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 Beta Released

Roblimo posted more than 14 years ago | from the new-browsers-to-play-with dept.

Linux 253

Wil Mahan writes "According to the LWN daily updates page, a beta version of the Opera browser has been released for Linux, and is available at Metalab (1.9 MB). Looks like Opera fufilled its promise of a full public beta before Christmas."

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

second first post today :) (1)

dJOEK (66178) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447858)

Will it be be open sourced ?
Kris "dJOEK" Vandecruys

Re:second first post today :) (1)

stx23 (14942) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447859)

Will it be be open sourced ?
Or will it follow the same model as the Windows version, a 30 day trial license that doesn't mean 30 consecutive days?
I do use this on and off for testing/layout purposes, and it's refreshing to have a tool that doesn't expire just when it's needed.
Kudos to the Opera team, my conscience dictates I really should buy it now.

Nice, but succeded to crash it in about 1 minute (1)

zensonic (82242) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447860)

Well ... downloaded it, started it, looked fine,
couldn't log into slashdot (pressing the button didn't do anything), went searching for an option that could help me, which eventually crashed the
browser :(

Hmm, not quite stable yet.

no mention of it on (2)

MattMann (102516) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447861)

I'm too chicken to run it... there's no mention of it being ready on the opera website.

Hey, when did they become [] . They used to be "operasoftware" and "opera" really had something to do with singing.

A new contender on the browser front! (1)

Chilles (79797) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447862)

I've been using opera for the BeOS on and off the last few months cause it's still buggy.
But it's getting better with every new release and I sure am happy with the look and feel of it.

Now for linux too yay!
Together with the deal with Be for being it's browser on BeOS and Stinger (A lean version of BeOS for webpads) This should generate enough revenue and attract enough investors to allow them to seriously speed up development.
On to a version that doesn't crash when you change too much preferences! :-)

Happy holidays everyone!

A truly free browser for Linux (4)

nocent (71113) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447863)

There's been a lot of talk recently about Mozilla reaching usable status and now Opera releasing a beta for Linux.

However, I would like to call attention to a truly free (beer and speech) browser that has been available for Linux (as well Windows, Solaris and AIX). This is the W3 consortium's Amaya [] browser.

Some features (adapted from the w3 page):
1. Is a browser as well as editor
2. Amaya maintains a consistent internal document model adhering to the DTD.
3. Amaya is easily extended.
Several APIs and mechanisms are available to change and extend its functionality with the least modification to the source code. Amaya thus allows for easy customization by providing a means for extensions to access Amaya's internal procedures and functions.
4. Support of MathML protocol.

But best of all, it's released under the W3 Copyright [] which is fully compatible with the GPL []

Why not give it a try?
Binary Distribution []
Source Code []
RPM distribution []

opera, not bad (1)

Mathieu Lutfy (69) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447864)

I had a few rendering glitches, and post forms don't seem to work (voting, login, etc..). But overall, it's a fast browser and I'm sure it'll run well on older computers.

As for quicker computers, Mozilla M12 is starting to be a pretty good candidate. (and it's Open Source)

Re:second first post today :) (1)

truefluke (91957) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447865)

I have been waiting so long because the Netscape 4x series sucked so bad. I dont care about paying for an application that will work well (I don't have the qt toolkit installed, either). Please please please let this thing work well. I know its just beta right now, but ... :)

Alpha release (3)

Fats (14870) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447866)

Hmm, as far as I know, 'Opera 4.0a' indicates that it's an alpha release...

It hung after I resized the window.

not quite there (2)

axg (129284) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447867)

i got pretty excited, so i downloaded it run it and quickly became disspointed. it rendered the screens horribly. i tried and it butchered it to pieces. i tried amaya, it was not all that great (almost same as above), but i have the source code, and i can try to fix it if i want to. but if i am going to pay for a browser, it better work better than stuff i can get for free (Mozilla, Netscape, Amaya). yeah, it loads quicker, and it has a much smaller footprint, but if Netscapes renders the screens properly, i'll stick with the bloat and lagginess until Opera looks better or Mozilla is complete

Opensource (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447868)

No, it will NOT be opensource

.. And I'm SO f***** tired of you linux dudes only using opensourced software.. You cry _all_ the time "oh, I can't use it, because it's not opensource".. Well, then don't use it, and don't complain.

I'm going to buy this piece of software.. Yes, I think 35$ is CHEAP for a browser. I just bought Quake 3 too, and I'm happy I did. If you want more software on linux, start paying you too!

Seriously.. Stop complaining about people wanting to make a little money. If you use a program all the time, 100$ is not a lot. Hey, you payed for the computer, right?

sick and tired.. and it's christmas

Wow ... it's small & fast! (3)

RNG (35225) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447869)

Wow, this is pretty cool. I downloaded it, installed it and pointed it at slashdot. Yes, it's obviously beta with some things to fix (and a somewhat odd UI) but it's fast. Starts up within 1/2 second or so and seems to render pages fast ...

