Chances are, the code either has old code that checked for the Mozilla string (from the old netscape) and IE and doesn’t worry about anything else since there isnt a majority of users using anything else.
This is not Opera’s fault. But they offer a fix anyway. You can edit a file called UA.ini and tell it to always identify as IE/Mozilla for just that site. Let me know if you need any more info.
With Firefox, I get…
Adblock with the Adblock filterset.g updater == No ads ever
Image Zoom == Right click on images and use the mouse wheel to zoom in and out
FoxyTunes == Control my favorite music app while browsing
Bugmenot extension == right click in nytimes.com and don’t worry about registering
Forecastfox == weather forcasts so I know when to browse the ‘net for a few more hours
When I can get all of this and then some from Opera I might be inclined to try it out again. Opera needs to stay in the only place they dominate, mobile phones.
Adblock with the Adblock filterset.g updater == No ads ever
Image Zoom == Right click on images and use the mouse wheel to zoom in and out
FoxyTunes == Control my favorite music app while browsing
Bugmenot extension == right click in nytimes.com and don’t worry about registering
Forecastfox == weather forcasts so I know when to browse the ‘net for a few more hours
Those are useless toys that I call bloat.
Ok, fine, but I wouldn’t use all those endless and useless extensions, and Opera has tons of hidden features that I’m used to and that I miss in Firefox, so the choice is quick.
I think you’d be hard pressed to find many people who will agree that adblock is “bloat”…
The parent was laying out reasons he likes/sticks with firefox. Having your weather delivered to you like Forecastfox is quick, simple, and extremely convenient. While I see no need for Foxytunes and Image Zoom, I do see the use in mouse gestures (which yes, I know Opera has), adblock (with updater), and forecastfox.
Sure, some computers/users cannot or will not handle such memory/processor usage. Some, however, prefer these extensions to not having them at all.
Opera is an amazing suite. So is Firefox.
Different strokes dude.
Opera is an amazing suite. So is Firefox.
Firefox is not a suite. It doesn’t have a chat client, Usenet client, E-Mail client, notes. Opera does. Still, Firefox uses more memory and disk space. That’s it.
I used the wrong word. My mistake. I did indeed mean to say they are both amazing browsers.
And yes, Firefox does use more memory and space. In today’s age of 100GB+ HDs and 512m+ of RAM, many users simply don’t care.
Yes, I am well aware most people’s computers aren’t exactly modern. There must be some reason Firefox usage is higher than Opera’s – that’s all I’m saying.
Not one is better than the other. Just that different people prefer different things
There must be some reason Firefox usage is higher than Opera’s – that’s all I’m saying.
It’s the trolling that does that. Of course Firefox fanboys call it “advocacy” when they do it.
bloat? ummmmmmmm no. I would call all of the ads that I used to see on the internet bloat. adblock + filterset.g updater takes care of those.
I would call them convenience as they make my life just that much easier… yet another reason I will stay with firefox. Yes, the choice is quick. Firefox has extensions to do anything and everything + more than Opera can do. The choice for me will be firefox.
Everytime I open Firefox or any Gecko-based browser, I feel like my system is trying to pork a 400 pound fat-chick while she’s drinking a milkshake of memory.
Bullshit. I use Opera, but my ex g/f uses Firefox (I switched her to it).
She is going to log into gmail or hotmail with Opera, notice all of the missing features (like no address autocomplete in Gmail, quirky rendering in Hotmail) and she is going to blame it on Opera and switch back.
Linux and OS X are thought to be more secure than Windows. Do consumers give a shit? Most don’t
OpenOffice.org uses open standards and no lock-in whereas MS Office uses closed standards and lock-in? Do consumers give a shit? Nope.
Do consumers give a shit that Opera is more standards compliant than Firefox? Nope. Do they care that Opera is faster? Probably. Are they willing to gain extra speed and lose functionality on many different online services? Nope.
Unless things change, Opera is dead in the water for the vast majority of consumers. Firefox is closer, but still not there.
Have you given them good reason to care? Nope.
Do you expect them to just come up with these ideas on their own? Looks like you do.
Are you talking to them? Doesn’t sound like it.
Are the marketing people talking to them? You bet.
