Opera works out of the box. And has more features in less space than FF with a fair share of extensions. Opera however can't compete with all the possible extensions, but it has the best feature set, as you can see that several extensions just copy Opera features.
And with UserJS you can add lots of stuff, so it's not really not extendable as you say.
I wanted a feature to split a window in two parts with the same content, like you can do with MSWord dragging the little box in the top of the side scrollbar. I asked for that in the Opera forums, and half an hour later I had some nice JS that made it for me.
I know I will be modded down as a troll as everytime I mention Opera in/. but here I come anyway:
Opera handles memory better than IE7 and FF1.5/2.0. It doesn't has memory leaks there, and the memory is put to an use: when you go to the previous page, or the fifth previous page in a tab, it is rendered instantly, unlike the other two browsers. And you can configure how much RAM memory do you wish to use as cache, no need to use 512MB if you only want to use 64MB RAM.
Ohhh and 6b) Opera passes the ACID test!
Being fair, 9b) I have to agree, IE7 RSS reader rocks.
First, Lisp is a better language, it has concepts yet to be discovered in most other languages, but you have to study the language and code non trivial examples to grok that, no book or/. comment will help you there.
Second, C++ and PHP are not fads. I can tell that because have used both C++ and PHP since long before I had learned Lisp. Also, C++ and PHP are the ones that give me money, something Lisp has not done yet.
But just last week I was really hoping that PHP had closures and first order functions, as that would have made my job much easier. In fact, that sensation of "well I feel like trapped in this language" is real but anyway it doesn't matter.
Why? because you can code anything in any language. Sometimes what is trivial in Lisp requires a mini-parser in other languages, that is, a little more coding. Or some other technique. but it's equally doable and it doesn't matter what language I use, I still code much faster than my co-workers. And I get things done.
But in direct response to your post, well those academics have a point. Better languages can really give better solutions. However, the bad news are: Lisp stopped evolving a long time ago, with a small rebirth because of P. Graham since about 3 years, but still lacks a good free windows implementation to get all those programers that could need it. Yes, MSWindows is important, as finally PostgreSQL developers discovered, a little late after MySQL had almost all the marketshare. Otherwise USD$2000 is too expensive for a programming language license, if you have to choose between C# or Java and Lisp.
My point? There is a good oportunity to bring a nice GUI enabled BSD licensed version of Lisp for MSWindows (multiplatform would be better) and I would jump to it in a second if it existed.
(Note to lisp zealots: wxCL doesn't cut it, as it simply doesn't compile in my box. And most Lisp implementations are GPL or LGPL and they infect my code. LGLP infects code when linking statically which simply misses the point of ECL. I'm waiting for SBCL on MSWindows. The SBCL license is a good one.)
My sister is a medical student. For most of her seminars and classes she had to read from one to three articles in pubmed every week about very cutting edge research in the subject of the seminar.
I still remember when she told me that in one of her classes the teacher/doctor told the students that one of the former articles were not considered relevant anymore because of a new discovery. Because of that, I believe that medicine is probably the fastest evolving science and with reason, as human life is of primary importance.
Compared to, say, computer science, it advances much much faster. (with the growing of Java and C# instead of Lisp, I feel it has gone a little backwards.)
Unless you're an Opera user. We have that feature for several years now.:P
Re:Speed and direction?
on
An Ode To Al
·
· Score: 1
There is PC DJ (among other DJ software) and also Audacity and related editors.
I would say it is easier to play songs backwards and with different speeds now than in that time. My turntable could not spin backwards and had only three speeds, for a start.
I second that. I have over 40 tabs (formerly known as pages) open in Opera, 7 of them YouTube videos, other are nintendo Wii videos, lots of programming articles, and lots of other stuff. I usually have even more tabs open (like when browsing slashdot or digg). I only have 512MB in RAM.
I can change between the pages dawn fast holding right-click and using the mouse wheel and then use another mouse gesture to go back in the history of any of them and it's fast as hell. In fact the only thing I don't like is that the tabs/pages list is too long and uses two columns instead of one, but that's my fault.
All this while having my programming environment open, sometimes Paint Shop Pro 9 as well and iTunes in the background playing music or an internet radio station. And Opera is still fast.
