Opera can render things just fine. The #1 problem facing Opera today is browser sniffing. Spoof as Firefox, and the few sites that seem broken will "magically" work.
Firefox has the worst fanboys (to the point where the press started talking about it), and yet its market has grown. Looks like venomous fanboys aren't a hindrance to adoption after all.
And I can say 100% without hyperbole, opera is the black sheep in the family when it comes to standards support.
Nonsense. You are just bashing Opera because you are writing around bugs in your favorite browser, and if it breaks in Opera because of the bug you are relying on, you blame Opera.
It's good, just not the same as the others, and gives different renderings where the others are uniform.
Again, this is nonsense. Standards compliant code will work just fine in Opera. If you think otherwise, you are clearly not very competent.
it is wrong in that they would rather force standards then have the page display correctly
Please stop repeating this blatant lie over and over again. Opera have, for years, been explaining that the browser was built from scratch to be as compatible as possible with the real web.
I avoided Opera for years mainly because they're nazi like adherence to standards meant many pages would display incorrectly
But this is completely wrong, because Opera never had that "nazi like adherence." In fact, for many years they have very specifically and in no uncertain terms continuously stated that Opera was built from the ground up to be compatible with the real web. Opera was designed to handle the real web, in addition to supporting open standards.
The fanbois making false claims about Opera being the first to innovate many things never helped.
Actually, it does have the ability to use hardware acceleration for graphics in both opengl and direct3d, it just has not been implimented in general release versions of opera yet.
In other words, "there's no hardware acceleration yet."
I do get irritated by their efforts to keep up with Chrome's speed while screwing over long time users
They are doing no such thing.
Numerous bug reports on long time stable features and major regressions happen every time they release a major update for Opera and take months or years to fix.
Welcome to the world of insanely complex software. They have to prioritize fixes. This is not exclusive to Opera, so it seems kind of odd to complain about it.
They do generally listen to their users. They decided to force chrome like urls on their users during the Opera 11 development (removing "http://" and any of the args after *.com such as ?id=12345) claiming it would make users less likely to click fraudulent links.
This does not compute. Opera has always done things without the ability to change it back at first, to get proper testing and feeback, and only later added options to restore things.
However, if you're a developer, seeing the arguments is a must and not seeing "http://" or "https://" or "ftp://" is just kind of silly, since sometimes you like to know what protocol you are using instead of guessing through some abstract replacement graphic. Since opera has never been a browser to appeal to novice internet users, dumbing it down seems kind of counter intuitive.
But what is a browser? It's something you browse with. And hiding noise makes the browser safer to most people (the main audience). Developers can still enable both the protocol and query string again. There's nothing "silly" about optimizing a browser for browsing by default, and giving developers options. If Opera doesn't simplify and streamline things, it will never reach those novice internet users.
Mind you, I don't actually use Opera these days. The thing easily goes over 100 MB in memory usage just after two tabs and it doesn't seem as stable as it used to be.
100 MB? Out of what? Let me guess, more than 1 GB? In that case, that's by design. It's supposed to use more memory to increase performance, if possible. It's pointless to have loads of RAM, and then complain that it's being used.
Who gives a crap about "more objects"? Not the mass-market, that's for sure. Keep masturbating to your amazing graphics, but the rest of the world still won't care.
No, Kinect is just an add-on for the 360. If they had released a new console with Kinect as the control method, we might be talking. But Kinect is already a failure, so...
The article is not about who will control the web. It's about whether proprietary applications will take over from the web (iOS Apps Android Apps, Flash Apps, Silverlight Apps, etc.). It's so confused it even forgets to mention the dominant mobile browser, Opera, when talking about the mobile web! That's just sad.
A terrible, shallow, poorly researched article, in my opinion.
If the traditional news media refuses to inform people about things of huge significance, they will probably be replaced by someone who is willing to do it. In some ways it's already happening. What will happen if they comply is that they grave that is already being dug for the traditional news media, will be dug out even faster. RIP.
Rushing? 9.6 and 10.0 were stable as a rock. No problems with any other 10.x releases either. Everyone was complaining about 9.0 and 9.2, though. So you apparently got it all upside down.
