Arora Vs Firefox

[hoppipolla]

It starts up like lightning, has integrated ad-blocker and uses Webkit... I'm so tempted to replace Firefox with Arora as like, my backup browser (behind Chrome!).

What do you think? Do you like it? :)


Hoppi!

[the fix it man]

Because Arora is Qt it uses my widget setting (Kde). That I like very much.

I have read that it is to become default web browser for KDE, replacing Konqueror.

[the fix it man]

Just testing it out now and it gets a thumbsup, a couple of minor features are missing but I would go as far to say that, for Linux Arora is how Firefox should have been.

It even uses icons and actions so looks very nice if one has a good icon theme installed.

[hoppipolla]

Just testing it out now and it gets a thumbsup, a couple of minor features are missing but I would go as far to say that, for Linux Arora is how Firefox should have been.

It even uses icons and actions so looks very nice if one has a good icon theme installed.

Yeah true enough man!

Although one thing I just noticed - it doesn't seem to load pages QUITE as fast as Chrome. Although it looks gorgeous and starts in an instant! Maybe it just needs a TAD more work! :)

[RiceMonster]

It's pretty good but it doesn't have password management and spell checking. I actually prefer Konqueror to it.

[joey-elijah]

It adapts fine in Gnome using QT4...

..though if you're a proper Gnome-ite you're better off using Epiphany. It's now webkit and if you install the epiphany-webkit-extensions package you get adblocker, mouse gestures and a ton more.

WIN!

[Islington]

It's pretty good but it doesn't have password management and spell checking. I actually prefer Konqueror to it.

:^o you best be trollin.

[the fix it man]

It's pretty good but it doesn't have password management and spell checking. I actually prefer Konqueror to it.



Konqueror's icon is second to none. I admire Nuno alot.


http://www.icon-king.com/images/portfolio-konqueror.jpg

[Skripka]

:^o you best be trollin.

Try using it with Webkit instead of KHTML.

[schauerlich]

Any thread with "vs" in the title should automatically be moved to recurring discussions.

[Skripka]

Any thread with "vs" in the title should automatically be moved to recurring discussions.

I LIKE the letter "v" though. The more "vs" in a thread the better.

[peakshysteria]

Arora seem nice and lightning fast at first look. Handles youtube like it was sent with snail-mail. Not satisfactory at all. Typing: imdb (or other similar tests) doesn't bring me to internet movie database but to at google list of suggestions. Arora ain't even close to my current setup of FF:


My Firefox Information

Last updated: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:56:45 GMT
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3

Extensions (enabled: 20, disabled: 1; total: 21)

Autohide (http://www.krickelkrackel.de/autohide/) 1.3.1 [disabled]
Dictionary Switcher (http://en.design-noir.de/mozilla/dictionary-switcher/) 1.0
Dictionary Tooltip (http://www.dictionarytip.com) 1.5
DownloadHelper (http://www.downloadhelper.net) 4.6.4
Flashblock (http://flashblock.mozdev.org/) 1.5.11.2
Forecastfox (http://forecastfox.mozdev.org/) 0.9.10.1
Greasemonkey (http://www.greasespot.net/) 0.8.20090920.2
Highlighter (http://hashcolouredtabs.mozdev.org/highlighter/) 0.1.4
InfoLister (http://mozilla.doslash.org/infolister) 0.10.1
last.fmCode (http://mll2.free.fr/?p=42) 0.7b
Linkification (http://yellow5.us/firefox/linkification/) 1.3.6
Locationbar² (http://en.design-noir.de/mozilla/locationbar2/) 1.0.3
Nightly Tester Tools (http://www.oxymoronical.com/web/firefox/nightly) 2.0.2
2.0.10.0
[url=http://www.getpersonas.com/]Personas (]Norsk Bokmål og Nynorsk ordliste[/url) 1.3
SmoothWheel (AMO) (http://smoothwheel.mozdev.org/) 0.44.19.20090811.3
Tab Mix Plus (http://tmp.garyr.net) 0.3.7.4pre.090516
Text Link (http://piro.sakura.ne.jp/xul/_textlink.html.en) 3.1.2009032701
Tiny Menu (http://trac.arantius.com/wiki/Extensions/TinyMenu) 2.0.1
0.8
[url=http://www.oxymoronical.com/web/firefox/updatechannel]Update Channel Selector (]Ubuntu Firefox Modifications[/url) 1.5


Themes (6)