Do marketing people lie? Like dogs.
Opera has a pretty nice following, and its following is the sort that will go on and on about how great Opera is. That’s healthy, and I think that’s what will keep Opera alive. And now that it’s free it might even grow a bit faster.
Having a mediocre browser stinks, but for most people $40 was a bit much to pay for something better. But now they can try for free!
Of course, you have to tell them it’s free; because last they heard it was “only $40!”
She is going to log into gmail or hotmail with Opera, notice all of the missing features (like no address autocomplete in Gmail, quirky rendering in Hotmail) and she is going to blame it on Opera and switch back.
Hm, that’s odd. Autocomplete used to work fine in Opera on GMail. Looks like Google made some changes again to break it (not the first time they’ve changed something in gmail and it stopped working in Opera).
Tried FF, didn’t like it… It felt like using a skinned/tweaked version of IE.
Opera works great for me and it’s secure 🙂
Yeah, I love Opera, I’ve tried LOADS of other web browsers, but I always come back to Opera. When I do occasionally use WinDoze I use Opera. When I use Linux (like 99.99% of the time), I use Opera. I have used Opera (I’ve bought and paid for versions 4, 6, and 7.54, to help support Opera).
I find my internet experience very enjoyable with Opera.
/2 cents
Opera renders better than Firefox? I said honestly..
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. That’s all there is to it.
Tested it, but through it out as I couldn’t get the mail client to to talk to may cyrus-imap server over SSL.
As for browser speed, I can’t say I could notice any difference between that and Firefox 1.5.
The rpm install process messed up Application and Desktop menu of Fedora FC4, and the xml files had to be edited manually to make appear in one and only one place in the Gnome menus.
The default fonts for the GUI had to be tweaked to be of readable size. It didn’t pick up the color theme of my Gnome environment.
If I remember correctly some lib was missing f as well, not a big deal it was only a minor version problem that could be fixed with a symlink, but this kind of error probably would have stopped a newbie from getting it to work at all.
Perhaps it works better on windows, but I wouldn’t recommend it on Fedora FC4 it all felt like rather low quality software compared to Firefox 1.5 and konqueror 3.5.
@ mesomaan:
Have tried it on your own machine?
I suggest you, to try this open-source bios thing, and than of course ask the ATi or nVidia and Intel or AMD to give you the blueprint of their chip design. Or better: make your own processor and give it to the community. Yeah, it would be really successful.
I think the problem is all you, the open source fan. Psichologists would say: too “sensible” or “sensitive”.
Argumenting just because it is open-source than it is the best one is absolutely absurd.
Dont take me wrong, I am also using opensource products like Apache.
We are discussing about desktop and end user, not about clustering. No normal joe or jane user has interest in clustering.
Little bit fan is ok, but too much is sick.
By the way: “fanatic” come from “fan”. And this “fanatic” would become “fundamentalist” or “radicalist” if too much. And you know what it means.
—————————-
http://www.wnb.fh-furtwangen.de Frauenstudiengang WirtschaftsNetze – IT Course for Women – Furtwangen Univ. Germany
Edited 2006-01-04 22:51
Yes actually. Ran it on a pc104 computer with a flash disk for the os. Going into space soon.
The problem with all you closed source people is you don’t think big enough or far enough into the future. It’s the 21 st century now, time to move on.
The extra speed you get with Opera is nice, but it’s only a big deal when I’m using my older laptop, Firefox runs at a pretty decent speed on my newer PC. The thing that keeps me using Opera is it’s selection of features.
Firefox fans keep on bringing up extensions as if they are a killer feature that makes Firefox a lot more powerful than Opera. But many of them are just gimmicks or are full of bugs and are unstable or incompatible. Most of the really useful extensions that I’ve seen simply add features that are available in a default Opera install, things like mouse gestures and saved window sessions.
There are some Extensions that add features that aren’t available in Opera, but then many of Opera’s best features aren’t available in Firefox even with its extensions. Of course the features in Opera are integrated into its elegant and customisable UI, while you have to track down Firefox extensions and hope that they all play nicely together. Overall I think Opera has the advantage here.
konqueror works fine with gmail.
