Slashdot Mirror
Opera 10.0 Released, With Integrated Web Server Functionality
sherl0k writes "Opera 10.0, dubbed Opera Unite, has been released. Built into the Web browser is a full-fledged Web server, complete with nifty little gadgets such as a 'fridge' that people can post notes onto, a chat room, a widget to stream your music library anywhere, and a built-in file-sharing mechanism. It also scores 100/100 on the Acid3 test."
Readers fudreporter and TLS point to The Register's report on the new release and a
5-minute video demo, respectively. Update: 06/16 15:18 GMT by T: Roar Lauritzsen of Opera Software writes to point out that "release" isn't quite the right word here; though you can download it, version 10.0 is still in beta, and the version with Unite is a labs (experimental) release.
No kitchen sink?
I'm sure all seven Opera users will be thrilled.
Pretend for a second that I don't know anything about Acid 3. Pretend I'm just a regular Joe-sixpack web user.
Why should I care that my browser scored 100/100 on the Acid 3 test?
Acid test tests only the compatibility with the standards. It says nothing about how vulnerable the executable is in the hands of malicious web masters.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Somewhere in the summary you REALLY should mention this is an ALPHA release, not a final release.
Thanks.
Pretty funny user name for the person giving the demo in the video hehe "niclescooter"...
Hope is the currency of fools
I'm posting this from Opera 10. It seems quite different from the last version. Slashdot looks very, very good. To enable the file sharing, you have to click the "+" tab at the bottom and explicitly enable the web serving goodness. It includes a media player, to share your music collection around. I think we might have a game changer here. hanzie.
********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
It's a botnet writer's wet dream; a victim that will host your exploit once you've pwned it.
We can only hope that it's secure, or else the two dozen people who actually use Opera will be very unpopular indeed, at least until the RIAA has then rounded up for sharing their tunes with (world + dog).
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
The single biggest hurdle I see (at least one that they don't immediately address in TFA) is that most ISP's block incoming TCP connections on port 80. Even if the port is forwarded on the end user's router, many will still be unable to host their own sites without using a custom port.
Looks great, except that 10.0 isn't released yet, and Opera Unite is a "labs build", aka alpha release.
I don't think it's a good idea to run a web server on the average user's PC for security reasons. If there is a web server running on an un-patched (or not patched up to date, rather) and improperly firewalled it could be compromised in a small amount of time. Seeing as many have personal data on their PC as well this makes it worse. Plus, isn't it common practice to separate web servers from the rest of a network also for security reasons?
Yeah.....I don't think I'll be clicking that link, and I wouldn't recommend others do either.
"During My Service In The United States Congress, I Took The Initiative In Creating The Internet." -Al Gore
Ugh, so now geeks uptimes will be rivalled by their mums trying to host their latest ramblings 24x7 through Opera.
In a world where we are trying to lower power consumption I somehow get the feeling this won't help.
Building a firewall-piercing file server into a browser, a program which typically has full network and file system access, is going to cause many incidents of accidental file sharing.
Why does a web browser have full access to the file system, other than read-only access to its own "program" and "files to upload" folders and read-write access to "user profile", "cache", and "downloaded files" folders?
Wait, wait, wait... Opera 10 is still in beta and there is a clear distinction between Opera "the browser" and Opera Unite, which is probably in alpha state. So, do not confuse Opera 10 Web Browser with the new Opera Unite buzz word. How hard can it be to understand that?
Yo dawg, I heard you like surfing, so we put a web server in your browser so you can surf while your surf!
What about auto-updates?
This is something what prevents me from even considering Opera as main web-browser.
IE (in a way) does it. Chrome does it. FireFox does it. Opera - doesn't.
All hope abandon ye who enter here.
So when was the last time you tried Opera? I still use Firefox for a few things, and even IE, but the vast majority of my web browsing is done in Opera. It's faster, it's cleaner, mouse gestures are installed by default, and I like the way they use tabs better. With 10, the speed-dial tool actually got to be slightly useful, which I hadn't expected. It's been ages since I found a site that just plain didn't work in Opera, except ones that require ActiveX, and those don't work all that well in Firefox, either.