I think we have another (serious) entry in the Linux browser market with Opera. I've obviously just played with it for a few minutes now, but for a 1.5M download, it's pretty cool. The important question now is: how come it's so small? What features doesn't it have that Mozilla does have? All in all, I welcome the Opera people/browser to the Linux world. The more the merrier. Competition is good and will force any other browser makers out there to keep on their toes.

I still prefer Mozilla as it's open source, but this seems to be a nice addition to the Linux software world. What I'm wondering is: with Mozilla and (the rapidly aging) Netscape out there for free, what kind of market penetration do these guys hope for? This might be a good browser though for low end machines that don't have the RAM/CPU that mozilla seems to eat ... although Mozilla seems to have 'shrunk' (in terms of bloat) over the last few releases ... still, the Linux space should be large enough to allow them to continue development/support of Opera under Linux ... I wish them well even if they're not open sourcing Opera ...

Re:Nice, but succeded to crash it in about 1 minut (1)

flyneye (84093) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447870)

try using open on a text file then type a url
into the resultant window.
however i had to post this in netscape as it wouldnt submit.

Re:no mention of it on (1)

flyneye (84093) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447871)

I hope they didnt bully anyone out of the domain name.

No PNG support yet... (2)

httptech (5553) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447872)

Hmm, if I were trying to release a browser for the Linux market, I'd be sure PNG was at least partially supported in the beta version.

Re:second first post today :) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447873)

I suppose the 4.0a means that its ALPHA, and boy are you gonna be dissapointed. Sure it can browse, but its not quite ready for prime time. I just wish I could help out with coding because development seems to going slower than I would think.

Opera not quite ready (2)

BradleyUffner (103496) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447874)

When I saw that the beta was out I downlaoded it quickly beofre it was hit by the mass crowds who were bounds to slashdot the page. I untarred it and ran the script expecting it to goto the Opera webpage... but it didn't, just a grey background. After fidling around for awhile I figured out how to make it goto a web page. But unfortunatly every every web page I pointed it to either didn't render at all, or came up horibly mutilated. If anyone else had any beter luck with this, I would like to hear about it.

Re:Wow ... it's small & fast! (1)

neophase (97476) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447875)

The important question now is: how come it's so small? What features doesn't it have that Mozilla does have?

My copy is still downloading, but I've been (very happily) running the Win32 version for some time. Opera's reduced size is partly because it comes with JavaScript but not Java (you need the Sun package), and *basic* mail and news clients.

I wonder if it supports the button sets like the Win32 version...

MathML (1)

arielb (5604) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447876)

Mozilla will also have MathML Check this out for linux: lla-i386-pc-linux-M12-MathML.tar.gz

Screenshot (3)

Staunch (28647) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447877)

Here's a screenshot for anyone who wants to see what it looks like, and can't download/run it for whatever reason. It Seemed to render /. fairly well, but most sites were a little funny looking to say the least.

Screenshot []

Re:not quite there (2)

Bitscape (7378) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447878)

I was curious as to how it was coming, so I downloaded it and took it for a spin (this brings the total of different browsers currently executing on my system to three). Slashdot loaded ok, and so did a few other sites I checked on that I typically visit, so I'd say it's coming along.

Here were my general impressions, based on an admittedly brief and superficial examination.


  • Loading was very quick
  • The interface was clean. Good use of QT widgets.
  • Small download. No hassles.
  • The stylesheet examples I tried worked. Can't say so much for Netscape 4.X
  • Several features were missing. When I tried to change the zoom, or tile windows, nothing happened.
  • No png support. :( I noticed this immediately, because my web page makes heavy use of them.
  • Closed source. Unfortunately, I don't expect this to be remedied anytime soon.

Overall, it looks like Opera will become a viable option, and Mozilla is gonna have some competition, which is good.. The browser future on Linux looks bright. :)

Posted with M12, cause Opera's CGI submit didn't seem to want to work.

P.S. I doubt is a pinnacle of standards compliant authoring. Most of these commercial news sites put out horribley bungled html. A pity.

Doesn't even run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447879)

./opera: error in loading shared libraries: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
This is the problem with Linux: there is no such a thing as a standard Linux operating system. You'll never get acceptance of this crap.

In the rush for the holliday release..... (1)

billsf (34378) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447880)

I quickly downloaded Opera while it was still possible. (/. effect 80k..40k...12k/s!) Anyway my primary Linux box is an Alpha and this is a binary, so either open the source (preferred) or get an Alpha binary compiled. I did try it on an Intel, a plain old P133 from yesteryear and it kinda worked.

