Slashdot Mirror
Opera 7.10 Released (First Opera 7.x For Linux)
joshieck writes "The much awaited (at least I know I've been waiting for it) Opera 7.10 has been released. This marks the first release of Opera 7.x for linux, and is a cause for rejoicing.
Even if it is a 'beta,' it's opera, so you know it's gonna be good. Go get it at Opera.com, or go right to the download page. From the Press Release: 'Opera Software today released Opera 7.10 for Windows and Opera 7.10 for Linux Beta with features that are not only new to Opera, but also completely new to the world of browsing. Right from the beginning, users can see the two new buttons FastForward and Rewind in the toolbar, accelerating Opera users' Web navigation. Users can also speed up researching with the completely new Notes features or view photo files with SlideShow.'"
This is an illusion by the Zionist American forces. Opera 7.10 was not released, we valiantly fought them and killed all of the invaders.
Former Iraqi Information Minister Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf
Hell, NCSA Mosaic had an 'annotate' function.
'Completely new' my ass.
I've installed Opera 7.1 for both Windows and Linux, and am very impressed. Does anyone know how to create a note? I see the Copy to Note and Paste To Note options, but they don't do anything :-(
:-).
Also, Opera still doesn't display my ISP's homepage properly. Hopefully it will be fixed in the next release
"Opera 7.10" was not released. "Opera 7.10 Beta 1" was released. It does mention further down in the paragraph that this is a beta, but it still gives the impression that this is a release.
This is why I go to pclinuxonline.com for my Linux news.
Chris
The notes feature, and the slideshow feature, sound good. If I had that browser, I'd no longer need to open notepad in a separate window for note-taking. And I'd no longer need to download pics and use them in IrfanView for slideshow. Keep up the good work, browser makers! Call me old fashoned, but I still like LYNX.
on Suse 8.0!
Have more testing to do however.
If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
They've added a few features since the 7.0x releases (for Windows), which is really nice, but I find that the biggest difference is the quality. They've really taken the time to polish their product a lot. Sure, some bug remain. Overall, though, I find that it's just very enjoyable to use.
Opera 7.0 has so many problems regarding display and usability I don't even know where to begin; how about the inability to change from the "in system window display" like you could with opera 6.0.
I like the fact that there are indy folks still out tehre in the browser world, but I'm not going to give opera free props just cuz they aren't MS. 7.0 has too many problems, and many of teh changes that were made from 6.0 were just plain wrong.
-rt
Great news - I sure hope Opera make some money out of their browser. years ago, it was well worth paying the license fee considering that IE4 and Netscape 4 were the competition. Now that Mozilla, Konqueror et al have gotten so good, I wonder if it's so compelling anymore.
Add these lines to your hosts file if you want to block Opera from downloading the Cydoor ad banners in the free version. I've also renamed /usr/share/opera/images/operabanner.png to get rid of the default image.
0.0.0.0 ins1.opera.com
0.0.0.0 ins2.opera.com
0.0.0.0 rgs1.opera.com
0.0.0.0 rgs2.opera.com
0.0.0.0 rps1.opera.com
0.0.0.0 rps2.opera.com
0.0.0.0 www.cms1.net
0.0.0.0 www.cms2.net
0.0.0.0 www.rgs1.net
0.0.0.0 www.rgs2.net
0.0.0.0 www.bns1.net
0.0.0.0 www.bns2.net
Right from the beginning, users can see the two new buttons FastForward and Rewind in the toolbar
You mean like Safari Snapback?
I just installed RH9 and Mozilla 1.3, finally the fonts are beautiful, it renders fast, and tabbed browsing is heaven. I am loving life. Can someone give me some good reasons why I should use Opera over Mozilla (or at least, why i should use Opera in certain situations)? I'm generally looking for insight into the whole browser landscape.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
The web didn't exist in 1990.
Isn't it time for Slashdot to get an Opera icon? It has a Mozilla icon, a Netscape icon, and even an AOL icon.
/me sulks:)
Opera happens to be my favourite browser and I want to see it's giant O at my favourite tech news site.
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
Yeah, but does this version have the Swedish Chef? I refuse to use a browser that doesn't have a bork feature.
...and it's fairly pretty. I've been using Mozilla for quite a long time, mainly due to cross-platform compatibility, but this is definitely going to be worth looking into.
Though I can already see a couple of things that will cause problems. I'm running triple-head xinerama and gnome/sawfish, and when maximizing Opera, it fills one screen, but thinks that it has the realestate of all three, so stuff ends up being rendered off of the viewable area. I don't know if this is an Opera problem, a Gnome problem, or a Sawfish problem, but I won't be able to do much to fix it until I get around to installing a newer version of Gnome anyway. Hopefully this'll correct at that point.
Definitely pretty though.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
I downloaded this and have been playing with it for a few hours... it's very nice, except for the "close all" option in the tab-menu... I mean, why on earth should anyone want that? Probably to annoly people. :)
Actually, in my opinion Opera is superior to Mozilla. That's why you would buy something, because it is better product. Just because Mozilla is open source does not mean it is the best. I, including many others, would be happy to pay Opera for their excellent product.
Because Opera is worth the money.
Or why should I settle for an ad-supported browser?
Because the ad does not report your surfing habits and is generally innocuous.
And especially since I have so many free and open source choices.
It's a free planet. If you prefer them, use them.;)
Why would I not use Phoenix, Mozilla or Konqueror?
I use the Windows version of 7.10 and it is simply amazing. The interface is extremely smooth and has loads of little touches that are simply missing from Phoenix 0.5 and Mozilla 1.4.
I'll paste in a pro-Opera 7.10 rant that I posted in elsewhere: To illustrate the customizable interface, check out this pic of my personalized Opera.
I hope that helped.;)
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
But is it free?
As a CD-carrying FSF'ist, I don't appreciate this coverage of software that isn't Free (as in ankle tracking device).
