PDA

View Full Version : Opera is Megatastic



daynah
April 13th, 2007, 06:49 PM
I couldn't think of a good title.

So Opera has about a bajillion features. Just the other day I was in awe that Opera had a built in IRC client. You'd think me, the Opera nut, would know these things. I don't.

What do you use Opera for? No opera vs. firefox, por favor. Just some big lady lovin'. :)

I have uninstalled all bittorrent clients (I think I had like three I would switch between...), and disowned GAIM's mediocre IRC. I never see my desktop, so the wallpaper doesn't matter. Just opera. I might as well have a kiosk.

tribaal
April 13th, 2007, 06:59 PM
I installed Opera today for the first time, and I must say I'm pretty impressed by some features, while some other areas are lacking in my humble opinion. I don't want to start a flamewar mind you, I'm just expressing my point of view.

Good (great) parts:
- User interface feels more... intuitive somehow.
- I *love* the speed dial tab. That's just brillant.
- Being a tad paranoid, I love how I can browse and configure everything about security and/or privacy without the need of any plugin (I like the cache settings and browser in particular).
- It's really the most standard-compliant browser I ever tried (didn't try many, but it's still worth being mentioned).

Lacking parts (please PM me if theses are just newbie misunderstandings):
- Speed is awful in Ubuntu... I don't know what causes this, but it's really a pain to wait for remote (not cached) pages to load.
- What's with the RSS reader? Is it really that much to ask to have a settings pane allowing to change the default double click behavior? I want to be taken to the article itself! :( Or, somebody make an RSS bookmark plugin or something... :)

Well... as I said I'm just expressing my point of view... I like Opera, and if the RSS handling was a little more like I expected it to be, I'd be an instant convert :)

Just my 2c :)

- trib'

SendDerek
April 13th, 2007, 07:01 PM
I've always loved the built-in mouse gestures and "duplicate tab" functions. I have used the bittorrent client, but internet restrictions dissallow me to do it now.

Oh, and don't forget about the built-in mail client! I love that thing!

daynah
April 13th, 2007, 07:35 PM
SendDerek, I'm nervous about trying the built-in mail. I'm a thunderbird drone. What will I use for my calendar? I suppose standalone Sunbird. Dunno, every time I've tried something in Opera Ive been nervous before and then "WOW THAT WAS AWESOME!"

Tribaal, yeah I dispise in browser RSS agregators. The entire concept doesn't make sense to me. But you should be able to be taken to the page if you want to. Have you tried telling Opera? They're almost as awesome as Ubuntu is. Almost.

Quillz
April 13th, 2007, 07:35 PM
I like the new 9.2 release. The "Speed Dial" feature as it's called is pretty cool, although it's been in other browsers like OmniWeb for quite some time now. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of it's built-in e-mail client or BitTorrent client, but it is interesting to see how many features the browser packs, and yet still takes up less space and memory than Firefox 2.

justin whitaker
April 13th, 2007, 07:39 PM
The only thing I dislike about Opera is that it seems to exit at inopportune moments. Good thing it can pick up where you left off. Haven't installed it on Feisty yet.

SunnyRabbiera
April 13th, 2007, 08:05 PM
I am neutral on opera, on one hand it has a lot of nice features.
But on the other those features can be replicated by firefox though it will slow firefox down.
the things i dont like about opera is its download manager, I would like it if opera could make a seperate download manager I would be happier...
this is the same for its torrent downloader too, as I dont like leaving my browser idol.

daynah
April 13th, 2007, 08:31 PM
Justin Whitaker, Opera does that to me on my laptop on Beryl (intel video card and edgy) but not on my desktop, also with beryl, but with an nvidia card and feisty beta. It only started with Beryl, so my personal Opera-random-swooning problem, I've been blaming on Beryl.

ButteBlues
April 13th, 2007, 09:17 PM
I wish it wasn't QT.

I love the browser to death - but my Ubuntu boxes won't use it as the default browser until it uses QT4.

igknighted
April 13th, 2007, 09:22 PM
I am neutral on opera, on one hand it has a lot of nice features.
But on the other those features can be replicated by firefox though it will slow firefox down.
the things i dont like about opera is its download manager, I would like it if opera could make a seperate download manager I would be happier...
this is the same for its torrent downloader too, as I dont like leaving my browser idol.

Do you like FF's download manager? I feel like Opera's gives you so much more control and information. FF's is worthless, even compared to IE's, and I can't seem to find an extension that does anything about it...

In KDE I use Opera due to qt, but I refuse to mix, so I stick with FF (always get the source and compile yourself :) on gnome/xfce systems, even better than swiftfox if you set the flags right)

super breadfish
April 13th, 2007, 09:29 PM
Do you like FF's download manager? I feel like Opera's gives you so much more control and information. FF's is worthless, even compared to IE's, and I can't seem to find an extension that does anything about it...