It has allready been stated what most of the obvious bugs are, can't submit anything and it quickly hangs after trying a few things. Not mentioned yet as far as i can see is the fact that it has a rather outdated Windoze look to it. The BeOS version is sharp and it works quite well. Also, there was a small problem in rendering some types of images such as; "News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters". It isn't ready for market yet, but i'm considering throwing some of my money their way in the belief that if several people do that it will provide the necessary motivation to finish the job! It is however rather fast and so far unbloated, and just maybe this can be the 'browser on the floppy'.

Beta???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447881)

More like Pre-Pre-Alpha!!!

QPaintDevice: Cannot destroy paint device that is being painted followed by segfaults. Hmm, even de alpha labeled M12 release is better, in fact I'm using it right now to type in this message. There's still quite a way for Opera to go before they can even think about charging 30 bucks for this...

Happy Holidays!

Re:Doesn't even run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447882)

It's just more DLL Hell. Use source, build it yourself, or suffer this bullshit.

Re:Doesn't even run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447883)

No, that's wrong. *THE* standard Linux operating system is produced by Redhat. Look at the stockprice if you don't believe me.

Re:Doesn't even run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447884)

I am running Redhat/Linux, you nitwit. Lot of bloody good that did me.

Re:In the rush for the holliday release..... (1)

robertito (80580) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447885)

Actually the problem with the "News For Nerds" image might not be the fault of Opera - I'm browsing under NT using Netscape 4.7, and there are some funny horizontal lines running down the image....

quick but... (2)

jfinke (68409) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447886)

It was quick as hell, but it really does not matter when it cannot load any pages huh??

Runs on FreeBSD (1)

ps (21245) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447887)

This beta runs about as well under FreeBSD's emulation of Linux. Just as others have said, I can't use submit buttons, and occasionally it segfaults, but otherwise, it runs!

Not even ready for the dark of night (1)

The Original Bobski (52567) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447888)

Ugh! This isn't beta software. Its barely alpha quality. Totally useless!

Lots of problems (1)

Greg W. (15623) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447889)

All of the above, and

  • I can't enter my proxy settings, because pressing the OK button has no effect.
  • There's no easy way to type a URL into the browser. Typing "" into the File|Open dialog and clicking randomly eventually put the URL "file:/home/greg/opera-19991224/" into the browser panel, and after that I was able to highlight, delete and retype the URL into the now-present URL-entry textfield....
  • It crashed within 60 seconds.

Keep trying, Opera developers. Once this actually works it will be ready for beta testing.

Re: bully someone out of "" (2)

MattMann (102516) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447890)

That would be a good newspaper headline:
La Scala loses "" domain! U.S Judge rules its non-profit nature and freely available public domain sources confused the public and threatened the viability of a commercial browser product.

The judge also went on to condemn the growing popularity of scripts displayed as subtitles, pointing out they "allow 'script-grown-ups' with no particular skills to sing along.

Opera is fast and small. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447891)

I used it for a few minutes and it is awesome.

I couldn't submit any forms, and the default
flyspeck font is too small, but other than that
I enjoyed it.

Only 7MB of memory used. Hopefully no memory
leaks either...

Keep up the good work, guys!!

Re:Doesn't even run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447892)

Ever tried Debian ?

Re: At least you can tell what you need (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447893)

Compare this to the unhelpful messages you get in a certain other OS when a DLL is missing... you are completely screwed in that case.

Re: At least you can tell what you need (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447894)

But I'm still screwed. Suppose I don't know where to get this from. Suppose I don't know how to install it. This should be distributed staticly linked. Make no assumptions.

Re:Doesn't even run (1)

kaltoft (28641) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447895)

I have the same problem (I'm using SuSE 6.1) so i downloaded an upgrade from (gppshare.rpm)

But now instead I get:

martin@martin:~/opera > ./opera
./opera: error in loading shared libraries
/usr/lib/ undefined symbol: _IO_file_open

D'oh... :-(

Re:Doesn't even run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447896)

doesn't run, same problem: it's Suse 6.1 what do I do, help!

Re: At least you can tell what you need (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447897)

My problem is I'm not allowed to install system libraries, although I can have my own ~/bin -- so what am I supposed to do about this crap?

Computer=hardware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447898)

Computers are hardware. Until we get replicator technology I won't be able to copy a computer for zero cost. I can take a software CD, pop it in my drive and burn another copy for cost of the media.. $1. If I downloaded it I can reproduce it for nothing by simply making another copy on my hard drive and distributing it. The original person loses nothing by me having 1 or even 10,000 copies. This is why piracy is such a load of baloney. Nobody loses any money because of piracy. I certainly will NOT give them one penny for Opera but I may use it if someone comes out with a crack or a key generator for it. Actually, I don't even know if I'd use it then considering the Windows version sucks ass compared to IE and Netscape. I don't see what people think is so good about it.

