Beta
×

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 10.60 Released, With Faster JS, WebM Video Support

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the just-gotta-be-different-don'tcha dept.

Software 301

teh31337one writes "Four short months after Opera 10.50, the latest version of Opera's lightweight web browser has been released. It not only claims to be the fastest browser, but also the first final browser with WebM video support. It's available for Windows, Mac and Linux." Update: 07/04 21:53 GMT by T : Headline updated to reflect that this is Opera 10.60, rather than 10.6. Thanks to the readers who spotted this goof.

cancel ×

301 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

And still no users (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793702)

It's kinda sad. If no one browses the web using Opera, is it really a web browser?

Re:And still no users (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793926)

You're correct. Like FireFox, Opera is irrelevant. I's too bad about FF, it is now a bloated mess just like IE.

Re:And still no users (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793950)

The day after thanksgiving a few years ago, Richard Stallman was sitting on the toilet constipated. After about 4 days without being able to take a shit he finally decided to force it out. Straining himself, he began pushing really hard and eventually he started to hear a dripping into the toilet.

"Almost got it," he thought, and gave it one more big push. Kaaa splooosh! What a relief, he must have lost at least ten pounds right there. He started to wipe, but he then noticed that his hand was covered with blood. He quickly jumped up to see a pile of bloody intestines trailing their way back to his ripped open bloody asshole.

"Oh God! I can't believe this is happening to me," the distressed hacker yelled, grabbing his intestines out of the toilet and trying to push them back into his ass. The experience was so disgusting that he puked all over himself and passed out. His dog Hurd found him later that day and ate most of the intestines that were outside of his body. How did he survive you ask? Well, lets just say that the power of GNU Emacs should never be underestimated.

Re:And still no users (2, Funny)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794090)

No, but I hear it's a good webserver.

F!rst post (5, Funny)

fredan (54788) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793742)

damn, it's fast!

Error in article: 10.60, not 10.6 (4, Informative)

students (763488) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793744)

At first I was confused by this article, since I was reading it in Opera 10.11. The new version is called 10.60, not 10.6.

Re:Error in article: 10.60, not 10.6 (1)

yuhong (1378501) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793800)

Yea, the confusion of decimal version numbers. How often is Ubuntu 9.10 called Ubuntu 9.1, as another example? Windows 3.1 had decimal 10 as the minor version, while Windows XP (5.1) had decimal 01 as the minor version.

Re:Error in article: 10.60, not 10.6 (2, Interesting)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793876)

FYI, on my system the opera:about page shows it as version "10.60 internal", but its browser identification is:
"Opera/9.80 (X11; Linux i686; U; en) Presto/2.6.30 Version/10.60"
which could be construed as meaning either version 9.80 or version 10.60.

Re:Error in article: 10.60, not 10.6 (4, Informative)

A Friendly Troll (1017492) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793912)

FYI, on my system the opera:about page shows it as version "10.60 internal", but its browser identification is:
"Opera/9.80 (X11; Linux i686; U; en) Presto/2.6.30 Version/10.60"
which could be construed as meaning either version 9.80 or version 10.60.

You can thank idiots who do browser sniffing the wrong way for that.

Basically, some people who should have never been allowed to do any development checked for Opera's version by the first digit. When Opera went to 10.00, some scripts suddenly thought it was Opera 1, and things went very bad. Therefore, all future Opera versions will fake-identify as "Opera/9.x" in order to prevent that from happening.

Chrome seems to be the next in line to hit version 10 by the way things are going, so I don't doubt they'll be in the same boat when it happens.

Re:Error in article: 10.60, not 10.6 (4, Insightful)

Tim C (15259) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793988)

You can thank idiots who do browser sniffing the wrong way for that.

If you're doing browser sniffing you're already doing it the wrong way.

One case when object detection fails (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794416)

If you're doing browser sniffing you're already doing it the wrong way.

The right way is object detection using client-side JavaScript, but there are a couple cases where object detection fails. One of them is figuring out whether the mouse cursor position includes the scroll value or not [evolt.org] .