Those are not "the HTML5 tests." Those are a bunch of tests that aren't even HTML5, and it doesn't even test all of HTML5. Basing your opinion on Opera's HTML5 compliance on that page is just stupid. And as for "Opera offering much", clearly the other browsers think it does since they keep ripping it off.
Slashdot Mirror
Opera can render things just fine. The #1 problem facing Opera today is browser sniffing. Spoof as Firefox, and the few sites that seem broken will "magically" work.
Firefox has the worst fanboys (to the point where the press started talking about it), and yet its market has grown. Looks like venomous fanboys aren't a hindrance to adoption after all.
Nonsense. You are just bashing Opera because you are writing around bugs in your favorite browser, and if it breaks in Opera because of the bug you are relying on, you blame Opera.
Again, this is nonsense. Standards compliant code will work just fine in Opera. If you think otherwise, you are clearly not very competent.
Please stop repeating this blatant lie over and over again. Opera have, for years, been explaining that the browser was built from scratch to be as compatible as possible with the real web.
That is pure nonsense. They've been talking for years about how Opera was built from scratch to handle real, broken sites.
TST sounds like using Opera's "Windows" panel...
But this is completely wrong, because Opera never had that "nazi like adherence." In fact, for many years they have very specifically and in no uncertain terms continuously stated that Opera was built from the ground up to be compatible with the real web. Opera was designed to handle the real web, in addition to supporting open standards.
Why shouldn't one point out who's the innovator?
Interesting discussion, by the way...
In other words, "there's no hardware acceleration yet."
They are doing no such thing.
Welcome to the world of insanely complex software. They have to prioritize fixes. This is not exclusive to Opera, so it seems kind of odd to complain about it.
This does not compute. Opera has always done things without the ability to change it back at first, to get proper testing and feeback, and only later added options to restore things.
But what is a browser? It's something you browse with. And hiding noise makes the browser safer to most people (the main audience). Developers can still enable both the protocol and query string again. There's nothing "silly" about optimizing a browser for browsing by default, and giving developers options. If Opera doesn't simplify and streamline things, it will never reach those novice internet users.
Knowledgeable users choose the best tool for the task, and it doesn't matter if the source is open or closed.
100 MB? Out of what? Let me guess, more than 1 GB? In that case, that's by design. It's supposed to use more memory to increase performance, if possible. It's pointless to have loads of RAM, and then complain that it's being used.
Opera has more than 150 million active users, apparently. Maybe it's lacking compared to Firefox's 400 million user base, but...
So what are you doing with the source code?
Because it's Google?
Who gives a crap about "more objects"? Not the mass-market, that's for sure. Keep masturbating to your amazing graphics, but the rest of the world still won't care.
No, Kinect is just an add-on for the 360. If they had released a new console with Kinect as the control method, we might be talking. But Kinect is already a failure, so...
The slim PS2 was not next-gen. Wii is. In case you didn't notice, it had a completely new controller.
A terrible, shallow, poorly researched article, in my opinion.
I thought they had already announced something for Russia.
If the traditional news media refuses to inform people about things of huge significance, they will probably be replaced by someone who is willing to do it. In some ways it's already happening. What will happen if they comply is that they grave that is already being dug for the traditional news media, will be dug out even faster. RIP.
Nice excuse for ripping off someone else's algorithm and claiming that you invented it...
Rushing? 9.6 and 10.0 were stable as a rock. No problems with any other 10.x releases either. Everyone was complaining about 9.0 and 9.2, though. So you apparently got it all upside down.
Of course, those "global stats" focus almost exclusively on North America. And fail to detect Opera properly.
And Opera actually has more than 140 million users, which translates to a market share of about 7%.
More than 140 million users are "few users"? Wow.
Actually, Opera is currently faster than Chrome.
Why are you "sorry for Opera"? They are getting millions of new users every single month. They now have more than 140 million users.
Opera 10.0 was one of the most stable "major" releases of Opera, ever. Haven't had any major problems with any of the 10.x series, really.
Those are not "the HTML5 tests." Those are a bunch of tests that aren't even HTML5, and it doesn't even test all of HTML5. Basing your opinion on Opera's HTML5 compliance on that page is just stupid. And as for "Opera offering much", clearly the other browsers think it does since they keep ripping it off.