Well, you could try Flashgot. It's not a download manager itself, instead it lets you integrate your own download manager into Firefox. I used to use it all the time.

I don't use Opera, I couldn't get on with the interface. Opera Mobile, however, i use all the time. Makes the internet on my phone a much more pleasurable experience. After snake it's my favourite mobile app.

rubinstein
April 13th, 2007, 09:53 PM
I don't use Opera, because it's proprietary software. What is the point to run Ubuntu (=free/libre software) and then install proprietary software on it?

I can understand it if you don't have an alternative, but there are Firefox, Epiphany, Konqueror and others.

LordFu
April 13th, 2007, 10:19 PM
Not all of us are all hung-up on F/OSS. I use Ubuntu because it's a good operating system. I'm not interested in the politics.

OT: My two favorite Opera features are the ability to Zoom (great for videos) and the New Tab button.

kerry_s
April 13th, 2007, 10:25 PM
I hate how opera handles plug-ins, flash, mplayer, etc...I'ts like they don't cooperate with others to get good plug-ins support. On top of that it's always slower than firefox for me, so opera is not even on my radar. :D

urukrama
April 13th, 2007, 10:36 PM
I love Opera as well, and used it long before I even heard of Firefox. I use its email client as well, and though it could be improved on it is very easy and powerful in use (its filters are great!)

What I especially like in Opera:


* The speed! And the neat pop up progress bar (you have to enable this) where you can see the speed at which the site loads, how much more it has to load, how many more images, etc. If the images take too long to load, just switch the images off for this page with one click.
* The 'forward' and 'rewind' button. If you have a password saved with the 'wand', it enters it automatically when you press forward. Great also for browsing pictures: just click forward and you go to the next one (for most sites).
* Right - Left mouse click brings you back in history; left-right goes forward (or same as the forward button). It makes browsing so much easier! Very frustrating if you're using another browser that doesn't have this feature, and you're used to it.
* you can choose how to start Opera: load homepage, no pages, sessions (!), or just what was last opened.
* the trashcan (in the upper right corner): any tabs you have closed (including its history) can be easily opened again. If you just want the last closed tab, type Ctrl+Alt+Z and you are back there.
* The 'duplicate tab' option (right click on a tab). Again the history and all is duplicated.
* Site preferences. Have a site that doesn't recognises only IE? Edit your site preferences, and make Opera identify as IE, or even mask as IE.
* Press spacebar to go down the page (standard, no?). When you reach the end of the page, press spacebar again and it takes you to the next. Great for Google searches!
* Disable gif animation!
* Block unwanted ads.
* Asign shortcuts or nicknames to bookmarked sites
* The transfer (download) system. See how fast things go, where you are downloading from and where to, option to retransfer or pause transfer, or use the quick download option (just enter a url). Torrents will also appear there.
* the option to save particular file types (mp3, pdf, etc) to particular locations on your hard drive
* 'Work offline' option
* 'Links' panel: see where the site you are on links to.
* The notes feature. Just select some text, right click and select 'save to note'. A new note is created and the url is automatically preserved. Just double click on the note and the webpage is opened.
* the built in search engines. Type 'g ubuntu' and you do a google search for Ubuntu; z for amazon, etc.
* 'Fit to width': is the image to big and do you have to use the horizontal scrollbar, or is the page just badly designed for your small screen? Click the fit to width button and it is automatically resized or adjusted.
* Zoom easily in and out.
* Its easy to customise the look. Move all buttons around until you like where they are.
* etc.

finferflu
April 13th, 2007, 10:38 PM
I hate how opera handles plug-ins, flash, mplayer, etc...I'ts like they don't cooperate with others to get good plug-ins support. On top of that it's always slower than firefox for me, so opera is not even on my radar. :D
I second that, and I add that I hate the zoom feature, I wish I knew how to enlarge the caracter without the images.
I like it's speed in general, even though it's not very quick to load pages, and at times it leaks, so that my fan goes crazy.
I mainly use it as a supplement to FF, when I can't get some website to load on it.
Also, I've read that Opera is the most secure web browser out there, which is a very good reason to use it.
What I miss are the plugins, and open source, though. And lastly, I have settled with FF too long ago, and it's difficult to make the switch, especially because I still don't feel like switching...There is something in FF that makes me stick with it, perhaps how it feels, I don't know...
Nothing against Opera though, even though I would have liked it more if it was open source...

Kingsley
April 13th, 2007, 11:31 PM
I used Opera for almost a year and then dumped it due to sketchy plugins and lack of extensions. I agree that Opera is impressively fast and has great built-in features like mouse gestures, easy keyword search, and the wand for passwords. Now I only use Opera for quick and easy image browsing on certain web sites. I'm able to mouse gesture forward through multiple images in their original order.

hanzomon4
April 14th, 2007, 01:34 AM
I loved opera in windows and like it in linux, but I have one nagging problem...