Re:Error in article: 10.60, not 10.6 (4, Insightful)

hackel (10452) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793992)

Perhaps, but who cares? Let those sites break. Sites should display identically on every browser and adhere to all standards, not utilizing any browser qwirks. If they don't they are badly designed pages, plain and simple. It's not the browser's responsibility to compensate for an incompetent web developer.

Re:Error in article: 10.60, not 10.6 (3, Interesting)

TorKlingberg (599697) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794050)

How would the users know it's that site that is broken, and not the browser?

Re:Error in article: 10.60, not 10.6 (4, Insightful)

hackel (10452) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794066)

Ask their geek friends who read Slashdot.

Re:Error in article: 10.60, not 10.6 (0, Flamebait)

timothy (36799) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794076)

Thanks for the correction; I've updated the story.

And how do you like Simon's Rock? :) (Beautiful place. I'll be up at a nearby YMCA camp several weeks from now.)

timothy

Re:Error in article: 10.60, not 10.6 (1)

Spewns (1599743) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794102)

Thanks for the correction; I've updated the story.

And how do you like Simon's Rock? :) (Beautiful place. I'll be up at a nearby YMCA camp several weeks from now.)

timothy

The opening line of the summary, "Four short months after Opera 10.5", suffers from the same issue (as in, it was actually 10.50, not 10.5). Might as well point that out as well.

Re:Error in article: 10.60, not 10.6 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794212)

As a mathematician, I fail to see your point.

If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use it (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793748)

Opera brags about this, but my experience is that it's generally quirky in comparison to other browsers (not IE) with valid (X)HTML/CSS. For instance, W3 specs say that a blockquote should be rendered with equal whitespace before and after (link here [w3.org] ) , yet Opera won't give it any whitespace in a after the closing blockquote tag. This breaks the appearance of many sites, including imageboards.

Why should I care about a non-extensible browser that does some artificial benchmarks a millisecond faster? Not trolling, I'm trying to figure out what practical benefit Opera has for its users.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (2, Informative)

JLennox (942693) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793772)

Are you sure? This [w3schools.com] shows as your exact description of proper in Opera 10.6...

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793848)

Also renders correctly on my outdated Opera 10.10 (build 6790) on Mac OS X 10.6.4

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793944)

There's an official video somewhere that pronounces it version 10-60.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794092)

Its a decimal system, 10.6 is the same as 10.60 and a newer version than 10.11. jesus

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794396)

No actually it does not. Look a little closer. Opera aligns the right side both inside and outside the block quote rather than indenting both left and right.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (1)

TheReal_sabret00the (1604049) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793776)

Which is why I'm that much more baffled over their 'beef' with Yahoo in regards to Yahoo Mail. They really need to sort that out, it's annoying.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793782)

Can you post some screenshots of this problem? I have never noticed it before. My suspicion is that you're using a proxy or some filtering software that's damaging the HTML that Opera is subsequently displaying.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (1)

Arimus (198136) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793948)

Should be easy...

This text has the blockquote tag with no space

either side of the tag and none

afterwards.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793980)

That renders virtually identically using Opera 10.60, multiple versions of Firefox 2 and 3, Safari, Chrome 5 and 6, and even IE 7 and 8. I'm only seeing differences of, at most, three pixels between the different browsers. That is, there is virtually no difference between Opera 10.60 and the other browsers, as far as I can see.

(Posting from Opera 10.60)

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793996)

Example: Opera [imageshack.us] , Firefox and other browsers [imageshack.us]

My html got filtered out by slashdot (my mistake, I put a TD tag within < and > without using HTML entities), the problem occurs when blockquotes are within TD tags and is not the result of any filtering software.

Filed a bug report with Opera software, never heard back.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (5, Informative)

m1ss1ontomars2k4 (1302833) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793788)

For a long time it was the only browser to support border-radius CSS. It's currently the only browser with WebM support. I like it because of its right click->Validate feature, which sends the cached copy of the current page to the w3 validator. Plus it also has Inspect Element (like Chrome), mouse gestures (like the Firefox addons), and it looks good in Mac OS X and Windows (although not so much in Linux). Plus Opera Unite is really cool too. Opera Mail is also pretty decent. Also, I can't find in the spec where W3 recommends equal whitespace before and after blockquotes. All it says, as far as I can tell, is that it should be indented.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (2, Interesting)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793898)

Plus it also has Inspect Element (like Chrome), mouse gestures (like the Firefox addons), and it looks good in Mac OS X and Windows (although not so much in Linux).