You should only discuss software that is Free, so that I can live my life blissfully unaware of the superior products available.
... until the fat lady sings!
Yes, I know, too obvious. Mod me down, see what I care [whimper].
. . . it killed all my bookmarks. I upgraded from Opera 6.04. I guess I should have expected that. Oh well! I like it otherwise *)
If you hang around on opera.linux, the guys at opera have been posting about preview releases for awhile now. They're really nice about people's input and critcism (thanks Espen!)
Vote for global prefs bug
Is that the correct model ?
I am scared of putting any adware on my PC. I don't care if Opera is THE browser. I still refuse to even give it a shot.
And for those of you who will say "Why not pay the odd 40$ and buy the ad free version.". I would say "Why should i dish out 40 $ when i can do with perfectly competetive products like mozilla or phoenix or god-forbidden even IE ?"
for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
0. Mouse gestures (you know, the things that Mozilla and Phoenix ripped off from Opera) are now customizable.
Because Opera never copied anything from Mozilla? Oh, and I was using mouse gestures in Black & White before Opera had them.
Whaddya know, all I had to do was import from my old Opera directory. Bookmarks restored, wh00t. Carry on then.
I've been using Opera since 7.0 came out for windows. Though yes the occasional web page has minor compatibility issues with Opera, i will never go back to IE. The main reason that EVERYONE should switch to Opera is Mouse Gestures. A quick flick of the wrist now gives me features like back, forward, close page, new page, minimize, refresh, and more. Until you get used to it you'll never know just how much sense mouse gestures make. Pr0n browsing productivity is through the roof! Just Like netscape and Mozilla, Opera has tabbed browsing. I thought I wouldn't like that at first but it keep my desktop really organized. Will never go back to multiple windows, but Opera has the option if I wanted to. Another nifty little feature is when you start, you have the option of opening all the pages that were open when you last closed Opera. This is always handy, but especially so after your browser freezes while you had 10 pages open...annoying to go back to them one by one. No longer an issue. I've also switched to Opera's brand new mail client, M2. Not as mature as Outlook but I would still say it's nicer overall. Try it out. Factor in the Skinning feature, 3D effects on buttons, and the truely useful fast forward, fast back features, and you've got to wonder how long until either MS steals these features or Opera becomes the new standard.
Careful with the flamebait there, buddy. Mozilla and Phoenix have a hard time "ripping" anyone "off". Their users saw a feature that they liked and enough developers agreed so they wrote it. Welcome to open source. Don't be so abrasive.
Mouse geastures, big deal... Opera ripped of the ability to display HTML from Mosaic.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
I bank with TD Canada Trust, and have always been able to use most of the features of the site through Opera. Now, it just refuses to log me in. The page never updates, nothing. This is a real shame, since the fast forward button labels itself 'log in', which is exactly what I want. If this one thing worked, it would be just about the perfect browser.
Oh, well. I'll use Phoenix for banking and Opera for everything else until they fix it. (I DID submit a bug report.)
One of the really nice features with Opera is you can set a preference so that it identifies itself as IE of Mozilla. This makes browsing the web very easy as you get no errors being thrown about not having a supported browser. This does lead to inaccurate statistics from web servers. Whatever about not getting errors, I cannot set my default browser to Opera yet as there are still some sites which dont work in it e.g. www.ifilm.com. If administrators never see Opera showing up on their logs they are not going to design for it either.
Anyone know if an OSX version of 7.x is ever coming? Couldn't find anything on their site about it. Weren't they mad about Safari or something (can't remember who it was, maybe it was them...)?
putfwd.com - 1GB Free file storage with a twist
More info here.
I am over here... now I am back over here!
Why the hell would I pay for a browser? Or why should I settle for an ad-supported browser? This is not 1990!! And especially since I have so many free and open source choices. Why would I not use Phoenix, Mozilla or Konqueror?
One feature: fast-forward
--Drunk as in Beer
To illustrate the customizable interface, check out this pic of my personalized Opera.
Better watch out for the RIAA and DMCA freaks clicking on that link and seeing Kazaa running. . .
I am over here... now I am back over here!
Why pay for Opera? Opera is like Mozilla on speed (and maybe crack). That's why. $40, or whatever it may seem like a bit much, but its well worth the pay if you enjoy your web surfing. But I guess the cheap folks will settle for their mozilla or ie. Point being.. Opera is much better then the other browsers, be it on Linux or on a Windows machine. I must say though, I do like Mozilla, but it seriously lacked in one department--speed. It took forever to load up. IE had that beat. It was either go with IE, Mozilla's sluggish bloat, or bad ass quick web surfin Opera. Also, I've enjoyed the mouse gesture quite a lot. Hold down left-button, and click right-button to go forward, and hold down right-button, and click left button to go back. There are others too. Opera actually have some USEFUL features, and not just bloat. See it beyond the price tag.
Wow, well, I was going to read why I should be using Opera, but your first (or zeroeth...) point was pure flamebait. Great wait to start off a list of arguments!
So, Moz is ripping Opera off when they use mouse gestures, eventhough that's a common theme among many programs. People have been using mouse gestures for ages. But when Opera has tabbed browsing like mozilla, its just Opera being great and not ripping off. Give credit where credit is due. The Browser landscape is so filled, there's no ripping one thing off from a competitor, its all minor changes.
Opera is for fat woman.
I agree with you completely. Opera must have taken the idea that the web browser is so central to the computing expeience that they would test the limits of what a browser could do.
A co-worker of mine asked me why I would use this thing over IE. I showed him a few features like opening all bookmarks in a selected folder, in paned windows
I explained that to exploit these features, there was a definite need for the user to read the tutorials, and that it was well worth it. He agreed.
Not that there aren't other good/great browsers out there, but Opera is my favorite. BTW Opera even displays my online banking website properly now...it didn't before.
