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 Goes To 11, With Extensions and Tab Stacks

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the none-more-fat dept.

Software 296

surveyork writes "Opera Software released Opera browser 11 for desktop (Windows, Mac, Linux, etc). The main features are support for extensions similar to Chrome and Tab Stacks, Opera's version of tab management. The extension catalog is still small, with roughly 200 extensions, but steadily growing. The browser is very fast — Chrome-fast — and lightweight, with a new installer which is 30% smaller than the one in the previous version. Other enhancements include visual mouse gestures and better address field. There's no hardware acceleration yet, but it could be coming in a further dot release and benefit XP users as well as Mac, Linux and Windows 7/Vista users."

cancel ×

296 comments

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

I can't be the only one who thought of this... (-1, Redundant)

mark-t (151149) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603798)

... "This one goes to 11"

Re:I can't be the only one who thought of this... (5, Funny)

Xeoz (1648225) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603820)

Why don't you just make 10 better? And make 10 be the top, number... and make that a little better?

Re:I can't be the only one who thought of this... (1)

poptones (653660) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603966)

dammit! For liek 3 weeks they just kept throwing mod points at me and half the time I couldn't even use them up. And now, here I sit without any mod points...

Re:I can't be the only one who thought of this... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604088)

Yes, but here we have ELEVEN.

Re:I can't be the only one who thought of this... (1)

Jesus_666 (702802) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604332)

Well, it's one browser, isn't it? It's not ten.

Re:I can't be the only one who thought of this... (1)

beakerMeep (716990) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604556)

The tech news headlines would be awesome... "Opera releases version 10.... uh, again...ffs"

Re:I can't be the only one who thought of this... (5, Informative)

biryokumaru (822262) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603858)

I can't be the only one who thought of this...

Ya, I'm sure the guy who wrote the headline Opera Goes To 11 never thought of the connection to Spinal Tap [youtube.com] .

Re:I can't be the only one who thought of this... (1)

nodd (1704580) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603870)

Actually... you aren't. [goo.gl] ;)

RTFT (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34603880)

You didn't even read the title?

Re:I can't be the only one who thought of this... (1)

SEWilco (27983) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603892)

Yay, THREE!

Re:I can't be the only one who thought of this... (3, Insightful)

Isaac Remuant (1891806) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603906)

How is Opera "Chrome Fast"? Shouldn't it be Chrome that is almost opera fast?

Based on both age and lots of tests...
 

The stack concept is an interesting alternative to Firefox's panorama. I find the former convenient with a small amount of tabs.

Re:I can't be the only one who thought of this... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604166)

As far as Javascript performance goes, I'm ok with with Opera and Chromium. The area that Chromium really lags is when opening new tabs in the background, perhaps HTML/CSS rendering. Every time I open an new tab in the background with Chromium, the browser lags so badly that I can't even scroll the current, fully loaded tab.

I have never had this problem with Opera and that's why I like it more. It's not just fast at Javascript, it's fast at everything.

Re:I can't be the only one who thought of this... (1)

windcask (1795642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604676)

I know this is a little late, but that was what they were playing off on the Beta for weeks now.

All look the same to me... (2, Insightful)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603830)

I tried Opera last time. It looks quite a bit like FF 4. Which itself is looking somewhat similar to Chrome.

Meh, at this point in time, it hardly matters which browser you use - so long as its not IE6... So browser wars can stop now ;)

But at least all this competition is putting a lot of push into better browsers.

Re:All look the same to me... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604018)

Actually FF4 looks a lot like Opera. The big thing is Opera has always had a URL attached to each tab that is unique to each tab. Opera also added a menu button in the top left. FF4 has copied both of these to a point where it looks like exactly like Opera now.

Re:All look the same to me... (-1, Troll)

anomaly256 (1243020) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604116)

Who cares what they /look/ like. The real question is 'Can Opera finally render correctly the 75% of websites in the wild it couldn't before' that FF chrome and even IE have been able to do since the start?

Re:All look the same to me... (4, Informative)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604172)

What on earth are you talking about? I've been using opera for years, it does a fine job for well over 99% of the sites I visit. Opera 11 is really smooth-feeling and quick. Haven't tried the extensions yet, but the browser itself is excellent, at least on FreeBSD and OS X.

Re:All look the same to me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604238)

I can't get gmail to work properly with Opera 10.63, unless I switch to basic HTML gmail. If you have a fix for this, I'd be most grateful.

Re:All look the same to me... (-1)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604600)

I do have a fix for that -- use a real mail agent. You can get your gmail via imap, it's a *much* better experience.

Re:All look the same to me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604828)

What mail agent can thread conversations properly like gmail does? Or hide the mess left when people top-quote? Or handle a 3GB IMAP mailbox without taking 2 hours to check for new email? "Real" mail agents are the reason I quit using email in 1998, and gmail is the reason why I started again in 2004.