So why the hatred? Given that it's just a browser, and can't have killed your dog/cat/relative, I don't get it.
If you don't like it, don't use it. But don't insult those of us who find it to be a more usable browser.
Unfortunately, it still looks completely out of place.
This is the problem with software. They try and try to add more functionality to it, that 90% of the users do not use. This creates more and more chances for security flaws, and makes the software very bloated. How many users actually want to run their version of a browser, as a server. Leave those things as add-ons, and the person that wants them can "add" them.
Obviously you care enough to reply. AC retard.
"I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
Despite the obvious differences the whole thing somehow reminded me of Google Wave. It seems when the time of an idea comes (distributed communication service, every user can run a server easily, something like that) then different teams come up with similar solutions independently without knowing about each other's work.
The apparent drawbacks of Opera Unite are bandwidth problems when running locally (e.g. ADSL upload speed) and the services being dependent on your computer being turned on.
Google Wave seems more promising in the long run.
If you're completely uninterested in this browser, why are you reading this thread? let alone posting. If you're truly bored, there's an ascii goatse link in an earlier thread above.
That goatse link, plus some tissues, should afford you at least an hour's relaxation and enjoyment. And if you're using Opera, you can go to the Tools -> "Delete Private Data" after you're done cleaning the floor and your screen. Nobody will ever know.
********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
You should reread and look at what is actually going on.
Why will this not lead to a hackers wet dream? Static HTML, no scripting language so nothing like php vulnerabilities or access to anything except what the browser allows you to. The file shares are running from a folder that you select to share. This makes a VERY nice way to share big files with your friends. Access is not publicly advertised, you have to invite somebody to have access. If they do give some dynamic features it will be in the form of widgets (which themselves are sandboxed) and gives them a lot of control over what those widgets are and aren't allowed to do.
A number of these features seem akin to devices such as slingbox which let you pick up your home tv from anywhere and gives you access to your material anywhere you go.
Opera already has chat functionality so hosting its own IRC or whatever isn't a big jump.
I find it funny the google talks about wave and everybody is all gaga over it but opera is bring something similar that is not hosted and its horrible.
You do understand that my point was to give something that seems to work(acid test 100/100 in this case) a least a second chance,right?
There's no patch for stupidity
That said, YMMV.
Why does a web browser have full access to the file system, other than read-only access to its own "program" and "files to upload" folder[...]
It has filesystem access because, even without a file server component, users want to upload files
Uploading a file doesn't need file system access; it needs file chooser access. In the Sugar toolkit used by OLPC's XO laptops, for instance, apps that let the user select a file send a request to the file chooser service, which then opens the file and passes the equivalent of a file descriptor to the app. (In fact, a Sugar app's installer doesn't even let a single program request both directory listing and network connection privileges; the user has to apply them manually after the fact.) Another way to do this is to have the user use the operating system's file manager to copy the file into "files to upload" before uploading it, and then the "Browse" button behaves more like the pop-up menu that a <select> element creates.
Meanwhile, it is completely reasonable to run Opera and Firefox simultaneously. I do it all the time, and for exactly the reasons you are mentioning above. In fact, I'm doing it right now on an XP system.
There are some websites that I want firefox for, and there are others that opera works better for. With the advent of tabbed browsing and the ability to open a folder full of links on each, bookmark sharing is much less a concern.
********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
Unfortunately, it still looks completely out of place.
It's highly functional. Of course it looks out of place on a Mac.
The latest stable release of Opera is 9.6.
This is an Opera Labs release with a new (and btw. great) functionality. That's why it is listed on the Desktopteam Blog.
Its version number also says it's 10.00 Beta.
Now it seems that they are following MS lead by providing proprietary bloat instead cross platform functionality.
Huh? I run Opera on Windows, various Linux distros, Mac and Open Solaris, you can also find it in use on Wii, Symbian, FreeBSD, Windows Mobile, Nintendo DS. That's not enough platforms for you?