Camifox [selected]
Chromifox Basic
Daum Firefox용 테마
Default
Dustfox
Elementary


Plugins

Default Plugin
Demo Print Plugin for unix/linux
DivX® Web Player
Java(TM) Plug-in 1.6.0_16-b01
QuickTime Plug-in 7.2.0
Shockwave Flash
VLC Multimedia Plugin (compatible Totem 2.28.1)
Windows Media Player Plug-in 10 (compatible; Totem)

[hoppipolla]

Arora seem nice and lightning fast at first look. Handles youtube like it was sent with snail-mail. Not satisfactory at all. Typing: imdb (or other similar tests) doesn't bring me to internet movie database but to at google list of suggestions. Arora ain't even close to my current setup of FF

It depends what you actually want out of a browser though doesn't it?

All I really want is fast speed, good security/stability and semi-privacy, speed dial, bookmarks, adblocker... and support for Delicious. For me despite their minimal appearances both Chrome and Arora hit these on the head without the slow speed or feeling of bloat that Firefox can often have.

I also like a nice looking interface, and personally I think that both Arora and Chrome look more modern and refined than Firefox these days.

This isn't to say I actually dislike Firefox, I just think it needs an overhaul. Particularly on Linux. And particularly when running in KDE! lol


Oh and RiceMonster, yeah Konqueror is looking a bit nicer now I think - Webkit will help a lot and if they just get it to start up a bit quicker I will be tempted to use it sometimes again :)

[armageddon08]

It starts up like lightning, has integrated ad-blocker and uses Webkit... I'm so tempted to replace Firefox with Arora as like, my backup browser (behind Chrome!).

What do you think? Do you like it? :)


Hoppi!

I've done it already ;)

[SomeGuyDude]

Until another browser finds a way to command Firefox's vast army of extensions, it will never replace the king of the mountain.

[jaxxstorm]

I have no idea why arora has suddenly become so popular, especially considering Midori is much better featured and works much better.

Its not QT, but still..

[lukjad]

At this point, practically nothing can really drag me away from Firefox. I finally upgraded to Firefox 3.5, and I just can't get enough. I like the look and feel, it responds quickly enough even though I have 40-50 addons, and I know it fairly well. I'm stickin' to it. ;)

[hoppipolla]

I have no idea why arora has suddenly become so popular, especially considering Midori is much better featured and works much better.

Its not QT, but still..

Yeah that's the thing! Qt is the main reason I like Arora - as it starts up even faster than Chrome and integrates well with my desktop! :)

[CharmyBee]

I've had Arora crash within minutes of Twitter. Arora loses the fight for me.

[peakshysteria]

It depends what you actually want out of a browser though doesn't it?

All I really want is fast speed, good security/stability and semi-privacy, speed dial, bookmarks, adblocker... and support for Delicious. For me despite their minimal appearances both Chrome and Arora hit these on the head without the slow speed or feeling of bloat that Firefox can often have.

I also like a nice looking interface, and personally I think that both Arora and Chrome look more modern and refined than Firefox these days.

This isn't to say I actually dislike Firefox, I just think it needs an overhaul. Particularly on Linux. And particularly when running in KDE! lol


Oh and RiceMonster, yeah Konqueror is looking a bit nicer now I think - Webkit will help a lot and if they just get it to start up a bit quicker I will be tempted to use it sometimes again :)

I agree, it all comes out to what one really want out of a browser.

I really want:

-Speed
- Near unlimited tabs
- The ability to make a custom build to each user easy (addons, about:config, userchrome etc solves this easy and by far better than any other browser I have tried so far)
- Themes

In my eyes Arora cannot fulfill my wishes at all. So in this Arora vs. Firefox I have to say:


At this point, practically nothing can really drag me away from Firefox. I finally upgraded to Firefox 3.5, and I just can't get enough. I like the look and feel, it responds quickly enough even though I have 40-50 addons, and I know it fairly well. I'm stickin' to it. ;)


Until another browser finds a way to command Firefox's vast army of extensions, it will never replace the king of the mountain.

Second that guys. No doubt about it. I'm stickin to it as well.

[Skripka]

Until another browser finds a way to command Firefox's vast army of extensions, it will never replace the king of the mountain.

Then one bloated browser will get replaced with another.

[hoppipolla]

I agree, it all comes out to what one really want out of a browser.