I really like Opera on Windows, but I find it dreadful on OS X. I like mouse gestures and use them regularly, but Opera only supports the mouse gestures built into Opera, not the system service ones that work in all my other apps. The same goes for the rest of the system services. No support for the native spellchecker or grammar checker or word statistics. No automatic language translation, dictionary/thesaurus lookup, or text manipulation services. If you give up all the cool OS supplied features of OS X, you might as well be on Windows. I always seems to me like a badly ported Windows app, which is too bad because it is a very nice Windows app.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (1)

m1ss1ontomars2k4 (1302833) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793960)

There are system mouse gestures? Since when? Do you mean multitouch gestures? I don't have a such a capable mouse or trackpad, and my trackpad is broken anyway. As for all those other services, I don't need a grammar checker (generally...), there is a spell checker built-in to Opera (which, again, I don't need), Opera can send you straight to MW.com for dictionary/thesaurus or Wikipedia for encyclopedia, and I don't know what "text manipulation" services you're talking about; the ones that show up in the services menu for me are the same that show up in Safari's services menu. Then again, I'm also services-retarded; I never use them beyond playing with Summarize every once in a while.

I'm sure better Mac OS X integration will come in time; it already looks like a native Mac app. More so than Firefox, at any rate.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (3, Informative)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794068)

There are system mouse gestures? Since when? Do you mean multitouch gestures?

OS X supports system services which can be installed by themselves or be supplied by an application. There are two different services available for OS X that can be used in pretty much all applications that use the Cocoa APIs, but won't work in Opera. So while I can use gestures in Opera, I have to configure them independently of all my other mouse gestures, which rather sucks.

. As for all those other services, I don't need a grammar checker (generally...), there is a spell checker built-in to Opera (which, again, I don't need)

Maybe you don't like grammar checking, but it's nice to have the option. As for spell checking, it's a lot less useful when it hasn't been trained with all the words I've taught the native spell checker. I meant really, why would I want to have to teach it twice that MSDP isn't a misspelling, and do the same for every other word? Why for the love of buddha can't it simply use the native spell checker offered to all apps?

Opera can send you straight to MW.com for dictionary/thesaurus or Wikipedia for encyclopedia

Right, but it can't use the native dictionary/thesaurus already installed on my machine, and which also goes to wikipedia and online resources all at once. Why does it have to be different and not behave the same as all the other native apps that aren't badly ported?

and I don't know what "text manipulation" services you're talking about; the ones that show up in the services menu for me are the same that show up in Safari's services menu.

I take it you haven't installed any services that operate on text, like something to fix those terrible line endings left by notepad, or to replace smart quotes with straight ones, or to automatically change a URL into a proper bibliography citation? I use them heavily, but last check they still didn't work at all in Opera.

I'm sure better Mac OS X integration will come in time; it already looks like a native Mac app. More so than Firefox, at any rate.

I put in feature requests to fix the problem, wow, forever ago. It just doesn't seem to be a priority there. It is too bad because I do like it on Windows. It's about the same as Safari on Windows, just not there.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (1)

m1ss1ontomars2k4 (1302833) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794154)

I take it you haven't installed any services that operate on text, like something to fix those terrible line endings left by notepad, or to replace smart quotes with straight ones, or to automatically change a URL into a proper bibliography citation? I use them heavily, but last check they still didn't work at all in Opera.

No? I use a text editor for that...can't think of why you'd need them in a browser, but sure, I can see why having to use a text editor instead of doing it right in your browser would be annoying. Unfortunately, I can't tell you if they work, only that some services (potentially not the ones you want) work.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (1)

XO (250276) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794308)

You could bug report "Opera Mac doesn't use the native spell checker built into the operating system". :)

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (3, Informative)

KiwiSurfer (309836) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794374)

I think you're missing the big picture. The Mac port of Opera is very poorly designed -- with lots of really minor issues which, all added up, make the experience of using Opera on the mac worse than even Firefox. Look at Chrome for a better port -- they made a lot of effort to ensure that Chrome blended in well with the Mac environment. The result is very good -- to the point that Chrome looks and feels like a native browser.