However to be fair, I have to add, that the superb session management in Opera was a result of the browser crashing a lot in a previous version, I believe it was version 6.
Well, I'm really expecting that a lot of people, most of them corporate users, change to IE7. They won't use anything different than a version of IE.
If that happens I could make my web pages look much better, using features like alpha channel pngs and more modern CSS.
It doesn't matter if I can see the wonderful CSS Garden web pages in all their glory with my faithful Opera, the people that use the applications I code will use IE for the foreseeable future.
Several years ago, Opera was the only modern and fast Web Browser that used and perfected the tabbed browser interface.
Opera was known as "The Tabbed Browser" for such a long time, while Mozilla users debated in their forums about the silliness of tabs.
That's the reason Opera users and developers feels that's unfair all the credit FF has. The same with mouse gestures, pop-up blocking, that you can undo closing a page, the ultra fast history cache, etc.
In fact, FF 1.0 was still a POS compared with Opera while their zealots said FF was much better because of the license. FF 1.5 was the first version usable (for a Opera user), with its fair share of extensions. FF 2.0 could be better than Opera for the first time (we must test it!), however FF has got almost 80% of its 'features specification' from Opera.
If what you say about Claris Works is true, then I'm glad they failed.
I'm sure IBM would have been the same if there were no PC clones. That would have been boring, elitist, unproductive, and we would never had computers at home.
In that sense, MS was a good thing. Not absolutely the best possible thing, but better than the alternatives.
Slashdot Mirror
Whenever someone mentions higher level languages, I think Lisp, not C#.
What is high level when you don't have closures, first order functions, or macros?
Opera works out of the box. And has more features in less space than FF with a fair share of extensions. Opera however can't compete with all the possible extensions, but it has the best feature set, as you can see that several extensions just copy Opera features.
And with UserJS you can add lots of stuff, so it's not really not extendable as you say.
I wanted a feature to split a window in two parts with the same content, like you can do with MSWord dragging the little box in the top of the side scrollbar. I asked for that in the Opera forums, and half an hour later I had some nice JS that made it for me.
How's that for extensibility ?
Sorry I couldn't think anything else after reading the title of your post.
Now zealots mod me down again.
Instead of flaming, I have to agree with you.
BSD is the only one really open.
... but with a different language.
I want a similar technology developed with a language from the Lisp family.
That would really be programmer nirvana.
Would you tell me the URL of these sites?
I would happily report those sites in the Opera forums.
Only 5 tabs? My Opera never has less than 15!
I just counted 21, and Sysinternals process explorer reports 69MB working set.
I know I will be modded down as a troll as everytime I mention Opera in /. but here I come anyway:
Opera handles memory better than IE7 and FF1.5/2.0. It doesn't has memory leaks there, and the memory is put to an use: when you go to the previous page, or the fifth previous page in a tab, it is rendered instantly, unlike the other two browsers. And you can configure how much RAM memory do you wish to use as cache, no need to use 512MB if you only want to use 64MB RAM.
Ohhh and 6b) Opera passes the ACID test!
Being fair, 9b) I have to agree, IE7 RSS reader rocks.
I sort of agree and disagree with you and the GP.
/. comment will help you there.
First, Lisp is a better language, it has concepts yet to be discovered in most other languages, but you have to study the language and code non trivial examples to grok that, no book or
Second, C++ and PHP are not fads. I can tell that because have used both C++ and PHP since long before I had learned Lisp. Also, C++ and PHP are the ones that give me money, something Lisp has not done yet.
But just last week I was really hoping that PHP had closures and first order functions, as that would have made my job much easier. In fact, that sensation of "well I feel like trapped in this language" is real but anyway it doesn't matter.
Why? because you can code anything in any language. Sometimes what is trivial in Lisp requires a mini-parser in other languages, that is, a little more coding. Or some other technique. but it's equally doable and it doesn't matter what language I use, I still code much faster than my co-workers. And I get things done.
But in direct response to your post, well those academics have a point. Better languages can really give better solutions. However, the bad news are: Lisp stopped evolving a long time ago, with a small rebirth because of P. Graham since about 3 years, but still lacks a good free windows implementation to get all those programers that could need it. Yes, MSWindows is important, as finally PostgreSQL developers discovered, a little late after MySQL had almost all the marketshare. Otherwise USD$2000 is too expensive for a programming language license, if you have to choose between C# or Java and Lisp.