Re:Doesn't even run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447899)

What? You mean SuSE isn't a full source system? I can do this:
$ cd /usr/src/gnu/lib/libg++/libstdc++
$ ls -F
CVS/ config/ std/ stl/ tests/ testsuite/
If you don't have full source, you don't have a good Unix.

Re: At least you can tell what you need (1)

whoop (194) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447900)

Learn the LD_LIBRARY_PATH environment variable, for one...

Is Amaya compatible with html out there? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447901)

Last time I tried it (granted, several years ago) it came nowhere close to the functionality of Netscape at the time. I don't even think it could do tables or display animated gifs. Probably doesn't have style sheet support OR javascript and java. What good is it? And how compatible is the html used? Is it compatible with IE and Netscape (THE standards of the web no matter what W3C would like to think).

Re:Doesn't even run under Debian "slink" either (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447902)

$ ./opera
./opera: error in loading shared libraries cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
$ ldd opera => /lib/ (0x4000f000) => /usr/X11R6/lib/ (0x40028000) => /usr/X11R6/lib/ (0x400cd000) => not found => /lib/ (0x400d9000)
/lib/ => /lib/ (0x40000000)
$ ln -s /usr/lib/
$ export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=.
$ ./opera

(wait...wait...load goes up...wait...wait...)

$ strace ./opera

(extraneous output deleted)
select(4, [3], NULL, NULL, NULL) = 1 (in [3])
read(3, "\1.:\0\0\0\0\0\276\276\276\276\276"..., 32) = 32
brk(0x856e000) = 0x856e000
time(NULL) = 946046288
open("opera.ini", O_RDONLY) = 4
brk(0x856f000) = 0x856f000

(more's hung up at this point)

Too bad they didn't just statically link it. Oh well, I'm not about to go build a new libstdc++ just to test a beta web browser.

Fast. Buggy. Weird UI design. Windows-like widgets (2)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447903)

The whole thing has StarOffice-ish "look and feel" -- large window, MDI in it, widgets are exactly the same as in StarOffice.

It has good chances to become usable, however MDI shouldn't be the only option for windows handling -- while it may be tolerable in Windows, in X it looks like an insult to the idea of window manager.

Re: At least you can tell what you need (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447904)

I'm not a systems adminstrator, and I can't call one because today's a holiday. So I can't do this. Windows isn't even this bad.

Re:No PNG support yet... (1)

tweek (18111) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447905)

No doubt.
This is my biggest complaint with the current browsers. PNG support is horribly lacking. How hard is it to get PNG transparency right? I try to use all PNG's on my site but I hate having to add backgrounds to the images just because browsers can't handle the transparency.

How long have png's been around now? Why in HELL did we start using gifs when png's look so much better? My guess is people can't do without animated gifs. I'd at least like to think the one animated gif on my site is tasteful ;)

Re:Is Amaya compatible with html out there? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447906)

Hey man, at least Amaya's prettier than Lynx, even if it is harder to use.

Re:Doesn't even run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447907)

~~ If you don't have full source, you don't have a ~~ good Unix Grow up. Linux isn't UNIX, there are plenty of "good" (commercial!) Unices out there without source. You don't have to be a Jedi just to have Source.

Linux = Unix - /usr/src/ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447908)

So, Linux is just a Unix that's had its source stripped? What the hell do I want a castrated system like that for? The reason I fled commercial Unices was for lack of source. This is no better. What tripe!

Re:no mention of it on (2)

NettRom (39971) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447909)

they got the domain sometime this fall. there used to a short snippet about it on their front page, but it's gone now, and there doesn't seem to be any mentioning of it anywhere on their site (nothing shows up through searching).

Re:Fast. Buggy. Weird UI design. Windows-like widg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447910)

What's MDI?

Re:Doesn't even run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447911)

Huh? So if we wanted source, we should just Unix instead of Linux?

This is pure bullshit. The "NOT UNIX" crap is just an excuse for tolerating brokenness.

Fuck that noise. I want something that works.

Re:Linux = Unix - /usr/src/ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447912)

Let's get some bananas, and start working.

Re:Doesn't even run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447913)

Didn't you know that Linux is an abbreviation for "Not Unix"?

Re:Doesn't even run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447914)

Great. More FSF cult sophistry.

How does this compare to the new KDE browser? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447915)

What's good/bad? Some people have mentioned Amaya and Mozilla, but what about Konqueror?

Re:Computer=hardware (2)

juhaz (110830) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447916)

Nobody loses any money directly as if it was stealing, but undirectly losing money because of pirated software is as real as it can get. If you give out those 10000 copies you just made, someone who would have bought it otherwise doesn't do it now.. piratism isn't any worst possible crime, but you must be pretty damn stupid to claim it doesn't cost one penny to commercial software makers..

And windows-version may lack some of the features compared to IE or Netscape, but it is *FAST*, *LIGHT*, and *STABLE*. That is why people think it is so good.

