Slashdot Mirror
Opera 9.0 Released
Nurgled writes "After teasing us for months with betas and snapshots, Opera Software have finally released version 9.0 of their web browser. The new version features correct ACID2 rendering, native support for the SVG Basic profile, a built-in BitTorrent client, support for Microsoft's designmode and contenteditable extensions, per-site configuration, Atom support, Web Forms 2.0 support, Canvas support (and some Opera-specific extensions), NTLM authentication, some support of parts of CSS3 and lots more. The full changelog is available."
p14nd4 adds "And for you *nix users, it hasn't hit their .deb repository quite yet, but there are regular installers available for the major players, including a fixed Ubuntu installer and an x86 Solaris version."
I love Opera. I'd love it even more if it came with the possibility to create extensions.
Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
I'm glad they finally released; I'm looking forward to it.
However, I am weary of all these new features; it seems like it is possible they could turn Opera into a bigger resource hog.
ACID2-passing capabilities, bloatware? Are you insane or just really, really sarcastic?
I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
but still closed-source though.
Ehh.. What happened to the worlds "most standards complient browser"? *dismay* 8-O
The main Opera.exe plus the Opera.dll that contains all the fun stuff still only adds up to a paltry 3.12MB (Windows version, obviously) even with all this stuff. It might be experiencing a bit of creeping featurism, but it doesn't seem to be suffering for it. I've noticed no speed decrease from Opera 8.51.
I'm actually quite pleased with the BitTorrent support; There have been many occasions when I've gone to download something and a site has offered both BitTorrent and a normal HTTP download, and I've picked HTTP just because it saves me launching some other app. Obviously the prolific downloaders aren't going to use it in preference to Azureus or uTorrent, but I expect it'd come in handy for more casual users and is also a good first step to greater adoption of BitTorrent.
I love Opera, but their integrated bit torrent client sucks. It doesn't show transfer rates, you can't limit your upstream, you can't see how many people you're connected too, you can't see if there are any seeds and it doesn't keep track of your share ratio.
Nice try Opera, but for now I'm sticking with my old BT client.
Has their CEO reached the US yet since their last release? http://www.opera.com/swim/
Can someone verify how well the svg rendering works in Opera? Some simple tests like at svg basics would be nice to check. I've heard all sorts of varying reports on how well this worked, then compared to Firefox native rendering, then the adobe plugin. When will we see some consistency in the svg world?
Ok, first off, the DL for OSX was simple and quick, total time to install and relaunch was less than 1 min. Can't beat that... Features, it is pretty extensive, I don't necessarily care for integrated BitTorrent clients in my browser, yet it is forethinking of Opera to include it since BT seems to be the #1 traffic on the Net by about 4:1 ratio. Now for the weird part, who are these "lifestyle" models they have photoed for the browser's new help and information? The Features shows two girls, looking like they are college crack whores gotten at the 9.0 release party's rave. :) Just some thought here, maybe Opera could actually consult a professional modeling agency for its photo shoots.
So, I guess once you can see that face on acid correctly in your browser you really have reached the end of the Internet, there is nothing more to see. Good bye, all the Opera users, it's been nice while it lasted.
You can't handle the truth.
about:config / opera:config -> BitTorrent -> Max Upload Rate :/
Not that I'd use Opera for mail, bt, irc, notes and whatnot. Damn featurebloat, just let me surf
Are these extensions "open" as in they can be implemented by other parties? otherways they are meaningless. I use mostly Opera and Firefox, but I would never implement _any_ web page/game/solution if only Opera users can view it. Don't get me wrong - I love the browser but I'm realistic towards the amount of people using it.
"Sounds like"...? Have you actually tried it?
I am an avid Firefox user but I have always been impressed with the speedy interface Opera offers, despite all the extra features they put in. And from release to release, they manage to simplify the interface more and more. The options menu is no longer the scary mess it used to be, I suppose they are learning from Firefox's success. They may be adding a lot of stuff in that people would consider bloatware, but they manage to add it in a way that the browser doesn't seem to be suffering from it one bit. Take into consideration the constant advancement of the rendering engine and the unusually wide spectrum of platforms it supports and you've got quite a good browser.
