Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Opera 10.0 Released

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the making-a-grab-for-two-percent dept.

Software 325

neonsignal writes "Opera 10 has been released. It now supports rich text email, the 'turbo' Opera proxy server feature, some HTML 5 support, XML 'pretty printing,' extra skinning features, and a 100/100 score in the Acid3 test. There has been no official announcement as yet."

cancel ×

325 comments

frist psot? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272283)

frist psot??

Don't bother trying it (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272311)

It is a joke of a browser. Just use the industry standard: Internet Explorer. It's fast and extremely secure.

Re:Don't bother trying it (-1, Offtopic)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272351)

Obvious troll is obvious. I mean seriously, get subtle.

Re:Don't bother trying it (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272411)

Usually troll too obvious is an attempt at humour.

Re:Don't bother trying it (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272615)

If you take the obvious troll seriously (like someone trying to make a point and not like an obvious troll) then the reply seems like an attempt at humour.

Re:Don't bother trying it (0, Offtopic)

Turiko (1259966) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272721)

sarcasm isn't in your vocabulary, i guess?

Re:Don't bother trying it (0, Offtopic)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272975)

It probably is. It's just preceded by the phrase "doesn't understand".

Re:frist psot? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272551)

second post

That is impressive (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272285)

But does it run on Linux?

Re:That is impressive (4, Interesting)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272333)

But does it run on Linux?

It was released for all Windows, Mac OS and Linux.

Opera has always been my favourite browser. It has pretty much everything packed in that you want and need, and still its really lightweight and smooth. Even firefox doesn't get close, a lot of times it feels quite non-smooth. Responsiveness from the GUI and things like scrolling does *a lot*. And its consistent on every platform, and always has been *the browser* to push new things on browsers. Mouse gestures, speed dial, advanced browsers on Wii/Mobile phones etc.

The old "Next" page [opera.com] also has been updated with little bit of information about 10.10, which will include Opera Unite. So its not included in this version yet.

Another interesting thing about Opera is that its marketshare on CIS countries [opera.com] is more than IE/FF/Other browsers. Are they just technically more aware or whats the cause for that?

Re:That is impressive (2, Informative)

lxs (131946) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272515)

I don't like it much, but I use it on a daily basis, because it is so light on system resources. (Firefox tends to bring this near obsolete POS win2000 system I have to use at work to it's knees, and IE6 well... let's not go there.)

Re:That is impressive (1)

Antiocheian (859870) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272983)

I use it on my virtual machines for the same reason. Much faster than Firefox to boot, highly compatible with the published W3C specifications.

As a personal browser I still prefer Firefox though; the variety of its add-ons is unbeatable.

Re:That is impressive (3, Insightful)

zlogic (892404) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272811)

And its consistent on every platform, and always has been *the browser* to push new things on browsers.

While Opera does have a lot of neat features, Google Gears support and the new fast Javascript engine haven't been released, these features do make web apps such as Gmai, Google Docs and Buxfer a lot better.

Another interesting thing about Opera is that its marketshare on CIS countries [opera.com] is more than IE/FF/Other browsers. Are they just technically more aware or whats the cause for that?

When Opera wasn't free, people could easily crack it, Opera was a lot faster on dialup connections (because it rendered pages immediately instead of waiting for them to load completely), it had caching that was actually useful and didn't need a lot of system resouces. So installing a "free" browser resulted in faster and cheaper internet. The latest Opera versions are installed because people remember how fast it was. It's still a great browser, and if other browsers aren't a lot better then why bother migrating?

Opera Mini seems to repeat the same success story, GPRS/EDGE internet is slow and pretty expensive in CIS (around $0.15-$0.20 per megabyte), and because Opera Mini compresses reduces the pages' size by 5-20 times, it's even used on devices with "real" browsers.

Re:That is impressive (4, Informative)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272987)

Actually the only thing Opera still kind of needs is as good ad blocker as adblock. While it does have its feature for blocking content, it doesn't have lists and it doesn't always work as good. I know you could find lists for it and put them in the config files, but it's not as comfortable and still doesn't work as good.

Thats why I've always used Ad Muncher [admuncher.com] tho, it does the ad blocking perfectly (and not just in Opera, but all browsers). But Opera should really fine tune their ad blocking features. Otherwise there's no really features I can come up thats missing in Opera.

Re:That is impressive (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29273041)

can you please list in your user-agent string the fact that you use ad blockers so I can redirect you to pages which are "just headlines", since you seem to have decided that you're incapable of filtering information for yourself?