"I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
1. Grandma doesn't know what a web browser is.
2. the web server is disable by default.
i can just see it now... your mom calls from her vacation abroad: "Hey! How you doing? Can you turn your laptop on i want to show uncle henry your photos of the wedding", "mom, it's 3am... i wish i had put my photos on flckr!"
They are not going to kill the WAN if they are blocked by the firewall.
Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
More to the point, does it feel Mac-like? Or do the text fields still have different click and {control,option,command}-{left,right} behaviour to every other text field in the system?
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
I couldn't agree more. I understand that Unite is a P2P/Groove retread. Still, creating a massive new vector for a botnet doesn't strike me as a responsible thing to do for a software maker.
Did they just slap a GUI on Emacs?
*Runs away*
/* No Comment */
With this release, they also wanted to take free software to the next level. Now anyone can own it.
Living in Chile
But it doesn't change the fact that I don't want a web SERVER built into my web BROWSER. I'll get Apache separately, thanks.
This reminds me of Nero. Once a nice, light-weight CD burn software product, it is now so full of other cr*p that you have to spend 10 minutes going through the install menu pruning almost everything off.
Thumbs down Opera. Those that needed it, already installed IIS or Apache on their machines. Those that wanted to share sh*te already installed Limewire or some other evil P2P product.
I disagree. It looks like Opera on a Mac ought to look. It doesn't perfectly integrate into the Mac desktop because it isn't Safari. That, my friends, is actually a good thing.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
The same way you didnt think your post through--a quick read through the comments (not even the article!) reveals that its NOT integrated into opera, its a widget aka addon. "I hear you can get virus extensions for firefox, so clearly mozilla is retarded". What?
My unscientific tests of Opera 10 (i.e. about an hour, this afternoon) hasn't had any problems with vids, so far - even though FF is firmly screwed.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
This simply opens up one, quite specific, point of attack through an application which has a fairly good track record for security.
I can see how, on the face of it, getting entry level users to run web servers is opening you up to some attacks, but in a cost benefit analysis I still think it is a winning move. Besides, it is a web server specifically aimed at entry level users; if Opera have any sense security will have been their main focus.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
that my printer has a web server built in. Now my browser is going to have one too?????
Just one more thing to patch
Build a Man a 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.
...will find out what the "A" stands for when three people access their photos and they get slashdotted (along with everybody else on their ADSL circuit, probably).
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
Not saying it's not posted somewhere, but I'd REALLY like to know the security behind Unite before touching it with a ten foot pole
It won't be much of an issue - most users are behind a NAT device so are not easily (for joe sixpack) going to be able to enable the webserver part. A lot of other apps have embedded webservers in them (think torrent apps and firewalls!) to remotely control them anyway, so its not like this is going to make a significant increase in the number of computers that are already "botnet-enabled".
But... lets assume it works really well, and is secure (eg only serves static html pages or carefully written add-on modules written by people who know what they're doing). Maybe this could be IPv6's killer app.
The "Fishbowl" browser had an integrated web server.
http://web.archive.org/web/20010502014727/chronofish.com/FishBowl/
-CF
They'll integrate Emacs next.
This sig is intentionally left blank
Because users wont want to learn to stick stuff in the "files to upload" folder
Likewise, users wont want to learn to run non-administrative apps as a non-administrator.
Tis good for freedom, as censors and rent-seekers have an easier time going after more centralized servers; imagine if this browser had come out a few months earlier and now been semi-widespread in Iran. The government would've been chasing their tails trying to stamp out a huge amount of 'immoral' content, rather than just having to block a stream of tweets.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
I've never understood this complaint. At least to me, Zoom is *better* than text size changes as it preserves the layout of the page, and I would guess thats why IE et al added the Zoom feature. Secondly, at least in Opera, you could just set a minimum text size in the options, and then you'd never need to change text size anyway because it would always be whatever you defined a readable size or larger...
In what way is just changing text size helpful vs the zoom functionality?
Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3
If we really take ISP terms serious, most ISPs disallow running a COMMERCIAL (selling goods etc.) web server on your personal line, they aren't really concerned about personal web hosting especially if your "visitors" are just a bunch of friends.
