They are not so easy to manage/find as in Firefox (eg. install AdBlock vs download adblock.ini manually).
What a terrible example. AdBlock is not very discoverable at all, since you have to download a third party app (extension)! On the other hand, Opera has content blocking right there in the context menu. You don't need to download any.ini files manually.
Opera's widgets are mostly useless. There's a great amount of games, weather/earthquake-checkers, translators, etc, but Browser-tweaking widgets are lacking.
Widgets aren't supposed to tweak the browser. They are supposed to be separate applications. They are nothing like extensions, so it's pointless to treat them like they were.
Opera just announced that they have more than 120 million users (up from 100+ million just a couple of months ago). Looks like they are doing just fine to me!
It's true; their days are numbered, and their attempts to do silly things like add webservers to their browser suggest that they know that very well.
This is hilarious.
People like you have been predicting Opera's demise for 15 years. And for some reason, Opera is still around, and not only, that, but it's thriving. They just reported having more than 120 million users globally, up from 100 million a few months ago.
They're pulling in major deals with the likes of AT&T, Sony, Nintendo, Verizon, etc. all the time.
They're profitable, have a large cash reserve, and are even buying up other companies.
The fact is that the only people who are saying that Opera is doomed are the ignorant ones who haven't a clue about the market. You whine about a web server in the browser without understanding why they are doing it, for example. Hint: they have an actual strategy behind it. You just haven't bothered to educate yourself about it.
Opera's market share hovers around 2% vs 50% for firefox
Huh? Firefox has, if you are optimistic about it, a 25% market share. Opera has about 3% worldwide, but 5-10% in Europe, and in some places (like Russia and countries around there), up to 30-50% market share.
That puts Opera's annual google revenue at 2-3 million. Enough to keep up with IE, Firefox, WebKit, V8? ehh.
You seem to forget that Opera had multiple revenue sources.
Your comment is typical of someone with rose-tinted glasses. Opera 10 works fine for most people (in fact, the 10 series is one of the most stable Opera versions I've ever used), and back when Opera 9 was the most recent version, some people were going on about how some random version before it was much better and Opera 9 was just going downhill, and Opera was doomed.
It's the same thing over and over and over again. If one is to believe people like you, the quality has only gone downhill since the first public version...
The fact is that it's working just fine. All software will have bugs, but that's life.
And it sounds like you have messed up something on your end, to be honest.
(Chrome) kicks Opera's ass in the one advantage it used to have over Firefox (speed)
Opera is currently faster than Chrome, though.
Until then, please no more Opera stories...just let it die in peace.
Then who would the other browsers be stealing features from?:(
Also, Opera isn't going away any time soon. It reached 100 million users a couple of months ago, and just the other day they announced 120 million users.
1. The Nazi like adherence to standards. Opera has a 100% adherence to standards. In an ideal world, this would be a good thing. However, Opera has no market share to try and force these changes.
Whatever gave you that idea? Opera was build from the ground up to handle real sites with non-standard code. It support all kinds of non-standard crap. If Opera had really refused to render sites that are not 100% standards compliant, no sites would be working at all.
So there is no "nazi like adherence to standards", nor are they trying to force changes. They are being pragmatic and building the browser to work with real sites.
3. This is more of an ideological reason than technical....but them tattling to the EU because microsoft ships a b rowser with their OS. In this day and age every OS should have a browser, and MS was not preventing anyone from using any other browser. It was a bitch move by Opera to try and get more market share because they have an inferior product.
Once again you seem to fail miserably at reflecting reality in your comment. The problem wasn't that Microsoft shipped a browser with Windows. It was that Microsoft abused its OS dominance to destroy the browser market.
Of course, your comment also ignores the fact that Google, Mozilla and several other companies backed the complaint, but for some reason, you are only whining about Opera...
They try to do too much. Webserver in a browser? Overkill.
Why? As long as it doesn't affect the browsing it's irrelevant for you. You won't even notice that it's there unless you actually activate it.
A torrent client kind of makes sense, but as with many things like that when they are integrated, you lose the control a proper torrent client provides, so not a useful feature really.