I used some the 5.x and 6.x versions of Opera for a while but eventually got tired of constantly running into web sites that don't display properly. I tried Opera 7 briefly, and although it looks really cool and seems to be really fast, Opera's programmers are, unfortunatley, still stuck in their mindset of "we're going to strictly adhere to a set of web standards, despite the fact that 95% of the web sites in the world don't follow those standards."
Too many creators of "alternative" browsers are hung up on the idea that making a browser that can handle crappy designed-for-MSIE web pages somehows equals selling your soul to the devil.
Mozilla made the same mistake early on, but they finally woke up to the fact that MSIE, not W3C, is the standard, and you *CAN* make a browser that handles most of the crappy designed-for-MSIE web pages out there *AND* still has lots of innovative features -- the two are not mutually exlusive.
The new Notes feature seems rather silly. It's like a "drafts" folder in their mail client. If you create a "note" and double-click it, it opens up as an email. It's odd, and seems useless to me.
Otherwise, 7.10 is good. I've purchased Opera and am happy to have done so.
"Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
I want to know if you were even using computers in 1990.
must... stay... awake...
But when Opera has tabbed browsing like mozilla, its just Opera being great and not ripping off. Give credit where credit is due.
Opera has had tabbed browsing since version 4.0 in 2000. I am sorry I was rude about Mozilla-based browsers, but a lot of their design is inspired by that of Opera Software's.
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
It was copied word for word from another website where I am on friendly terms with a Mozilla evangelist at whom that line was directed. I should have edited it.:)
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
Opera still does not have HTML-enabled email. When writing instructions, for example, it is nice to have bold and italic.
Of course, you pay more for an HTML-capable email client. The additional cost for Mozilla is -39.00 dollars U.S. Don't you just love those negative additional amounts?
You say you want to see a giant O?
Hmmm...were's that Goat.cx link when you need it?
Notice how they are always submitted by some person without a slashdot account.
WTF are you talking about? I have a buttload of journal entries and a posting history going back a year or two. Are you drunk?:)
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
Too much wasted screen real estate. Those of us that only have 1024*768 screen resolutions hate that wasted junk at the top. And no, I don't buy web browsers. Too many free alternatives to do that.
/.
Fonts are ugly as hell. Konqueror / Nautilus / Mozilla all look much better. Even on
The speed is nice. So is a functional "cnn" takes you to "http://www.cnn.com/" and such.
That being said... I will try it for a week or so (using it now).
You know, you gotta give these guys credit, they give great quote. Their pronouncements are way more fun to listen too than ours. Come on, wouldn't you love to hear Rumsfield say, at a press conference, "We will crush and destroy these criminals like the odious cowards they are. Our glorious war machines will burn the godless heathens in their beds, and in their bunkers, and smite them where they stand. I shall personally remove Saddam's head with my sword and throw it to the mongrel dogs to eat."
Hell, I'd watch Fox News to see that.
What if life is just a side effect of some other process and God has no idea we exist?
See, I think the lack of html capability is a good thing. That's because I don't like html in email. I actively encourage people who send me html-encoded email to stop.
...but html in the mail client? WTF do you need an email client in your browser anyway? Opera, at least, is perfectly happy calling any email client you want to use.
You could always just cut-and-paste, but then you'd have to know how to insert bold and italic tags in a text editor.
And really - your criterion on the useworthiness of a browser is whether the embedded email client can generate html email? Whatever, dude.
If you want something to smack it around for, try the consistent difficulty with getting Java to work, or the fact that (at least prior to 7.10) getting non-standard webpages to render correctly is a hit-or miss prospect, or the arcane way of getting font anti-aliasing to work, or the serious problems with plugins and removing them after the program is closed, or the fact that closing one tabbed window seems to freeze the browser for 5 seconds or so...
Ah, well. It's your $39, dude. I suggest you keep it.
Ce n'est pas un vrai mouvement de robot!
I installed Opera 7.xx (I think it was 7.0) on a P1 133 and it sucked.. WAY TOO MUCH graphics for old, slow machines. I dumped it and went back to 6.05 and it was just fine on that slug slow laptop.
I installed 6.xx (I forget) on my Mandrake 9.0 box and I just didn't like it. I actually am one of the few that LIKES Konqueror.
I've gotten used to Konqueror and will stay with it.
On a Winbloz box I LOVE Opera, it whips ass, but beware, eveyrone is pushing new versions of everything (including for Linux) that *assumes* everyone uses they newest, fastest box available.
Not so, some people have old clunkers around.
My MDK 9.1 box is a P4 w/200gigs, 512ddr Gf4-Ti4200, it's really decent..
My laptop sucks, it runs on Flintstone brand batteries. My son uses a K6-2 400mhz and it's pretty klunky but he's a Playstation2 kind of guy and Opera 6.05 works best on his box, I tried 7.x on it and it sucked.
So, you coders out there, lighten up on the graphics PLEASE! There is more to life than eye candy!
Exactly. And all those silly fools who cried a bloody river about Microsoft releasing their "free" alternative included within Windows.
Yea, what cry babies!
In other words, they ripped it off.
...they got bought out, went open source.... a positive outcome! Perhaps when Opera goes under something good will come from it too!
It is really great. I had been using Phoenix 0.5 for a week now, but I have now fallen in love with Opera. I'm still too poor to dish out $40 for a web browser, but I would if I could. The rendering is great. Pages load very fast. I haven't run into any pages that don't look right (I haven't been to that many sites either). I could also liked that I had a greater choice of page fonts, as opposed to Phoenix (configuration issues?) The eyecandy is fascinating. Smooth effects all over, from forms (buttons, scrollbars) to toolbars and page tabs. Plus, I've got my qt settings really sweet now with transparency, great anti-aliased fonts and such, so the menus also look great. One of the things that took me by surprise was the size, only 4 megs (3986283). This was linked with qt, but nonetheless, this is pretty small for a full fledged browser with e-mail client. I haven't set any custom mouse gestures or keyboard shortcuts, but I looked at the interface, and it was pretty simple to do. I think I'm staying with Opera for a while.