MDI windows have no place in UNIX world (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447917)

Or at least make it an option to turn off MDI. Half the people in the UNIX world *HATE* MDI and will not use any program with it.

Cuttin it close (1)

Uart (29577) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447918)

but they made it...

Re:A truly free browser for Linux (1)

AndyElf (23331) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447919)

Please do not consider it a flamebait, but...

Amaya is nice, but if it really is so standards-compliant, then it has a very tough time around: not a single site (except for the very plain ones) is rendered anywhere close to what any other browser would show. Not even lynx.

On Opera: a nice README could help very much. Basic things, like this works, this does not, or here you can just edit opera.ini file.

Otherwise, as pointed out in some other post, it was not even possible to go beyond a proxy.

I'd say that Mozilla M12 is in a better shape feature and stability-wise than this Opera beta. Then again this MDI thing... Nice that they did not (could not?) use in under BeOS, though.

I'll use Mozilla instead - has PNG support (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447920)

It's open source too - enough said

Do they want bug reports? (2)

Greg Merchan (64308) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447921)

I was able to run it under Debian potato. I've had the same problems with logging in to /.

What did work worked fast. I didn't check memory use. I almost forgot what browser I was using!

I did think that I'd be willing to pay even $100 if the final version is as solid as I expect it will be. I'm glad to see someone mention that the expected (announced?) price is only $35. Geez, I haven't bought software since OS/2 in 1993! (Unless you count the MS tax *sigh*, I did reformat immediately ;)

I haven't checked on where to submit bug reports yet. There is one 'bug' I haven't seen mentioned yet. I have no idea what files the binary installs on my system. I checked a few common places. It wrote directories ~/.opera and /tmp/opr. (That last may have been /var/tmp/opr, I've symlinked /tmp to /var/tmp). There was no man page or info page.

Well, besides not knowing what a binary is doing, I have no other problem; it is a first release, after all!

Well, it didn't crash... but it's really buggy (1)

waldeaux (109942) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447922)

First the bad news:

There wasn't a single page I visited that didn't have rendering mistakes. The most annoying bug seems to be that if the page finishes loading before images are displayed, it just stops rendering the pages. Sometimes you don't even SEE some of the images on a page, just the holes where they're supposed to go.

It's apparent that there's no support for the HEIGHT and WIDTH options to img src= tags; they're just rendered at the original size.

Forms don't work. Submit buttons do not appear to do anything. Sometimes, input areas don't appear, so you can't even fill out the form before finding out that you can't submit it anyway.

Paragraph spacing is "odd". Anyone who writes pages to fit just right is going to go insane trying to get pages to look identical on IE/NN and Opera!

In all, I would say that this is not a beta. It's not even an alpha release.

Now the good news: :-)

What is encouraging is that pages do render VERY quickly compared to NN4. The status bar has a lot of geeky information (transfer speed that updates more quickly than NN's, and an elapsed time monitor), and it displays the full URL of each item that is being loaded. There were other widgets on the status bar that I didn't play with.

When Opera does have a true beta out, I'm sure it will be fantastic. It didn't crash on me, so I suppose that puts it ahead of NN :-)/2. But if you're expecting to jump in and use this starting today, you will be VERY disappointed. Instead, look at it as a "coming attractions" demo.

Bob Donahue

Re:Dumb. (1)

Myxx (21264) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447923)

Dumb is making a statement like that when you know that this is an alpha version. Obviously no one would expect you to pay for this product. This is like saying that M1 of Mozilla was not worth paying for.

Re:second first post today :) (1)

FagFace (100805) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447924)

I just wish I could help out with coding because development seems to going slower than I would think.

Yeah, which brings an obvious question to mind: why aren't more companies (or any, for that matter) taking advantage of libwine to port their products to Linux?

While it's great that the Opera folks went through all that effort to do a "real" linux port, wouldn't it have made allot more sense to just get their Windows source to compile with wine? I've had the native Windows version almost running properly under recent versions of wine, so I'd imagine that it would have been trivial for them to find the bugs in wine's Win32 emulation that cause problems, and either work around them, or even better, send bugfixes to the wine team and fix the problems properly.

Mozilla M7 was farther along. (5)

hatless (8275) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447925)

No frames support, poor "tactile" feel for when something is clickable, can't handle a simple redirect, often loads a page but won't display it, segfaults in a minute or so.

This has miles to go. What's interesting to me is that this is supposedly part of a port series that uses a common codebase. Based on that statement, I expected it to be a buggy cousin of the BeOS version in terms of where it stood in feature support. From the looks of this, it certainly doesn't look like they're managing to write cross-platform code.

Contrast this with everyone's favorite oft-delayed vaporware, Mozilla. A baseline Mozilla-based Communicator 5 now seems about 6 months away, and some 18 months past initial targets. But the codebase is by most measures 98% cross-platform, and it shows in the way the Win32, Unix and MacOS versions are progressing in lockstep.