If you want control, it's easy to use a separate client. Opera supports torrents because it makes it more convenient for most people
Opera Turbo? Cant see it being that much faster with the prevalance of broadband these days. Maybe if everyone was still on dialup.
Most of the world is still on shitty connections. In fact, huge parts of the US is still on shitty connections. This is especially true if you use public wifi, for example. Most of the world will definitely benefit from Opera Turbo, so now you are just being narrow-minded.
They are not faster.
Faster than what? It's noticeably faster than Firefox.
Oh, and one more thing. Opera did not invent most of the features first. It did not have tabbed browsing, it had a shitty albeit innovative MDI, as opposed to a tabbed MTI.
Opera's tab handling has always been superior to that of other browsers. Opera had proper tabbed browsing back in 2000 or so.
It did have mouse gestures, which no one uses. Pretty much everything else fanbois like to claim opera invented were either not invented by opera at all, or were implemented far better by the competition.
Opera did invent or pioneer most of the things you see in modern browsers. Popup blocking, tabbed browsing, address bar searches, sessions, full page zoom, speed dial/top sites, memory cache, private data management, etc.
Who implements it better is a matter of taste. Who implemented it first or pioneered it is not.
OK, I read your link, and it's basically BS, mainly because similar arguments are used by all sides, in probably every kind of debate.
But not in the same way.
Denial of well-established evidence
This is nonsense, and your examples are blatantly dishonest. For example, your IPCC example was just a mistake.
Petitions of supporters, perhaps scientists: It's pervasive everywhere. How many times have you heard of 'scientific consensus?'
Scientific consensus is not a petition. The consensus describes the collective results of the research done in the area. Comparing the scientific consensus to petitions full of anti-science looks is just disgusting.
On manufactured controversies: An Inconvenient Truth: polar bears, hurricanes, etc.
Those are consequences, not controversies. Once again, you fail.
I'll give you another one other technique: outright propaganda and scare tactics.
Then I ask why is Earth's temperature not explained by it's density of atmosphere and distance from the Sun like its neighbors, instead of it's contents?
Because the science shows that the cause of warming is different.
Denialists always have these weird hangups. Their scientifically illiterate minds cause them to draw idiotic conclusions, such as, "I drank water the other day and survived, therefore water is perfectly harmless under all circumstances."
Actually this is pretty humorous. Do you think your narrow rationalizations have any meaning beyond the straw man characterizations within your own head ?
What straw man? It's a simple fact that creationists, tobaccoists and AGW denialists use the same tactics and arguments, to a great extent. Hell, even many of the same powerful right-wing organizations are behind all of them!
Here, I can play too ! Lets add a couple of more entries to your list: Homeopathy denialist, Racial superiority denialist, these guys use the exact arguments too.
No, these guys use science and accept facts. There is no evidence for homeopathy. There is huge amounts of evidence for AGW.
What homeopathy lovers and denialists have in common is that they reject scientific facts.
Yes...openess will always allow dissent and that is not allowed.
What on earth are you talking about? Science is all about dissent. Furthermore, skeptical scientists are actively getting published in scientific journals. And yet you subscribe to these insane and idiotic conspiracy theories?
Having said that I find the nutiness on the side of climate change to be as bad as that against. I find it strange that the "enlightened" believers in science can see the ridiculous behavior on the side of the deniers and ignore that same kind of behavior in their own camp.
There's nothing strange about that. At least the nutty ones that accept science... accept science!
I've heard some of the most ridiculous claims by climate change advocates about how we're all going to be dead in a decade or two, how we'll see the oceans rise to cover almost all the land masses and other extreme nonsense.
Yeah, but they are the nutty ones without any power. The denialists, on the other hand, are part of a powerful and well-oiled propaganda machinery which has been causing problems for many, many years. It goes back to the claims that tobacco doesn't cause any harm.
Yes the earth is warming, yes we should try to alter how we do things to reduce our contribution to the warming, No we don't have to destroy our entire way of life to do it. It's not the facts I reject, it's the extremism that says I have to give up my quality of life or we'll all die.
Ah, so it's all about ideology for you. What if the facts show that you have to do more than you are comfortable doing?