Re:All look the same to me... (0)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604934)

mutt

Re:All look the same to me... (1)

windcask (1795642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604688)

Uhm, I just quit Gmail a couple months ago, but I'd been using it ever since nine point something with no problems at all.

If you like the browser, check out Fastmail.fm, their newly-acquired mail service. It's rock-solid, but it's a shame you have to pay for SMTP...

Re:All look the same to me... (3, Funny)

Nimey (114278) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604802)

What? Opera looks nothing like Final Fantasy 4.

Tab groups, I like them. (1)

eddy (18759) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603840)

Only took seven years [opera.com] , but now I'm using them and liking them. Would probably prefer them to expand vertically instead of horizontally, and while I realize it's a niche-request and might not work well in practice, I'd still like the ability to automatically redirect pages into groups using regex against title/url/whatever.

Tree Style Tab for Firefox (2, Informative)

traindirector (1001483) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603888)

I haven't used Opera's tab stacking yet, but it sounds a lot like one of the features the Tree Style Tab [mozilla.org] add-on adds to Firefox. It's quite a flexible add-on, and if you constantly have a lot of tabs open or would prefer to have a hierarchical tab list on the side to save vertical real estate (especially if you have a 16:9 monitor), it can revolutionize your world almost as much as tabs did originally. I can't recommend it enough.

How to remove visual mouse gestures (2)

kanto (1851816) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603866)

Preferences -> Advanced -> Shortcuts -> Enable visual hints... I personally use mouse gestures so I don't need to use menus. They also changed the close tab which is really the only movement gesture I used (apart from the button flips), it prompted me to look at the settings more carefully and remove everything else so now it's just GestureRight; setting it to the old style GestureRight, GestureLeft, GestureRight failed 50% of the time.

Re:How to remove visual mouse gestures (1)

sa666_666 (924613) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603930)

It can be turned off with 'opera:config'. Search for the keyword 'gesture' on that page, and turn off the applicable checkbox. Note that simply turning off the gesture UI won't fix the lag that this new release has wrt mouse gestures. There's a lengthy list of complaints and reports in the Opera forums that mouse gestures don't work as well as they did i previous releases. Some people (myself included) have even had their posts deleted because these complaints were deemed, and I quote: "off-topic". Personally, I'm sticking with 10.63 until this issue is fixed.

Re:How to remove visual mouse gestures (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604282)

After attempting to play Black and White for over two hours, I'm deathly afraid of anything related to gestures.

Middle-click still buggy... (5, Interesting)

Cl1mh4224rd (265427) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603898)

Firefox is my primary browser, but I do have Opera installed and keep it updated. One annoying bug that's been around for a while is that middle-clicking on a link does not set the Referrer header. This causes a number of *ahem* "image-hosting" websites to throw their hotlink prevention message at you.

Re:Middle-click still buggy... (1)

noidentity (188756) | more than 3 years ago | (#34603932)

Maybe that's a feature, not a bug, for when you don't want the referer header set.

Re:Middle-click still buggy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604060)

No. IIRC, Opera has its own setting to stop the referrer header from being sent.

Re:Middle-click still buggy... (2)

kanto (1851816) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604210)

Would that be opera:config -> User Prefs -> "Enable Referrer" box? Can't really tell because apparently no help exists for any of my config variables:)

Re:Middle-click still buggy... (1)

antdude (79039) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604966)

I always disable send referrers in my Mozilla's SeaMonkey web browsers. I don't like web sites tracking me where I came from. I get annoyed when web sites really don't like that send referrer disabled or when I fake it. Are there other people disabling their send referrers too?

Chapter 1 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34603900)

September 16, 1991. Today it finally began! After all these years of talking and nothing but talking we have finally taken our first action. We are at war with the System, and it is no longer a war of words.

I cannot sleep, so I will try writing down some of the thoughts which are flying through my head.

It is not safe to talk here. The walls are quite thin, and the neighbors might wonder at a latenight conference. Besides, George and Katherine are already asleep. Only Henry and I are still awake, and he’s just staring at the ceiling.

I am really uptight. l am so jittery I can barely sit still. And I’m exhausted. I’ve been up since 5:30 this morning, when George phoned to warn that the arrests had begun, and it’s after midnight now. I’ve been keyed up and on the move all day.

But at the same time I’m exhilarated. We have finally acted! How long we will be able to continue defying the System, no one knows. Maybe it will all end tomorrow, but we must not think about that. Now that we have begun, we must continue with the plan we have been developing so carefully ever since the Gun Raids two years ago.

What a blow that was to us! And how it shamed us! All that brave talk by patriots, "The government will never take my guns away," and then nothing but meek submission when it happened.

On the other hand, maybe we should be heartened by the fact that there were still so many of us who had guns then, nearly 18 months after the Cohen Act had outlawed all private ownership of firearms in the United States. It was only because so many of us defied the law and hid our weapons instead of turning them in that the government wasn’t able to act more harshly against us after the Gun Raids.