My point? There is a good oportunity to bring a nice GUI enabled BSD licensed version of Lisp for MSWindows (multiplatform would be better) and I would jump to it in a second if it existed.
(Note to lisp zealots: wxCL doesn't cut it, as it simply doesn't compile in my box. And most Lisp implementations are GPL or LGPL and they infect my code. LGLP infects code when linking statically which simply misses the point of ECL. I'm waiting for SBCL on MSWindows. The SBCL license is a good one.)
I'll tell her:
sudo do me a blowjob
... when I ask: Is she HOT ?
I'm more a Dogbert fan than a Dilbert Fan.
I mean, the dog rules!
You're soooo right.
My sister is a medical student. For most of her seminars and classes she had to read from one to three articles in pubmed every week about very cutting edge research in the subject of the seminar.
I still remember when she told me that in one of her classes the teacher/doctor told the students that one of the former articles were not considered relevant anymore because of a new discovery. Because of that, I believe that medicine is probably the fastest evolving science and with reason, as human life is of primary importance.
Compared to, say, computer science, it advances much much faster. (with the growing of Java and C# instead of Lisp, I feel it has gone a little backwards.)
I do agree with you.
I want a nice sharp readable big enough resolution for my text. Too many small pixels are not that readable.
In fact most of the web is still designed for 800 or 1024 width.
AMD has a cooler name and Intel has a cooler chip.
Keep using Opera, in the worst case you will have to use "Mask as Firefox" in trouble sites and that's all.
Opera is still better.
Why you can't compare Firefox to Opera on Linux????
Opera has a native QT version for Linux FYI.
Unless you're an Opera user. We have that feature for several years now. :P
There is PC DJ (among other DJ software) and also Audacity and related editors.
I would say it is easier to play songs backwards and with different speeds now than in that time. My turntable could not spin backwards and had only three speeds, for a start.
I second that. I have over 40 tabs (formerly known as pages) open in Opera, 7 of them YouTube videos, other are nintendo Wii videos, lots of programming articles, and lots of other stuff. I usually have even more tabs open (like when browsing slashdot or digg). I only have 512MB in RAM.
I can change between the pages dawn fast holding right-click and using the mouse wheel and then use another mouse gesture to go back in the history of any of them and it's fast as hell. In fact the only thing I don't like is that the tabs/pages list is too long and uses two columns instead of one, but that's my fault.
All this while having my programming environment open, sometimes Paint Shop Pro 9 as well and iTunes in the background playing music or an internet radio station. And Opera is still fast.
However to be fair, I have to add, that the superb session management in Opera was a result of the browser crashing a lot in a previous version, I believe it was version 6.
Well, I'm really expecting that a lot of people, most of them corporate users, change to IE7. They won't use anything different than a version of IE.
If that happens I could make my web pages look much better, using features like alpha channel pngs and more modern CSS.
It doesn't matter if I can see the wonderful CSS Garden web pages in all their glory with my faithful Opera, the people that use the applications I code will use IE for the foreseeable future.
Several years ago, Opera was the only modern and fast Web Browser that used and perfected the tabbed browser interface.
Opera was known as "The Tabbed Browser" for such a long time, while Mozilla users debated in their forums about the silliness of tabs.
That's the reason Opera users and developers feels that's unfair all the credit FF has. The same with mouse gestures, pop-up blocking, that you can undo closing a page, the ultra fast history cache, etc.
In fact, FF 1.0 was still a POS compared with Opera while their zealots said FF was much better because of the license. FF 1.5 was the first version usable (for a Opera user), with its fair share of extensions. FF 2.0 could be better than Opera for the first time (we must test it!), however FF has got almost 80% of its 'features specification' from Opera.
Immune... or infertile ?
If what you say about Claris Works is true, then I'm glad they failed.
I'm sure IBM would have been the same if there were no PC clones. That would have been boring, elitist, unproductive, and we would never had computers at home.
In that sense, MS was a good thing. Not absolutely the best possible thing, but better than the alternatives.
Looks right in Opera. It also loads faster than any FF.