Re:That is impressive (-1, Troll)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272555)

Actually, it's had a dual-core linux server built-in since alpha-2. Just before feature freeze, the added a built-in IPv6 internet. Not the protocol; the internet.

Re:That is impressive (5, Informative)

azior (1302509) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272911)

But does it run on Linux?

It runs on these OSs:

  • Windows
  • Mac OS X
  • Linux x86 64
  • Linux PowerPC
  • Linux i386
  • FreeBSD i386
  • FreeBSD AMD64
  • Solaris Sparc
  • Solaris Intel
  • QNX
  • OS/2
  • BeOS

You can also see specialized versions for your distro of choice on their site [opera.com]

no announcement? (2, Informative)

Mishotaki (957104) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272287)

They might not have announced it, but if i click "check for updates", i get that version 10.0 is available...

Re:no announcement? (2, Informative)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272327)

And just look at the opera.com homepage. It sure looks like an announcement to me.

Re:no announcement? (2, Informative)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272469)

They also made a cool launch trailer [youtube.com] . Now how cool is that Opera Mini Cooper ;) It's quick but I guess the guys had lots of fun making it.

Re:no announcement? (-1, Troll)

MancunianMaskMan (701642) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272549)

Now how cool is that Opera Mini Cooper.

answer: not cool at all. Because it's not a real Mini but a counterfeit BMW Mini. Also known as the Twatmobile.

Re:no announcement? (-1, Troll)

machine321 (458769) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272571)

Bitter much?

Re: Bitter Much (0, Troll)

RotateLeftByte (797477) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272617)

Mine's a pint of ESB if you please.

Seriously, the modern day Mini is to Real Mini fans a Bavarian Impostor. The firmly beleive that Alec Issigonis (designer of the original) would be turning in his grave at what BMW have done with it.
Personally, I think he would appreciate the modern take of his classic. The original car never made any money for BL, Leyland, Rover etc. This one does make money for BMW.
And no, I don't own or drive either types.

Re:no announcement? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272623)

Not especially. Just English.

Re:no announcement? (2, Informative)

michaelwigle (822387) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272341)

I'm not sure about an announcement but here's a CNET article from last night...

Opera 10 browser is here [cnet.com]

Re:no announcement? (4, Informative)

alexhs (877055) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272533)

Press release [opera.com]

Maybe it wasn't online at the time of submission, but now it is.

Alert on startup. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272865)

As soon as I started mine, an alert popped up an asked if I wanted to download a new one.

Snappiest beast out there (1, Informative)

whatajoke (1625715) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272297)

I am finding it to be a lot snappier than firefox and chrome. Does opera use the same code base for their mobile and desktop browsers? That may explain the low memory and CPU usage.

Re:Snappiest beast out there (2, Informative)

mcwop (31034) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272365)

You can see teh speed tests in an Opera article over at ARS. [arstechnica.com] Look how slooooooooow IE 8 is.

Re:Snappiest beast out there (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272815)

I like Opera. It's the only browser that still supports my ancient G3 Mac.

Re:Snappiest beast out there (2, Insightful)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272855)

While Opera is indeed also quite fast in those benchmarks, I believe what OP was talking about is overall feel when using it, and how heavy treatment it can stand gracefully. It's far beyond any other browser in that regard (and yeah, I like that aspect of it a lot).

Re:Snappiest beast out there (5, Informative)

MenThal (646459) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272379)

Ex-Opera employee here: Yes, the same code base is used for mobile and device versions of Opera.

Usually the versions used lags a little behind the desktop version, as a desktop version can allow to use more CPU and memory. No idea if 10.0 is in any mobile versions yet (perhaps Opera Mini is). When I worked there, the Opera 9 code base was starting to get into a lot of mobile projects.

Re:Snappiest beast out there (2, Interesting)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272453)

Ex-Opera employee here: Yes, the same code base is used for mobile and device versions of Opera.

How is that possible? Opera Mini, for example, is a MIDP 2.0 (Java 2 Micro Edition) application, while the desktop Opera appears to be C/C++. I suppose that Windows Mobile edition of Opera Mobile shares code with the desktop Opera browser (which is already coded to the Win32 API), but the Opera Mobile for the Symbian phones would almost certainly have to be Java, right?

Re:Snappiest beast out there (3, Informative)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272521)

You can still reuse things like rendering engine and most of the system. Remember that Opera is also available for Mac OS and Linux and they obviously aren't using Win32 API there.