I’ll never forget that terrible day: November 9, 1989. They knocked on my door at five in the morning. I was completely unsuspecting as I got up to see who it was.

Read more... [avrtech.com]

Liking it so far (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34603924)

I've been using Opera 11 for a few days now and I'm enjoying it. It feels faster than version 10. I think it's more stable too, based on my testing so far.

Still waiting for a way to view pixelart/QR codes (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34603976)

Mozilla has image-rendering: -moz-crisp-edges;
IE has -ms-interpolation-mode: nearest-neighbor;
Chrome has an open bug about it [webkit.org] and it's in discussion on the w3 mailing list [w3.org]
How come Opera isn't an early implementer of this?

Wow...shortest beta ever (0, Troll)

metrix007 (200091) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604034)

It's still fairly buggy, I'm surprised they are releasing it so soon.

The compatibility with websites has finally improved so as to be usable, which is great.

It's decently fast, although Minefield (not FF 32bit v) is faster on my machine.

Now, if only they will allow me to customize keybindings and get extensions that work. At least here, Opera adblock doesn't block ads.

Re:Wow...shortest beta ever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604128)

You never needed Adblock for Opera, you just need a filled urlfilter.ini in your roaming/opera/opera folder. Look it up on Google, shouldn't be hard to find if you search for something like "urlfilter.ini for opera" and go to Fanboy's Adblock List for Opera.

Re:Wow...shortest beta ever (1, Troll)

metrix007 (200091) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604218)

Bullshit. AdBlock is a whole lot more advanced than basically blocking out things via a glorified hosts file. As it stands, Opera still does not have a decent AdBlock extension.

I keep trying (1, Interesting)

farnsworth (558449) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604046)

I keep trying Opera and I keep being disappointed. I guess it's just not for me. The text rendering is worse, the chrome takes up more room, the form elements are not native looking, the url input seems more rudimentary than others, its image rendering doesn't seem to be color-space-aware, and its rendering quirks are somehow louder than other browsers' quirks.

It may very well be numerically faster than other browsers, but it doesn't feel faster. I don't really care if a gmail inbox takes 5 seconds to render -- I can always switch away and read twitter or whatever in the meantime. Opera does have many UI innovations, but they always seem to lack polish to my eye.

I just want a browser that is "fast enough", gets out of my way, and is thoughtfully designed for human interaction. It is my impression that Chrome, Safari, and Firefox are all better in this regard.

I don't mean this to be a dig against Opera or the people who make it. I realize that it takes an extraordinary amount of effort and magic to produce Opera. I'm just curious why people like it, and if it will ever make it beyond a niche product on the desktop.

Re:I keep trying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604144)

I have found some isolated situations where Opera was useful. For example, Opera takes around 5 seconds to render an average web page on my Eee PC 701SD running Windows XP, while the other browsers take 30-60 seconds because they incorrectly (in this case) assume that HDD reads and writes are fast, compared to uploading and downloading data from the web site.

This is an incorrect assumption on this EEE PC, because the throughput of the SSD is actually slower than the average internet connection.

Errr (0, Troll)

metrix007 (200091) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604256)

I avoided Opera for years mainly because they're nazi like adherence to standards meant many pages would display incorrectly (even with UA set to FF or whatever), it never having extensions so no adblock or checkthemall or whatever addons you might want.

The fanbois making false claims about Opera being the first to innovate many things never helped.

I have been using it next to FF beta 8 and Chrome and it has gotten a lot better. It's decently fast, and I quite like it.

Some of the things you mention are just false though. I notice no difference with text rendering on my HD screen, the chrome takes up less room than both IE and FF*, although not Chrome, the form elements look identical to the ones rendered in any other browser...URL input also is no different...seemingly you have simply made these things up.

The things that annoy me is that it uses shift + ctrl to open a new tab instead of the defacto standard ctrl, and there is no way to have tabs you open from a link open next to the active tab and have new blank tabs open at the end of the browser. Also, no working adblock despite what hosts files trolls say.

I just wonder how the opera fanbois will mod this post.....

*this is after disabling the ridiculous toolbar down the bottom...it uses the space a lot better than both FF (which has all that wasted space in the title bar) and IE (which put the address bar on the same level as tabs). Although it at least has a proper toolbar, unlike chrome....

Re:Errr (1)

farnsworth (558449) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604318)

Some of the things you mention are just false though. I notice no difference with text rendering on my HD screen, the chrome takes up less room than both IE and FF*, although not Chrome, the form elements look identical to the ones rendered in any other browser...URL input also is no different...seemingly you have simply made these things up.

I should have clarified -- I'm on OS X. I assure you that I am not making anything up. HTML forms don't look anything like Cocoa forms, text rendering is different from every other app's text rendering, image rendering seems to use sRGB, on and on. The url autocomplete menu is a free-floating rounded thing with sub-menus and things that look like links but aren't.