Opera has had a Mac port for a long time now, so filing a bug report about a minor issue like not using the built-in spellcheck seems pointless to me -- Opera seems to not care about the little issues which stands out like a sore thumb to people who have actually sat down and tried using Opera on the Mac.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (5, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793816)

Not trolling, I'm trying to figure out what practical benefit Opera has for its users.

The 80-20 rule, 80% of the benefit of Firefox with 20% of the effort fiddling with all the extensions. Firefox without any extensions at all is a poorer browser than Opera, and I got better things do to than to custom design my browser.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (1)

Mantrid42 (972953) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794000)

Not to mention that most greasemonkey scripts work in Opera as well.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794054)

Really?

The extensions I use with Firefox:
NoScript
AdBlock Plus
FlashBlock
FireBug
RefControl

Now tell me exactly how I can get that functionality with Opera. There is no "fiddling", I just click "install" and I'm done.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794148)

I don't know what RefControl does, but Opera does all the others right out the box, no clicking to install them needed, the Opera versions are much more flexible too.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (4, Informative)

eliphas_levy (68486) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794200)

I'll bite.
NoScript: disable scripting and enable it selectively using the F12 "site preferences" shortcut.
AdBlockPlus: You can get various urlfilter.ini [fanboy.co.nz] if you really want to. I really dont need this, just block the most annoying ones with right-click:block_content. Some sites need the "normal" advertising, and once you block the top-10, you don't have much to complain about. Anyway, I will give you that point.
Flashblock: Here [opera.com] . Myself I just "enable plugins" (F12 again) on sites I want. *And* you can block the flash content with the normal "block content" too.
Firebug: Meh. Have you worked with dragon fly [opera.com] ?
RefControl: Hmpf. F12, disable "send referrer information". Maybe it is just me, but I never needed to spoof referrers.

And yes, I use every one of these extensions on firefox, because it is not there as default. And some more. In a *memory-limited VM* just so it does not goes haywire and swaps the hell out of my current apps to oblivion. Lucky me.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (1)

pi8you (710993) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794354)

There's a newer, nicer looking Flashbock-like feature in Opera as of 10.50, On-Demand Plug-in [opera.com]

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (0, Troll)

Compuser (14899) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794162)

I want tabs arranged vertically. Period. Can't get that with Opera as far as I know. In Firefox, just instal verttabbar extension and you got a usable interface.

That and the combo of AdBlock, betterprivacy, flashblock, ghostery, and TACO.

Give me these things and I will consider leaving Firefox.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (1)

eliphas_levy (68486) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794238)

Oh god, another extension.
To do this [dropbox.com] , this [dropbox.com] , or this [dropbox.com] ? Meh.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794312)

Right click on Tab Bar, Tabbar Placement, Top, Botton, Left, Right...

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (2, Informative)

XO (250276) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794314)

Move the tab bar to the left or right side.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794384)

Right click on the tab bar, click customize, click appearance. Under placement, select right or left. I swear, I'm sure that Opera had that back when it included ads... which was a fair while back now.

As for the other things, you can block ads (you might even be able to use adblock scripts, I'm not sure), flash, javascript and cookies, all without ever having to bother with addons. I've no idea about ghostery though since I've no real idea about what you use it for, and have never tried to do anything like that in Opera.

Will you consider leaving firefox now?

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (3, Insightful)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793930)

I'm trying to figure out what practical benefit Opera has for its users.

Of all browsers I've tried, it has the most customizable keybindings, and, in general, the single best implementation of keyboard-only browsing.

(Yes, I've tried the Firefox plugins which promised the same. They're not on par.)

On the whole, though, Opera doesn't have a single major killer feature. Rather, it's a combination of little (and obvious, come to think of it) things, each of which makes your life that much easier - and no-one else offers the entire set in one box. For example, Opera is the only browser I know of which lets you submit a form to a new tab, background tab etc (same keyboard modifiers when clicking submit button as for links).