I'd also like to hear your reasoning for complaining about the built-in BitTorrent client. After all, downloading is one basic feature of a browser, so why not jump in at exactly that point and help advance the system to a more server-friendly standard. Most common users don't know about Azureus and uTorrent and whatnot, so I think it's a good way to introduce the protocol to a wider audience.
parasight.de
You are arguing a specific against a generality.
Ah, I see they fixed some stability issues. That's pretty much the only problem I had with Opera 9 Beta 1, though even when it crashed, it wasn't an issue, because Opera simply let me continue my last session from before the crash. Bless the hearts of those Opera developers. :)
The canvas extension in question is the opera-2dgame context. Some of what it features is:
There is work underway to get a similar API for the canvas into the specification.
Disclaimer: I am the author of the mentioned blog post detailing the opera-2dgame context.
http://virtuelvis.com/
Now that it has ad blocking there's no need to use Firefox anymore. Finally I have features that work 100% (password manager, download manager) and no need to close down the browser every time the memory usage gets too much
Just upgraded to 9.0 on my work PCs (windows and ubuntu linux) without any problems.
Will upgrade my home PC within a week probably.
I just love how easy it upgrades, from version 7.x to 8.x and now 8.x to 9.x I've had my same skin/custom buttons and it just works. I remember upgrading previous versions and the skins would no longer work and I'd have to find a similar one and customize it from scratch again.
Now its so easy.
Only bad part is the new widgets menu.. I'm very anal/obsessive compulsive and I hate change (which is why ive had the same skin since version 7 and similar skins in 5 and 6).. now im all twitchy.. i hate when they add/remove menus =P
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
An internal web site that works kind of slow with fire fix and IE. I try going through our single sign on web page and it can't handle it. no idea why.
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
I am just trying out the new version... looks like it's still beta quality. The edit boxes have 2 spaces instead of one. For instance when posting this message I see two spaces between each word in the subject edit box.
Also Opera can't log in to codeproject (http://www.codeproject.com/)
For anyone that feels Opera is "bloatware"?
LOL... Guys, it's the fastest browser there is! And, I am running 8.54 alongside it, & it takes up 30mb, & this new version 9.0 only takes up 22mb!!!
Ok, not enough? WELL, then take a read:
The URL below is the MOST even-handed browser speed comparisons page I have ever run across online, that covers IE/Mozilla variants/Opera & across multiple OS platforms as well, where Opera blows away the competitors (especially in Windows, and even in other OS too):
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html
APK
unfortunately, my own pet bugs still are there...
:)
1. opera constantly stats all files in the download list, including already downloaded ones;
2. bittorrent downloads don't work through an http proxy;
3. systray icon in kde breaks icon arrangement with 48px tall kicker
though it is good that google maps buttons now work and icon is transparent
Rich
What are they so afraid of?
Donde Ser Geek No Duele
That seems like a pretty obscure feature to me. Absolute positioning inside a scrolled block? Is there actually any mention of how such a situation should be handled in the relevant standards?
Opera seems to update the visible area once the box has been scrolled, placing the box back where it was as if it is floating over the blue box, Firefox seems to make it stick to the scrolled area.
I was under the impression absolute positioning was always relative to the inside of the browser Window, not the container.
If you're convinced this is a bug, have you reported it?
"# Initial support for NTLM authentication."
It's about farging time already.
It finally connectes to the web interface of Exchange at least as well as firefox. However it still doesn't do the public folders bit (IE does though).
I refuse to use IE, and now that Opera works with the websites that I have had some problems with (youtube.com for some reason also) I'm giving firefox the flick.
All that's missing is the proverbial kitchen sink.
Am I the only one wondering why a web browser is including a BT client? I'll stick with Firefox, thanks.
I am consistently amazed by the support Opera has for different platforms.
They have Ubuntu packages (that can be installed with dpkg) for all (past and present) versions of the operating system.
I saw at least 10 other supported distributions.
I can honestly say I have never seen a consumer product so supportive of *nix.
The FreeBSD build works great. I'm using it as of now. Although, some of the mirrors had the the names of packages incorrect and when I installed Opera the script complained about a missing icon directory..but it works fine so far..