Everywhere I look, it just seems like there is no attention to detail. It may well be that it is a better experience on Windows or Linux. Is it?

Re:Errr (1)

metrix007 (200091) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604378)

Hmmm...sorry can't speak for OS X, was going by the windows versions here.

Re:Errr (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604346)

I avoided Opera for years mainly because they're nazi like adherence to standards

Of all the things to troll about, what drives a person to do it about browsers?

Re:Errr (1)

metrix007 (200091) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604354)

It's important to adhere to standards but no to the point where most sites will not practically display. Something opera learned only recently.

Re:Errr (0)

metrix007 (200091) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604360)

Oh, the another things that annoy me are no way to disable the needless system tray icon to the click to use this control crap.

Re:Errr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604824)

What do you mean no working adblock? It's been a feature of Opera since forever. Right click -> Block content.

Re:Errr (0)

metrix007 (200091) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604836)

Obviously you have never used a proper ad blocker

Re:Errr (1)

windcask (1795642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604862)

I just wonder how the opera fanbois will mod this post.....

They probably won't, because they're too busy REPLYING.

Dunno if you're using a different OS, but my windows version opens tabs with Ctrl+T. As far as tab order goes, I have mine set to open in new background tabs, but the order has never really bothered me. When you Ctrl+Tab they go through in the order you opened them, anyway. I could almost do without the tab bar in the first place.

Re:Errr (1)

metrix007 (200091) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604910)

Ctrl + T opens a new tab yes. I was talking about splitting up right clicking and openening a link in a tab, and using ctrl + t to open a blank tab. Unlike in FF, I cannot seperate these actions, which is annoying.

Re:Errr (1)

windcask (1795642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604948)

Huh. I never even knew you could do that. I've never really been too aware of the advanced tab features in browsers cos I never have more than four or five open anyway.

Re:Errr (1)

luckymutt (996573) | more than 3 years ago | (#34605162)

You know you can middle-click a link and it will open in a new, background tab ?

Re:I keep trying (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604268)

I like Opera because everything you said is bullshit.

Re:I keep trying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604292)

I used to be an Opera user too, actually up to a few days ago, because I admired how they conform to Web standards and are responsible for many innovations that other browsers rip off. Unfortunately, not many Web sites conform to Web standards. I had to keep a second browser around for using sites such as some of my university course Web sites hosted on Desire2Learn, my banking site, GMail (logging in twice in order to get past the login page).

Privacy issues are a big problem these days. Advertising and flashy Web pages are increasingly popular. One thing I like about Firefox is their large catalog of add-ons. I installed a lot of add-ons to make the Web a little more tolerable. I checked out Opera's catalog, but it wasn't very impressive. I finally made the full switch to FF and purged Opera from my computer.

I think Opera has its heart and mind in the right places, but sadly the rest of the world doesn't seem too compatible with them.

Re:I keep trying (2)

kanto (1851816) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604314)

For me Opera was the first browser which actually made sense; practical mouse gestures, backtracking via closed tabs "trashcan", ctrl-z actually works, speed dial, convenient keyword searches (use and creation of) and modifiable layout weren't a done deal in those days and neither are they now. It was and probably still is the most viewer/user friendly browser if you take advantage of these things.

Re:I keep trying (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604340)

I'm just curious why people like it, and if it will ever make it beyond a niche product on the desktop.

Seems to run better for me usually than firefox, and the mouse gestures are different from what I'm used to in Opera.

If I wasn't already used to opera, I'd probably be using firefox or chrome, but I'm reluctant to switch because it feels foreign.

Re:I keep trying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604418)

Because, this one goes to 11!

Re:I keep trying (2)

Pentium100 (1240090) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604628)

What I always liked about Opera is that I can customize the UI to be whatever I want (in my case it's a modified version of Opera 7 UI and "Opera Standard" skin) instead of being stuck with Chrome UI (and Firefox, now that FF4 is copying Chrome UI). I have a big monitor (21", 4:3) with resolution high enough that I do not need to maximize the browser window (1600x1200) and I do not really care about saving 16 pixels by eliminating the menu bar or whatever. The menu bar (for example) is useful to me and I want to keep it.

I agree with you on the render time though - I don't really care if the browser renders the page in 5 or 4.9 seconds, as long as it does that fairly quickly.

Re:I keep trying (1)

windcask (1795642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604834)

I also use the standard skin, with the standard menu rather than the Chrome-y dropdown menu. I use a 16:9 monitor, so I put the tabs with the screens on the right-hand side, and then links/history/page info/whatever on the left, so the resulting profile more resembles a standard-aspect monitor rather than a ton of wasted whitespace. It looks more tricked-out than it really is, especially when DragonFly is open.

Noscript (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604066)

So... when do we get noscript for opera?