Robert Bindler
A Computer Science student's views on technology.
Great post, but I cannot be silent on how lousy the fonts look in your screenshot. I don't recognize the OS. You should try Mandrake or RedHat, the fonts are beautiful right out of the box.
installing opera 7.03 over opera 7.01 resulted in the deletion of all my favorites, which really torqued me. I don't know if this happens with everyone but I back up all my favs everytime I update opera now (this would be the first time since then!).. also opera has a rather annoying problem with persistent cookies ( i think it may be a default setting, too lazy to look) and it seems to bork up every once in a while requiring you to reinput your user info (annoying at the least). Also a slew of rendering errors can be immediately noticed when using opera also, esp when viewing an entirely cached page (incorre ctly stretched images etc).. fixed by a refresh... The only good thing i notice about opera is its fast as hell
When Apple released Safari these fools cried a bloody river [com.com] Now after they complained about the cost of producing a Mac version of Opera... they release a linux version.
They have been making Linux versions since late 4.x series I believe. I know I had Opera 5.02 for Linux so it's not just the 7.x series that has had a Linux port available for it.
this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
There was some serious sour grapes going on in that article. Part of it I understand, from a business standpoint; it's hard to develop for such a small market in the first place with all of the free competition. The other part sounded suspiciously like, "Hold on, wait a second, why don't you dump that open source KHTML core that you've already built into your application and were planning on offering to your developers, and instead pay to license our proprietary, closed-source core?"
;)
The part that really gets me is that it sounds like they were using the release of Safari to have an excuse to abandon the Mac platform. It's not like IE, Mozilla, Netscape, and Camino weren't already competing with them for free. Safari is great and all, but it still isn't all the way there yet; I prefer Camino and Mozilla first. Opera is just there for cranky, IE-oriented pages, as a last-ditch effort before I have to open IE.
"Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
Don't pay for a browser then. Go to here and download a nightly build of phoenix. Its a very nice browser, I tried the 0.5 version which needs some work, and then tried the nightly build which is not only stable but fast and with good features.
Because none of them can provide session and mouse-gesture and fast performance and skinnable UI and mail/news reader and note keeper and image zooming and tabbed-window.
You can also use "G" to cycle through [NO | CACHED | ALL] IMAGES.
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
Just tell me...why would I need this stuff,
with Konqueror 3.1 and Phoenix around?
-><- no
is useful when the new porn site you're trying out starts spewing up pop-ups by the dozen, with gay male voices promising you the blowjob of your life and all - and your mom is about to walk in through the door :-)
Of course, you could block pop-ups [F12,R] and embedded audio [F12,N] in the first place...
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
Because the ad does not report your surfing habits and is generally innocuous.
Bullshit, Opera directs me to ad.doubleclick.net and some shit ad servers, phoenix/Mozilla/IE doesn't do it. IE of course uploads your index.dat's to M$.
I ripped out IE by using this utility
http://www.litepc.com/ier_lic.html
But I am now moving to FreeBSD 5.0, and Konqueror.
the gestures were awesome when they came out, but linux and mac both now have system-wide gestures, making all browsers able to do the same thing (all cocoa browsers in the case of the mac www.bitart.com).
so why pay 40$? you get an operamail pop account. they dropped imap support on operamail and gave up the free pop3 access following suit with yahoo (which irked me having switched all my contact to opera) and changed the mail so it does not function on any of my browsers. operamail sucks, so why would anyone want it if they already have email (wouldn't most people who want a power browser already be hip to the whole Electronic-mail thing by now?). it did not use to cost forty dollars and i will not pay it considering that is half of the cost of my operating system (more for most of you that are not mac users yet) after student discount.
so opera may be better than other browsers on linux or windows, but i scarcely think it can hold a candle to anything on os x that is not iCab. omniweb, safari, mozilla and even the dredded mac ie are better for mac than opera. try them all out, opera will lose on the mac every time.
Make sure all these are enabled: cookies [F12,C], pop-up windows [F12,A] and Javascript [F12,J].
If this fails, delete all your private data [FILE->DELETE PRIVATE DATA...], check all except the ones you deem necessary, and try again.
Let us know how you went.
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
safari does all of that with a minor amount ingenuity, as can omniweb or ie for mac for that matter.
why would you want email and news mixed in with a web browser? everytime i use a web browser to do email and news i find out just how much i love using a seperate client.
works fine for me with Opera 7.10, running Windows 2000, with the browser ID set to Opera [CTRL+ALT+O].
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
Up to version 6.x, Opera's DOM support was next to non-existent, which meant Javascript and other dynamic stuff wouldn't work properly, if it all. Remember NS 4.x's CSS usability? Yeah...
With 7.x, Opera has finally fixed this wanting need. Every site I visit that uses dynamic HTML etc works very well [as long as there is no proprietary crap code. Even 7.10 has many improvements and bugfixes over 7.
Give it a go and let us know if things have changed for the better. If not, tell us which sites give you troubles.
- CD
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
i think opera is great and they could potentially justify someone paying for it, but i think the cost has gotten out of hand. you now are buying operamail premium with every copy you buy, and that is just lamo! operamail through a web browser is a nightmare, makes me want to use hotmail. they dropped pop3 to non-premium members and imap entirely. they used to just have badass ad-driven mail with every feature you could come to enjoy, and now it is just garbage.
i would buy opera for 20$ if i still ran intel architechture, but powerpc opera is no good at all, and forty dollars is unacceptable for a browser. omniweb for mac blows opera's doors off and looks nominally better doing so.
Simple - upgrade to 7.10, then go to PREFERENCES -> SKINS and select your toolbar magnification scale. I've set mine to a perfectly usable 40%. Additionally, you can use more skins that may suit your needs better.
