KHTML is a bit too immature I think. It doesn't handle badly coded sites as well as Opera and Mozilla, and doesn't have as good standards support as them either.
Then again, more users could mean more sites taking KHTML into consideration.
Or continue to use Opera with M2 - browser and e-mail in a 3 MB package.
Then again, whatever suits one's needs. M2 is quite a novel concept to some, so it might take some time getting used to. M2 was first of the "browsers" with access points, or views, as they are called in Mozilla. And it does only access points, not normal folders at all.
Anyway, what I am saying in a way, is that when I try to convince friends and acquaintances to try an alternative browser, I find it far easier to ask them to download 3 MB and get both a browser and an e-mail client (M2 is incredibly easy to use for beginners who haven't gotten into the hell yet), rather than have them download 15 MB (6 MB browser, 9 MB e-mail client). And Opera generally seems to show more pages correctly than Mozilla/Firebird.
Will TB/FB ever be as small as Opera or at least a more decent size? What's being done for MSIE compatibility in Firebird? If my newbie friends can't use their favorite sites they can't use the browser:)
Someone alert the FBI, CIA, KGB, USSR, RIAA, MPAA and whatever they are called! If credit cards can be used to help you steal money, they must be STOPPED IMMEDIATELY!
Mozilla wins over MSIE in the embedded market, while Opera is "too small to make a difference"? Where have you been for the last couple of years?
Has Mozilla actually been used on any embedded devices? Can you show me any evidence that Mozilla is the embedded browser of choice?
Opera is the browser of choice for Symbian, which is owned by major mobile players like Nokia, Sony, Ericsson, Motorola, and more.
Opera actually uses the same core (engine) on devices as on the desktop. Can Mozilla do that?
MSIE is a terrible embedded browser. Pocket IE is a stripped down version of desktop IE - a completely different browser.
Opera, on the other hand, has full desktop engine features on devices, and has introduced things like small screen rendering and spatial navigation specifically for the embedded market.
How you can claim that Opera is "too small to make a difference", especially in the embedded market, is beyond me. Just the single fact that Opera is the browser of choice for Symbian and has proven itself in plenty of embedded devices, such as the Sony Ericsson P800, Nokia's series 60 mobile phones and so on. It is also available for Linux, and was included on the highly popular Sharp Zaurus.
Both Konqueror and Opera are better choices for embedded devices due to their smaller size. You can say what you will, but Mozilla's footprint is huge compared to Opera's tiny size.
People have been paying for Opera since the mid-nineties - it was profitable even back then.
Opera is also a 3 MB download, not 6 as you claim.
Nothing to show for it? What about mouse gestures, keyboard shortcuts, Hotclick, Notes, FastForward, Rewind, M2, quick preferences, etc. All this in a 3 MB package.
And Opera 7 does have an email client. It's called M2.
What specific requirements for a web browser do you need to use Opera? Opera has far more user-oriented features than MSIE. Features that make browsing more efficient and fun.
It needs to mature more before it can become a viable alternative. It already has a hard time competing with Opera and Mozilla which generally do a better job at both standards compliant and badly coded web sites. Maybe Apple can get it up to speed eventually, but it is lagging behind Opera and Gecko at the moment.
Innovative? Such as mouse gestures, small screen rendering, Notes, M2, the Links and Windows panels, Hotclick, sessions, (Google) search field (yes, that was Opera's invention), FastForward and Rewind, spatial navigation...
Which "one great innovative feature" are you waiting for? Opera is flowing over with them!
1. Get the 7.20 beta of Opera from the opera.beta newsgroup.
2. Already in. F12 key - Refuse popups.
3. Get the 7.20 beta of Opera.
4. Useless waste of bandwidth.
Why is that? Opera started out as a niche browser which had a limited but very dedicated market. It was a tiny, lightning fast browser for power users. It continued to evolve, and has brought several innovations to the browser scene that have later been mimicked in other browsers. It was able to grow and evolve because it had a niche market it could survive in, but the company then decided to take on the mass-market.
Today, Opera is an important player in the embedded browser market, and is seeing increased use on the desktop.
Nobody pays for what they can get for free, if the free stuff is what caters for their needs. Apparently, Opera being a number of tightly integrated modules in a tiny package caters for a lot of people's needs, because people are paying for it. And where do you see things like mouse gestures and inline find (renamed to type ahead find when it was added to Mozilla later) first? In Opera.
What I am saying is that people will pay if they find a product which caters for their needs, and especially if the free products available do not.
Except you'll have to fiddle around with it, while Opera is an integrated package. Nothing wrong with extensions as such, it's just that they need to be installed in addition to the main browser if you use Firebird.