Reading changelogs such as these should strike fear into the hearts of the Firefox developers, while that they squander so foolishly their hard-earned market share. If it wasn't for Opera, Joe Clickit wouldn't have reason to think FF was so poorly cobbled together.
Firefox, while it started with good intentions has become thick around the midriff. It's memory useage is embarassing, and I use Linux which is apparently the build target Firefox is most optomised for. How long can we be told we're sick of being told they're imagining FF's gushing memory leaks.. Why does an open-source application fall so miserably behind a closed-source competitor? The trend is the inverse.
I can't put my finger on it, but something about that acid2 test reminds me of drugs.... you have to wonder what the web standards people do for a good time.
Promote Charity on Myspace, Show Your Colours!
Deal with it like the rest of us. Web software isn't supposed to work 100% of the time. The goal is to crash the least you can muster. At least unlike those 'old times', a crash doesn't take the entire machine down (usually -- I've had opera do just that).
You've posted this URL a couple of times in the comments by now. Maybe you should report it to Opera instead? What is the "trivial (and common) code" you are referring to? What is the actual problem?
Clever signature text goes here.
In Soviet Russia we use BT more than any where else. Opera's demographic shows 99% of we Soviet users use Opera (is very true). Hence, we welcome our BT client.
How about adding an Opera topic to Slashdot? It seems popular enough. (I swear by Opera myself.)
Actually my collegues found the bug, and they have already reported it to opera weeks ago.
do they allow focus on non-'input' elements via TABINDEX yet?
Opera's email client is awseome in general (and is usually my primary email client) -- but there is one issue that I've found that they have yet to fix: IMAP mail...
It's a bit of a weird one: If you use a non-opera email client (with IMAP, at least -- I don't use POP), and that email client is the first to see a new message, there are a few issues. (Say, you use your 'company mandated' email client to get the mail at work, then Opera at home.)
Opera doesn't acknowledge the existence of emails that have been first detected with a non-opera browser. I noticed this because I kept looking for particular emails that had seemed to vanish on me. I finally noticed the problem -- Opera simply wasn't detecting the messages. They were sitting there in my inbox, but Opera coudln't see them.
Otherwise, I've been using the Opera 9 (beta) series, and I've been quite pleased.
-- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
Another quality browser joins Konqueror and Safari in beating ACID2.
Hey Firefox & IE - stop lagging behind!
You posted that link a few minutes ago as well. Did you file bug reports with clear testcases, or are you just whining here? Offset properties are underspecified, so hard to implement - something Opera is working on at the moment.
If you don't like having choices made for you, you should start making your own. - Neal Stephenson
Surely this is a personal point of view? You might very well argue that Opera is better programmed, or more efficient, or does a better job of rendering pages, but just "better" is a subjective assertion.
I'm impressed with Opera, but until it supports the same level of extensions, I personally wouldn't class it as "better" (as otherwise, I'd be using it!)
Gentoo FTW!
Obligatory blog plug: http://www.caseybanner.ca/
Now if they'd just release a U3 or "PortableApps" version then I could use it. It's a shame too, because it's such a great product.
uhm, it actually works with the new 9.0 stable release. Atleast I couldn't see any error ...
Have you guys looked at the Nostalgia style?
Definitely a stroll down memory lane if you were into computers in the 80s.
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
Yes, because if there's one thing I need in a web browser, it is the ability to click a white box around inside a blue box.
Without this feature I might as well browse the web with a banana!
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Why is this modded redundant? I personally don't agree with it either, but that's no reason to mod it down.
i don't know where you got your information from, perhaps some incredibly early beta, but Opera 9 actually does most of what you list. perhaps you need to take a second look...
you _can_ see no. peers/seeds
you _can_ set bandwidth limits
you _can_ see transfer speed
now, you can't see details for individual peers, but frankly who cares? i've been using azureus for ages, but as the opera 9 previews have matured, i now find myself using opera's built-in capabilities 99% of the time, because it's nice and light, not a resource hog like azureus, even for large torrents...
i'd suggest you take a second look, it's better than you seem to think.