That's your main complaint solved. Let's optimise things a bit, shall we?
Turn off the navigation bar: VIEW -> NAVIGATION BAR -> OFF.
Right-click on the main toolbar and press "I" [or "Images only".]
Finally, if you've registered Opera you can do this to good effect - remove all the toolbar buttons that you don't use by right-clicking on them and selecting "REMOVE". Then click on the status bar [if it is visible] and drag it on to the main toolbar. Select VIEW -> STATUS BAR -> OFF.
Have fun.
P.S.: To get to www.cnn.com from "cnn" faster, turn off local computer searching by going to PREFERENCES -> NETWORK -> SERVER NAME COMPLETION... and un-check "Look for local network machine".
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
Honestly... he was the comic relief amongst all the death and destruction (well deserved on Saddam's part, I might add).
Quotes like "we will slaughter them all" and "committing suicide by the hundreds at the gates of baghdad"... and who can forget the favorite "there are no coalition troops in baghdad... none at all."
The guy had chutzpah, I'll give him that... American tanks rolling by in the background while he touts the glorious Iraqi victory... I'll bet even Saddam almost peed his pants laughing at some of the stuff that guy whipped out.
Truly and genuinely hilarious... I'm buying a T-shirt.
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
I went to the website and on loading, I got a "cookies not enabled" error, even though it was. Filled in some dummy info, and on clicking Login another msgbox popped up saying I've double-clicked the login button. Then nothing happens.
Hmmm. Sounds like a DOM bug within Opera, assuming the Javascript is correct.
Works fine for me on the latest Phoenix nightly, btw.
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
should be found in [opera install directory]\UNINST\BACKUP. I believe the filename is Opera6.adr.
If you're using NT/2000/XP, you may have enabled multi-user profiles. In that case go to DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\[your username]\APPLICATION DATA\[opera install directory]\UNINST\BACKUP.
I'm guessing the second part, so correct me if I'm wrong.
Good luck.
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
In Phoenix Page Info->Links This lists all the links on the page, too bad you can't have it as a sidebar or something (yet). For opening all links (Or all picture links, or all pictures, or several other options) phoenix has the Linky Extension, which does what you need. I personally don't think looking at so much Pr0n is a good idea, but I do use those features for other purposes, so I thought I would inform you of their existence
I won't use Opera for Windows because it uses Windows MDI multiple document interface. But some people like this feature of Opera.
Enjoy the opera.
I like mozilla. it renders html properly.
... and Konqueror. Actually, Opera *introduced* tabbed browsing with their first public version several years ago. I didn't like it then, but for some reason I really got addicted to it when Multizilla came out.
* And remember, it's spelled N-e-t-s-c-a-p-e, but it's pronounced "Mozilla."
Do CTRL-Q in Mozilla and, the next time you return, all your tabs are gone; so much for the oh-so-great tabs. Because of dumb oversights like this, Galeon and Mozilla aren't worth a hoot in real life, while Opera had already figured out the right way to do tabs, ages before Mozilla gave their first try at it. That, my friend, is the difference between a well-matured commercial product and an OSS hobbyist's project that gets there 5 years afterwards and still lacks the polish that real-life, non-hacker end-users need.
Software is not supposed to be about how to work around a useability issue. - Ken Barber
Opera is totally free to use, and has a small unobtrusive ad, which doesnt bother most rational people. I use it all the time. I am also a web designer.
Patent: from Latin patere, to be open
Great! I will try it now.
But the point is still there. Why buy Opera when Mozilla is free? I have to buy Opera to support customers. But why do others buy Opera?
As a web developer, I will never develop pages for Opera. Just MSIE, Mozilla/Phoenix and Netscape 4.x.
Why on earth do you feel you need to develop for specific browsers? That's just so n00b.
Other than the totally borked horror that is Netscape 4.x, modern web clients - including Opera - generally do things right as long as you do it right.
Or like valuable screen real estate occupied by a banner image (and using bandwidth to download the banners)?
Most already use bandwidth to download the crappy images and plugin data you web DUH-signers throw in the pages themselves. Also, the banner ad is only present if you don't pay - so which are you criticizing, the ad-ware version or the paid version?
(I am sure your web-pages are designed to work with a browser's bandwidth-saving "no images"-mode though - unless you're pushing double standard here.)
I thought that the internet is about freedom and free access to information.
There is no such thing as a free (gratis) lunch. The "free" in "freedom" isn't the "free as in beer" but "free as in speach". Don't mix the two.
The idea of paying for a web browser seems ludicrous to me
Why is it wrong for a company to charge for the only product they make? But hey, if you think software should be subsidized, you're free to use other programs that have a different financing model that lets you use it at someone else's expense.
Why pay for something that is clearly sub-standard?
It's not sub-standard to those of us that use it.
And why do you write web pages for Netscape 4.x (which you mentioned at the start of your trolling) which is clearly sub-standard in every possible way?
Or bombard those who wont pay with flashing advertisments (that probably track usage and habbits anyway).
Lovely unfounded "probably" there. I guess you also turn off cookies in your browser and demand that web sites you visit turn off IP logging...
I know why it is only a 3.2 MB download, portions of the code are missing!
Such as? Is it really that hard to realize that someone actually can write a smaller program that does the same as a bigger one?
You can zoom into prOn pictures!
'nuff said.
witold.org
While I have NOT filled every field in the Advertising section, the fact that I selected "country: Finland" and "birth: 1970-1979" should be enough of a clue that I do NOT want any fucking ads from the American-latino dating agency Migente popping at me continuously!
Anna miulle suomenkielisiä mainoksia tai sitten mee pois, vitun norjalaishölmö!
Software is not supposed to be about how to work around a useability issue. - Ken Barber
Really, it should be. If someone claims to be a webmaster, but consistantly checks their work ONLY in IE, they have earned the right to be shot dead. I really, honnestly mean it. Death to all self-proclaimed webmasters who don't know anything else than IE and cannot be bothered with W3C standards!