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793942)

Forgot to noparse my HTML...
Opera won't give it any whitespace after the closing blockquote if the blockquote tags are within TD tags.

Re:If Opera implemented other things right,I'd use (1)

XO (250276) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794292)

Unable to duplicate here

you can't handle the speed!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793764)

holy cow i'm totally going so fast oh f***

Opera is for arepos (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793806)

I just downloaded Chromezilla Safari Explorer 6.0 and get 0/100 on the Acid3 test.

engadget summary clipped (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793822)

Summary is a nice rehash of Engadgets post. nice.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/04/opera-10-6-hits-windows-mac-and-linux-with-faster-javascript-w/

Re:engadget summary clipped (1)

teh31337one (1590023) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793934)

I'd blame the original submitter for that.

where's the beef? (3, Insightful)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793870)

Opera used to cost money. Then they switched to an ad-supported shareware model (no ads if you paid). Then they went free (as on $0) on the desktop and brought in the revenue by licensing to mobile phones, consoles, etc. That worked when smartphones were neglected and the only other option was IE mobile. But these days, WebKit is used by (or will be used by) pretty much everyone except Microsoft (who are on the verge of irrelevance). And Mozilla might, someday, gain traction with their mobile browser.

Who is going to pay for Opera when they can use WebKit or Fennec for free? They don't have the google ad revenue that Mozilla has. They don't have a sugar daddy like IE or WebKit.

It doesn't matter how good their browser is, their business model is dead and their days are numbered.

Re:where's the beef? (1)

yuhong (1378501) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793908)

Yea, remember the race between Microsoft and Netscape where Netscape tried to make money off their browser at first, then MS used the money it made from Windows to make it's competitor IE free, then Netscape tried to make money off of web server software, and then MS in the same way make it's competitor IIS free?

Re:where's the beef? (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793928)

If you only took your sig to heart...

They are actually growing (it's all int the financial reports); don't know/don't care much "why?", perhaps device manufacturers and telcos value what Opera offers after all. And with Opera as #1 mobile browser by worldwide usage (despite many of its users surely being rather cautious with number of sites visited / data transferred), the outlook doesn't look so bad - after all, they are doing fine despite being by far the longest without corporate daddy out of all major browsers.

Re:where's the beef? (1)

XO (250276) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794338)

Exactly how many Wiis has Nintendo sold worldwide?

Re:where's the beef? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794454)

Exactly how many Wiis has Nintendo sold worldwide?

Wii is saddled with old Opera and old Flash.

Re:where's the beef? (1)

LearnToSpell (694184) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794466)

71 million as of March, 2010.

Re:where's the beef? (1)

Zoidbot (1194453) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793998)

You might want to check your sources.

Opera Mobile is the most widely used mobile webbrowser, significantly ahead of webkit.

On the desktop it's marketshare is small, but it's by far the best product. This only highlights how product quality has no bearing on what American consumers use, they just use what the New York Times tells them to use.

Re:where's the beef? (1)

mr_walrus (410770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794026)

doesn't opera mobile go through a proxy server allowing it to compress
the datastream and speed things up?
when using slower cell data services (EDGE) the compression speedup is
very nice. when paying for bytes downloaded, the compression is also nice.

sorry, not everyone lives on 3Gs iphones and unlimited dataplans.

do the other browsers provide this advantage? not that i've heard...

Re:where's the beef? (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794310)

> do the other browsers provide this advantage? not that i've heard...

No, I don't believe the other browsers put your online banking data through more computers/caches. Also, although it sounds like it should be fast I always found Opera on my Touch Diamond quite slow. Well, fast when a new version came out - perhaps they had more servers which then got turned off/overloaded pretty quickly.

Semantics (1)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794116)

It's true; their days are numbered, and their attempts to do silly things like add webservers to their browser suggest that they know that very well.

Opera should be:

a) Open-sourcing their browser and making money from extras like T-shirts and manuals and other silly crap like that, which kids with browsers will buy.
b) Working real hard on a totally new, advanced, streamlined, user-friendly browser for the semantic web.

Re:Semantics (1)

XO (250276) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794350)

... not sure if serious?