That is why he said code base, and that it lags behind because you obviously have to port some things.

Re:Snappiest beast out there (4, Interesting)

hkmwbz (531650) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272725)

How is that possible? Opera Mini, for example, is a MIDP 2.0 (Java 2 Micro Edition) application, while the desktop Opera appears to be C/C++.

Opera Mini is just a thin application. The actual "browser", or the engine, runs on a server.

I suppose that Windows Mobile edition of Opera Mobile shares code with the desktop Opera browser (which is already coded to the Win32 API), but the Opera Mobile for the Symbian phones would almost certainly have to be Java, right?

Nope. They use the same engine (the biggest and most complex part of a browser), but not necessarily the same UI.

Re:Snappiest beast out there (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272899)

Why Opera Mobile for Symbian would use Java instead of...native Symbian APIs? It almost seems like you're confusing Opera Mini & Mobile...they are two different beasts. Mini uses Opera engine running on Opera servers which sends reformatted/compressed webpages to it. Mobile runs the engine natively on the phone.

Re:Snappiest beast out there (1)

Dj Offset (260006) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272501)

Hey MenThal :-) Opera 10 is using Presto/2.2.15, and Presto 2.2 have been used in various Opera Mobile releases for some time now... My "javascript:navigator.userAgent" says "Opera/9.80 (X11; Linux x86_64; U; en) Presto/2.2.15 Version/10.0"

Not free (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272299)

Don't compromise the freedom of your systems!

Re:Not free (1)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272573)

That's what I used to think. Then I decided to lighten up a bit, and give it a shot. Then I realised I shouldn't have. Opera is very incompatible, even compared to Konqueror.

rendering Slashdot (1)

MetalliQaZ (539913) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272321)

Can it correctly render Slashdot now? Seems like an obvious enough test to me... but O9 can't seem to do it out of the box.

Re:rendering Slashdot (1)

Mishotaki (957104) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272329)

i never had problems with version 9 on slashdot...

Re:rendering Slashdot (3, Informative)

michaelwigle (822387) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272383)

I never tried 9 but I just installed 10 and it's running Slashdot beautifully! I hate to admit it, but it's certainly faster than my Firefox. If it only ran XMarks...

Re:rendering Slashdot (1)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272363)

Haven't noticed any problems with slashdot yet, and except for the same every browser had I didn't have any with Opera 9 either. Also, slashdot is *a lot* faster now, probably because of the new javascript engine.

Re:rendering Slashdot (1)

xaxa (988988) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272503)

What's the problem? It looks fine in 9.64. The teal bars ("rendering Slashdot (Score: 1)") don't have a curved border, since 9.64 doesn't do CSS border-radius, but that's the only thing different from Firefox (except Firefox misses the space between "Anonymous Coward" and "on").

It's a trick! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272585)

Hah! /nothing/ can correctly render slashdot!

Re:rendering Slashdot (5, Funny)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272601)

Can anything??

Re:rendering Slashdot (1, Funny)

ZERO1ZERO (948669) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272967)

A beowulf cluster of linux machines running Opera might, just.

Re:rendering Slashdot (1)

Carik (205890) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272937)

I've never had problems with it rendering slashdot, even back through version 7 or so. Also, being able to just type "/." into the url bar to get here is a nice trick. Not really useful, but neat.

Announced on Twitter (2, Informative)

bodger_uk (882864) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272337)

Opera 10 final was announced on twitter over 6 hours ago. http://twitter.com/opera [twitter.com]

Re:Announced on Twitter (5, Funny)

Nadir (805) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272399)

Oh my ${deity}, six hours !!! That's like AGES ago !

Re:Announced on Twitter (1)

value_added (719364) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272687)

Oh my ${deity}, six hours !!! That's like AGES ago !

LOL. If that throws you, how about a somewhat related message from the FUTURE:

Sony plans to install Chrome as the default browser [theregister.co.uk]

The story submission just disappeared from the Firehose before I could link to it there, so this a message from the PAST FUTURE. Or something like that.

Re:Announced on Twitter (1)

laejoh (648921) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272827)

1st September 2009 called, it wanted its announcement back!

It's not a score! (2, Interesting)

nmalinoski (1216950) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272355)

Am I the only one who realizes that the #/100 on the ACID3 test is not the number of tests completed and that it isn't a score? It should be the number of tests -started-. Like the ACID1 and ACID2 tests, it's either correct or it isn't.