Software is not supposed to be about how to work around a useability issue. - Ken Barber
I downloaded the rpm package for Redhat 7.x / Mandrake 8 which uses a shared qt library and it did not install.. "Failed dependency libqt.so.3".. I don't know too much about qt library versions but I do know that I have qt installed (the default that came with Redhat 7.2 ) so it should work..
I guess everyone should just download the version with a static qt library to be safe..
7.10 beta does NOT have HTML enabled email composition. I just tried it. There is an option to use another email client, but it does not work, presumably because this is the beta version.
Opera 7.10 beta is fast, but I don't see any compelling reason to prefer it over Mozilla. Anyone care to give a reason?
That's how I read the Opera web pages, that 7.10 for Windows has been released. But Opera 7.10 under Windows is very buggy, so it must be a beta, also.
Is there a bork function in this one. I would desperately need one.
Or, in Opera 7.10, you can just click on the first link (if the links link to images) and fast-forward to the next image.
"Even if it is a 'beta,' it's opera, so you know it's gonna be good."
;)
//H
Yeah, the last beta I tried from opera SIGSEGVd when I pressed a link. Kind of defeated the purpose of a web browser.
ObNotTroll:
Yeah, it was the first release they made, and yes, I think I remember it was an alpha, not beta, but hey...
I'm too stupid to preview.
OK, I realise that asking anything about using a Microsoft product on Slashdot is the online equivalent of putting a "STONE ME TO DEATH" sign around my neck, but does anyone have any idea of how to configure Opera's mail feature to work with Hotmail addresses? Is this at all possible? (I'm guessing that it is, but that I'm just not smart enough to figure how to do it.)
There are some of us out there (myself and my partner included) that were using Hotmail before it was bought by Microsoft/assimilated by the Borg, and still continue to receive email to that address that must be regularly checked.
So, any genius out there know how to do this? Want to share the knowledge please?
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
Opera doesn't hide its identity that sneakily. Here's the user agent HTTP header from Opera 7.03:
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; MSIE 5.5; Windows 98) Opera 7.03
You can see that user agent headers are a mess, and figuring out which browser sent the request isn't trivial: that's Opera pretending to be Internet Explorer pretending to be Netscape 4.0! However, anyone who reads a web server log correctly can figure it out.
This marks the first release of Opera 7.x for linux
This is not the first Opera 7.x for Linux. Personally I would argue that a beta doesn't count as a release anyway, but this isn't even the first beta for Linux. El Reg linked to a beta of Opera 7.0 for Linux which I've deployed successfully, and had no complaints with (apart from the fact it crawls on a remote X display).
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
You want it to remember tabs when you have just closed the application?
Do you always want it to?
I know I dont want it bringing up the 15 pages I was surfing last night when I open it the next day!
If you want to do that you can bookmark a group of tabs and open them at once.
With mozilla there is even an "undo close tab" option in case you accidentally closed a tab. When reopened you can even use the back button on that tab to go back through its history.
Bush and Blair ate my sig!
Mouse Gestures. Custom Keywords.
Why on earth do you feel you need to develop for specific browsers?
I develop to W3C standards, and test it on NS4, MSIE, Mozilla/Phoenix (depending upon requirements).
Other than the totally borked horror that is Netscape 4.x, modern web clients - including Opera - generally do things right as long as you do it right.
'Generally' isn't good enough if browsing is integral to a person's career or to their study. Netscape 4 is a solid browser, even if CSS support is lacking, JavaScript 1.3 is satisfactory.
Most already use bandwidth to download the crappy images and plugin data you web DUH-signers throw in the pages themselves. Also, the banner ad is only present if you don't pay - so which are you criticizing, the ad-ware version or the paid version?
Plugin data? What kind of sites are you visiting? I rarely (like twice a year) use plugins. Images usually serve a purpose... if NCSA had never developed Mosaic, you would be just as happy since you don't like images. What version of Lynx are you using these days?
There is no such thing as a free (gratis) lunch. The "free" in "freedom" isn't the "free as in beer" but "free as in speach". Don't mix the two.
Just because I used 'freedom' and 'free' in the same sentence does not mean I do not understand their meanings. btw it is 'speech'
It's not sub-standard to those of us that use it.
Maybe I should have termed it "not as standards compliant as others"?
And why do you write web pages for Netscape 4.x (which you mentioned at the start of your trolling) which is clearly sub-standard in every possible way?
Trolling? That's right, you don't believe in free speech. Netscape 4 was a very popular browser. The deployment environment dictated by the clients will determine whether I develop for NS4.
Lovely unfounded "probably" there. I guess you also turn off cookies in your browser and demand that web sites you visit turn off IP logging...
HTTP requests are often logged by servers, especially advertisements. I do turn off cookies by default, and allow the 10 or so sites that do require it. Sites who bypass this are added to my hosts file.
Such as? Is it really that hard to realize that someone actually can write a smaller program that does the same as a bigger one?
You got me there... OpenOffice vs. M$ Office is a good example.
(I am sure your web-pages are designed to work with a browser's bandwidth-saving "no images"-mode though - unless you're pushing double standard here.)
I usually do browse with images turned off. As a result, I always use ALT and TITLE attributes whilst developing.
On a dialup modem connection, I easily download more than the 1GB per month than I am allowed. Turning off images helps, but frustrates my fiance. lol
opera users paid the $40 because they were too stupid to find a good free browser.
If you had cared to look at my screenshot, you would have noticed that I am using the "adware" Opera.
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
I bet you could just write it as a pluggable extension in mozilla.
I'm currently a Phoenix user and I would love to see it (Opera's fast-forward) added. Also, I'd like to see a feature which saves all your open web pages when you exit the browser, like Opera has done for ages. When I have some time, I might have to sit down and write some of these features, but I have no experience writing Mozilla extensions yet.