For ISP router, there is no difference between putting a 1 gig file to rapidshare (with very questionable policies) or directly posting it over port 80.
BTW, soon or later, this thing will hit mobile opera. Nokia has a similar, full function web server already which even uses Python. Thing is, if Opera lacks publicity in that sense, Nokia doesn't even exist! What I mean is, networks and cell phone companies will love this just like they love Opera Mini.
How many times did they have to refresh the acid 3 test page? I just tried 4 times in Firefox 3.0.11 and got 4 different scores.
Opera PPC OS X is just 12 MB, the actual executable is way below it.
In fact, if you dig deeper, you figure the amazing fact. Core renderer is below 1 MB. Yes, 1 MB of ultra portable pure C is the "Opera". Rest is done via the functionality it already has. E.g. lsof when you use the "bulky" IRC function of Opera, you will see the thing you see as "IRC" is actually a web page along with CSS!
Same with the "Web server". It must be amazingly tiny, even less than the rendering engine since it is clear that they are heading to mobile with this.
Opera and Firefox has different development models, concepts and even targets. Ask Firefox developers if they will remove 80% of code just because they want the exact same binary to run on my horribly outdated, OS dead UIQ3 Sony Ericsson P1i. That is what Opera does.
With Google, Google Backed Mozilla, MS Backed IE, Apple backed Webkit, I really don't think Opera dreams about "World Domination!". Look at these silly people, they want to boycott Opera because MS backed blogs called for it. Why? EU judicial system investigates MS (did you see IE icon's size on Win 7?) and MS pulled one of "I am taking my toys and going home" tricks again by not including IE in EU Windows. So, it is all Opera's fault now (as they can't mess with Google/Firefox) and they want to boycott Opera (as if they ever used!).
I mean, as ordinary user, I can see the stupidity but they can't? I bet they do and they never dreamed of being some 20-30% market share browser because of these facts which aren't really too technical.
Your assumption is that every WAN site in a global/distributed enterprise is firewall isolated. The more accurate assumption would be the protocols that CAN be black holed would be at layer 2/3 (at the WAN routers) rather than firewalled. The problem will be identifying the protocols and praying that they aren't tunneling it all over HTTP/port 80 or HTTPS/port 443.
Armaments, 2-9-21 And Saint Attila raised the hand grenade up on high, saying, 'O Lord, bless this Thy hand grenade' N
So Opera's going to transform and combine to form a giant robot?
Bow-ties are cool.
Methinks some ISPs aren't going to like this once it is released "for real".
From Comcast's TOS:
Prohibited Uses of HSI. You agree not to use HSI for operation as an Internet service provider, a server site for ftp, telnet, rlogin, e-mail hosting, "Web hosting" or other similar applications, for any business enterprise, or as an end-point on a non-Comcast local area network or wide area network.
An optional feature that can presumably be completely disabled or not even installed in an enterprise installation disqualifies it as an enterprise browser candidate...why, exactly?
"OMG! OMG! Opera is leveraging their dominant position in the web browser market to unfairly compete with Apache! Why does everybody whine when Microsoft does this and Opera gets away scot free?"
Because Miscorosft doesn't actually have anything that really competes with Apache.
Need Mercedes parts ?
You forget, Opera is one of the companies behind the EU trying to force Microsoft to install other browsers on the new operating system. So if this goes through, guess how many millions of web serving zombies will be out there by gramdma and grandpa or even your mom and dad who just bought the PC and don't know what opera is don't care and let alone it is sitting there serving web pages. I mean seriously did we lean nothing with Windows 200o default install of IIS.
Webserver, extras etc ? I wish it had a browser....:-)
Dear Rogerborg,
We have received information that you are performing illegal public broadcasts of your music to dogs.
Cease and desist this activity! Dogs have no way of paying for the possibility of hearing our music.
We also expect proper compensation for each song you have already played for dogs. Our legal team has calculated that $2000 is a reasonable sum to ask for each song.
Do not make us take you to court.
Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
"The acid 3 test is good, but so last year. Here is what would be cool. A mechanism that would allow the browser to use firefox plugins. Opera does not seem to have the wealth of plugins that firefox does, and from what I can tell, plugins is why people use firefox. Instead of wasting effort, why not make Opera so it can use the Firefox model?"
True 'dat.
Every now and then I try Firefox. Every time it seems, by comparison to Opera, a klunky, slow, featurelss POS. I can never understand why most of my my friends, who seem pretty smart otherwise, use it. In a word: plugins.
Need Mercedes parts ?
"This reminds me of Nero. Once a nice, light-weight CD burn software product, it is now so full of other cr*p that you have to spend 10 minutes going through the install menu pruning almost everything off."
It's not just Nero, it's everything. Norton Ghost stopped being useful at version 11.5, a 7 meg program. Version 14 is like 600 megs and isn't functionally that better.
http://oldversion.com/ is your friend.
Need Mercedes parts ?
FYI it's not Opera that everyone hates, it's people like you that everyone hates. Opera is doing good things for the internet, what are you doing?
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Finally, someone that beats Opera on the "oh, but opera had it first" ;)
http://stoploudness.org/
First of all, I really like Opera, I use it all the time for browsing and email alongside Firefox and Iron, and will continue using it as a web browser.
So I was thrilled to read about this new feature in 10 beta version, downloaded it and installed it on a test system. Turns out if you want to use the new feature you'll have to register with their "network". Sorry, but my privacy is worth a little more than the convenience that this new feature provides over the current apps used for the functions it's supposed to cover.
I guess we'll need to wait for Google Wave to come around (brought to you by the creators of google maps) - just saw this video and was very impressed. It lets you upload pics, messages etc. as if you had a webserver, but is far more interactive. If you run your own server node (and encrypt your data) there shouldn't be any security or privacy concerns either, because you can decide what data gets out to third parties (incl. Google). Best of all it's open source using open standards - anyone can write extensions or fork.
And when you gaze long enough into the code, the code will also gaze into you.
They even do releases, including this beta, for Linux on PPC. Which is something the Firefox team does not do. Just installed it on my PS3 running YDL 6.1
Troll? What the hell are the mods smoking today?
I'm not getting the graphics problem, but I do have a problem which has actually just happened again reading through these comments. I use Opera and have just migrated to Ubuntu from Windows (Hooray!) My problem is that once in a while - maybe once a day - Opera just disappears. One minute it's there, then it's gone. It starts up again OK, and will unfailingly start where it left off (including logged-in to /.) if I ask it to, but it's bloody annoying. Is this a Ubuntu thing...it never did it in Windows? Gnome, by the way, if that's important.
Smivs on the intertubes!
Why is this bad? I mean, I basically ignore facebook and myspace already... Just a few 100 million more websites out of the billions I already don't look at... I thought the web already got over the elitism of the "eternal september" mentality...
Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3
So put the server on your mobile phone (if you have a Nokia): http://mymobilesite.net/. Opera is hardly being original here ...
Jilles
Opera making a laughable ploy to stay relevant by putting more crap in the browser is hilarious. Like there aren't a myriad of products _dedicated_ to sharing your own content.
Well, it's not that it's a huge issue, but I don't know that one should dismiss it as 'elitism'. Look, by your own admission, there are already "billions" of websites you don't look at; nothing wrong with that. All I'm saying is, where is the value added by making it easy for a person who is probably not very likely to have a lot of web design expertise to put up a web page/pages?
Maybe it's just me, but I do tend to get annoyed when I'm searching for something, and have to root through a few hundred search engine results that are either 'parked' sites populated with various keywords and advertisements, or some personal blog with no real information. I'm not saying that everything on the internet needs to be of a certain type, and I'm certainly not meaning to advocate any type of elitism. However, I don't think I'm the only one who's apt to be annoyed when the number of 'junk' sites jumps up because now every person who's capable of installing a browser can host web sites and just starts sticking 'whatever' up because....well....because they can.