The Greymagic test is completely useless. Where are the technical details on the tests? How were they performed? Do they actually say anything what so ever about real-world performance?
It is easier to optimize a browser for specific "test lab tests" than to get good performance overall on the actual web as it exists in the real world, outside theoretical test labs.
First, you say that you have bought Opera and then you manage to churn out this gem:
"a browser is not something people are willing to pay for"
Self-contradictions are fun, aren't they?:) You've just proven your own claim wrong!
Seriously, if no one was willing to pay for a browser, Opera wouldn't be around today. It only recently entered the embedded market remember, and they sold the desktop version exclusively before that.
If people aren't willing to pay money for a browser, how come Opera is still around?
And don't tell me it's because of the embedded market. It isn't that big yet, and they have pumped money like mad into embedded browsers. The money has to come from somewhere. Desktop products perhaps?
How can you make such statements like "[Opera] can't grow" when that's exactly what is happening right now? You do know that they have a free, ad-sponsored version right? And the ads bring Opera money as well.
Opera doomed on the desktop? Wonder why Opera continues to give out new versions all the time then. Could it be because people are willing to pay for the browser?
If you are one of the people who would never pay for a browser - fine - but don't expect everyone else to be like you.
It is a problem if you live in a country and do not speak the language. Before you get a passport, there should be a few things that are demanded of you, one of which is learning the language of the country you are applying for a passport in.
Not knowing the situation in Estonia very well, I can only speak in general terms, really, but my initial reaction when reading this is that those who do not speak the language of the country they live in do not deserve a citizenship. Put up or shut up, so to speak. And apparently, most of these native Russian speakers learn Estonian anyway, so what is the problem?
Look, in any country there are large groups of people who do not have the local language as their native language. But they can only blame themselves if they do not wish to integrate in the society they are to be a part of. With a language barrier blocking integration, it might all end in chaos.
"If spam is such a big problem for you, why don't you get your ISP to install a filter so you don't have to download it?
That would cost me money as well. And if the filtering is done on the server, maybe I wouldn't even be able to catch messages wrongly marked as spam.
"It's very easy to lock down a network so that there is no outgoing spam, and blocking incoming spam is not their problem."
It is if you use e-mail in your business.
"Here's one such problem: Slashdot. It wastes people's time, money, and bandwidth (like what I'm doing right now). Yet people still use it. I guess the three aren't such precious resources, are they?"
Are you really so ignorant that you can't see the difference between something you choose to do, such as visiting a web site, and having e-mail shoved down your throat if you want it or not?
No wonder you are a spam apologist, you have no clue about these things what so ever!
Slashdot Mirror
Then again, more users could mean more sites taking KHTML into consideration.
Then again, whatever suits one's needs. M2 is quite a novel concept to some, so it might take some time getting used to. M2 was first of the "browsers" with access points, or views, as they are called in Mozilla. And it does only access points, not normal folders at all.
Anyway, what I am saying in a way, is that when I try to convince friends and acquaintances to try an alternative browser, I find it far easier to ask them to download 3 MB and get both a browser and an e-mail client (M2 is incredibly easy to use for beginners who haven't gotten into the hell yet), rather than have them download 15 MB (6 MB browser, 9 MB e-mail client). And Opera generally seems to show more pages correctly than Mozilla/Firebird.
Will TB/FB ever be as small as Opera or at least a more decent size? What's being done for MSIE compatibility in Firebird? If my newbie friends can't use their favorite sites they can't use the browser :)
Someone alert the FBI, CIA, KGB, USSR, RIAA, MPAA and whatever they are called! If credit cards can be used to help you steal money, they must be STOPPED IMMEDIATELY!
Has Mozilla actually been used on any embedded devices? Can you show me any evidence that Mozilla is the embedded browser of choice?
Opera is the browser of choice for Symbian, which is owned by major mobile players like Nokia, Sony, Ericsson, Motorola, and more.
Opera actually uses the same core (engine) on devices as on the desktop. Can Mozilla do that?
MSIE is a terrible embedded browser. Pocket IE is a stripped down version of desktop IE - a completely different browser.
Opera, on the other hand, has full desktop engine features on devices, and has introduced things like small screen rendering and spatial navigation specifically for the embedded market.
How you can claim that Opera is "too small to make a difference", especially in the embedded market, is beyond me. Just the single fact that Opera is the browser of choice for Symbian and has proven itself in plenty of embedded devices, such as the Sony Ericsson P800, Nokia's series 60 mobile phones and so on. It is also available for Linux, and was included on the highly popular Sharp Zaurus.