Opera is not wor4h $40 when the competition is giving away superior, free extensible products
"Superior" is debatable. I like and use Phoenix, but after using Opera 7 (for Windows) for a few days, I really felt it blew away the competition. It is to the level that it is worth the money because it is a quality product. I'm trying out the Linux version as I write this.
It's the sheer speed that really sets it above the rest, in addition to the features and well thought-out user interface. If you don't agree that Opera 7 is faster, you haven't used Opera 7. For example, browsing Slashdot can be very slow in Phoenix. I find myself waiting for pages to load. At first I thought this was Slashdot's fault and blamed slow servers. But when Slashdot starts getting slow in Phoenix, I run Opera and its still blazing fast (and yes I'm logged in when I try it). Maybe it's something I need to tweak in Phoenix (pipelining or something?), but I don't know exactly why it behaves like this.
I'd love to see Mozilla improve to the point where it can compete with Opera 7 in terms of performance, but I don't think this will happen any time soon. Maybe KHTML-based browsers have some promise. But in any case, when Opera 7 for Linux is released, I may just throw down $40 for it.
--Drunk as in Beer
I have to admit Opera is really fast...or maybe it's because its Sunday morning...ehhehe...
But I checked the memory allocation with one page open (Win XP SP1)...46MB real memory, 49MB virtual. That's 95MB allocated. What happened to the lean, mean browser?
Also...the checkboxes No karma and Post anonymously show up without their labels...is slashdot non complainant?
Okay, this is great and all but useless for me as I run FreeBSD and not Linux. I'd like to know when the native FreeBSD version will be out.
Sure I can run the Linux binary in emnulation, but that's like a Ford enthusiast putting a Chevy engine into his Mustang. It's just not right.
Wow, just realized that might start a Ford vs. Chevy flamewar. Then the MOPAR trolls will chime in. Let's not even talk about the Jap scrap rice burners.
... has picked up this post. This is the first time I've seen a /. article make it to the news.google.com "front page"!
I'm not trying to flame or dis mozilla here but the mozilla children are so superior that there isn't a reason not to use them. Both Galeon and Pheonix are much faster. Pheonix has some pretty cool UI concepts going on (didn't do it for me but should be tried) and Galeon tab browseing and mouse gestures are way more sophisticated than Mozilla. Opera certainly solves a lot of speed and UI issues that Mozilla has but while using it I always felt drawn back to my moz and his children. Though I will give 7 a shot. Ultimately Mozilla is good but once you get used to using gestures and tabbing properly in other browsers you'll find it very hard to go back. Don't worry about your plugins... they all work in Opera and Galeon and Phoenix.
Why on earth do you feel you need to develop for specific browsers?
I develop to W3C standards, and test it on NS4, MSIE, Mozilla/Phoenix (depending upon requirements).
Strange; if you're developing to W3C standards, then you shouldn't have to someday develop to Opera, 'cause it's the only browser out there that's strict about these things (including Mozilla and its 'legacy' support). You do validate what you're putting out, right?
And if you've managed to develop fully compliant HTML 4.01 Strict that doesn't look barebones in Netscape 4, please show me how you pulled that trick, because I have found no way to manage it at all. (It is a common misconception that validating as "transitional" means you're fully compliant with the standards. You're not. Transitional is just what the name implies - a transitory step, not a final destination; sometimes necessary for folks who won't move ahead, but NOT the ultimate goal.)
Other than the totally borked horror that is Netscape 4.x, modern web clients - including Opera - generally do things right as long as you do it right.
'Generally' isn't good enough if browsing is integral to a person's career or to their study. Netscape 4 is a solid browser, even if CSS support is lacking, JavaScript 1.3 is satisfactory.
CSS isn't merely "lacking" on Netscape 4 - it's irrerievably broken. Outside of treating it like a verbose alternative to <font>, you simply can't use CSS with any degree of complexity in Netscape 4; it'll come out terrible.
It's not sub-standard to those of us that use it.
Maybe I should have termed it "not as standards compliant as others"?
You could, but this is incorrect (so far as I've experienced) for 7.x. Slamming Opera's scripting support for 6.x and earlier is entirely justified; 7.x is a whole 'nother animal. (Literally - they rewrote it.)
And why do you write web pages for Netscape 4.x (which you mentioned at the start of your trolling) which is clearly sub-standard in every possible way?
Trolling? That's right, you don't believe in free speech. Netscape 4 was a very popular browser. The deployment environment dictated by the clients will determine whether I develop for NS4.
"Was" being the operative term; it's really not prepared for the modern world. Although, yes, if clients insist on it, I'll admit it's necessary. (It's never a job I look forward to, though.)
Lovely unfounded "probably" there. I guess you also turn off cookies in your browser and demand that web sites you visit turn off IP logging...
HTTP requests are often logged by servers, especially advertisements. I do turn off cookies by default, and allow the 10 or so sites that do require it. Sites who bypass this are added to my hosts file.
Opera's got a pretty strictly detailed policy regarding how they collect information for their ads; have you read it? Personally, I've never had a problem with the ads (but admittedly, I'm also not as strict as you apparently are with cookie control).
--
viqsi - See "vixen"
If we do not change our direction we are likely to end up where we are headed.
"As a web developer, I will never develop pages for Opera. Just MSIE, Mozilla/Phoenix and Netscape 4.x."
... or are you?
You of course disclose this up front to your potential clients, don't you? My company won't hire slugs like you, who insist on using non-compliant code and thus alienating any number of potential customers. A class of customers by the way who aren't adverse to spending money for a good product.
"The idea of paying for a web browser seems ludicrous to me, especially when there are fantastic free browsers out there."
Substitute "operating system" for "web browser" in your statement and perhaps I'll agree with you.
"I know why it is only a 3.2 MB download, portions of the code are missing!"