How do you get streaming media to work? For a year I have tried to get this working and it fails every time. I tried all of the suggestions on their site and here on the forums, and nothing. I have the problem tracked down to the operapluginwrapper crashing but with every update the problem persist. I even tried it on my sabayon install and operapluginwrapper still crashes.

igknighted
April 14th, 2007, 01:38 AM
I hate how opera handles plug-ins, flash, mplayer, etc...I'ts like they don't cooperate with others to get good plug-ins support. On top of that it's always slower than firefox for me, so opera is not even on my radar. :D

You must have some conflict with it (perhaps you disabled ipv6 locally for FF but not systemwide?). Opera is, according to professional benchmarks, almost twice as fast as a clean FF (no extensions) at loading most pages. It is also more standards compliant than FF, and loads much much faster (again, maybe not on gnome due to the whole qt/gtk thing).

maniacmusician
April 14th, 2007, 01:55 AM
I installed Opera today for the first time, and I must say I'm pretty impressed by some features, while some other areas are lacking in my humble opinion. I don't want to start a flamewar mind you, I'm just expressing my point of view.

Good (great) parts:
- User interface feels more... intuitive somehow.
- I *love* the speed dial tab. That's just brillant.
- Being a tad paranoid, I love how I can browse and configure everything about security and/or privacy without the need of any plugin (I like the cache settings and browser in particular).
- It's really the most standard-compliant browser I ever tried (didn't try many, but it's still worth being mentioned).

Lacking parts (please PM me if theses are just newbie misunderstandings):
- Speed is awful in Ubuntu... I don't know what causes this, but it's really a pain to wait for remote (not cached) pages to load.
- What's with the RSS reader? Is it really that much to ask to have a settings pane allowing to change the default double click behavior? I want to be taken to the article itself! :( Or, somebody make an RSS bookmark plugin or something... :)

Well... as I said I'm just expressing my point of view... I like Opera, and if the RSS handling was a little more like I expected it to be, I'd be an instant convert :)

Just my 2c :)

- trib'
To be honest, I think all desktop-based RSS aggregators are pretty horrible. I've never really liked any of them...but have you tried Google Reader? That's what I use, and I absolutely love it. It makes much more sense to me that a feed reader should be in a browser like a webpage, where you can interact with it like you would other web content; it is web content, after all.

I hear that Bloglines is good too, if you don't use Google. I'm just waiting for google to introduce a search feature to Reader, and then I'll be inseparable from it.

Ireclan
April 14th, 2007, 01:57 AM
I WOULD use Opera, but it's not open source. With all these open source browsers, I really can't justify supporting a closed source browser. It's not that I dislike closed source. I just prefer to support open source applications, where they exist.

FuturePilot
April 14th, 2007, 02:00 AM
I could never get into Opera. I've used it, but it just doesn't agree with me too well. Why is there 2 back and forward buttons? That always confuses me and I end up clicking the wrong one and get taken to some page that I don't want to go to:-? And I really miss the Firefox extensions.

igknighted
April 14th, 2007, 02:13 AM
I could never get into Opera. I've used it, but it just doesn't agree with me too well. Why is there 2 back and forward buttons? That always confuses me and I end up clicking the wrong one and get taken to some page that I don't want to go to:-? And I really miss the Firefox extensions.

Fast-Forward takes you to the next "logical" page (if you are viewing say a multi page article it would go to page 2, etc.). Rewind takes you back to the first page of many you visited on a site (so if you look at 20 photos on a site, you don't have to click back 20 times). They are very useful if you take the time to learn them. As far as extensions, Opera has widgets. They work a little differently, but then again most of the "extension functionality" used in FF is built into Opera... without the performance hit.

It is closed source, and that is a serious issue. But especially for KDE users who do "power browsing" it is the app to use, as FF just doesn't perform well in the KDE environment and Konqueror, while a great browser for most, isn't quite feature-rich enough for power users.

FuturePilot
April 14th, 2007, 02:18 AM
Well that seems useful. I could never figure out how that worked. Thanks for explaining.:D Now if I could just get the Mplayer plugin working....

riven0
April 14th, 2007, 03:16 AM
Opera is beyond megatastic; it's the only browser I'll use. Well, besides links2, that is. :D The new speed dial feature is so useful, and each release seems to get better and better. You can't beat the speed, either.

Opera, FTW!

daynah
April 14th, 2007, 03:43 AM
Not all of us are all hung-up on F/OSS. I use Ubuntu because it's a good operating system. I'm not interested in the politics.

OT: My two favorite Opera features are the ability to Zoom (great for videos) and the New Tab button.

