Slashdot Mirror
Comparing Firefox 3 With Opera 9.5 On Linux
Joe Barr writes "Mayank Sharma has two recent stories on Linux.com; one evaluating the performance of Firefox 3, and the second comparing it to Opera 9.5. Which is better? For most people, it's probably more a matter of familiarity or personal preference, but these stories provide hard performance data to consider as well. Sharma notes, 'In terms of rendering JavaScript, Firefox 3 had the edge over Opera 9.5 in the SunSpider JavaScript Benchmark, which has an error range between +/-0.8% to +/-11.3% depending on the type of test. In the JavScript Engine speed test, Opera 9.5 scores over its peers when it comes to error handling, DOM, and AJAX.'"
Slashdot shares a corporate overlord with Linux.com.
I was using Lynx!
With four (count'em, four) good browsers competing for user attention, the evil days of monopoly and stagnation are ending at last. The light of the standards-based Internet is dawning, and "works best with Internet Explorer" is becoming the odd anachronism it deserves to be.
The real challenge/merit is whether Opera 9.5 is accepted by webpages as being able to display all the content correctly, rather than insisting a component isn't there and demanding its download only to be told it's still not there.
That's my complaint about the last version or two of Opera (and I've been using it since 3.5), that I wind up having to break out IE or FF for some pages because just being adherent to the HTML 4 standard isn't enough of a claim anymore.
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
Frankly, with as many features Firefox has copied from Opera, it'd better be good. Don't get me wrong here, I love FF, but there's no denying that some of their "latest greatest" features are ripped straight from Opera.
If Opera was FOSS, the Firefox team wouldn't have had to write nearly as much code. (insert smiley for people who will inevitably think this is completely serious)
Cue mountains of posts pointing out, yet again that oldbar doesn't make it exactly like it used to be, just close.
Opera loads old version of GMail and that works fine, if you want the new version you need to navigate to this link: https://mail.google.com/mail/?nocheckbrowser (which also works fine in Opera)
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
Am I the only one who thinks of this picture every time I hear "Awesome Bar"? It just seems like one of those things that was a placeholder name that never got changed.
Dev 1: Man, what should we call the new multifunction search-address bar?
Dev 2: I dunno, I've been calling it the "awesome bar" in the code.
Dev 1: Damn that's stupid.
Dev 2: Yeah I know, but I can't think of anything better.
Dev 1: Me either, just leave it for now.
And then, over time, everyone just got used to calling it that, and it ended up released that way.
I've been organizing the bars like that since I started using FF, and I find it makes for much better use of that space than just a gray, blank area.
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
Replacing old features with new ones has nothing to do with lacking respect for users, it's about trying to improve the user experience. Not everybody is going to like them, sure; that's true of just about any change you make. The fact that it's possible to download an extension and get pretty close to the behavior people complain they no longer have isn't a strike against Firefox, it's a sign of the robustness of the extensions and community. Apparently extensions aren't permitted to drill so deeply into the core browser that they can change how things are looked up--at least I assume that's why the extension isn't quite the old behavior. That may be good or bad depending on your perspective, but it's certainly safer.
More to the point, most of the posts seem to be: "I just downloaded Firefox and I fucking hate this new address bar!@" I thought we were supposed to be reasonable people here? What happened to giving something a chance before you spit on it and declare Mozilla to be disrespectful of its users for ever having implemented it? For that matter, if these people ever bother to actually give details about what they don't like about it it seems to be basically the order it's returning the results. For example, lots of people complain that typing "en" is no longer bringing up "en.wikipedia.org" as their first result. For one thing, this behavior can be mirror even more closely with a configuration option. It's not in the GUI; bitch about that if you want, but it's there. Beyond that, it's simply more proof that they haven't bothered to give it a chance. The search results are adaptive. The more you type "en" and select "en.wikipedia.org," the more it learns that's what you want. Sounds like a feature to me. All it takes is patience, but clearly most people have none and would prefer to rant about it on forums like this one.