Today) Opera has missed the boat. They may have more features and more neat and whizzy things in a tigher package than anyone else, but they don't have the few things people want. Firefox is The Way and what I use when I want anything more than raw reading capability. The delays in getting versions out shows just how dead the "We'll do all the work for you" model is.
I'm sorry guys. I'm glad I could support you when IE was free, but you're just not fast enough or extensible enough.
A lesson for everyone) If you change the UI you put me into a position where I have the learn something new. It could be new elements, new keystrokes, or removing old keystrokes that used to work. Ultimately, if I have to learn something new to use you're product, I might as well learn something new to learn a product that works a little better. People like to be comfortable. If you force them to change, don't expect them to just change a little.
I have always loved the Opera browser, I really think it is the best browser available out there. Fast, standards complaint, everything well integrated together, it has also a very clean, nice, intuitive and easy to use interface. I really was a huge Opera fan. However I had to give up and stop using it essentially for one reason: it does not work well with new Google products. Gmail used to break every other week, maps didn't scrolled properly, I never managed to properly render the calendar. Dunno who's fault is this Opera for not implementing some relevant stuff heavily used by new Google's technology, or Google for heavily using technology on which there is still not yet a standard. I am now downloading the new Opera 9.0 to see it for myself, but does anybody knows whether the situation has improved, or if there is at least some interest on either party to solve this very frustrating problems??
A real disappointment is that you have to use "Wand" to manage passwords. I wish it would integrate with Apple's keychain and Apple's bookmarks. Then I could sync it more easily. I guess the Mac market isn't large enough for them to create better NAtive support for OS X.
Opera uses its own custom HTML rendering engine, called Presto. I think it's been around longer than KHTML.
~ Aero
Is the non-native interface. I like all my apps to look and behave the same way. Custom interfaces was cool with winamp 2.x.
I used Opera for years, but once firefox hit 1.0, I switched. I kept trying new Opera versions, but they fell short in compatability area or content control like Flashblock that I just couldn't live without.
But now with all the per site configuration, I may finally switch back. Per site identities, per site masking, per site control of multimedia; These were things I always said Opera needed to deal with a poor web pages. The diehard Opera heads would always tell me we have the change all the bad web sites. Being a realistic person, I knew that wasn't going to happen. So I stuck with Firefox.
But now I am ready to give Opera another shot. It was a great browser, now with more control and compatability, it may be back in my books.
Bravo Opera dudes.
when i right click on a plain image i get the 'block content' menu item just fine, but when i right click an image enclosed in a link i no longer get the option. eg, right clicking on the ads on slashdot does not give me an option to block content. is anyone else having this problem or is it an OSX specific bug?
TIAEAE!
One thing that I really couldn't stand about Opera was the way it handled RSS feeds. I've gotten so used to the Live Bookmark feature in Firefox, that it has become my preferred way to briefly review the RSS feeds from sites like Slashdot. If Opera had that capability, I would consider switching. Until then it's Firefox for me.
All your sig are belong to us.
The test page doesn't validate (no doctype, for one). What is the 'correct' behaviour in quirks mode? Have you tried it with a validating page?
If Browser==Firefox
{
It's not the browser's fault=True;
Sun shines out of browser's extensions=True;
}
else
{
It's not the browser's fault=OfCourseItIs;
Sun shines out of browser's extensions=LMAO;
}
Opera is now more standards compliant than Firefox. If you care about web standards, you should use the browser that supports them most fully. I love firefox, but I recognize that the existence of web standards is ultimately what allows firefox or any other non microsoft browser to exist. Until Firefox catches up, I'm going to use Opera.
Thanks for keeping Slashdot open minded by trying it out.
My bank, once you log in, does a redirect within a frame of the top using "top.location.href=..." javascript.
Opera doesn't seem to like a redirect to a different domain from within a frame; when I load the inner frame as a top level page, the redirect works fine, it's only from within the frame the javascript doesn't fire.
It's shit like that that keeps me from switchin to it.
I've submitted the issue to them, but I'm sure they just blame the site developers, even though the site works in FF, IE, Safari, and KHTML...
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Off course not. Same as driver airbag is standard safety equipment but say adding passenger airbags doesn't mean you don't.