Amen! Ubuntu rocks above and beyond the fact that it's free (like speech).

Also, the extra forward buttons also confused me, so I just ignored them. And then someone explained them to me and now I use them like crazy! I never again click the "gle" on google pages anymore. That seems kinda dumb, but I like it. And when I'm looking at unanswered posts on ubuntu, I click on one unanswered post, and if I don't know the answer, I click fastforward, and it takes me to the next. It's just a tiny thing that saves you three seconds of scrolling but... I like it. :)

Moments like that are why, when I'm using a program that I really feel I don't have a full grasp on, I make posts like this begging people to tell me what they use the program for. There's gotta be something I'm missing if every other day I'm finding something new on my own!

My RSS aggregator is www.rojo.com. I cannot recommend it higher.

RAV TUX
April 14th, 2007, 06:12 AM
I couldn't think of a good title.

So Opera has about a bajillion features. Just the other day I was in awe that Opera had a built in IRC client. You'd think me, the Opera nut, would know these things. I don't.

What do you use Opera for? No opera vs. firefox, por favor. Just some big lady lovin'. :)

I have uninstalled all bittorrent clients (I think I had like three I would switch between...), and disowned GAIM's mediocre IRC. I never see my desktop, so the wallpaper doesn't matter. Just opera. I might as well have a kiosk.

The IRC client in Opera is almost as good as Konversation and 1000 times better then xchat.....simply awesome

also the torrent client is a dream to use...

awesome work overall Opera!

:)z

der_joachim
April 14th, 2007, 08:11 AM
I use KDE. Although Konqueror is a pretty good browser, it has too many things which prevent me from making it my default browser. Firefox on KDE is slooooow and font management is absurdly bad.
When I installed Opera 9.1 a few months ago, it looked and felt quite decent, but I never really got around to really testing it. 9.2 quickly became my default browser though.

Some pros and cons:
- Speed Dial is sheer genius. I really do not know why nobody had that idea before. It is quite simple really.
- It is a lightning fast browser on my KDE desktop. As stated above, FF is a slow beast on my desktop, even in safe mode.
- Its safety features are up to par IMHO. A nice option is to change options on the fly with the Quick Preferences submenu.
- Working with tabs is a lot more flexible. You can tile two or more tabs, you can cascade them, etc. And the thumbnail when you move your mouse over a tab is quite nice (although utterly useless;)).
- Without extensions, its featureset is good, although some things are well hidden.
- The widgets are quite good actually, but its development tools are a bit lacking. Something like firebug or web developer would be a good thing. I do like the PHP widget though.
- The ad blocker is mediocre (no regexp, no compatibility with Filterset.G). It is also a lot of mouse clicks away and AFAIK there is no keyboard shortcut.
- I have not yet found out how to open a bookmark in a background tab. It is probably quite easy, but I have not yet found out.

All in all Opera got promoted to primary browser quite quickly.

ButteBlues
April 14th, 2007, 08:12 AM
The IRC client in Opera is almost as good as Konversation and 1000 times better then xchat.....simply awesome

also the torrent client is a dream to use...

awesome work overall Opera!

:)z
Does it support C, Ruby, Python, Perl, or PHP scripts and plugins?

Thought so.

So please get the facts before making blanket assumptions about other applications.

riven0
April 14th, 2007, 08:19 AM
Does it support C, Ruby, Python, Perl, or PHP scripts and plugins?

Thought so.

So please get the facts before making blanket assumptions about other applications.

Well, no need to be rude about it. Most of us aren't really concerned with Ruby, Python, etc support. Most of us just want something that works well, is fast and doesn't crash all the time.

Alpha_toxic
April 14th, 2007, 10:14 AM
I use KDE. Although Konqueror is a pretty good browser, it has too many things which prevent me from making it my default browser. Firefox on KDE is slooooow and font management is absurdly bad.
When I installed Opera 9.1 a few months ago, it looked and felt quite decent, but I never really got around to really testing it. 9.2 quickly became my default browser though.

Some pros and cons:
- Speed Dial is sheer genius. I really do not know why nobody had that idea before. It is quite simple really.
- It is a lightning fast browser on my KDE desktop. As stated above, FF is a slow beast on my desktop, even in safe mode.
- Its safety features are up to par IMHO. A nice option is to change options on the fly with the Quick Preferences submenu.
- Working with tabs is a lot more flexible. You can tile two or more tabs, you can cascade them, etc. And the thumbnail when you move your mouse over a tab is quite nice (although utterly useless;)).
- Without extensions, its featureset is good, although some things are well hidden.
- The widgets are quite good actually, but its development tools are a bit lacking. Something like firebug or web developer would be a good thing. I do like the PHP widget though.
- The ad blocker is mediocre (no regexp, no compatibility with Filterset.G). It is also a lot of mouse clicks away and AFAIK there is no keyboard shortcut.
- I have not yet found out how to open a bookmark in a background tab. It is probably quite easy, but I have not yet found out.