Re:It's not a score! (4, Informative)

beelsebob (529313) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272583)

No, it *is* the number of tests successfully passed. A 100/100 however does *not* indicate a pass, browsers need to pass all the tests at over 30fps to pass the whole test.

Do the issues printing still exist? (1)

C_Kode (102755) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272359)

I use Opera all the time, but it has issues printing a lot of stuff. Of course it always had is issues rendering many pages too. The UI is the reason I use it though. It is far and away better than the rest.

plugins? (0, Troll)

spottedkangaroo (451692) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272381)

Does it support plugins yet? No, then who cares....

Re:plugins? (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272513)

If you mean Java, Flash etc. as normally meant by that then yes.

If you mean if it's a DIY framework of a browser that you'll need/want to assemble with a bunch of extensions, no. Certain parts of vanilla Firefox I think suck bigtime, like the download manager. I guess the only reason they get away with it, is because they tell people to install one of the many download manager extensions.

Who cares? I guess everyone that wants a good browser by doing "sudo apt-get install [browser]" and not spend time finding plugins on every machine. Getting one good bundled package in Opera is simply more convienient. I don't need my browser to be another little microcosmos of package management.

Re:plugins? (2, Interesting)

machine321 (458769) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272595)

I hate using browsers without adblock/noscript. Are there equivalents for Opera?

Re:plugins? (1)

Peter Mork (951443) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272665)

There aren't equivalents because Opera doesn't have plugins. However, Opera ships with controls for blocking images and javascript.

Re:plugins? (4, Informative)

hkmwbz (531650) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272839)

Oh yes, there are equivalents [fanboy.co.nz] . Also, Opera has NoScript built in, in the form of site specific settings.

Re:plugins? (1)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272849)

Yes, Opera does have build-in blocking, but I've always preferred Ad Muncher [admuncher.com] myself. It comes with good lists and works easily - I've basically never seen ads anymore.

Re:plugins? (1)

noundi (1044080) | more than 4 years ago | (#29273045)

There are workarounds, such as privoxy. Still it's a matter of priority, if you consider usage of plugins more important than 100/100 ACID3 score then you should pick such a browser, if you don't then go ahead and use Opera. More often I value the importance of licenses much higher than functions, except some specific cases. To me virtually nothing is more important than to have the entire product, including blueprints (source). There's nothing wrong or right about that, it's just the way I value software and it will benefit me in some areas and cripple me in others, which is why I try to be somewhat flexible. Being somewhat of a perfectionist I hate to make crappy adhoc fixes, which I would consider privoxy to be. There's nothing about privoxy that the browser itself couldn't do, so why not include that in the browser and make the browser better? And if somebody doesn't want to I either do it myself or , if I don't know how, ask for someone else to do it for free or for money, much like anything in life.

Basically I'm one of those whom always prefers open source for these very simple reasons. We who do don't do it "just because", and those who cannot understand why we do usually have very little coding knowledge, hence why they cannot relate to the benefits, which is fine if you ask me. We all make choices based on our own experiences, and if you've never benefited from a source code, or know that you have, it really does make sense.

Re:plugins? (1)

Curien (267780) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272691)

Yes. Unlike Firefox, it's built-in. If you want to devise your own method, you could use the built-in GreaseMonkey work-alike (I'm not sure whether GM or Opera's UserJS came first) to implement it.

Re:plugins? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272799)

You're funny.

Plugins have been supported for years.

Qt3...Good Job! Honestly why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272389)

Why do they still bother wrapping their own toolkit with the obsolete Qt3 on unixes/linuxes/solarixses(/othersexes?)?

Considering that the Opera site... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272395)

...appears to be slashdotted at the moment, I'd agree that there has technically been no official announcement. It's kind of a "if a tree falls in the forest" situation.

Re:Considering that the Opera site... (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272439)

Sorry dude, it's just you [downforeve...justme.com] .

best browser out there (4, Insightful)

spyk (1272152) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272417)

I've never quite understood why the best browser has the lowest market share... I have been using Opera as my main browser for about 2 years, and I believe that once you get used to it you can never go back..

Re:best browser out there (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272467)

For me it was a question of add ins. I stuck with Firefox because of XMarks/FoxMarks. It's still not available for Opera but they do have an IE add in for it and I'll probably take more interest in seeing how IE8 does since it has this add in.

I will say that Opera Mobile is the best thing to hit the Windows Mobile platform in some time.