Re:Noscript (2)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604100)

It's built in. Firefox is *the only major browser* that doesn't give its users more control over JS than a global on/off switch buried 3 menus deep. The relevant bug has been given the silent treatment for a decade, so it's safe to say they don't give a shit at this point.

Re:Noscript (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604112)

http://www.ghacks.net/2010/02/02/opera-noscript-alternative-blockit/

Re:Noscript (1, Informative)

Ksevio (865461) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604180)

It's part of the top most popular extension now:
https://addons.opera.com/addons/extensions/details/noads/1.0.8/?display=en [opera.com]

With the bonus of a one click install

Re:Noscript (1)

AaxelB (1034884) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604334)

That's more of an adblock-equivalent, and I found it lacking when I first tried it (I don't remember my specific complaints, and it may have gotten better). The more direct noscript-equivalent is "NotScripts" [opera.com] , which is quite simple and works pretty nicely.

Re:Noscript (1)

metrix007 (200091) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604608)

adblock for opera blocks no ads for me

Re:Noscript (3, Informative)

surveyork (1505897) | more than 3 years ago | (#34605002)

If you are having problems with NoAds, it might be because it's not compatible with Opera 11 final. The last NoAds release dates from November 25. You can try this:

1. In Opera, paste in the address bar exactly this: opera:config#PersistentStorage|UserJSStorageQuota
2. Change it to 500 or more.
3. Save this new setting.
4. Install NoAds.
5. NoAds Preferences > Select a blocklist > Click save.
6. Restart Opera.

You may still see some ads. You can block them by clicking the NoAds button and selecting Block Ads/Elements

noscript? Morescript! (1)

eddy (18759) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604522)

Since the only thing I really never want and haven't been able to control using the built-in options, are those annoying ad-things which highlight words, I've been using a user-javascript in Opera [gazonk.org] with a hook to detect and disable them. Sure, I need to manually update it a couple of times per year, but no big deal. To use, find/set your user javascript directory under "prefs->advanced->content->javascript options" and just drop the file there.

Re:noscript? Morescript! (1)

pi8you (710993) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604552)

Thank you for that! Those, more than any other ads, really get on my nerves.

of the O11 extensions i tried, i like f.b. purity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604072)

my favourite extension for opera 11 that ive tried so far is F.B. Purity, it filters out the junk, such as application spam, and other machine generated messages, from your facebook homepage newsfeed, making fb much less annoying to use. it also lets you increase the font size and easily apply your own custom css rules. pretty cool: http://www.fbpurity.com/ [fbpurity.com]

Re:of the O11 extensions i tried, i like f.b. puri (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34605144)

Yay for shilling for a free utility...

Opera folks amaze me... (3, Insightful)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604150)

Programmers at Opera have proven to me that they are a force to be reckoned with. If the Firefox team had just 3/4 of the ambition of Opera folks, Firefox would be quite advanced. Credit goes to them. The [frequent] releases they make are a testimony to their skill.

Re:Opera folks amaze me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604662)

Yet the user base is still lacking. They can be the best programmers the world has ever seen, but it means nothing if they have yet to gain a user base of any significance. It's the same story release after release.

Re:Opera folks amaze me... (1)

windcask (1795642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604820)

Or maybe they're just a small, quiet company that does their job very well, without the advantages of being a browser that's installed by default on an operating system (IE, Firefox, Safari) or being made by the world's largest search engine (Google).

I'm hoping that'll change over time. I've been telling everyone I know to use Opera since I first started using the 9.x version.

Opera Graphic Acceleration (5, Insightful)

ya really (1257084) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604250)

There's no hardware acceleration yet, but it could be coming in a further dot release and benefit XP users as well as Mac, Linux and Windows 7/Vista users.

Actually, it does have the ability to use hardware acceleration for graphics in both opengl and direct3d, it just has not been implimented in general release versions of opera yet. See this discussion for more details [opera.com] and a post by an Opera developer [opera.com] . Currently, as the links mention, Opera's rendering engine is pure software, but it seems to keep up well enough with the browsers that have opted for hardware acceleration so far. I'm guessing they wont implement it until they can make sure it works on Windows/OSX/Linux/Unix, since they try to keep uniform support most of the time on all major Operating Systems.

I've been a long time Opera user, switching from Mozilla (pre firefox) to Opera when it became free (as in beer). However, I do get irritated by their efforts to keep up with Chrome's speed while screwing over long time users (they cant win that fight in the long run anyways, Google has way too much money). Numerous bug reports on long time stable features and major regressions happen every time they release a major update for Opera and take months or years to fix. From Opera 10.5 to pre 11, tool tips would cover up other applications even if Opera was located in the background. If you happen to have a mouse with arrow buttons for back and forward, the forward arrow button has been broke as far as using the "fast forward" feature since 10.5. At one point, during the version 11 betas, the arrow buttons were broke period (though it was a development release so one cannot really complain about that). With Opera 11, their famous mouse gestures are also partially broken with their implementation of a graphical interface for showing what gestures do what when you hold down the right mouse button. One of the more useful gestures was "right" + "left" + "right" (closes the current window). Now, with the changes they have made, this gesture only works half the time, but they have said they will fix it, but it's tied into the UI they implemented, so it will probably be a while.