Yup, there was definitely a scientific consensus that bacteria were crazy imaginary monsters, and the world was flat, and the the earth was the center of the universe...consensus is a wonderful thing, but science, it ain't:)
Scientists knew that the world wasn't flat, and that it wasn't the center of the universe. They just couldn't say it because if they did, they would be executed.
So your attack fails miserably.
Also, scientific consensus shows what the science says. It's relevant indeed for understanding the world around us. You are using examples that were never about scientific consensus in the first place to spread FUD against science. Good job.
So you just proved that there is very little money in climate research. Good job blowing your own fucking stupid conspiracy theory out of the water. Good job indeed. Denialists are getting more and more fucking stupid by the day.
The grant money is firmly tied to interests that want to see the application of the precationary principal.
Denialist claims are always full of shit. This one is just an example. They are funding climate research. That means that the results can point to anything. It just happened to show AGW. And now we need to learn as much as possible about it.
The academic folks have an agenda, mostly political and somewhat pro-Gaia
Stop spewing your shitty garbage, please. Educate yourself instead of spreading lies and propaganda. Just because the scientific facts don't match your superstitious beliefs doesn't mean that you should reject them like that.
A lot of people around here mock religion but blindly follow and believe anything they perceive to be 'scientific.'
What does that have to do with anything? The fact is that there is an overwhelming amount of evidence for AGW. If you deny it, you are a denialist
For all of you 'science is my religion' people:
Creationists, tobaccoists, AGW denialists, religious fundies, etc., always fall back to this: "Boo hoo, science is your religion!" It's nonsense. You are just crying because the facts don't match your ideology/religion.
Slashdot Mirror
What a terrible example. AdBlock is not very discoverable at all, since you have to download a third party app (extension)! On the other hand, Opera has content blocking right there in the context menu. You don't need to download any .ini files manually.
Widgets aren't supposed to tweak the browser. They are supposed to be separate applications. They are nothing like extensions, so it's pointless to treat them like they were.
Actually, Opera 10.60 is currently the fastest at artificial benchmarks.
Opera has more than 120 million users across the world. "No one"? Heh.
Then something is clearly wrong on your end.
Flash works fine here.
Opera just announced that they have more than 120 million users (up from 100+ million just a couple of months ago). Looks like they are doing just fine to me!
Why do you ask?
This is hilarious.
People like you have been predicting Opera's demise for 15 years. And for some reason, Opera is still around, and not only, that, but it's thriving. They just reported having more than 120 million users globally, up from 100 million a few months ago.
They're pulling in major deals with the likes of AT&T, Sony, Nintendo, Verizon, etc. all the time.
They're profitable, have a large cash reserve, and are even buying up other companies.
The fact is that the only people who are saying that Opera is doomed are the ignorant ones who haven't a clue about the market. You whine about a web server in the browser without understanding why they are doing it, for example. Hint: they have an actual strategy behind it. You just haven't bothered to educate yourself about it.
Huh? Firefox has, if you are optimistic about it, a 25% market share. Opera has about 3% worldwide, but 5-10% in Europe, and in some places (like Russia and countries around there), up to 30-50% market share.
You seem to forget that Opera had multiple revenue sources.
It's the same thing over and over and over again. If one is to believe people like you, the quality has only gone downhill since the first public version...
The fact is that it's working just fine. All software will have bugs, but that's life.
And it sounds like you have messed up something on your end, to be honest.
I don't understand how anyone can look at some random and crappy site somewhere, and base their conclusions on that.
Opera is currently faster than Chrome, though.
Then who would the other browsers be stealing features from? :(
Also, Opera isn't going away any time soon. It reached 100 million users a couple of months ago, and just the other day they announced 120 million users.
Whatever gave you that idea? Opera was build from the ground up to handle real sites with non-standard code. It support all kinds of non-standard crap. If Opera had really refused to render sites that are not 100% standards compliant, no sites would be working at all.
So there is no "nazi like adherence to standards", nor are they trying to force changes. They are being pragmatic and building the browser to work with real sites.