Indeed, at the moment, Konqueror is in much better shape. Heck, the GNOME and Tk HTML widgets are in better shape.

I'm sure Opera will get something nice out the door. I'm still not sure what Opera's place in the world is, though. Consumers who use old, slow computers generally don't buy software. Companies that want to use old computers would probably be better off from a manageability standpoint if they turned them into X or ICA terminals (running Linux, DOS, *BSD, or whatever), and made full-featured browsers available on centralized servers.

As far as a lean, stripped-down browser goes for local execution, it looks like perfecty good Opera clones could be built out of Mozilla code. And since the MPL allows for BSD-like commercial extension, Mozilla's support for XML, DOM, plugins and so forth makes for a more realistic browser for the future. As DHTML continues to go mainstream and become a staple of web-based application development, Opera's austerity will come to look quaint.

Re:Doesn't even run (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447926)

Then maybe you aren't running the "right" version of RedHat.

If the authors were sloppy about things, they'll have used the "latest" everything and it won't work right without the latest version of RH.
(I'm running 6.1 right now and the thing seems ok.) It's got some of the problems that some of the other people have been claiming about it.

It's fast and relatively small, yes.
This version of the software is clumsier to use than Opera for Windows (There's a clunkiness somewhere within their UI design that I can't quite describe with words- suffice it to say it's "not quite right".).
It's got rendering problems and it doesn't support as many image formats as the big boys.

Beta software? Nope.
Alpha software? Yep.

Welcome? That remains to be seen...

Re:Fast. Buggy. Weird UI design. Windows-like widg (1)

Chris Pimlott (16212) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447927)

MDI (Multiple Document Interface? or something) is what you see commonly in the Windows world and _never_ in the Unix world. MDI is when you have a main window and every document/image/file/whatever you open is in a new window that is contain entirely within the main window. Examples of this - MS Word, Adobe Photoshop, mIRC (as default), Jasc Paint Shot Pro, Opera.

Compare this to the unix world, where, for example, you run gimp and have the tool dialog and the image you're working on free floating anywhere on your desktop.

It's great to see opensource, but... (2)

MattMann (102516) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447928)

Gosh, I just love browsers that make me type "http://" on the front of everthing. Boy, it burns me when I type "" in Netscape and it takes me to the slashdot website when I so clearly want it to do nothing! And, overall, I think there is just not enough "http://" in my life, so I appreciate having the to opportunity, and silent reminder, type it.

Thank you, (location:, for standing athwart the tide of them who would take shortcuts and shouting "enoughttp://"!

are you people nuts? (1)

Hitch (1361) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447929)

why do I feel like this is the quake opensourcing argument all over again? First off, of COURSE it's going to have bugs. it's their FIRST LINUX RELEASE. Yes, some of them seem obvious enough that they should have been fixed. But instead of bitching about how a program that you haven't had to pay for (and won't until it's out of beta) has bugs, submit bug reports. sure, you can't debug or get the code, but pop off an e-mail mentioning a particular problem.
it's small, blazing fast, and isn't a system hog. I'ts missing e-mail? GOOD. I wanted to separate those two programs out anyway. at $35 and free minor release upgrades, I'm going to be proud to support them. I've talked to some of their sales people over the past few days while I tested out their windows client to see what we were looking at as far as a linux client. they were extremely helpful and patient with even my most obnoxious questions. This is ONE case where a commercial product is smaller, faster, and better than an open sourced "free" one. point me at a browser that DOESN'T have the same sort of problems that opera does FIVE RELEASES OR MORE IN, and I'll be amazed. Netscape is the closest, and for pete's sake, it's HUGE. You think once Opera is done, Mozilla will be able to compete? only on the free side, man. We can't directly affect the way Mozilla is going any more than we can Opera. Oh sure "but I can go in and change it myself". But how many of us have the time and knowledge to look through a code base that HUGE??? Not me, that's for sure. So don't look YET ANOTHER gift horse in the mouth. Please. If you can't be happy about it, keep your mouth SHUT and go sulk in the corner.

Re:Fast. Buggy. Weird UI design. Windows-like widg (1)

Quarters (18322) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447930)

Two corrections: Word 2K is SDI. All other Office 2K programs are actually MDI but default to behaving as if they are SDI. Photoshop allows you to pull all of your working palettes out of the main window and place them wherever you want. This makes it easy to put all of your tool palettes out on your second monitor and devote your main, large, hi-res monitor to just image display.

opera has png support too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447931)

and now we have a garantee for future products

Re:How does this compare to the new KDE browser? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447932)

They all have very bad keyboard interfaces.

Re:No PNG support yet... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447933)

Hrm...The Windows and BeOS version do PNG just fine....what's up with linux?