Re:best browser out there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272657)

Opera Syncronization has been built into the browser since at least 2007.

9 great. 10 not so. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272457)

I won't be going to upgrade to version 10, I tried the beta recently and I was far from impressed.

I will stay with version 9 for a while longer.

email? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272463)

Why does a WEB BROWSER need to support rich text email?

Qt3...Good Job! Honestly why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272481)

Why do they still bother wrapping their own obsolete toolkit with the obsolete Qt3 on unixes/linuxes/solarixes(/othersexes?)?

It still fails at my simple CSS test. (5, Interesting)

TodLiebeck (633704) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272487)

I reported this about a year ago. [opera.com] Create a simple page, with two absolute positioned DIVs, nested one inside the other. Resize the browser vertically (but not horizontally). Watch as the DIVs are no longer positioned according to your specification.

My example: http://echo.nextapp.com/content/test/operacss/ [nextapp.com]

The consequences get a bit more catastrophic with applications with larger quantities of nested DIVs. Things really start to break when you start measuring using Element.offsetHeight.

Apologies for posting it here...again...but I'm tired of replying to users who ask "why does component X not render properly in Opera, it passes Acid3 thus something must be wrong with the component."

Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test. (3, Informative)

jjackalb (574662) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272671)

I'd love to use Opera more, but every version (including 10) seems to suffer from rendering issues that are often readily apparent on major websites that don't seem to affect any other browser. I don't know whether its the browser or the website, but either way they dissuade me from continued use of Opera. Checkout the weekend view http://www.weather.com/weather/weekend/USIL0225?from=36hr_topnav_undeclared [weather.com] for example.

Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test. (3, Insightful)

hkmwbz (531650) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272761)

I'd love to use Opera more, but every version (including 10) seems to suffer from rendering issues that are often readily apparent on major websites that don't seem to affect any other browser.

That's because the other browsers aren't victims of browser sniffing the way Opera is. Most of the time you can simply mask as Firefox, and it "magically" starts working.

Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test. (1)

jjackalb (574662) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272841)

That's because the other browsers aren't victims of browser sniffing the way Opera is. Most of the time you can simply mask as Firefox, and it "magically" starts working.

Granted that is a problem, but not the one for the weather.com example I posted.

Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test. (1)

Zpin (921535) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272699)

I don't see any problem with your example in Opera 10. The only thing that might be a bit odd is that it doesn't refresh the contents when increasing the size vertically. It does refresh when decreasing the size or resizing horizontally in either direction.

Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272709)

Im not seeing this problem with your test case. What should we "expect" to see in a non-failing browser vs. what we do see in Opera? Just wanted to get a little more detail on this...

Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test. (1)

Joehonkie (665142) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272733)

Works fine for me in both Opera 10.00 and Safari 4.0.3

Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272805)

You're right about resizing.

But Element.offsetHeight isn't part of any w3c standard nor recommendation, so it's not surprising opera doesn't support it (and it's even good it doesn't).

Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test. (4, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272931)

I was under the impression, that "offsetHeight" was nonstandard and not recommended to be used anyway...

Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test. (4, Insightful)

Animaether (411575) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272939)

Seeing as I still have all these at my disposal (see some older thread on browsers..)

IE8: fine

FF3.5.2: fine

Safari 4.0.3: fine; although I can't resize vertically completely. The extent of the lime-colored rectangle is always a minimum size to encompass the red rectangle. Can't check horizontally because the window won't resize small enough there :)

Chrome 2.0.172.43: fine

cat: fine too (*groan*)

Opera 9.64: yup, broken.. slow to redraw, the vertical scrollbar pops into and out of existance, the boxes end up overflowing or not being sized right, etc.

Opera 10.00: also broken.. if I very slowly drag the bottom edge of the window up, the resizing happens in 'pops'. basically any time the top edge of the bottom (status) bar is hitting the bottom edge of the lime-colored rectangle, a resize occurs (vertical scrollbar pops into view, resize occurs, vertical scrollbar pops out of view). If, instead, I do it a little faster.. it just doesn't respond in time at all and I can no longer see the bottom are of the lime rectangle, the vertical scrollbar stays in place, etc. In either case, expanding the window vertically from the window's bottom edge does -not- expand the rectangles again.

Note that this behavior -is- different from 9. 9 -would- smoothly resize as the bottom edge of the window is being dragged... it's just that it resizes incorrectly

Platform: Windows Vista

Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272957)

I've just tested your CSS example both in opera and in firefox and they both work exactly as expected. I'm running the Opera version 10.00, Build 4570 for linux. Why do you shovel that FUD/crap when you don't even bother testing it yourself?