I really want:

-Speed
- Near unlimited tabs
- The ability to make a custom build to each user easy (addons, about:config, userchrome etc solves this easy and by far better than any other browser I have tried so far)
- Themes

In my eyes Arora cannot fulfill my wishes at all. So in this Arora vs. Firefox I have to say:

Chromium! rofl xD

[SomeGuyDude]

Then one bloated browser will get replaced with another.

Arora is like a car that goes 0-60 in the blink of an eye but has no radio and no AC/heat. Firefox has bad acceleration, but also has AC, satellite radio, GPS in the dash, and DVD players built into the back of the headrests.

It's nice that some people don't want a browser to be able to do any more than render code adequately, but FF's massive repository of extensions have turned it into a far more useful browser than anything else. I've tried for the past MONTH to convert Chromium into my main, and while in many ways I like it more, I end up back on FF.

[hoppipolla]

Arora is like a car that goes 0-60 in the blink of an eye but has no radio and no AC/heat. Firefox has bad acceleration, but also has AC, satellite radio, GPS in the dash, and DVD players built into the back of the headrests.

It's nice that some people don't want a browser to be able to do any more than render code adequately, but FF's massive repository of extensions have turned it into a far more useful browser than anything else. I've tried for the past MONTH to convert Chromium into my main, and while in many ways I like it more, I end up back on FF.

Again, this is one of the best examples of something that's down to the individual. It all depends what you want :)

Although in answering my original question, this makes a good case for Firefox :)

[SomeGuyDude]

That's what kills me. Here's a list of things that I absolutely cannot get used to lacking:

1) Keyboard-operated and customizeable Speed Dial.
2) Twitter embedded in the address bar (starting to use this thing).
3) Google Toolbar functions such as clicking on an email address and it going to Gmail (CHROMIUM won't do this!)
4) Stylish/Greasemonkey, because I've put a style/script on almost every site I visit regularly.
5) Built-in FTP client
6) Video Downloader.

Special emphasis on #1 and #4, and that's just for starters. It's not as fast, but it DOES WHAT I NEED.

[Skripka]

Arora is like a car that goes 0-60 in the blink of an eye but has no radio and no AC/heat. Firefox has bad acceleration, but also has AC, satellite radio, GPS in the dash, and DVD players built into the back of the headrests.

It's nice that some people don't want a browser to be able to do any more than render code adequately, but FF's massive repository of extensions have turned it into a far more useful browser than anything else. I've tried for the past MONTH to convert Chromium into my main, and while in many ways I like it more, I end up back on FF.

And yet everytime an update to Firefox comes out-every one of those handy dandy extensions gets broken and is unusable.

I stopped using FF when a simple add-on to unify the seperate stop and reload buttons into one button took over a month to get edited to work with a newer version...same for themes, same for all those other wonderful extensions that often aren't well written, and break with every update.

[SomeGuyDude]

extensions.checkCompatibility false

Throw that in your about:config. For the most part, all of your extensions will work famously unless you're using the alpha nightlies.

[the fix it man]

Been trying Rekonq for the last hour, and found it to be coming along nicely.

It's webkit Qt and even has a feature I've never seen before, tab previews.

The deb files are here https://launchpad.net/~f4l3/+archive/ppa

Added them links to my sources as the browser is update frequently.

[NormanFLinux]

Its based on the same engine as Apple's Safari. But unlike Safari its a cross platform web browser.

[schauerlich]

Its based on the same engine as Apple's Safari. But unlike Safari its a cross platform web browser.

Safari has a Windows version. I'm not sure how it handles in wine, though.

[Frak]

Its based on the same engine as Apple's Safari. But unlike Safari its a cross platform web browser.
Safari IS a cross platform web browser.

[RiceMonster]

Safari IS a cross platform web browser.

It's only cross platform if it runs on Linux

[Frak]

It's only cross platform if it runs on Linux
I forgot, sorry. Well, Internet Explorer is cross platform; I can run it on Mac AND Linux.

[schauerlich]

I forgot, sorry. Well, Internet Explorer is cross platform; I can run it on Mac AND Linux.

Oh god. IE for Mac was truly horrid.

[samjh]

My only problem with Arora is it doesn't support Java plugins, and is sometimes unstable when lots of Flash objects are on a page.

Otherwise, it's a good little browser.

[Frak]

Oh god. IE for Mac was truly horrid.
I use it from time to time to lol at what epic failure was like in 2000.