This is rediculous (1)

guacamole (24270) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447934)

I don't understand why so many people get excited about Opera. I can't believe there is a company that actually expects to make money by selling a web browser. Specially a web browser that has _less_ features than IE or Netscape or Mozilla. This is rediculous. Yes, it is somewhat faster, but this speed comes at a cost. Last time I have checked it did not have java support. Many sites just don't render correctly with it. I certainly wouldn't pay a dime for something like this. I am using Netscape 4.7 glibc2.0 version, Thank you very much.

"truly free"? Not quite.. (1)

Useless (11387) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447935)

Amaya package is now configured
Amaya configured with libWWW
Amaya configured with Math support
Amaya configured with Graph support
Motif seems not installed on this machine
Thot and Amaya need Motif 1.2 or 2.0
Thot and Amaya probably won't compile

Motif isn't free (Yes, I know about Lesstif, doesn't work here)

Re:It's great to see opensource, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447936)

Is it their fault you have no understanding of the web or its valid schemata?

Re:Computer=hardware (1)

13th seer (33836) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447937)

my take on piratism is this:
take photoshop. I would not use it enough to warrant paying $600, nor do I have enough money to throw out that much on a program I would rarely use. therefore, I would never have bought photoshop in the first place. if I downloaded it, and used it for personal (ie, noncommercial) tasks, and since I would not have bought it in the first place, adobe is losing absolutely nothing.

I am gaining something I otherwise would not have had, sure; but they lose nothing. it is simply greed and anti-altruism of software companies to claim they lose $40 billion (I made that up I don't know the real amount) per year to "software piracy."

sure, that is the theoretical loss, had every one who obtained it illegally instead purchased it. but I wager that that is a very small fraction indeed.

on a related note, if I had need of photoshop for commercial use and profited (directly or indirectly) from its usage, I would definitely pay for it.

I don't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447938)

Honestly, Opera has had a pretty functional BeOS beta for like 6 months.
Never gets a mention on /.
But when they release a crappy ass barely alpha quality release for Linux, it's a front page story.

Call me flamebait, but WTF?

Re:This is rediculous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447939)

It can't have less features. It might have fewer features, or be less featureful.

Count nouns take fewer. Mass nouns take less. Textfile nouns take more.

Opera information. (1)

bons (119581) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447940)

Humor value. Opera wasn't news for slashdot when the new Windows [] (Dec 20) or BeOS [] (Dec 15) versions came out. (I know, I submitted the article.) Also we have icons for Netscape and Microsoft but not for an alternative to the big two... Hmmm... 6 kids in MTV bunker is news but not an alternative browser for BeOS. (is this "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters."?)

All that aside: If you go to Opera and you happen to run Windows or BeOS you'll find new versions there as well.
Bugs, tech discussions, etc. can be found on theirdiscussions page [] (most of the links there are newsgroups, which works rather well).

Re:This is rediculous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447941)

What is "rediculous"? Is that when you "redicule" someone? What happened the first time they were "diculed", and why do you have to repeat it?

Re:Fast. Buggy. Weird UI design. Windows-like widg (1)

13th seer (33836) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447942)

not to be picky, but word 2k actually opens separate windows for each document. very nice! now I can alt-tab between docs. (why they didn't also do this for excel 2k, I will never know.)

you know, one thing I never figured out, why didn't they make it so you could type alt-# to switch between docs in the old versions? alt-w # is very awkward. (perhaps you can configure keys to do this, I never checked.)

screenshots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447943)

anyone have screenshots available?

Re:Opensource (1)

bug-eyed monster (89534) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447944)

There are more advantages to opensource software than just the low price (free) :

1. With opensource you get better security. Anybody with some time on their hands can look at the source, find security holes, fix 'em and ship patches. And for a web browser, security is a big issue.

2. Stability and more features. Again, anybody with time on their hands can fix bugs or add new features and have these incorporated into later releases.

Myself, I paid for Opera on Windoze even though I had a fully-functional pirated copy of it. And if the Linux-version is just as good, I'll pay for it too, opensource or not.

even KFM would do (1)

bulbul (1999) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447945)

Although it's great to see Opera coming, i think that KFM would be an adequate browser for 90% of my needs if they'd just fix the stupid cookie bug. (KFM never saves cookies, even when you tell it to.) Is it too much to ask KDE developers to step back from Krash long enough to fix this stupid bug, which would render stand-alone browsers largely superfluous? Why should we have to wait until KDE 2.0?

And I thought netscape sucked. (1)

Blue Lang (13117) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447946)

My first opera session:

one% cd opera-19991224/ ~
one% ls ~/opera-19991224
gif opera runnow
one% ./runnow ~/opera-19991224
one% ./runnow ~/opera-19991224
Sorry, not implemented: ProxyServerConfigurationDialogx::slotHelp()
UNDEFINED STRING -- SEE PrefsManager::GetLanguageString()UNDEFINED STRING -- SEEone% ./opera ~/opera-19991224
one% cd ../ ~/opera-19991224
one% rm -rf opera-19991224 ~
opera-19991224 opera-19991224.tar.gz
one% rm -rf opera-19991224* ~

Yes, it is beta. I think I'll wait another 2 or 3 months. :)


Re:Screenshot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447947)

how many times must I say this:


Thank you!