Re:Semantics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794428)

150m Opera users know different. Go troll somewhere else Firefox fanboy.

Re:where's the beef? (1)

m1ss1ontomars2k4 (1302833) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794184)

Who is going to pay for Opera when they can use WebKit or Fennec for free?

A better question is, no doubt, "Who is going to pay for Opera when they can use Opera for free?"

Correction (4, Informative)

value_added (719364) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793872)

It's available for Windows, Mac and Linux."

No, it's available for Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, FreeBSD and Solaris [opera.com] .

Re:Correction (0, Troll)

Kenja (541830) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794002)

I understand what three of those mean, but why would you want to run a web browser on a bad remake of a 80s movie with George Clooney. And I dont know what a BSD is (BS device?) but it cant be very good if its free.

Re:Correction (0, Flamebait)

pgmrdlm (1642279) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794170)

Why is it people like you are to stupid to recognize or accept an abbreviation of a general type of OS when it is anything but Windows or Linux. Wait, because you have your head stuck up your ass. FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, PC BSD. Your a Slashdot reader aren't you? Do you know what the BSD License is?>

And I dont know what a BSD is (BS device?) but it cant be very good if its free.

http://news.netcraft.com/ [netcraft.com] Damn, I see FreeBSD and Linux as the most used servers for Web Hosting. Considering FreeBSD is a specific Operating system and NOT a generic name such as Linux, I find that even more impressive.

Not fucking bad asshole for free now is it.

Re:Correction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794108)

Actually 10.11 version is available for Solaris not 10.60

Re:Correction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794110)

10.60 doesn't seem to be available for Solaris Sparc [opera.com] or Intel [opera.com] .

Re:Correction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794114)

Thanks for the correction. After all, a 0% browser share for five OSes is much greater than a 0% of web share for only three OSes.

WebM? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32793918)

I thought the specifications were at best poorly written and confusing?

Also, where are the WebM encoders? Doesn't do us much good if browsers support WebM and there's not any tools to encode into that format.

Version sync (1)

Stratoukos (1446161) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793952)

10.60 finally syncs the version between all their supported versions (Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD; Solaris was dropped recently and is stuck on 10.10). The had to rush 10.50 to get it in the browser ballot, so they released only a Windows version with OS X being on beta and Linux/FreeBSD on alpha. Some weeks layer they released 10.52 (IIRC) for Windows and OS X and announced that there wouldn't be an official release for 10.5* for Linux or FreeBSD (betas were available).

Who cares anymore? (-1, Troll)

hackel (10452) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793966)

We now have TWO excellent open-source browsers available, one of which (Chrome) kicks Opera's ass in the one advantage it used to have over Firefox (speed), and Firefox continues to be far superior as a general browser thanks to the available extensions. There is no reason for anyone to continue using proprietary browsers such as Opera or IE.

Once the Opera source code is released under an Open Source license, THAT will be news. Until then, please no more Opera stories...just let it die in peace.

Re:Who cares anymore? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794006)

Why? The more, the merrier!

Pretty awesome it is too. (1)

Zoidbot (1194453) | more than 4 years ago | (#32793978)

And pretty darn awesome it is too. Feels much faster than both Chrome and Firefox, is more fully features than them too.

I also like the really decent content and plugin blocking options, global and per-site.

10.6 has vast stability improvements... (1)

lisany (700361) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794008)

...over 10.5x series on the Mac. 10.6 hasn't crashed yet!

Re:10.6 has vast stability improvements... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794042)

Same here for the PC, I was getting pretty worried with 10.5 - seems like nearly every issue I was having is fixed now.

It still (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794030)

Runs like crap on Linux. Really, really really really REALLY fast when it does work, various browser benchmarks utterly trash Firefox and Chrome.

However it's always been plagued with an issue of not multitasking very well and random freezes make it a no go for me.

Is google.com messing with Firefox? (1)

thoughtsatthemoment (1687848) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794032)

I just downloaded this new version and found the animation on the google.com home page much smoother in Opera than in Firefox, especially the star falling part. This really makes Firefox look bad.