[CharmyBee]

I thought Mac IE 5.5 was better than IE 5 and 6 itself. For one thing, it does support alpha channels in PNGs, resampled image scaling (which Firefox did not get until 3.x) and changing the colors of the toolbar was cute. Even better, it doesn't even come with half of the security vulnerabilities the real IE does.
I can't see how it was an "epic failure" in 2000. Netscape 6 preview and Neoplanet are winning that by a large margin.

[Frak]

I thought Mac IE 5.5 was better than IE 5 and 6 itself. For one thing, it does support alpha channels in PNGs, resampled image scaling (which Firefox did not get until 3.x) and changing the colors of the toolbar was cute. Even better, it doesn't even come with half of the security vulnerabilities the real IE does.
I can't see how it was an "epic failure" in 2000. Netscape 6 preview and Neoplanet are winning that by a large margin.
I was just thinking how sites said "This site only works with IE 5 or above" and that excluded the Mac versions.

[hoppipolla]

Oh here's a question... (in fact several!)

1) Why does Firefox still use Gecko?

2) Why is Firefox slower in Linux and based on GTK which makes it go even slower on my machine lol xD

3) Why can't they refine Firefox to make it more lightweight?

4) Is 4.0 going to have a revised interface? There are screenies of it that suggest it might ^_^


If they changed some of these things I might switch back ^_^

[Skripka]

Oh here's a question... (in fact several!)

1) Why does Firefox still use Gecko?

2) Why is Firefox slower in Linux and based on GTK which makes it go even slower on my machine lol xD

3) Why can't they refine Firefox to make it more lightweight?

4) Is 4.0 going to have a revised interface? There are screenies of it that suggest it might ^_^


If they changed some of these things I might switch back ^_^

1) Beacuse they want to, and due to marketshare, there is good support out on the internet for Gecko.

2) Firefox is NOT based on GTk. Firefox uses XUL. (XUL is quite good at faking GTk, and gawd-awful at faking Qt.)

2a) It is slow/er/est, because Mozilla chooses not to put the time into a good port of Firefox for linux.

3) Extensibility (bloat) or lightweight, pick one.

4) Dunno

[the fix it man]

This is why I've started using Rekonq because it uses the QtWebkit so is naturally part of Kde and not just an add on thta looks and sometimes feels foreign

[hoppipolla]

1) Beacuse they want to, and due to marketshare, there is good support out on the internet for Gecko.

2) Firefox is NOT based on GTk. Firefox uses XUL. (XUL is quite good at faking GTk, and gawd-awful at faking Qt.)

2a) It is slow/er/est, because Mozilla chooses not to put the time into a good port of Firefox for linux.

3) Extensibility (bloat) or lightweight, pick one.

4) Dunno

But see, if Mozilla don't put in more time to make a good Linux version, then I for one am not using their browser. Why should I?

Additionally, extensibility does not equal bloat. The standard, straight install of Firefox is STILL slower than Chrome and Arora.

I just... I'm losing patience with Mozilla, you know? They give lazy Linux support, take ages to fully support newer and different OSs (the Vista and Mac versions of FF looked lame for ages), and the browser now feels kinda slow and sluggish to me, with an uninteresting interface ._.

I LIKE Mozilla but... I just think they're going to need to make changes or they are going to get walked all over within the next few years.

[Skripka]

But see, if Mozilla don't put in more time to make a good Linux version, then I for one am not using their browser. Why should I?

The main reason being that, with the exception of most banking institutions, Firefox will pretty much work with any website.




Additionally, extensibility does not equal bloat. The standard, straight install of Firefox is STILL slower than Chrome and Arora.


A good cut of the problem is that Gecko has to draw not just web content-it also handles the XUL GUI of the app itself. FF in linux isn't using native GUI toolkits, Firefox has to handle and draw its own. This is why projects like QtFirefox can help somewhat....it is also why QtFireFox is a very difficult undertaking, and not just drag-&-Drop easy, because Gecko is designed/intended to draw the XUL GUI.

Gecko is quite modular and very extensible, but this comes at the cost of a VERY complex code. A light and lean codebase (Webkit) will kick a heavyweight codebase (Gecko with all the wonderful extensibility) every time.

[hoppipolla]

The main reason being that, with the exception of most banking institutions, Firefox will pretty much work with any website.



A good cut of the problem is that Gecko has to draw not just web content-it also handles the XUL GUI of the app itself. FF in linux isn't using native GUI toolkits, Firefox has to handle and draw its own. This is why projects like QtFirefox can help somewhat....it is also why QtFireFox is a very difficult undertaking, and not just drag-&-Drop easy, because Gecko is designed/intended to draw the XUL GUI.