I can just imagine how many amateur internet entrepreneurs we're going to have making websites and filling them with AdSense banners and borders in the hopes of making millions. To extend the thought, given that hosting costs won't factor in (since the data will be hosted on the users' computers), won't it be a lot easier to create a lot more of these advertising only sites? Heck, as far as I can tell, there won't be any costs for domain registration, so it's going to be quite easy to throw up endless sites full of nothing but spam/advertisements/astroturfing. True, the domain names won't exactly be friendly, but some clever keyword manipulation could get site noticed by search engines.
Look, maybe I'm way off on this, it's late afternoon and I could use some caffeine, so there's no telling. But I'm definitely not trying to be elitist.
1. Grandma doesn't know what a web browser is.
Doesn't matter. If Opera wants to expand its market share, it needs to be developed with computer illiterates in mind, because to expand its market share, it needs to be adopted by more than just geeks.
2. the web server is disable by default.
LimeWire doesn't share your "my passwords.doc" file by default, either.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Grandma is a reasonable example despite some viable arguments otherwise. The point is that yes, this could work for Grandma. Few at my age have our own grandmother available to explain this to, but my mother is a grandma and I could explain it to her. She already knows how to take pictures with her digital camera, upload it to her computer and email it to her family. Soon they'll switch from dial-up to high speed (probably in the next couple months) and this could potentially save a good bit of time and effort for her. This is something I could explain over the phone as opposed to having to drive six hours to visit in order to set up an actual password protected web server.
Not that I'm sure this would be worth the effort, or that it would work as intended a week after I talked her through it, but that's beside the point.
B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
"Yeah, IIS7 is sufficiently far ahead of Apache in almost every way that you're right - Microsoft doesn't have to compete with Apache. "
Thank you Mr. Ballmer. Any other fantasies you'd care to share with us today?
Need Mercedes parts ?
"Does it look Mac-like yet?"
Download the right theme and it can. My 15 year old daughyter did this.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Ha, I posted about this 4 days ago on my blog, http://digg.com/tech_news/Opera_is_about_to_change_the_world
Some poor schmuck said "Huh. This must be the most clueless of the clueless speculations so far." and I was pretty close IM(NS)HO.
Jonaskoelker's Irony Meter
Jonaskoelker's irony meter has encountered a problem and needs to close. We are sorry for the inconvenience.
If you were in the middle of something, the irony you were working on may be lost.
Please tell Beelsebob about this problem.
We have created an irony report that you can send to help us laugh at Internet Explorer. We treat this report as hilarious and highly entertaining.
To see which nuggets of irony the report contains, click here.
"Opera already have a very nice version resized to fit in a PDA and it's integrated with Google Gears persistence. It would be a *perfect* execution plataform but unfortunately Windows Mobile is so buggy that it deactivates the IP stack if you're not physically connected to the network so it's impossible to run an offline version of the application. But if Opera includes an embedded web server... "
This is the most insightful and cogent point made on this whole page.
And what he said about windows on phones. Holy crap what a disaster. I've seen more people return phones because they kept "freezing" than I can shake a stick it. Funny how it only happens to phones running windows. And from what I've seen it happened to all of them among people I know in the area.
Gears is indeed a keystone.
Need Mercedes parts ?
"Like being able to make the fonts smaller or larger on pages? (They haven't had this, they "zoom" into the page, which is rubbish)"
Have you actually used it much? If somebody sends you a 4000 x 3000 image, "zoom" to 20% is very useful. Any browser that can't do this is broken.
Moreso, any 320P animation, like, say this real time feed of a beach in Kauai:
http://66.91.152.38/-wvhttp-01-/GetOneShot?image_size=320x240&REQUEST_ID=1229794393811
Looks great on a TV when zoomed 100% and becomes full screen.
Just because you haven't found a use for something doesn't mean it's not worth having.
Need Mercedes parts ?
The beta had like... NONE of these features. What next? OperaOS?