They do generally listen to their users. They decided to force chrome like urls on their users during the Opera 11 development (removing "http://" and any of the args after *.com such as ?id=12345) claiming it would make users less likely to click fraudulent links. However, if you're a developer, seeing the arguments is a must and not seeing "http://" or "https://" or "ftp://" is just kind of silly, since sometimes you like to know what protocol you are using instead of guessing through some abstract replacement graphic. Since opera has never been a browser to appeal to novice internet users, dumbing it down seems kind of counter intuitive.

Opera is still my primary browser (except for development--I prefer Firefox/Firebug for that over Opera Dragonfly, but it seems every new version they release, I dread what long time feature they will break next. They haven't frustrated me enough to want to modify the Chromium source code to natively have all the features of Opera, but I wouldn't hold my breath on it for Opera 12.

Re:Opera Graphic Acceleration (1)

windcask (1795642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604808)

I wouldn't know about the mouse gestures, I've got all the keyboard shortcuts memorized so I hardly use the mouse at all. I use Ctrl+Left and Ctrl+Right for back and forward, and the shift+arrow keys work great for reaching hyperlinks and form elements 95% of the time. I develop with Dragonfly and haven't had any major beefs, though I do wish they'd give more I/O data. I also enjoy their click-on-play plugin elements and their image-blocking system, as well as Opera Link's customization import/export features.

But the main reason I use Opera? Their search engine system is without equal. IE, Firefox and Chrome, maybe if there's an engine enough people like they'll throw you a bone and you can add it. Opera's is quick, easy, and infinitely customizable. My personal search engine list: Scroogle SSL w/ POST, Ixquick SSL w/ POST, DuckDuckGo SSL w/ POST, Google SSL, Wikipedia SSL, Yauba, Amazon, Ebay, YouTube. It's fucking glorious.

And as for people who say Opera doesn't work with Gmal/Slashdot/whatever? Bullshit. I've encountered maybe three sites in the two years I've used Opera that wouldn't work correctly, and that's because the site was programmed to refuse it based on the user agent. Opera's a major, major innovator, a hell of a company, and I will keep irritating my coworkers, family and friends pushing them to use the wonderful product I'm submitting this post with.

Re:Opera Graphic Acceleration (1)

ya really (1257084) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604904)

Yeah, I love the search features in it as well. I noticed that google.com browser sniffs for opera and disables many of the newer features for their products in opera only (even if opera supports them, since their html5/css3 support is similar to chrome 7 and firefox4). Masking opera as firefox brings up instant search in google as well as their newer image search. Not that I really like either of those, but other people do I'm sure. However, their browser sniffing is less of a "screw you" to me and more of a "thank you for not making me use the crappy new image search you forced on everyone not using opera."

Re:Opera Graphic Acceleration (1)

windcask (1795642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604938)

I try not to use Google if I can help it, so I've never observed what you're describing. I'd gotten used to living without autocomplete in the search bar a while back (although I've found it works for non-SSL Wikipedia, strangely). I like the privacy features of the alternative search engines enough that it doesn't bother me at all now.

What's even stranger is that I've read the majority of Opera's operating revenue comes from Google, so it's really odd that they would go out of their way to disable certain features on their site.

Re:Opera Graphic Acceleration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34605156)

opera:config user prefs->show full url
quickest way to fix the address bar...

Devs better have fixed the UAC problem (4, Interesting)

vlueboy (1799360) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604398)

Starting Opera 10 as a normal user triggers UAC randomly. Eventually I started to skip that by pressing ESC since it will still run the program normally. Hard to believe the devs caused that since Opera doesn't know how to seamlessly automatically update itself or inform you why UAC is needed and why you need to cooperate. Lots of Opera forum users sadly type their PW everytime Opera asks, many fellow forumers have no idea what's going on, so they're are just told to DISABLE UAC! Disable UAC because of malware --the exact reason UAC was created!

The devs screwed up royally [google.com] and I've so far not found any workaround on their forums or elsewhere.

Re:Devs better have fixed the UAC problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604428)

Proofreading: I fail at you!

Disable UAC because of malware

I meant that users are enticed to disable UAC because of malware-friendly tech such as a webbrowser, which Opera is.

Why use a closed-source browser? (1, Troll)

gottabeme (590848) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604480)

I don't understand why any knowledgeable user would want to use a closed-source browser nowadays. Any specific benefit Opera might have over another particular browser would be outweighed by the drawbacks, IMO.