All in all Opera got promoted to primary browser quite quickly.

- the idea for Speed Dial comes from the mobile phones, Opera has (the best) browser for mobile phones, they had sth remotely simmilar there (pages assigned to the buttons), this was a logical step for them, and it is not strange that they were first
- most thing are actualy hidden too well. For example you have this project http://opera-usb.com/operausben.htm . AFAIK this is done onl by editing the human-readable config files!! No programing, no recompiling, if someone tells me Opera is not "configurable enough" I'll punch him in the face :p.
- development tools are plenty and very good, for example
http://operawiki.info/WebDevToolbar/
there are a bunch of others like this one but I've bookmarked them on another box so I can't link
- ctrl+shift+click , or right-click on the boockmark (yes, you can right-click in the drop down menu) and "open in background tab".

Oh, and btw, the mail client is about to get a MAJOR redesign soon (ver 10 or even earlier). There were a lot of people requesting more features to it and one of the devs spilled that they are actualy already writing it, but the changes are so big that there is no way they can integrate it with the code for the 9 family. Sounds good, isn't it :)

P.S one will only see the true genius of the "fast forward" functionality if he has some extra mouse buttons to assign it to. One for "Forward | Fast Forward", one for "Back". Fast forward even recognises if there is a password saved in the wand and uses this as next page. You will realize what "Your life at your fingertips" stands for :) .

igknighted
April 14th, 2007, 10:29 AM
- the idea for Speed Dial comes from the mobile phones, Opera has (the best) browser for mobile phones, they had sth remotely simmilar there (pages assigned to the buttons), this was a logical step for them, and it is not strange that they were first
- most thing are actualy hidden too well. For example you have this project http://opera-usb.com/operausben.htm . AFAIK this is done onl by editing the human-readable config files!! No programing, no recompiling, if someone tells me Opera is not "configurable enough" I'll punch him in the face :p.
- development tools are plenty and very good, for example
http://operawiki.info/WebDevToolbar/
there are a bunch of others like this one but I've bookmarked them on another box so I can't link
- ctrl+shift+click , or right-click on the boockmark (yes, you can right-click in the drop down menu) and "open in background tab".

Oh, and btw, the mail client is about to get a MAJOR redesign soon (ver 10 or even earlier). There were a lot of people requesting more features to it and one of the devs spilled that they are actualy already writing it, but the changes are so big that there is no way they can integrate it with the code for the 9 family. Sounds good, isn't it :)

P.S one will only see the true genius of the "fast forward" functionality if he has some extra mouse buttons to assign it to. One for "Forward | Fast Forward", one for "Back". Fast forward even recognises if there is a password saved in the wand and uses this as next page. You will realize what "Your life at your fingertips" stands for :) .

That is good news... I never really liked their mail client, so hopefully now it will be sweet. I like Opera because it makes browsing the web a mouse oriented behavior. Many do not like this, but I think right now the keyboard is the limiting device in web browsing. By making simple mouse motions for everything, Opera lets me sit back, use one hand on the mouse, and browse as simply as a flick of the wrist. To me, that can't be beat. FF gestures are very clumsy compared to Opera's, and Konqueror doesn't really have them yet. But hopefully in time the others will catch up.

And why the hell isn't opera open source? It's a free download, why not release under an open license so you can korner (lol) the linux KDE desktop market... a truely great open-source qt browser would dominate on KDE desktops, which I feel would be a great move for Opera.

ButteBlues
April 14th, 2007, 11:09 AM
Well, no need to be rude about it. Most of us aren't really concerned with Ruby, Python, etc support. Most of us just want something that works well, is fast and doesn't crash all the time.
All I'm saying is that FUD in general is just stupid. Especially when it's coming from within the OSS community.

Colonel Kilkenny
April 14th, 2007, 01:09 PM
...Konqueror doesn't really have them yet. But hopefully in time the others will catch up.

And why the hell isn't opera open source? It's a free download, why not release under an open license so you can korner (lol) the linux KDE desktop market... a truely great open-source qt browser would dominate on KDE desktops, which I feel would be a great move for Opera.

Actually Konqueror can use gestures if it's configured to use them. I don't use KDE but the app that configures gestures is something like KHotKeys or something like that. And they work with file-manager as well which is absolutely great. And they aren't as clumsy as firefox gesture extensions.

The way I see it is that there really isn't any point in open sourcing Opera as technically speaking it's way ahead other browsers (core works on different platforms, they have developed their own GUI toolkit, etc.). Why let anyone get any closer. It's software company which has to make money. I'd be really surprised if they decided to go open source.