"The introduction of in-built publishing mechanisms (like the web server) seems almost contrary to the concept of cloud computing - in a good way. From what I understand, in a cloud computing world all applications and content are hosted "in the cloud". This of-course brings a lot of ownership (who owns my content?), privacy (who can access my content?), and history (what happens when I want to remove my content?) issues. I suppose if we were to host all our personal info on our own web-browser, we would have full control of every aspect of what and how our content is disseminated. Now, the only problem is the upload bandwidth. "
Cloud computing means the server owners are in charge. Desktop webservers mean the user is in charge. The paradigm is changing.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Whenever a computer person tells you something is possible, believe them.
Whenever a computer person tells you something is impossible or a bad idea, ignore them.
Need Mercedes parts ?
You mean like on mobile phones where Opera started before anyone else? Oh, and Firefox's success came because it focused on the "MS Platform".
Clever signature text goes here.
"i can just see it now... your mom calls from her vacation abroad: "Hey! How you doing? Can you turn your laptop on i want to show uncle henry your photos of the wedding", "mom, it's 3am... i wish i had put my photos on flckr!" "
If yer mum calls you at 3 am looking for photos tell her to quit doing speed.
Need Mercedes parts ?
I'm guessing you've never used IIS7 then. I wouldn't say it's far ahead of Apache, but it is finally on the same level.
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
... isn't this just what the Iranians are looking for? This kind of democratic peer to peer communication removes the need to rely on central social networking sites and puts the internet back in the hands of the people.
I was overstating it a bit, but IIS7 is technologically superior to Apache in almost every way, and provides a superset of functionality as compared to Apache in most areas. Even PHP performs as well now in IIS7.
Good luck in your career as a tech dinosaur, though.
"Grr, Windows bad! Windows Baaad! Me tech dinosaur!"
Enterprises are using IE6 anyway.
We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
You retarded comment no one gives a shit about is 'very, very' annoying.
So obviously you believe this to be preferable to Opera actually making a "better", less bloated, fewer attack vector, "enterprise ready" alternative? BRILLANT!
Armaments, 2-9-21 And Saint Attila raised the hand grenade up on high, saying, 'O Lord, bless this Thy hand grenade' N
Have you tried Opera? Zoom is not better its worse. I don't give a hoot about layout, I want to be able to read the text! But it just enlarges the pictures too so often there is a thin gutter of text and these huuuuuge pictures, often pictures of totally irrelevant rubbish. Totally ridiculous.
Besides, Firefox has a 'only text' switch and generally preserves layout.
"Secondly, at least in Opera, you could just set a minimum text size in the options, and then you'd never need to change text size anyway because it would always be whatever you defined a readable size or larger..."
Yes you would often. Because it may be too large to render the page. The "set a default setting" is something which should have been dumped years ago, that is useless.
"In what way is just changing text size helpful vs the zoom functionality?"
It makes a page readable.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Like have they added the ablity to make the fonts smaller or larger on the fly? (They haven't had this, they "zoom" into the page, which is rubbish)
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
"Have you actually used it much?"
Very briefly - when I can't use a browser to read webpages I'm ditching the junk at once.
"If somebody sends you a 4000 x 3000 image, "zoom" to 20% is very useful. Any browser that can't do this is broken."
WHAT?! Are you totally sick in the head! If someone SENDS me an image, I get that in the email program, and i view it in a picture viewer. That's in no way some idiot browser should be able to do. But if they want to add that, sure fine, who cares, but that doesn't mean they should add superfluous rubbish at the expensive of things which are needed more: Like users being able to read the fucking pages!
"Moreso, any 320P animation,"
Should not be played in a browser.
"Just because you haven't found a use for something doesn't mean it's not worth having."
Yes actually, that's exactly what it does.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
I use Opera daily. It's my primary browser. I almost never need to zoom, but whenever I have, the resulting page is as readable for me as increasing the text size with Firefox, but it preserves page layout and sizing, so as I stated initinally, it is - to my eyes - clearly superior to text only sizing.
Your answer really isn't helpful, because if it was obvious to me why zoom is inferior, I wouldn't have asked the initinal question. If it's just personal preference I can understand that. Perhaps it has to do with HOW large you need to make the text?
Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3