Re:Why use a closed-source browser? (2, Interesting)

lyinhart (1352173) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604730)

And I don't understand why any sensible user would discriminate between browsers solely based on the license. Unless of course, you're of the same frame of mind as Richard Stallman. The truth is, the major web browsers have differences that have little to nothing to do with the availability of their source code. Want guaranteed compatibility? Use IE (closed source). Want a large library of extensions? Use Firefox (open source). Want a simple, no frills, fast browser? Use Chromium (open source). Want a little bit of everything? Use Opera.

Oh yeah, and don't mention about an open source browser being more secure. The closed source Opera has a consistently low number of vulnerabilities according to Secunia. Mind you, I don't actually use Opera these days. The thing easily goes over 100 MB in memory usage just after two tabs and it doesn't seem as stable as it used to be.

Free Software matters. (1)

gottabeme (590848) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604864)

Richard Stallman's mindset may be overkill at times, but he's basically right. I don't want to use a closed-source browser for the same reason I don't want to use a closed-source OS, among other reasons.

I think determining which browser is more secure is more complex than simply checking a vulnerabilities list. There are all sorts of other variables and factors that play into the number, which may or may not be representative of reality.

Opera seems like a good bunch of people, so I'm not especially worried about their doing anything malicious. But when there are excellent open-source alternatives, why even bother?

If you truly don't care about Free Software, then you have missed the point, and I wouldn't expect you to care about open-source browsers. I think that Free Software is better in principle, in theory, and in practice. It's more future-proof than being locked-in to any company's closed-source software. And as time goes on, it will become even more important, because the power of marketing and media and government conglomerates will continue to grow, and Free Software is nearly the only way to retain user freedoms and privacy, and control over one's own hardware, software, and data.

Re:Free Software matters. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604942)

Praise the sources brother! And Stallman's yummy feet! Hallelujah!

Re:Free Software matters. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34605060)

(Posting as AC because I have moderated in this discussion)

I use open-source software. I use closed-source software. I have projects in the works, some of which I will release as open-source, some I will not.

I believe in open source. I believe it is a generally better development process that usually produces superior software. However, that is not a guarantee. Quite often, the open-source magic fails, either due to lack of interest, or because some things, like games, work best with a more authoritative design.

I use whatever program works best. If Firefox is the best browser, I'll use it. If Opera is the best browser, I'll use it. If Internet Explorer somehow becomes the best browser, I'll use it. If Linux is the best OS for a purpose, I'll use it. If BSD is the best, I'll use that. If VMS makes a major comeback and becomes the best OS, I'll use that, regardless of license. Quite often, when installing a program, I don't know that it's open-source until I see the license agreement begins with "The GNU General Public License". Simply put, the license is the last thing on my mind when selecting software.

I, and most other people, use the best tool for the job. Quite often, that's an open-source tool - I use Firefox, Blender and the GIMP regularly. Sometimes, it's a closed-source tool - I use Windows on my gaming machines because that's the best OS for gaming.

If open-source is the best development method, it will naturally produce better products, and it will be used more. That's the power of capitalism - the best system will win out in the end. So, let it. If you're so confident that open-source is the best way, prove it - by letting people choose the best way, and then find that the best way is open-source.

Re:Free Software matters. (1)

smellotron (1039250) | more than 3 years ago | (#34605114)

I think that Free Software is better in principle, in theory, and in practice. It's more future-proof than being locked-in to any company's closed-source software.

I think that Free Software is better in principle, too, but I personally think that Opera as an application has better execution than most other browsers. I am also not too worried about future-proofing of a web browser for a number of reasons:

  • Opera has been around long enough to demonstrate they are not a "fly by night" browser. I trust that they will continue to provide a good closed-source browser just as much as I expect the Mozilla Foundation (in its current form) to continue providing a good open-source browser.
  • Opera supports many platforms, including Linux on the desktop. Brandishing that User-Agent everywhere on the Internet is as good as dollars to many organizations.
  • The presence of multiple browsers forces "future-proofing" of content on the Internet via compliance to published standards. You know what's worse than vendor lock-in to the Opera browser? Vendor lock-in on the entire Internet. Note that if many sites were writing opera-specific features, I wouldn't be too happy about it; but as-is Opera is a good citizen in the browser and web standards community.
  • Auditing the code to make sure a browser doesn't phone home is pointless, when phoning home involves IP traffic. I can monitor that from a tcpdump, or an strace, or even a network tap if I think the browser is a rootkit. So even without source code, the "many eyes" methodology still holds.

Re:Why use a closed-source browser? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34605038)

Mind you, I don't actually use Opera these days. The thing easily goes over 100 MB in memory usage just after two tabs and it doesn't seem as stable as it used to be.

You have GIGS of RAM in your machine. GIGABYTES. Who cares if an application decides to load everything into RAM instead of paging it to disk? When was the last time you actually ran out of RAM and had the disk thrashing?

I don't like Opera either, but ignoring benefits of software simply because it uses an amount of RAM that would be considered crazy ten years ago is beyond me.

Re:Why use a closed-source browser? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604902)

And what exactly are you doing with this source code of your browser, may I ask?