Opera is also developing developer tools which will integrate to the gui quite like firebug and others.

Erik Trybom
April 14th, 2007, 01:27 PM
My favourite feature is the ability to search from the address bar by typing a keyword first. "g elephants" gives a search for elephants on Google. "w elephants" gives the Wikipedia page. "rh fire" gives me rhymes on fire from Rhymezone and so on (provided you've specified those search sites).

But Opera's best feature is actually the whole package. Mouse gestures? Built in. Tabs? Built in, including all the extras. There's no need to use 10+ extensions to get all the functionality you want.

TravisNewman
April 14th, 2007, 01:36 PM
All I'm saying is that FUD in general is just stupid. Especially when it's coming from within the OSS community.
There was no fear, uncertainty, or doubt in his statements. This is incorrect usage of the word FUD.

All he was doing was stating an opinion.

Let's take this out of the context of software--
Person 1: "I think spaghetti is the best food, and is way better than burritos."
Person 2: "What? Does it have refried beans, and rice? Didn't think so."
Person 3: "Not everyone cares about refried beans and rice."
Person 2: "FUD!!!"

Opinions are totally incapable of being FUD. Facts used to back up opinions can be, but RAV stated no facts.

ButteBlues
April 15th, 2007, 05:53 AM
There was no fear, uncertainty, or doubt in his statements. This is incorrect usage of the word FUD.

All he was doing was stating an opinion.

Let's take this out of the context of software--
Person 1: "I think spaghetti is the best food, and is way better than burritos."
Person 2: "What? Does it have refried beans, and rice? Didn't think so."
Person 3: "Not everyone cares about refried beans and rice."
Person 2: "FUD!!!"

Opinions are totally incapable of being FUD. Facts used to back up opinions can be, but RAV stated no facts.
He tried to pass them off as such.

Claiming that one IRC client is better than one which is not only more widely used, but is more feature-filled, is silly at best.

TravisNewman
April 15th, 2007, 07:08 AM
"better" is a subjective term in and of itself, unless there's something measurable. In this case, its a matter of preference. Just like Windows vs. Linux, KDE vs Gnome. Internet Explorer is more widely used than Epiphany and has more features (useless ones, mind you ;)) but it's not better (IMO).

I agree with you that Xchat is far and away a better IRC client than Opera's, but I'm sure plenty would disagree.

Sorry for hijacking the thread all.

karellen
April 15th, 2007, 08:06 AM
opera...I like it and i use it on pair with firefox in my ubuntu :). what I find it a cons is that it doesn't get too well with gmail/google docs/picasa web albums - things that I use a lot every day :D (in fact google docs and spreadsheets doesn't supports opera as it states ). and so for these reasons I have to stick with firefox (or ie 7 in windows as it happens to really like it...)

hanzomon4
April 15th, 2007, 08:15 AM
All I'm saying is that FUD in general is just stupid. Especially when it's coming from within the OSS community.

How does Rav Tux's comment constitute fud? He just gave his opinion so I don't see why you would make such a fuss about it. Chill out dude........

Polygon
April 15th, 2007, 08:20 AM
i love opera. i would love it even more if it was open source.....

but i also love firefox. the plugins (espically the new one from google that syncs all of your settings between firefox browsers) really tempt me. but it is slower then opera, but not that much

which is why i keep both (along with iceweasel) on my computer

beefcurry
April 15th, 2007, 09:32 AM
Opera owns, but I only just need a browser, so I use Firefox. When I need IRC, I use X-Chat, Azueres when i need BT etc.

der_joachim
April 15th, 2007, 10:05 AM
- development tools are plenty and very good, for example
http://operawiki.info/WebDevToolbar/
there are a bunch of others like this one but I've bookmarked them on another box so I can't link


Thank you. As I stated before, I've only actively used Opera for a few days now, so I am still exploring its many many options...


- ctrl+shift+click
...like this one. :)

daynah
April 15th, 2007, 03:40 PM
He tried to pass them off as such.

Claiming that one IRC client is better than one which is not only more widely used, but is more feature-filled, is silly at best.

Opera's IRC is fully featured.

The torrent client is not, but the IRC client is completely fully featured, no denying it. :)

Just because something is more widely used does not mean it is better. IE, Microsoft.

allix
April 15th, 2007, 04:24 PM
I've been a dedicated Opera user since 6.0. The one thing that got me hooked was the fast-back feature, I just reaaaaally hated how IE would take all day to go back in history. Since then I've discovered mouse gestures and all the little things that make Opera the great browser it is.

Multimedia-plugin support is the one thing that needs fixing IMO. Using the xine-plugin (http://xinehq.de/) works ok, better than mplayer imo. If you compile it yourself I suggest using the latest version of xine-lib.