Too bad Opera is much less stable than Firefox on Mac OS X. It is the sole reason I finally switched completely to Firefox and I sure don’t regret it.
When Opera 9 is out and IF it is as stable as Firefox is, the maybe I’ll rethink the switch.
If only it did not look like CRAP. I mean, please, hire a decent designer. Not that FF shines, though (widgets…). This is all in Mac OS X, at least.
As a long time Opera user (version 2 or 3, since 1998) my story is completely different. I switched to FF recently and it’s not because FF is quicker or even better out of the box.
One word: Extensions.
Noscript
Adblock
Adblock Filterset updater
Google Customize
Cookie Permit (yes Opera can do this one but not intuitively and on the fly)
Opera just doesn’t have this functionality, even almost everyone begs on the Opera forums for them.
(Yes, some will point out you can use a proxy or user JS, but it’s incredibly tough)
And then I have a couple of extensions to make FF behave like Opera:
All-in-One Sidebar
All-in-One Gestures
Sessionsaver
Tab Mix Plus
Is it slower? yes. Is it a memory hog? Yes
But boy what is the internet beautiful without ads.
I also think that FF has more future because of its extension framework. Somehow Opera is focused on features I am not interested in like mail/news clients
No doubt I will try Opera again, but I have a heavy heart.
I use them all. they are all free, why limit yourself?
firefox, mozilla, konqueror, opera, galeon, epiphany, lynx, links…..
I don’t think so. I couldn’t live without the rich set of extensions offered for Firefox (11 of them are currently installed). Apart from that it is stable and fast enough on my machine. I couldn’t care less for applications which use the Gecko engine either because those don’t support the extensions, be they faster or not.
“Who cares? Do you ask your PC manufacturer for the source code of the drivers of the graphics card, sata controller and NIC before buying? No, you buy the damn “closed proprietary driver” computer and shut the f–k up.”
Perhaps a little off-topic, but your analogue is horrible. We so totally *do* ask our PC manufacturers for source code for drivers, and if they fail to deliver them, we will select another manufacturer.
I use Opera on Linux in preference to Firefox. It’s slower to load but in all other respects I’ve found Opera superior. I enjoy using what feels like software of real quality; there is a pleasure in just that alone.
Those who miss Firefox’s adblock, which is a killer extension, should try privoxy which comes ready-rolled as an rpm or deb. This is equally as effective in my experience, with the added advantage that you can tell any of your programs to put their http requests through it. Privoxy can also filter for some of the malicious or borked stuff out there on the web. It’s a very useful program and fairly easy to customize.
what about the potential privacy issues of using a proxy?
The URL should be:
http://poptech.blogspot.com/2006/01/opera-is-faster-more-secure-and…
Opera also uses less memory on Linux. It is running on my system now taking up 73 MB. Firefox is running at 130 MB. One of the disappointing aspects of Firefox and thunderbird is the common runtime which was supposed to allow both applications to be run from the same executable Gecko interpreter exists but still isn’t ready to be packaged up with Firefox and Thunderbird. So what you have are two large memory eaters duplicating code and now they actually have less interactivity than when they were bundled with the Mozilla suite. Firefox’s saving grace is the nice extension system built in. Take away extensions though and Firefox is just a less functional version of Seamonkey (mozilla suite).
Opera is excellent,and try K-Meleon it is very good and very fast. I also use them on a very old laptop and both
load much faster than firefox, but firefox is quite well
done as well. But on old computers i run opera or k-meleon.
Edited 2006-01-05 18:20
All these adblock nuts must be people to lazy to edit their hosts file… which works a billion times faster than any ‘extension’ and can be done in most any OS without the browser even having to think about it. (although OS X does kinda have it’s head up it’s backside about hosts entries)
good ‘example’ here:
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
I can’t say some crap bloat extension is worth staying with a browser like firefox which is so flaky and unreliable it makes IE look GOOD.
Opera owns firefox on all (maybe not showing some css pages how they where supposed to be shown) points except that to me it crashes more. But it’s faster and especially it doesn’t leak 100s of MB of ram.
Yeah, right. As if. If this is the case, then why do all the new features in Firefox 1.5 already exist in Opera?