Once again you seem to fail miserably at reflecting reality in your comment. The problem wasn't that Microsoft shipped a browser with Windows. It was that Microsoft abused its OS dominance to destroy the browser market.
Of course, your comment also ignores the fact that Google, Mozilla and several other companies backed the complaint, but for some reason, you are only whining about Opera...
Why? As long as it doesn't affect the browsing it's irrelevant for you. You won't even notice that it's there unless you actually activate it.
If you want control, it's easy to use a separate client. Opera supports torrents because it makes it more convenient for most people
Most of the world is still on shitty connections. In fact, huge parts of the US is still on shitty connections. This is especially true if you use public wifi, for example. Most of the world will definitely benefit from Opera Turbo, so now you are just being narrow-minded.
Faster than what? It's noticeably faster than Firefox.
Opera's tab handling has always been superior to that of other browsers. Opera had proper tabbed browsing back in 2000 or so.
Opera did invent or pioneer most of the things you see in modern browsers. Popup blocking, tabbed browsing, address bar searches, sessions, full page zoom, speed dial/top sites, memory cache, private data management, etc.
Who implements it better is a matter of taste. Who implemented it first or pioneered it is not.
But not in the same way.
This is nonsense, and your examples are blatantly dishonest. For example, your IPCC example was just a mistake.
Scientific consensus is not a petition. The consensus describes the collective results of the research done in the area. Comparing the scientific consensus to petitions full of anti-science looks is just disgusting.
Those are consequences, not controversies. Once again, you fail.
Yep, denialists.
Good job keeping yourself willfully ignorant.
Because the science shows that the cause of warming is different.
Denialists always have these weird hangups. Their scientifically illiterate minds cause them to draw idiotic conclusions, such as, "I drank water the other day and survived, therefore water is perfectly harmless under all circumstances."
The oceans are picking up a huge amount of heat. It's looking very ugly indeed.
What straw man? It's a simple fact that creationists, tobaccoists and AGW denialists use the same tactics and arguments, to a great extent. Hell, even many of the same powerful right-wing organizations are behind all of them!
No, these guys use science and accept facts. There is no evidence for homeopathy. There is huge amounts of evidence for AGW.
What homeopathy lovers and denialists have in common is that they reject scientific facts.
Gee, I don't know... How about both? Oh, that's what they are doing already? So what the fuck are you talking about?
What the fuck are you talking about? No one is predicting the end of the world.
What on earth are you talking about? Science is all about dissent. Furthermore, skeptical scientists are actively getting published in scientific journals. And yet you subscribe to these insane and idiotic conspiracy theories?
There's nothing strange about that. At least the nutty ones that accept science... accept science!
Yeah, but they are the nutty ones without any power. The denialists, on the other hand, are part of a powerful and well-oiled propaganda machinery which has been causing problems for many, many years. It goes back to the claims that tobacco doesn't cause any harm.
Ah, so it's all about ideology for you. What if the facts show that you have to do more than you are comfortable doing?
Scientists knew that the world wasn't flat, and that it wasn't the center of the universe. They just couldn't say it because if they did, they would be executed.
So your attack fails miserably.
Also, scientific consensus shows what the science says. It's relevant indeed for understanding the world around us. You are using examples that were never about scientific consensus in the first place to spread FUD against science. Good job.
So you just proved that there is very little money in climate research. Good job blowing your own fucking stupid conspiracy theory out of the water. Good job indeed. Denialists are getting more and more fucking stupid by the day.
Denialist claims are always full of shit. This one is just an example. They are funding climate research. That means that the results can point to anything. It just happened to show AGW. And now we need to learn as much as possible about it.
Stop spewing your shitty garbage, please. Educate yourself instead of spreading lies and propaganda. Just because the scientific facts don't match your superstitious beliefs doesn't mean that you should reject them like that.
What does that have to do with anything? The fact is that there is an overwhelming amount of evidence for AGW. If you deny it, you are a denialist
Creationists, tobaccoists, AGW denialists, religious fundies, etc., always fall back to this: "Boo hoo, science is your religion!" It's nonsense. You are just crying because the facts don't match your ideology/religion.
You are wrong. Scientific facts contradict your ideology. Get over it.