578 members have voted

  1. 1. FireFox or Opera ?

    • Firefox
      354
    • Opera
      224


Recommended Posts

'OK, here's what i'm going to do, everybody. I'm going to sign up for a forum and then i'm going to accumulate 1258 posts by just reading the thread titles and replying to them without thinking about or expounding my reply.'

CHECK

I'm going to end up getting banned because i can't stop pointing out idiocy. :(

585110621[/snapback]

(Y) very well said! :p

There are several members who have more than 1000 posts and most of their posts are meaningless.

i love opera because:

- i'm using dialup and i love how i can turn off and on images with just a button. In fact, that's the reason i started using Opera since version 3.

- the 'back' feature is the fastest among any browser. again, being a dialup user, every byte counts.

p/s: for the 'collapse ad' problem some of you are having, i recommend using admuncher. it's the best ad blocker ever. it works just like a host file+edexter but with wildcards enabled. install it and forget it. i promise that you would not see ads ever again. even google ads when you search on google.

Errrrm, I'm not sure about other browsers but Firefox caches it in memory. :blink:

585110853[/snapback]

And yet it's still slow as hell considering that. He's got a point, Opera beats everything in forward/back loading, was also one of the reasons why I like 'Screaming Fat Lady' more than Firetruck. :happy:

screamingfatlady.JPG

Edit: Could somebody make an icon out of this:

the_fat_lady_sings.GIF

It's in 'File types' in the preferences. Click 'Edit...' on an existing file type, or create a new one, and there's a box that says 'Do not ask for folder, but save directly to'. Opera has lots of other rad file-type settings that you can play with, too, although i don't know how many of them are common to Firetruck as well.

No idea about the sites not loading though.

585107208[/snapback]

Sweet...maybe I'll give that a try after my next formatting. Thanks.

PS: I still prefer Firefox though.

public school is free too, without ads. look what became of 51% of Americans.

"free versus not free" is not the issue.

585111629[/snapback]

Public school is most certainly not free. It's (generally) paid for by property taxes and enrolment fees. Did they tell you that in a private school?

I've used both, and I have to say, Opera is my choice.

It has a lower memory foot print and less CPU usage, and comes with more built in features than Firefox, without being bloated. It can be made to look identical to firefox or IE, but still give you it's own features. Opera has a few plugins and panels, but it does fall behind in them.

Of course, 90% of Firefox's addons are rehashes of the same idea.

Opera will load every site I visit regularly fine, and the ones it doesn't, I can submit to the forums there and get it fixed soon enough.

Opera has my favorite features and options, while running faster than any other browser. Of course, I'm a bit biased, as I've used it for years and find anything else completely unusable for more than short periods of time.

I have tried them all and if you want speed go with opera. If you want lots of plugins, options, knikknaks and dont care about speed get firefox. Simple as that but:

My personal opinion: D/L them both. And choose for yourself cause ppl with never agree. heck d/l them all:

  • Avant
    Firefox
    Maxthon (My Personal Fav)
    Mozilla
    Netscape
    Opera
    ect...

Just to list a few.

IE not listed cause it is a scary piece of crap!

Get these top 6 know browsers, try them out, and choose the one that works best on your sys and the one that suites you best for your internet browsing needs.

I got Firefox cause ppl said it was the best, I played with it for 4 months and decided it wasnt right for me, then i got opera, played with it for 2 months and the same it wasnt right for me. I just tried em all till i found the one that suits my needs for a browser(Maxthon i.e.(MyIE2)). I suggest you do the same.

And yet it's still slow as hell considering that. He's got a point, Opera beats everything in forward/back loading, was also one of the reasons why I like 'Screaming Fat Lady' more than Firetruck.?:happy::

http://snbx.net/ul/screamingfatlady.JPG

Edit: Could somebody make an icon out of this:

http://www.hants.gov.uk/cats/Paws/the_fat_lady_sings.GIF

585110878[/snapback]

Yep.

Though I think this one is better;))

Edited by Chode
All that shows is that the neowin user base favors firefox.

585109926[/snapback]

That poll just show that the majority of Neowin users use Gecko, nothing more..  :rolleyes:

585109934[/snapback]

The same trend is also reflected in the general net population except for IE and we know why that has such a big chunk so there must be some reason for Firefox being mroe popular. Firefox has come from nothing and surpassed the popularity of every browser except IE, surely that says something about it.

The same trend is also reflected in the general net population except for IE and we know why that has such a big chunk so there must be some reason for Firefox being mroe popular. Firefox has come from nothing and surpassed the popularity of every browser except IE, surely that says something about it.

585114509[/snapback]

I'm just glad there are choices. It sucks when a piece of software has no competition. It makes them slow to improve. I am wondering if anyone uses Netscape now. I'm thinking of giving it a try.

I'm just glad there are choices.  It sucks when a piece of software has no competition.  It makes them slow to improve.  I am wondering if anyone uses Netscape now.  I'm thinking of giving it a try.

585114808[/snapback]

I just tried it and realized that it's like Firefox only not as useful. The tabbed browsing works almost as well as Opera though. It just doesn't seem to have the freedom of Opera or Firefox or even the Mozilla suite. :(

The same trend is also reflected in the general net population except for IE and we know why that has such a big chunk so there must be some reason for Firefox being mroe popular. Firefox has come from nothing and surpassed the popularity of every browser except IE, surely that says something about it.

585114509[/snapback]

Yeah, it's called advertising and exposure. Opera is some tiny little software company in Norway that barely makes any noise at all. Meanwhile, Mozilla is an international (in spirit if not in law) foundation partially funded by a huge media corporation. Not to mention, Opera fans don't tend to be as rabid about evangelising others (i know that's a huge generalisation, but it's been true in my own experience), so it's not as often that you see Opera banner ads and Opera wall papers and Opera sig links and Opera news-paper ads and so forth.