Surely you're not that clueless
Substitute "operating system" for "web browser" in your statement and perhaps I'll agree with you.
There are fantastic free operating systems out there, and fantastic free browsers. I never said otherwise.
You of course disclose this up front to your potential clients, don't you? My company won't hire slugs like you, who insist on using non-compliant code and thus alienating any number of potential customers. A class of customers by the way who aren't adverse to spending money for a good product.
You are making way too many assumptions. I code to W3C standards, and validate my pages. It's not really an issue if NS4 doesn't support the latest standards, the older standards still work.
I was saying that I will code to standards, if it works on Opera - good, if it doesn't, I'm not going to alter my standards compliant code for a browser that can't interpret the standards completely. This is not a crime.
buy opera for the browswer, not for its mailing capabilities. even when i used mozilla, i didnt use its mail program. :]
;p
:\
as far as mouse gesture are concern, i may be wrong, and i havnt used mozilla for a while, but it had mouse gesture before it did. (i left mozilla for opera 7.0) and as far the mac is concern, i dun use it
well my computer suck maybe, im running p3 700 256mb ram. it load faster then both mozilla and ie, so its somethin im enjoying.
i hate switching to ie (sometimes u have to switch to ie, cause a javascript doesnt work, or ur on a m$ site), and i subconsciously try to use opera feature, and realize its not working
also with the mouse gestures... you can surf other pages, without knowin the link. ie, for a web gallery. or an online tut. as long as it has a common-base name, it will add up incremental. good stuff. good stuff.
but anyways, to each his own. i personally think opera is better then all other browsers, and worth the pay. if you like mozilla or phoenix, heck, even ie, go with it. just giving you my view.
Firstly, I've got nothing against paying for software if:
a). it's good
b). it's realistically priced for what it is
c). it's realistically priced in relation to price of similar products of similar quality
Ok, let's take for granted that Opera have indeed nailed a) and that the product is smokin'! And yes, they support a heap of OS's and Dists. Wow debs too! This can't be cheap, and I can see someone has to pay for this. But c'mon, the pricing fails common sense economics.
Most browsers are of similar standard and are free eg: Mozilla, IE6, Netscape. Economics 101 would state that Opera should be at least near to these prices. Not free, but not overpriced. Let's say "modestly priced".
I'll go further to say, IMHO if it were say US$10, then a heck of a lot more people would say, "yeah ok I'll shell out for that". Opera might even make more money with a higher turnover.
As it stands, there's no way I'd shell out US$39 for a webbrowser, no matter how good. $20, hmmm maybe, if it's good. $10, well ok, if I like it better than what I am currently using. I bet there are many out there who feel the same.
There is a market of people who are obviously using the Ad-supported version and are enjoying it. With a realistic pricing strategy, Opera could tap into this market if they really wanted to.
Opera has some really braindead idea of "fastest browser".
:P
/js directory is empty, all scripts appear repeated on as many subpages as they were supposed to be included in the first place. Aligning text to the left of some odd gfx element made it go far right in other browsers because of stupid placement issues, etc, etc. For you, netsurfers, this may be nothing important, but we, web developers, lose money because of that! Before this project I had quite an openminded approach to Opera, thinking "it's not M$, it's not evil". Now, I'm Opera hater, claiming even M$IE is much better.
I've been recently developing a webpage that was supposed to have quite a few dynamic elements and had to be cross-browser. Moz, NS6+, MSIE5+ were all OK, but Opera was something we just had to negotiate with the employer as something "barely working". Reason?
When in DHTML in a normal browser you change a DOM element, all its contents change accordingly, plus if the change has any influence on neighbor elements, they change too, often modifying whole page layout. In Opera, only the concerned element changes, completely ignoring the rest. So, for example you have a table of width 100%, the first column defined as 40% width, the other will appear as 60%. Now resize the first column to 60%. Any normal browzer will squeeze down the other column to 40%, but Opera will just draw a square that overlaps the neighbour. Contents of the table other than the cell border won't change.
That's just one problem - there are others, like very obscure means of counting pixels. (put P{ margin-top: 15px;} in the style sheets, the paragraph will appear several pixels below the place where other browsers locate it, obviously further than 15px from the top), inability to use script src="..." format (all scripts had to be embedded in the webpage!), counting all "absolute" dimensions with the scrollbar etc.
The question is: Is O7.10 DOM fixed yet, or is it as badly broken as in 6.0 and 7.0 ?
Just please note, it's not quite the same as with LYNX etc, where if you just keep basic rules, everything works fine. Often workarounds to get things working on Opera break working solutions for other browsers. In our case, tha
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
I was really hoping the new Opera would have
support for MathML. If we want to put math and
science on the web, we have to get over this
awkward idea of making images of equations.
There are fantastic free operating systems out there, and fantastic free browsers. I never said otherwise.
So then by your logic isn't it just as ludicrous to pay for an operating system when there are fantastic free operating systems out there as it is to pay for a browser? Or might you admit that one could justify paying for a browser as well as paying for an operating system?
You are making way too many assumptions. I code to W3C standards, and validate my pages. It's not really an issue if NS4 doesn't support the latest standards, the older standards still work.
Ah, but you didn't say that - you said you coded for MSIE, Mozilla/Phoenix, and NS 4. And MS at least is well known for promoting their own non-compliant extensions to standards.
I was saying that I will code to standards, if it works on Opera - good, if it doesn't, I'm not going to alter my standards compliant code for a browser that can't interpret the standards completely. This is not a crime.
Fair enough, if you adhere to that same rule where MSIE and Mozilla/Phoenix are concerned. Opera's stated mission is to correctly render pages which are fully W3C compliant. If it doesn't, then shame on Opera. But if Opera fulfills its mission, it's unfair to blame it rather than the web developer for failing to render pages that deviate from compliance.
This space left intentionally blank.
Or maybe not.
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
Software is not supposed to be about how to work around a useability issue. - Ken Barber