Opera owns 8)

ButteBlues
April 15th, 2007, 04:59 PM
Opera's IRC is fully featured.

The torrent client is not, but the IRC client is completely fully featured, no denying it. :)

Just because something is more widely used does not mean it is better. IE, Microsoft.
It's a basic IRC client. I'd rather not take this thread any further off track than what it's gone.

GSF1200S
April 16th, 2007, 09:11 AM
I like the new 9.2 release. The "Speed Dial" feature as it's called is pretty cool, although it's been in other browsers like OmniWeb for quite some time now. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of it's built-in e-mail client or BitTorrent client, but it is interesting to see how many features the browser packs, and yet still takes up less space and memory than Firefox 2.

Man, I just dont agree!

Ive always heard about how much faster Opera is, and how it takes up less memory. It just cant be true in all cases.

I opened up a firefox window and an opera window, and I opened 6 tabs. Each tab had exactly the same pages. I checked the system monitor, and they were both using the same memory. Than, I opened a page that had alot of images, and noted the time it took to load the page. Doing the same in Firefox, it loaded faster. Ive tried many different combinations, and Firefox is always comparable to less than on memory usage.

Keep in mind.. my firefox has 25 extensions, which should theoretically make it use more resources.

Has something changed since the 2.0.0.3 release of Fox 2? It seems like this "information" is now false. Ive included a screenshot to prove it...

RAV TUX
April 16th, 2007, 11:04 AM
Opera is Da'Bomb!....plain and simple....

I'm calling my stockbroker tomorrow, and investing into Opera on the Oslo Stock Exchange, if I can?

TheR
April 16th, 2007, 12:52 PM
I love Opera for mouse gestures. I hardly ever move mouse to back button, because I use right then left click. It's much faster when browsing news sites.

But Firefox does AJAX so much better.


by

TheR

igknighted
April 16th, 2007, 01:11 PM
Man, I just dont agree!

Ive always heard about how much faster Opera is, and how it takes up less memory. It just cant be true in all cases.

I opened up a firefox window and an opera window, and I opened 6 tabs. Each tab had exactly the same pages. I checked the system monitor, and they were both using the same memory. Than, I opened a page that had alot of images, and noted the time it took to load the page. Doing the same in Firefox, it loaded faster. Ive tried many different combinations, and Firefox is always comparable to less than on memory usage.

Keep in mind.. my firefox has 25 extensions, which should theoretically make it use more resources.

Has something changed since the 2.0.0.3 release of Fox 2? It seems like this "information" is now false. Ive included a screenshot to prove it...

Well, you are in gnome. Opera is relying on non-native QT libraries while FF is drawing from the integrated GTK libs. I would be willing to bet that those GTK libs are not counted in FF's ram footprint. I think if you use gnome then FF is a better choice, but if you use KDE opera is the better choice... on looks and performance. While qt and gtk apps can be used in the othe DE, you are seeing first hand with that performance why it isn't recommended.

GSF1200S
April 16th, 2007, 01:23 PM
Well, you are in gnome. Opera is relying on non-native QT libraries while FF is drawing from the integrated GTK libs. I would be willing to bet that those GTK libs are not counted in FF's ram footprint. I think if you use gnome then FF is a better choice, but if you use KDE opera is the better choice... on looks and performance. While qt and gtk apps can be used in the othe DE, you are seeing first hand with that performance why it isn't recommended.

Sigh.. just when you think you know something.. lol

Whats up with KDE anyways? Not to bash or anything, but I havent heard anything it really accells on other than looking and acting like windows. Gnome sounds like a more stable and lighter GUI. I guess this is another thread....

Ok, obviously by performance you mean speed of connection and memory footprint, but what exactly do you mean by looks? Just how it interfaces with KDE's GUI? Or does it render pages better in KDE because it uses these "libraries" more effectively than Fox does?

igknighted
April 16th, 2007, 01:39 PM
Sigh.. just when you think you know something.. lol

Whats up with KDE anyways? Not to bash or anything, but I havent heard anything it really accells on other than looking and acting like windows. Gnome sounds like a more stable and lighter GUI. I guess this is another thread....

Ok, obviously by performance you mean speed of connection and memory footprint, but what exactly do you mean by looks? Just how it interfaces with KDE's GUI? Or does it render pages better in KDE because it uses these "libraries" more effectively than Fox does?

WHOA... kde does lots well. It is, IMO, the most advanced and powerful DE for linux. It is more customizable and integrated, gnome is a very loose collection of apps. The advantage with KDE is that if you have an environment of KDE, everything shares really well. Konqueror, Kopete, Kword... down the line, if you have all these KDE apps open compared to gnome (or even Xfce) with its equivelents, KDE will outperform by a large margin.