I remember having to say this the last time /. had an article on opera too.

Re:Doesn't even run (1)

rimez (21822) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447948)

I'm using suse 6.2 and Opera runs fine (well... except that it segfaults all the time).
I'm grateful that opera took the time to port the software but ( always a but ;-) I'm going to wait for konqueror 2.0. I really think it's something to watch.

Re:A truly free browser for Linux (1)

pb (1020) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447949)

Amaya is a cool browser. It doesn't support Frames (they aren't standard, yeah!) and it doesn't read past the closing HTML on a page (cuts off my school's lousy disclaimer, yay!) and it allows me to laugh at people who write bad HTML (ha ha ha ha ha!).

...and if it doesn't do something that you want... why, change the source! Work on Lesstif, port the widgets to GTK, hack in graphics support or something. Or at least don't sit here and whine.

But Amaya has some cool features I'd still like to see in some browsers. Their layout view for webpages when you view source is downright nifty. I never tried compiling it, but did check out the binaries on Solaris. (Lesstif doesn't work?)
pb Reply or e-mail rather than vaguely moderate [] .

Re:Doesn't even run (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447950)

Go away, troll. As someone actually using Debian stable right now, I can tell you it doesn't work.

Can't wait... (1)

rbf (2305) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447951)

until they fix those nasty bugs and release a version for us Alpha Linux users! Then I'll buy as many copies as I can afford/have machines for..


Chill out a little... (1)

The_Jazzman (45650) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447952)

Hey all,

Quite a few comments seem to be slagging off this release with views such as 'segfaults after a mintue' and the like.

Well, what do you expect ? Tell me how many distributions of *nix's are there out there... and now how many libraries... and now how many versions of those libraries ... and then which kernel versions ?

I think most of those who post these types of comments have never even attempted to get substantial program working accross many platforms. I certainly havn't, I'm a PHP programmer, so that isn't going to happen... but I can appreciate how difficult the task is.

So, chill out a little... This release of Opera just about works for me and it is very quick... it's not like Netscape which is so *slow* and crashes 90% of the time if a lookup on an URL fails... and that's happened on *every* platform I have tested it on...

As for the comparasins to Mozilla... I'm running on a 400 Mhz 128mb system... and yet it still crawls along... fair enough, it's not even officially alpha status yet.

So, finally, sod off to all you so ready to slag of an attempt to produce a half-decent browser.

P.S. Don't forget that Opera 3.62 works perfectly under WINE... well, for me that is ;)

I got slashdot, everything else crashed it (1)

Mojojojo (15516) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447953)

It's very very unstable. I was able to bring up slashdot 50X faster than with any other browser, but it's got a lot of work to do. Mozilla is a lot farther along and doesn't use Qt. Also, Opera costs money, and Mozilla is free, not to mention way farther along in development.

Re:Doesn't even run (1)

The_Jazzman (45650) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447954)

Simple... SuSE 6.1 had serious problems with the Glibc2 (or something like that) libraries... I used to run 6.1 and couldn't run any program that required it, such as Mozilla...

However, I'm now running Sexy SuSE 6.3 which has them sorted and I'm flying with Opera at last ;)

Re:Opera not quite ready (2)

Mawbid (3993) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447955)

Same here. I closed it and ran it again, and then it was fine. Before I closed it, I turned on a full button bar and a status bar, neither of which appeared until I restarted it. Perhaps that's a relevant factor.

It renders things a bit differently from what I'm used to, but I gotta say, it's FAST (or shall I say, the stuff I've been using is SLOW).

Gives the Mozialla crew something to shoot for, I imagine :-)

No source, no GPL, no go.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1447956)

I *wasted* my time too, hey that was a neat *waste* of band width. I think I'll not *waste* time reporting bugs on this one.

Good day and Merry Christmas RMS,

Re:second first post today :) (2)

bmetzler (12546) | more than 14 years ago | (#1447957)

Yeah, which brings an obvious question to mind: why aren't more companies (or any, for that matter) taking advantage of libwine to port their products to Linux?

If all you are using is Windows programs, then why not jsut use Windows. It is a catch-22. You can make Windows programs to run under Linux, but then why use Linux? That's where OS/2 lost. OS/2 could run Windows programs, but why use OS/2 to run Windows programs if you can jsut use Windows.

We need Native ports that take advantage of the OS. Wine is Fine. And it'd even be nice if Opera would be wine compatible. But certainly not what we want to see for a browser on Linux.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?