Both Konqueror and Opera are better choices for embedded devices due to their smaller size. You can say what you will, but Mozilla's footprint is huge compared to Opera's tiny size.
How do you not like the way it saves passwords?
You can open "tabs" (pages) with Shift+click, and in the background with Ctrl+Shift+click.
Most pages display just fine.
With NetCaptor, you pay for what is basically a shell on top of the MSIE engine, which means that you are exposed to MSIE's security holes.
People have been paying for Opera since the mid-nineties - it was profitable even back then.
Opera is also a 3 MB download, not 6 as you claim.
Nothing to show for it? What about mouse gestures, keyboard shortcuts, Hotclick, Notes, FastForward, Rewind, M2, quick preferences, etc. All this in a 3 MB package.
And Opera 7 does have an email client. It's called M2.
What specific requirements for a web browser do you need to use Opera? Opera has far more user-oriented features than MSIE. Features that make browsing more efficient and fun.
Nokia uses Symbian OS. Nokia's series 60 mobile phones are Symbian devices, and you can download Opera for these phones.
It needs to mature more before it can become a viable alternative. It already has a hard time competing with Opera and Mozilla which generally do a better job at both standards compliant and badly coded web sites. Maybe Apple can get it up to speed eventually, but it is lagging behind Opera and Gecko at the moment.
Which "one great innovative feature" are you waiting for? Opera is flowing over with them!
Yeah, well, the server logs on my own system which only allows connections from localhost shows 100% other and 0% IE! So there.
If tabbed browsing is the only thing which will put Netscape/Mozilla on top, Opera is already there.
1. Get the 7.20 beta of Opera from the opera.beta newsgroup.
2. Already in. F12 key - Refuse popups.
3. Get the 7.20 beta of Opera.
4. Useless waste of bandwidth.
Today, Opera is an important player in the embedded browser market, and is seeing increased use on the desktop.
Nobody pays for what they can get for free, if the free stuff is what caters for their needs. Apparently, Opera being a number of tightly integrated modules in a tiny package caters for a lot of people's needs, because people are paying for it. And where do you see things like mouse gestures and inline find (renamed to type ahead find when it was added to Mozilla later) first? In Opera.
What I am saying is that people will pay if they find a product which caters for their needs, and especially if the free products available do not.
But anyway, tabbed browsing is great, especially if you open a lot of browser windows, because it doesn't clutter up your main task bar.
And the tabs don't take up much space anyway. Methinks you are kind of grasping for straws, unless you are running in 640x480 or something.
Except you'll have to fiddle around with it, while Opera is an integrated package. Nothing wrong with extensions as such, it's just that they need to be installed in addition to the main browser if you use Firebird.
It is easier to optimize a browser for specific "test lab tests" than to get good performance overall on the actual web as it exists in the real world, outside theoretical test labs.
"a browser is not something people are willing to pay for"
Self-contradictions are fun, aren't they? :) You've just proven your own claim wrong!
Seriously, if no one was willing to pay for a browser, Opera wouldn't be around today. It only recently entered the embedded market remember, and they sold the desktop version exclusively before that.
And don't tell me it's because of the embedded market. It isn't that big yet, and they have pumped money like mad into embedded browsers. The money has to come from somewhere. Desktop products perhaps?
How can you make such statements like "[Opera] can't grow" when that's exactly what is happening right now? You do know that they have a free, ad-sponsored version right? And the ads bring Opera money as well.
Opera doomed on the desktop? Wonder why Opera continues to give out new versions all the time then. Could it be because people are willing to pay for the browser?
If you are one of the people who would never pay for a browser - fine - but don't expect everyone else to be like you.
Not knowing the situation in Estonia very well, I can only speak in general terms, really, but my initial reaction when reading this is that those who do not speak the language of the country they live in do not deserve a citizenship. Put up or shut up, so to speak. And apparently, most of these native Russian speakers learn Estonian anyway, so what is the problem?
Look, in any country there are large groups of people who do not have the local language as their native language. But they can only blame themselves if they do not wish to integrate in the society they are to be a part of. With a language barrier blocking integration, it might all end in chaos.
These guys have circumvented hardware protection against running something else on the hardware? How can you copy hardware?
People can get surgery, they can get implants, they can... and so on.
As I said, I get a minimum of 30-40 spam e-mails a day. It is a major problem to me. It is a major problem to millions, no, billions of people.
But you trivialize it, thereby showing your ignorance.
And I have never used AOL.
No wonder you are a spam apologist, you have no clue about these things what so ever!