And, of course, there is the fact that the entire goal of Firefox is to target the 90% of the world that uses Internet Explorer and to make as much noise as possible doing it. Opera just kind of hangs out in its own little bubble, Firetruck is like LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME THE WEB IS EXPLODING WE HAVE 1000 DOWNLOADS NO NOW WE HAVE 10'000 NOW WE HAVE 100'000 NOW WE HAVE 1'000'000 EVERYBODY PAY ATTENTION HURRY IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT IF YOU'RE TOO STUPID TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO CHANGE INTERNET EXPLORER'S SECURITY SETTINGS YOU'RE NOT ALONE DOWNLOAD FIREFOX NOW.

Firetruck is like LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME THE WEB IS EXPLODING WE HAVE 1000 DOWNLOADS NO NOW WE HAVE 10'000 NOW WE HAVE 100'000 NOW WE HAVE 1'000'000 EVERYBODY PAY ATTENTION HURRY IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT IF YOU'RE TOO STUPID TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO CHANGE INTERNET EXPLORER'S SECURITY SETTINGS YOU'RE NOT ALONE DOWNLOAD FIREFOX NOW.

585114958[/snapback]

Security is not the only issue with IE you know, the rendering engine is the biggest issue for me and until thats fixed I'm going to reccomend alternate browsers. I don't care if people use an insecure browser because that doesn't affect me in any way, its their own problem, its when I need to hack my CSS to suit a poor excuse for a rendering engine it annoys me. Of course Opera is not far behind Gecko in this aspect so I'm happy for you to use Opera.

Yeah, it's called advertising and exposure. Opera is some tiny little software company in Norway that barely makes any noise at all. Meanwhile, Mozilla is an international (in spirit if not in law) foundation partially funded by a huge media corporation. Not to mention, Opera fans don't tend to be as rabid about evangelising others (i know that's a huge generalisation, but it's been true in my own experience), so it's not as often that you see Opera banner ads and Opera wall papers and Opera sig links and Opera news-paper ads and so forth.

And, of course, there is the fact that the entire goal of Firefox is to target the 90% of the world that uses Internet Explorer and to make as much noise as possible doing it. Opera just kind of hangs out in its own little bubble, Firetruck is like LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME THE WEB IS EXPLODING WE HAVE 1000 DOWNLOADS NO NOW WE HAVE 10'000 NOW WE HAVE 100'000 NOW WE HAVE 1'000'000 EVERYBODY PAY ATTENTION HURRY IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT IF YOU'RE TOO STUPID TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO CHANGE INTERNET EXPLORER'S SECURITY SETTINGS YOU'RE NOT ALONE DOWNLOAD FIREFOX NOW.

585114958[/snapback]

That's so true!

Security is not the only issue with IE you know, the rendering engine is the biggest issue for me and until thats fixed I'm going to reccomend alternate browsers. I don't care if people use an insecure browser because that doesn't affect me in any way, its their own problem, its when I need to hack my CSS to suit a poor excuse for a rendering engine it annoys me. Of course Opera is not far behind Gecko in this aspect so I'm happy for you to use Opera.

585115043[/snapback]

And that goes back to audience. You can only write two kinds of Web sites: (1) sites for a general audience and (2) sites for a niche audience.

(1) When you're writing for a general audience, you must compromise with your code. Sorry, you have to, or people are going to think your site is retarded. If you care that potentially 90% of your audience is using Internet Explorer*, you're going to hack your CSS, whether you like it or not. I have to do this to all the sites i design and so does just about everybody else who doesn't want to leave a bunch of people looking at a broken Web site. It sucks and every time i have to do it i wish there was some way that i could physically smash Internet Explorer, but i do it anyway. The fact that i and a bunch of my visitors use browsers that follow the CSS recommendations doesn't excuse me from making my site visible to people who want to use IE.

(2) If you're writing for a niche audience, it doesn't matter at all whether or not the browser your niche audience uses follows the recommendations. If you're writing specifically for Mozilla users, Mozilla could make up their own CSS spec for all you're concerned, because you're only writing for their users anyway. The Mozilla Foundation itself follows this logic -- some of their pages (i think the Firetruck-themes pages, don't remember exactly) use proprietary, Mozilla-specific CSS that doesn't follow the recommendations. They can do this because it's pretty safe to assume that only people who are using Mozilla will want to download themes for it.

* Of course it'll probably never be that high of a ratio unless you've either got a hugely popular site or you're writing for IE users anyway. The audiences of my own sites are more or less half IE users and half <everything else> users.

Security is not the only issue with IE you know, the rendering engine is the biggest issue for me and until thats fixed I'm going to reccomend alternate browsers. I don't care if people use an insecure browser because that doesn't affect me in any way, its their own problem, its when I need to hack my CSS to suit a poor excuse for a rendering engine it annoys me. Of course Opera is not far behind Gecko in this aspect so I'm happy for you to use Opera.

585115043[/snapback]

Indulge me. How does FIREFOX's rendering engine differ from IE's?

Edited by Chode
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I grew up a Star Trek fan and never watched Star Wars movies. To this days I've not watched most Star Wras movies. As a result I rarely get these references, I have no idea what this post means. Given the popular reactions these get I have to accept I missed out.  
    • Spotify really have turned in to a butthole of a company. Assuming this isn't a bug then this is a low act for Premium users. Honestly, YT Premium which includes YT Music is a genuine alternative. In any event, the internet enshitification continues unabated...next up, the banning of VPN's.
    • This is why science is the only path to truth. It isn't rigid in its beliefs, rather it changes its views based on scientific discoveries.
    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      92
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      76
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!