Re:It still fails at my simple CSS test. (1)

Nimloth (704789) | more than 4 years ago | (#29273055)

Works fine here in Opera 8 for Mac. Resizes just the same as in Safari and Firefox.

Great (2, Funny)

Vahokif (1292866) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272499)

I'm sure both Opera users are ecstatic ;)

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272589)

yes, we are!
although opera has the biggest marketshare in my vicinity (ppl-wise). :)
me, most of my friends, ~all my female friends, even my mother on her debian-box without knowing what a browser is.

Opera 10.0? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272575)

Opera has a new version? I mean, don't get me wrong. She's been an incredible role model to African Americans and Women alike. Her show is one of the most watched television programs, and she's worth a lot of money. Not to mention that she hides some pretty cool schwag under her live audience's chairs.

Her current format works for the network. Why would she spin it into "Opera 10.0"? That sounds so silly.

Re:Opera 10.0? (1)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272745)

Oprah 10.0? Does that mean she's back to being thi... wait, was Oprah 9 fat or thin Oprah?

Couple of questions (1)

ThePhilips (752041) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272593)

1. Is it possible to configure Opera so that tabs behave like in FireFox? The default behavior of Opera after closing a tab to always switch to previously open tab. That totally messes up my workflow when I work with sites like Bugzilla.

2. Is it possible to tell Opera when restoring tabs during start-up to fetch them from net, not from cache? FireFox 3.5 does the same and it is also impossible to turn off. That gave me couple of time already the shock - WTF!? AGAIN???? IMPOSSIBLE!?!?!? - caused mainly by a browser showing me an outdated version of a intranet web page. It's really not the best way to start Mondays.

As FireFox more and more evolves into a "better browser for your mom", it seems that after 10+ years using Mozilla, I have to finally say goodbye. Opera is a great candidate, but the minor perks prevent it from being usable to me.

Re:Couple of questions (4, Informative)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272701)

1) You can change that behaviour in preferences.
Preferences -> Advanced -> Tabs
When closing a tab
- Activate the last active tab
- Activate the next tab
- Activate first tab opened from current tab

Personally I really prefer to go back to last active tab - it speeds up things a lot, atleast for me.

2) You could try emptying cache on exit always
Preferences -> Advanced -> History -> Empty on exit
On same page is always Check if document is updated on server, where I have "Always" and I think they do update when I start Opera.

Re:Couple of questions (1)

jones_supa (887896) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272719)

1. Is it possible to configure Opera so that tabs behave like in FireFox? The default behavior of Opera after closing a tab to always switch to previously open tab. That totally messes up my workflow when I work with sites like Bugzilla.

The tab behaviour can be configured.

2. Is it possible to tell Opera when restoring tabs during start-up to fetch them from net, not from cache?

I think Opera can only fetch them from the net.

Re:Couple of questions (1)

Peter Mork (951443) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272763)

1. Yes, under Tools->Preferences->Advanced->Tabs you can choose your desired behavior "When closing a tab." 2. I think so; under Tools->Preferences->Advanced->History you can choose to "Check Documents" always.

Opera 10 trailer (3, Informative)

rbb (18825) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272607)

Apparently they figured the release was important enough for a full-blown trailer [youtube.com] as well ;-)

Opera (0, Troll)

nomad-9 (1423689) | more than 4 years ago | (#29272663)

"Opera 10 has been released."

<sarcasm> That's great news for the 15 or so opera users in the world.</sarcasm>

"some" HTML5 support, and finally Acid3 100/100... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272697)

...only months after the WebKit-browsers (Safari etc.)

I just ran a few simple tests on CSS behavior... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272823)

...and Opera 10 has changed the appearance of at least one crucial CSS item since the most recent version of Opera 9, which, in this specific aspect, conformed to and rendered identical to Safari 3 and 4, Firefox 2 and 3 and even IE 6, 7 and 8.

Opera 10 now features a broken "line-height" CSS behavior, both in terms of how all other renderers behave, and in terms of what the WC3 specifies. Well done.

Acid3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272873)

Is Acid3 really still a useful test now that browser vendors will specifically tweak their software to pass it?

It's like those idiots who practice IQ tests in order to attain Mensa membership.

Download speeds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29272885)

It is taking forever to download. Why can't both Opera users stagger their downloads?

Well ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29273019)

Is it still closed source?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...