Re:Is google.com messing with Firefox? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794476)

Just tried it. Perfectly smooth for me in both Chrome and Firefox, most recent versions in Fedora 13.

I think the update/latest version sucks (2, Interesting)

pgmrdlm (1642279) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794052)

I have opera installed on all my computers(FreeBSD and Windows) and was a huge fan of the browser. I find that every single web page I try to connect to, including Slashdot, takes forever to load. I have tried using the turbo option with no improvement. I have tested the same pages, right after trying to connect with opera and have found 100 percent improvement in connection and loading speeds. These pages include my bank, various media web pages, and several different forums I belong to.

I've switched my default browser from opera to chrome. I'm ready to uninstall opera, it's not worth trying to browse the web with right now. I have to go to FireFox on FreeBSD because chrome is not ported.

Re:I think the update/latest version sucks (2, Informative)

KiwiSurfer (309836) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794322)

Have you looked at using FreeBSD's Linux Binary Emulation feature?

Re:I think the update/latest version sucks (3, Insightful)

XO (250276) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794362)

Sounds like local problems, I find myself utterly amazed at how fast pages are loading in 10.60.

I've been an Opera user for a long time (2, Interesting)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794142)

and I'm on the verge of changing browsers. I paid for Opera back when the choice was between IE, Netscape, and Opera. Been using Opera as my main browser, and very happy with it, since then... must be quasi 10 years now. I'm very sad to see Opera dropping the ball that bad, and not fixing it:

  - basically, 10.x versions are much lower quality than 9.x and before. An occasional hiccup can be understood, but 10.x is kinda old by now, there have been several point releases, and the issues that bother me still are there.
- broken feature 1: mouse gestures. One a large screen, with the mouse set for high velocity and high acceleration, mouse gestures don't register 9 out of 10 times. Chrome does not have that issue. It's probably kinda easy to fix (9.x has the issue, but not as badly).
- broken feature 2: autoscroll. 10.x goes out of autoscroll after a (random) handful of seconds. I've taken to copy-pasting URLs of long documents into Opera 9x, but that's cumbersome.
- broken feature 3: Opera Link keeps overwriting my main PCs bookmarks with stuff from PCs I haven't touched in ages. I'm back to synching bookmarks with backups and restore, and re-doing the rest (custom searches...) by hand.
- broken feature 4: cursor in text boxes. I routinely have issues getting my cursor back into rich-text edit boxes. I actually had the problem right now, and had to click on my comment's title then tab back into my text... this is cumbersome after a while.
- Broken feature 4: some sites that used to work perfectly no longer do. Hotmail is the main one, ZD sites are kinda screwy (the comments section)

I'm a bit disheartened. I've been a Opera fan and advocate for long, and now I feel they've dropped their focus on code quality to chase feature checklists and performance benchmarks. I personnaly don't care if my browser does WebM, or if it's 50% faster at javascript, if I can't use Hotmail, synch my PCs, scroll pages, and otherwise navigate with my mouse. These have been bugs since 10.0 beta, I've reported them, Opera hasn't moved on them.

I used to recommend Opera, I no longer do, and after enduring 10.x for months, I'm ready to leave, too. Chrome's mouse gestures and autoscroll work fine on my PC, as do Hotmail and text boxes...

Re:I've been an Opera user for a long time (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32794204)

Not another one of those upset Firefox/Chrome fanboys pretending to be a disgruntled long-time Opera user. How sad...

Re:I've been an Opera user for a long time (2, Interesting)

twidarkling (1537077) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794246)

How odd. I don't use mouse gestures, so I cannot speak to that one. As for the rest, I've never had autoscroll stop on me before. I've had some lag in it stopping when I wanted it to, though. Opera Link does seem to randomly take the older version, you're right there. Not sure that's part of the browser, and more the secondary service (not that it makes a functional difference, I'll admit).

Opposite problem with text boxes. It'll jump to them when a new page loads, even when there's lots of other content, so that's kind of annoying. As for hotmail, I've noticed improvements. It used to be that I couldn't even log in to the service (around 9.7). About the only thing broken in there is that I can't tab around an email message I'm composing.