Gecko is quite modular and very extensible, but this comes at the cost of a VERY complex code. A light and lean codebase (Webkit) will kick a heavyweight codebase (Gecko with all the wonderful extensibility) every time.

Fair do's, I mean I guess there is a chance 2 camps will form here - people who want extensibility and people who want speed.

I really do think that Mozilla have some competition on their hands though. I don't think they will win this, but they can stand a chance if they keep their browser alive and open to changes and certainly to design overhauls. My prediction is they'll be in the game at least another 2 years, but after that we may see some big changes unless they prove they can really compete.

[JoshuaRL]

Hahaha! Arora wins for having an XKCD bookmark fresh from the repos!

All kidding aside, I use Chromium for everything except Youtube/Hulu. Then I have to lower myself to Firefox. The speed and sandboxing just are full of win for me. Not to mention great security.

[Frak]

Fair do's, I mean I guess there is a chance 2 camps will form here - people who want extensibility and people who want speed.

I really do think that Mozilla have some competition on their hands though. I don't think they will win this, but they can stand a chance if they keep their browser alive and open to changes and certainly to design overhauls. My prediction is they'll be in the game at least another 2 years, but after that we may see some big changes unless they prove they can really compete.

On Linux, QtWebKit/Arora MAY overtake Firefox. Though, the Mozilla Corporation has a big pull on Linux distributions. Considering they make roughly $40 million, that becomes a pretty difficult fight for popularity. It's easier to advertise when you have a lot of money.

[hoppipolla]

On Linux, QtWebKit/Arora MAY overtake Firefox. Though, the Mozilla Corporation has a big pull on Linux distributions. Considering they make roughly $40 million, that becomes a pretty difficult fight for popularity. It's easier to advertise when you have a lot of money.

against Google?

[Frak]

against Google?

Google and Firefox are symbiotic. Google gets advertising through Firefox, which is more widely used than Chrome is. That's the main reason Chrome isn't being pushed much, they have another company to advertise for them.

[hoppipolla]

Google and Firefox are symbiotic. Google gets advertising through Firefox, which is more widely used than Chrome is. That's the main reason Chrome isn't being pushed much, they have another company to advertise for them.

possibly..

I do still find it hard to believe that Mozilla is going to come out of the next few years with more than an around 20% market share. However, we shall have to wait and see :)

[hoppipolla]

oops sorry for the double post! The connection here has SUCKED tonight so I was just sitting there clicking the reply button over and over!

[Frak]

possibly..

I do still find it hard to believe that Mozilla is going to come out of the next few years with more than an around 20% market share. However, we shall have to wait and see :)


possibly..

I do still find it hard to believe that Mozilla is going to come out of the next few years with more than an around 20% market share. We shall have to wait and see :)

OMG DUBL POST!

Anyways, they still don't have the cash to fight Microsoft, but they sure have enough to stop any competitors (non-funded).

[SomeGuyDude]

Chrome needs a serious overhaul of its "speed dial".

I really hate having to manually delete entries because one night I was looking at porn and suddenly those sites are showing up on my home page.

[Skripka]

Chrome needs a serious overhaul of its "speed dial".

I really hate having to manually delete entries because one night I was looking at porn and suddenly those sites are showing up on my home page.

I'll fess up. I lol'd. :)

[Islington]

Chrome needs a serious overhaul of its "speed dial".

I really hate having to manually delete entries because one night I was looking at porn and suddenly those sites are showing up on my home page.

this is why we use private browsing. take note.:P

[Frak]

Chrome needs a serious overhaul of its "speed dial".

I really hate having to manually delete entries because one night I was looking at porn and suddenly those sites are showing up on my home page.
You don't use Incognito mode?

[hoppipolla]

You don't use Incognito mode?

2nded! rofl xD

[andymorton]

Back in my dark Windows Vista days I used the Opera web browser. And very impressed by it I was too. I've used Firefox since switching to Ubuntu so I've got no idea what it's like on Linux distros. :)

[Pasdar]

Where can I download this Arora? I'm currently using Chromium as my main browser, let's see if it performs any better.

[MelDJ]

the repo. sudo apt-get install arora.
i tried it and its the interface is just like firefox. there are so many web browsers that have exactly the same design as firefox.

[Frak]

the repo. sudo apt-get install arora.
i tried it and its the interface is just like firefox. there are so many web browsers that have exactly the same design as firefox.
I have to applaud arora. They do at least support a lot of things Firefox can do, such as OpenSearch.