Back to this discussion, since GTK dominates in gnome, the GUI doesn't render QT apps very nicely unless you install a gtk-qt package to correct it. Also in KDE a similar thing happens, although KDE is more adept at correcting this.

As for the memory footprint and rendering speed (which I would assume is related to the first), it goes back to the libraries. Gnome apps don't share as well as KDE, but they do to a degree. And QT loads a fair number of libraries, so in a non-native environment, thats a lot more Opera has to load just for its GUI parts. In KDE, these would already be open and likely helping other apps, so its like they didn't need to be loaded at all. The vice versa is true in KDE, as no GTK would be loaded so Firefox would have to pull more otherwise unused libraries. So there is benefit performancewise and visually (gtk-qt isn't perfect by any stretch) to staying native. In a more neutral environment (and even many gtk environments) Opera can out-perform FF... overall it is a lighter app. I would look into ipv6 and other setting that are normally optimized in FF not being configured in opera before jumping to the conclusion that FF is faster, and since you are in gnome I would say the memory thing is due to the GUI toolkits (libraries).

GSF1200S
April 16th, 2007, 01:55 PM
WHOA... kde does lots well. It is, IMO, the most advanced and powerful DE for linux. It is more customizable and integrated, gnome is a very loose collection of apps. The advantage with KDE is that if you have an environment of KDE, everything shares really well. Konqueror, Kopete, Kword... down the line, if you have all these KDE apps open compared to gnome (or even Xfce) with its equivelents, KDE will outperform by a large margin.

Back to this discussion, since GTK dominates in gnome, the GUI doesn't render QT apps very nicely unless you install a gtk-qt package to correct it. Also in KDE a similar thing happens, although KDE is more adept at correcting this.

As for the memory footprint and rendering speed (which I would assume is related to the first), it goes back to the libraries. Gnome apps don't share as well as KDE, but they do to a degree. And QT loads a fair number of libraries, so in a non-native environment, thats a lot more Opera has to load just for its GUI parts. In KDE, these would already be open and likely helping other apps, so its like they didn't need to be loaded at all. The vice versa is true in KDE, as no GTK would be loaded so Firefox would have to pull more otherwise unused libraries. So there is benefit performancewise and visually (gtk-qt isn't perfect by any stretch) to staying native. In a more neutral environment (and even many gtk environments) Opera can out-perform FF... overall it is a lighter app. I would look into ipv6 and other setting that are normally optimized in FF not being configured in opera before jumping to the conclusion that FF is faster, and since you are in gnome I would say the memory thing is due to the GUI toolkits (libraries).

Do you sell cars for a living? Now youve got me wanting to try KDE too :)

I dont really have any more questions... you explained it all.

ouff
April 16th, 2007, 02:12 PM
Daynah,
I think G - gnome too! Thank you for being brave enough to come out on this issue. I feel much better now.

GSF1200S
April 16th, 2007, 02:27 PM
WHOA... kde does lots well. It is, IMO, the most advanced and powerful DE for linux. It is more customizable and integrated, gnome is a very loose collection of apps. The advantage with KDE is that if you have an environment of KDE, everything shares really well. Konqueror, Kopete, Kword... down the line, if you have all these KDE apps open compared to gnome (or even Xfce) with its equivelents, KDE will outperform by a large margin.

Back to this discussion, since GTK dominates in gnome, the GUI doesn't render QT apps very nicely unless you install a gtk-qt package to correct it. Also in KDE a similar thing happens, although KDE is more adept at correcting this.

As for the memory footprint and rendering speed (which I would assume is related to the first), it goes back to the libraries. Gnome apps don't share as well as KDE, but they do to a degree. And QT loads a fair number of libraries, so in a non-native environment, thats a lot more Opera has to load just for its GUI parts. In KDE, these would already be open and likely helping other apps, so its like they didn't need to be loaded at all. The vice versa is true in KDE, as no GTK would be loaded so Firefox would have to pull more otherwise unused libraries. So there is benefit performancewise and visually (gtk-qt isn't perfect by any stretch) to staying native. In a more neutral environment (and even many gtk environments) Opera can out-perform FF... overall it is a lighter app. I would look into ipv6 and other setting that are normally optimized in FF not being configured in opera before jumping to the conclusion that FF is faster, and since you are in gnome I would say the memory thing is due to the GUI toolkits (libraries).

Haha.. I might tinker with KDE a little more. Its kind of heavy at 360MB RAM, but its got a good feel to it.. Amazing.. I type one command and I have a completely different DE.

I could actually see KDE as being the DE for a migrating Windows user.. has that feel.

I kind of messed up though.. Ive probably got a lot of crap I dont need.. I used apt-get to install KDE versus aptitude install.. Any ideas on how to remedy this?

I guess I could just apt get remove KDE and then aptitude install it.