My biggest issue with the 10.X series is the flashblocker. There used to be a nice UserJS for that, but 10.X broke it some how, and the built-in one doesn't have a white-list that I've found.

Maybe the reason they've not fixed these issues isn't that they're not trying, but that it's more difficult than it seems, since we're having near opposite issues on some points.

Re:I've been an Opera user for a long time (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794352)

Indeed that's weird, and it would feel better if the issues were the same for everyone. They aren't, but the buggy areas seem to be.

I just checked, I can use Hotmail with my 9.64-usb. WIth 10.x, I go into some refresh loop for a while after each page load, I have to click on random stuff for it to stop, sometimes after stopping it's usable, sometimes it's not and I have to refresh and retry.

I don't know about the flashblocker, since I have flash mostly off, and use a custom HOSTS file on top of that. I see very few ads.

Re:I've been an Opera user for a long time (3, Informative)

XO (250276) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794404)

I think you should completely uninstall your current Opera installation, remove all traces of it, and then install and try again. The Mouse gesture problem was fixed backed in 9.5 or 9.6 .. i can't speak for autoscroll, because I don't know what it is .. You can't really complain about Opera Link doing exactly what it's supposed to do, can you? Well, you did, but your complaint doesn't make much sense. You should probably either disable Link, or login to your Opera Link account, and edit the bookmarks there. Maybe your old PCs are in use somewhere, and are still updating the Opera Link, and you should get a new MyOpera account for your current browsers.

I've not had the "cursor in text boxes" problem on Windows, only on Linux, and it appears to be fixed for the most part in 10.60. Hotmail appears to work ok for me, although i have nothing but about 82,000 spams in an email box that i got back in 1998, and have never once used.

Re:I've been an Opera user for a long time (2, Interesting)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794448)

I'll try the uninstall reinstall. Never had the issue prior to 10.x though, and my 9.64-usb still works fine.

Autoscroll is: when you have a very long web page to read, middle-click, drag the mouse down a bit, the page starts scrolling down without you having to roll the scrollwhell nor click the verticla slider (very convenient), and should continue scrolling until you middle-click again, or move the mouse back up. Only it doesn't, and stops after 1-5 seconds.

Opera link is not supposed to randomly overwrite my -recent- main PC's bookmarks with my -old- backup PC's (that haven't changed at all since I last booted it up a month ago).

One of the better upgrades but... (1, Insightful)

GrumblyStuff (870046) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794150)

...they fucking removed options that I prefer. I want the tab bar to go away if I only have one tab open. GIVE ME MY SCREEN SPACE! Also, let me get rid of the background image of the speed dial.

That said, unlike past upgrades which made changes that can only be characterized as "feeling different", I noticed no negative ones this time around. Feels a bit more stable and a little more spry.

I still want to have the tab bar hide though.

Re:One of the better upgrades but... (1)

GrumblyStuff (870046) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794178)

Ah, found out how to get rid of the image. It was under Configure Speed Dial. Imagine that....

Re:One of the better upgrades but... (2, Informative)

XO (250276) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794484)

Right click Tab Bar, click Customize, select "Only display when needed", same place as it's always been.

Re:One of the better upgrades but... (1)

pi8you (710993) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794432)

This behavior is still there, if not by default. Right click on the Tab Bar -> Customize -> Appearance -> Mark the "Show only when needed" checkbox.

Uninstalled... (1)

foxtyke (766988) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794222)

For whatever reason, Opera 10.60.6386 64-bit on Ubuntu 10.04LTS would not connect to any place on the Internet for me, I had to downgrade back to 10.11 to get Opera working again, I filed a bug report but I don't know how helpful that will be, I don't use proxies, I don't have any special setup.

Re:Uninstalled... (1)

blackdropbear (554444) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794442)

Using opera 10.60.6386 amd64 no problems out of the box on Ubuntu 10.04LTS. Including this post. Been using opera since 5.x days and still see no reason to change.

Does see it (1)

gsgriffin (1195771) | more than 4 years ago | (#32794264)

I installed it and don't see the improvement or fuss. I can run FF side by side and load the same page and FF wins. I even click refresh on Opera first then mouse over to click refresh on FF and FF still wins.

Whatever...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>