[hoppipolla]

Where can I download this Arora? I'm currently using Chromium as my main browser, let's see if it performs any better.

it's ok... I mean to be honest after slightly longer use I do see the problems it has at this early stage in it's development. It's a bit buggy here and there, and also it's quite slow at loading pages compared to Chrome. It fires up like lightning though on a KDE desktop, so hopefully they'll smooth out the other problems and we'll have a great little Qt browser on our hands! :)

[MelDJ]

I have to applaud arora. They do at least support a lot of things Firefox can do, such as OpenSearch.

i like the polar bear though :)

[Frak]

i like the polar bear though :)
He looks comfy.

[hoppipolla]

He looks comfy.

yeah he does look quite comfy...

[KushedVapors]

Dont kno why people keep sayin Chrome/Chromium is the best browser on linux so far. I find it a lot slower on my 443ram 1.6ghz 40gb hd laptop than firefox is. By slower i mean loadin pages. o and chromium seems to take the same amount of cpu. The best ive seen so far is the Epiphany webkit and midori. I have to ue one of the these two to watch video in hulu or youtube, the former seems to be the best.

I hope you guys have tracemonkey enabled in firefox.

Also Oper caught me off gaurd when it used the least amount of cpu. Strange it was always the worst. Good to see its good again.

[Erunno]

1) Why does Firefox still use Gecko?

Major reasons are that Mozilla has complete control over the platform and is therefore in the comfortable position to decide in which technological direction it should move. The most important reason though is that Gecko implements XUL, the interface description language used for Firefox' UI. XUL is the reason why extensions without binary components can run on any platform Firefox supports. Switching engines would mean to completely rewrite XUL from scratch.


3) Why can't they refine Firefox to make it more lightweight?

Actually, Firefox 3+ is very memory efficient. Tales of Firefox being a memory hog stem from the dark ages of Firefox 2 (which was horrible). Also features usually come with a price tag attached to it.


4) Is 4.0 going to have a revised interface?

At least on Mac and Windows it will. Firefox' UI will be revised in two stages (3.7 and 4.0). Especially 4.0 will bring Firefox UI closer to Chrome's. There are also some very interesting ideas how to redesign the history and bookmark UIs proposed by the Mozilla UI guys. Haven't heard anything about a new look for Linux yet though.

[hoppipolla]

Actually, Firefox 3+ is very memory efficient. Tales of Firefox being a memory hog stem from the dark ages of Firefox 2 (which was horrible). Also features usually come with a price tag attached to it.

I don't think that's true, for me it stems from personal experience and how sluggish the browser feels ._.

I do like the new upcoming changes though, I will definitely be watching it, and I do use it occasionally :)

[JoshuaRL]

I don't think that's true, for me it stems from personal experience and how sluggish the browser feels ._.

I agree. Even 3.5 for me was a little slower than Chromium, and it's supposed to be the lightning fast one. But the reason I use Chromium comes down to the whole package. It's the speed, sandboxing, and the security. The only addons I use are the ones that make Firefox more like Chromium anyway.

[hoppipolla]

I agree. Even 3.5 for me was a little slower than Chromium, and it's supposed to be the lightning fast one. But the reason I use Chromium comes down to the whole package. It's the speed, sandboxing, and the security. The only addons I use are the ones that make Firefox more like Chromium anyway.

exactly, I mean I think Chrome's speed dial is wicked for example, and that's an important feature for me :)

I also find the Chrome toolbar layout and interface very good :)

[DoktorSeven]

I love Arora but I still need NoScript. If they added something resembling NS I'd ditch Firefox forever.

[Skripka]

exactly, I mean I think Chrome's speed dial is wicked for example, and that's an important feature for me :)

I also find the Chrome toolbar layout and interface very good :)

Everyone loves to creatively borrow from Opera...

[hoppipolla]

Everyone loves to creatively borrow from Opera...

I hate to say it though man but they tend to do it better ._.

If Opera hopes to succeed it needs to render pages better (and probably faster), streamline it's interface and start-up time, and really offer me something Chrome and that don't like... really good plugins or a Qt version or... anything really.

Additionally, I prefer open source browsers :)

[sundown]

Arora and Rekonq render gmail awefully slow when one scrolles. It's proabably something to do with webkit. But still, other websites are also slow at renderning pages when you scroll. It's really annoying