You can go beyond the standard just as long as the standard still works.
That has always been MS problem, not that they added extra's but they didn't have the standards working.
Or put another way, standards are the minimum requirement. Opera is one of the best in this aspect and is usually the easiest browser to develop for if you code to standards. Just check the amount of work arounds that say IE needs if you write design a page to standards like oh say xhtml and CSS2 vs Opera.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Absolute positioning is in relation to a relatively or absolutely positioned parent/grandparent, etc. If no parent element is relatively or absolutely positioned it defaults to the document body.
I use Opera 8.54 now and will probably wait a few days before trying 9.0.
If Opera 9.0 is bloated, I'm going back to using Opera 8.54 & Firefox (I love Firefox plugins).
One of the most overlooked benefits of using Opera is that it has a better security compared to IE and Firefox. And before you flame about that being caused mostly by marketshare, look at Apache's compared to other Web servers (or qmail's compared to other email servers).
Will it run on Linux?
I mean, will it use shared libraries _and_ be able to deal with foreign characters (like ñ, ã, which is not foreign to me)? Or should I keep using the static version which takes a whole eternity to load -- that is, __after__ I spent about 2 years till I could find a post telling me about the static trick! >8-[ Grrr...
Ah, I can use other browser (like Konqueror or Firefox, and I do use them), but my wife and daughter prefer Opera, which admittedly is a lot friendlier.
Thanks for any response. Well, almost any... 8-P
Your bank uses an open security hole in FF, IE, Safari, and KHTML.
You know what the problem is, and it would be fairly easy for you to write a workaround. Write a UserJS to capture the redirect and make it use W3C DOM standards. Or complain to your bank that their web site is broken; You are giving them your money, after all, they are somewhat beholden to you.
Like it or not, there is no 'top' in the W3C DOM. I haven't done frames in a while, but I believe it's 'parent' instead. The web site developers that wrote your bank's software aren't worth their salt.
BTW: I should mention that my captcha down below is, and I am not making this up, "ponies".
Opera 9 has a super sweet Error Console - awesome for debugging JS errors. Does anyone have a clue how to open it inside the panels module? It's just to annoying to have it in a separate window.
TIA!
Thanks for the reply.
I use another you don't mention, but since I'm planning to switch, this will be no longer a problem.
Though I favour free software, I have to admit my wife and daughter are right: it's a fine work of software craftsmanship.
Right off the bat I was able to find an improvement in performance that I've been hoping I'd see.
I have a folder of about 20 bookmarks that I click to open when I open the browser. In Opera 8.54, and probably 3 or 4 different builds of Opera 9 beta, loading those 20 bookmarks would cause Opera to get a bit sluggish and mouse gestures wouldn't function correctly. Typically the minimize and close tab gestures would trigger a new tab being opened. Finally that isn't happening. Glad to see they've streamlined it and gotten it running more smoothly.
1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
Most people won't care, I'm sure, but Opera's cookie management, while better than Opera 8.5's (which was pretty damn useless), still fails to be of much use.
...sort of. It seems like the "accept all cookies" and "accept only cookies from the site I visit" do the same thing, because even with the latter I get a bunch of cookies from the advertisements Slashdot displays. This just doesn't happen on Firefox.
Good: You can actually do whitelisting now.
Bad:
It seems that, when it comes to cookies at least, Opera doesn't differentiate between the site you're visiting and the server that feeds ads to that site. It's a damn shame...
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
My mistake, there is a window.top, but it allows a frame to run scripts across frames, which means that Opera is probably throwing a Security Error. It's very sensitive to anything that smells like a cross-site-scripting attack.
The fix would be sucking the JS out of the frame and executing it from the frameset document. It's a stupidly easy fix to pull off.
And the downloads on my 1200 baud modem are really slow.
Are you sure this is a better version?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
As you said, the javascript is valid, and I think Opera is tigher on the security than it needs. What happens with that redirect I suspect is that they've written their own load balancer instaed of using a transparent one. So you get readirected from server.domain.com to server33.domain.com for example. Opera shouldn't see that a security hole. You are being redirected within the same domain to a different subdomain. Hardly a security hole, considering your on a signed https site.