Or bloated, depending on who around here you ask. That alone should clue you in that it's nothing more than a matter of perspective. But let's play along and say you're right. All that goes to show is that there are two camps with regard to things like this: One who believes the best stuff should be merged in or included by default with the browser, and one that believes the browser core should stay as lean as possible and let this functionality be done with add-ons. Opera tends to the former, and Firefox is a bit of a hybrid but tends to the latter. So what? If you really can't be bothered to customize things to your liking, that's fine--use Opera or whatever else you find that suits you. That's really what it's all about in the end. That doesn't mean that the alternate perspective is wrong, though.
Well, you're certainly free to use whichever browser you prefer for whatever reasons you prefer it--I just hope you have better reasons than "default Firefox is barebones," which seems to be all you said here. That smells a bit too much of zealotry to me. At the end of the day I guess it doesn't even matter what it is. *shrugs*
I gave Opera 9.5 a whirl last week and was highly impressed. It's packed with nice features (Where do you think Firefox and IE get most of their ideas?) but still pretty fast and light. Other versions of Opera never did much for me, but this is the first proprietary application that I've run across in a long time that I would seriously consider using on a daily basis. The only areas where it's really lacking are modularity (extensions, instead of everything being built-in to the browser) and of course the fact that it's not free software.
Here's the best example I can think of for this awesome feature.
1) Go to this page in a new tab
2) Now close that tab.
3) In a new tab start typing "Warlord Tiefling" in the location bar.
4) Notice how a link is coming up and how it is highlighting the word as you type it. But if you select it and hit enter, you'll see that the words "Tiefling Warlord" do not appear in the URL.
This is the awesomeness of the awesome bar. It doesn't just search the URL of your history and bookmarks, it searches the page title as well! So while trying to remember the URL for the Warlord Tiefling page would be impossible, the awesome bar means you don't have to.
The fact that most of my extensions are un-installable in the latest version did not help matters.
This made me wonder...Why haven't the coders ported these extensions to Firefox 3.0 if it has been in development for a long time?
I also thought I would be in position to play live CNN streams but I was wrong! Firefox plays the commercial OK but will display a balck screen with sound when it comes to the actual content! Not good enough.
Opera can disable scripts per page or globally, and you don't need a plugin to do that.
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
From TFA:
But Opera 9.5 is no less revolutionary than Firefox, matching its open source rival feature for feature,
That should be:
But Firefox is no less revolutionary than Opera, matching its proprietary rival feature for feature
Do we really need to break out the list of things that Opera developed that are now taken for granted by other browsers?
Yet Opera 6.5 runs GOOD, whether Firefox 3 won't run or just takes ages to start. Only/main advantage of FF is that it's customisable, with all the addons to 'improve the browsing-experience'.
I really appreciate OSS but at the moment Opera is the best browser for my older machines. My 2 cents.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.
about this release is the huge bug with the network home folders not working. I mean, come on guys, is it really that hard to test something like this in a Lin/Mac/Win environment that exists in virtually all of the corporate/academic world to see if this works. Granted the javascript performance is two to three times faster than v2, but if you release it in a state where I can't deploy it because you missed a bug in some library, it's a really hard sell to the PHB if the new whiz-bang version is fuxored.
Sig this!
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
Both Firefox and Opera?
Ignore this signature. By order.
Opera's awesome bar goes a step further, not only does it search the URLs and the titles of your history, but also the content. If I type Warlord Tiefling in Opera 9.5's address bar, I get this page as one of the results, because you motioned it, aussie_a.
Not easy? Okay, so it has "extract" in there, but it's basically the same as a Mac:
Mac: dump application file in location, run application.
Firefox/Linux (since they mention tarball): extract application in location, run application.
Okay, so they used a couple of techie words, but it's not exactly rocket-science (or even make scripts) to use it.
BAH! Who uses the keyboard anymore? It's hold right-click, move down, let-go. Mouse gestures all the way, baby!!!