Re:Why use a closed-source browser? (1)

gottabeme (590848) | more than 3 years ago | (#34605012)

Good point...but why bother to converse with an AC?

Re:Why use a closed-source browser? (1)

windcask (1795642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604916)

Why would you not, as long as you're not some Richard Stallmanian pseudo-communist free software puritan?

Re:Why use a closed-source browser? (1)

gottabeme (590848) | more than 3 years ago | (#34605028)

I'm not an extremist, but someday you will be more thankful for free software than you are now.

(Though it seems to me there's already plenty of reasons to be thankful for it. Imagine if we had never had Firefox.)

Re:Why use a closed-source browser? (1)

windcask (1795642) | more than 3 years ago | (#34605050)

Let's see, OSS programs I have open right now: RSSOwl, K-Meleon (a lightweight Firefox alternative), Xampp, LibreOffice, Audacity.

I didn't say I'm not thankful for free software. I am. I just don't see a good reason to use it if a free commercial product is available and of arguably superior quality.

Re:Why use a closed-source browser? (1)

gottabeme (590848) | more than 3 years ago | (#34605058)

Ok. Someday I think you will see good reasons. :)

Still won't scale to quad, X cores. (2)

electrosoccertux (874415) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604588)

I just upgraded my Opera 10 installation; I have about 20-25 tabs that I start when I decide to check the internet; forums, blogs, email, facebook, etc.
Firefox grinds to a halt for about 10 seconds, and takes a total of about 20 seconds to render all of them, max CPU usage on my quad core is about 28% when I'm not doing anything else with my computer. Keep in mind this is with Adblock enabled.

Chrome maxes all 4 cores to 100% for a few seconds and then it's completely done rendering. No adblock.

Opera still only hits ~30% CPU, so it's not using much more than 1 core as well. However, it manages to complete almost as fast as Chrome. Not sure how they've managed this. Very fast I must say. And the interface doesn't grind to a halt like Firefox's, it definitely appears to be capable of prioritizing mouse-click events on the fly (to change tabs for instance).

All that said I still use Firefox on my desktop, and can't wait till they get true multi-core support.
Opera definitely has a chance on my netbook though.

NO (0)

AmberBlackCat (829689) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604748)

Opera had a Filter feature. It would create "Filters" which looked like folders. Each folder had mail in it based on Bayesian filters that learned from the user dragging the mail into folders. I had all of my mail sorted this way. It looks like they suddenly removed the feature without warning. Now my thousands of mail messages are together, unsorted. It's the equivalent of your email program taking every folder you have for email and dumping all the contents into one big folder. I wish I hadn't trusted Opera enough to blindly upgrade.

Re:NO (1)

AmberBlackCat (829689) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604796)

Never mind. It's still there. They just changed the name from Filters to Labels.

Thoughts on it (1)

Twinbee (767046) | more than 3 years ago | (#34604840)

Amazing how few of these comments discuss the topic, and how many go on about Opera generally.

Anyway, I've wanted this feature for years, and this looks like it could be a decent implementation. I like the way the 'master tab' of a stack can be altered according to the last highlighted tab when you click "Tab Group" to stack them. One slight issue however is that it's hard to see which tabs are part of a group if the tab placement is vertical instead of horizontal.

Time will tell how all this works in the real world.

Opera vs. Others (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34604868)

I use Chrome, Firefox, and Opera regularly with Opera being my primary. Here is my run down:

Firefox: Powerfully extend-able, but slow and slower as you extend it. Rock solid display of websites and great set of developer tools. I'm really looking forward to FF4.

Chrome: Chrome is fast, illustrating that speed is a core part of user experience. It does the basics well and is a joy to use. The developer tools have some neat features built in.

Opera: Opera innovates. Most popular features in other browsers started off in Opera. Opera loads pages quickly, which is great, but it also has a UI that works faster (mouse gestures, speed dial bound with ctrl keys, magic wand info population, keyword shortcuts for search engine searches, etc.) Plus, you have the kitchen sink if you want it and it all is well designed (built in mail, feed, chat, torrents, media sharing, notes, private tabs, image blocking, flash blocking, mult-device sync, etc). Not perfect though, it has a "light" feel that I don't like (like using a plastic tool) and some websites block it (recommending other "safer" browsers like IE 6). Chrome will let a tab fail and the browser keeps going-- if Opera fails the whole thing is going down.

IE: IE is the sole domain of businesses who think that by associating with a Microsoft product they are somehow safer. It has no place on the web and won't until developers can stop using conditional codes to make it render pages properly (and fortunately, IE8 isn't so far away from that and *fingers crossed* IE 9 might be it)

Safari: I love Safari-- just like Chrome, it is simple but reliable. In fact, I think its Webkit engine displays pages more consistently than FF. Though not as fast as Chrome it's still fairly quick. The only problem with Safari is that it comes from Apple, which is the devil.

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>