Yes I can work around it, but I can just use Firefox instead until Opera fixes that.
I like Opera a lot - I think it's really slick, and it's refreshing to see a browser that doesn't consume obscene resources unlike Firefox.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
The opera site suffers from stupid looking stock photography.
> So you get readirected from server.domain.com to server33.domain.com for example.
> Opera shouldn't see that a security hole. You are being redirected within the same
> domain to a different subdomain.
This is not generally true. See foocompany.co.uk -> badone.co.uk
This is not generally true. See foocompany.co.uk -> badone.co.uk
AFAIK, co.uk is not a domain... foocompany.co.uk is not a subdomain of co.uk...
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
You, sir, are incorrect.
Even "." (the root nameserver) is a fully adressable domain, and may host webservers (among other things). For a good example, try http://tv./
Doesn't Opera by default do some prefetching of link pages?
Can't find anything about it since Op7 when it was a key-combo operated feature.
Actually I used FF for year, but it annoyed me by it's permanent crashes and unstable work. Extensions - great plus, but I don't see any extensions I can't live without in Opera. Opera - my choose. Especially after they released, and some serious bugs were fixed.
The exe and dlls are packed, so the real size is bigger
Agreed, just because a troop of idiot zealots try to erase all references to FF malfunctions doesn't mean the product is that bad - after all, they all are. But this makes my blood boil to see that these same fuckheads are against "teh Big M$ evil" because they try scare tactics against open source etc. Yet, they do just the same.
As for Opera, I've been using it for quite a few years. I always try to be as open-minded as I can, and stopped to be a product or group or anything-zealot when I turned 15, so even though I was fully satisfied with Opera, when FF came out I tried it. It's still installed today, and I keep updating it when new releases come out. But to summarize my FF experience:
- It's a resource hog. I know the memory leak bug is actually a feature; to me it makes it even worse. And putting that particular bug apart, it takes ages to load it on any machine/OS I tried it on
- If you use it out-of-the-box, it's just plain uggly. It's all squares and rectangles with awful gray all around.
- Also, still out-of-the-box, compared to Opera, it has no interesting feature
- That's where extensions come in: you have 14 billions extensions, 75% of which are useless. In the remaining 25%, there are a lot that just do the same, only in a different way. Extension a has this that the b has not and vice-versa. Since you want those 2 features, you should install both extensions, but when you do it explodes.
- Then you update your browser with the latest version and BANG! there's ALWAYS a couple of extensions, even sometimes skin, that will break.
There are other little annoyances but these are my main complaints about it. Right now I use FF only for a couple of websites that don't render well in Opera. But if these sites are fixed in Opera 9, then I'll ditch FF forever without any regret.Before you flame me, I'm not saying FF is a piece of shit (even though it may seem so). It's a good effort to make a nice browser, but it ain't there just yet, and I boycott it moslty because of the zealots hanging around it. I don't care too much about zealots usually (I wouldn't read
And then he said: "I'll tell you the meaning of life. It is" and then realized 120 chars are definitely not enough...
ain;t that a ansi editor for bbs's by the ansi ascii group called....not ice, um...damn i gotta fire up my old bbs again
I agree with the parent that the built-in BitTorrent client isn't what I want. I prefer uTorrent, and its user interface, and all the visual information it gives you, and the amount of control it gives you over your directory structure. I currently have Opera configured to use uTorrent instead.
What really frickin amazes me is how seamlessly it all integrates when you disable the internal BT client and decide to use your own. There's no "open with" box that pops up, nor is there Firefox's signature empty popup. It just opens up your default BitTorrent program and lets it sort it out. And if you use a program like uTorrent where you can make it download to a default directory without asking, it means you click once and it starts downloading right where you want it.
Every time I open a torrent in my installation of Opera, I breathe a little sigh of relief for just how easy it was. This will probably continue until I'm hopelessly spoiled by it, as I've become with Opera's mouse gestures.
Setting up Opera to do this was not as easy as I might have liked (Tools -> Preferences -> Advanced -> Downloads -> application/x-bittorrent -> Edit -> Open With Default Application), but I'm pretty amazed that a non-default behavior works this well.