578 members have voted

  1. 1. FireFox or Opera ?

    • Firefox
      354
    • Opera
      224


Recommended Posts

cmon i cant read mah gmail in opera , but then hotmail ( which i dont use) doesnt seem to work well with firefox , but still id say that firefox is better

585260941[/snapback]

This is what i have been trying to tell, and people here say "go for other alternatives". I have been using gmail for the past 6 months and it is my primary mailbox.

Not that it doesnt opens but it crawls and takes time to open up. Even mails take longer time to be send.

Exactley, he obviousley hasnt tried the latest version, Yet if we mentioned somthing about FF 0.9, we'd be flamed and told to use 1.0...Geesh..

585261255[/snapback]

1.0 is final. 8.0 is only in beta 1. If we don't want to run a beta, we don't have to. Stop touting 8.0 beta 1 and compare 7.54 to 1.0.

Oh, the voice library is only 2.5 MB according to the prompt Opera just gave me...

The sad thing in the browsers fight is that Opera seems to be forgotten completely. We only hear about FireFox around all the web.

Opera 8.0b1 is very intelligent IMO. I just love to see the status bar directly into the address bar.

FF's default UI looks more bloated than many other applications, but if you download noia 2.0, then it looks MUCH better than these old Windows 98 menus. In Opera, you cannot really pause the downloads, restart your computer and resume then (from what I've seen). Never tested this in Firefox, but if we can, then it's great.

Every browser has its weaknesses and strengths, but we have to remember that the real competitors are FireFox, Internet Explorer AND Opera.

This is what i have been trying to tell, and people here say "go for other alternatives". I have been using gmail for the past 6 months and it is my primary mailbox.

Not that it doesnt opens but it crawls and takes time to open up. Even mails take longer time to be send.

585260970[/snapback]

What do you mean crawl and take time? That's your connection, not opera. Plus, gmail has pop3 now, which you can configure gmail pop3 to read your mail within opera's m2 itself. I don't know about you, but that completely solves my problems.

1.0 is final. 8.0 is only in beta 1. If we don't want to run a beta, we don't have to. Stop touting 8.0 beta 1 and compare 7.54 to 1.0.

585261390[/snapback]

Eh!!!! This thread was started in October 2004. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the almighty firefox still a beta then? So I think it's perfectly acceptable to compare opera 8 beta to firefox 1.0.

In Opera, you cannot really pause the downloads, restart your computer and resume then (from what I've seen).

I can. I done that yesterday when I was downloading Apache2Triad 1.5.0 (57mb) from sourceforge and needless to say, I've already installed it without any problems. If the download has problems resuming then it's probably due to the configuration of the server you're downloading from.

1.0 is final. 8.0 is only in beta 1. If we don't want to run a beta, we don't have to. Stop touting 8.0 beta 1 and compare 7.54 to 1.0.

I agree to an extent, comparing Opera 8.0 Beta 1 to a final release of Firefox isn't very fair; however, I think that comparing Opera 8.0 Beta 1 to the latest Firefox nightlies would be fair. And in this comparison, Gmail still works in Opera so I don't understand the purpose of this argument :p

What do you mean crawl and take time? That's your connection, not opera. Plus, gmail has pop3 now, which you can configure gmail pop3 to read your mail within opera's m2 itself. I don't know about you, but that completely solves my problems.

I'd have to agree with you here, Gmail's online interface crawls on all browsers I use (IE 6.0 SP2, Firefox 1.0 01/07 nightly custom built for AMD Athlon, and Opera 8.0 Beta 1.) I haven't seen any noticable speed differences between them. I only did that for testing purposes though, I use M2 and gmail's POP3 server to read my emails and it's always fast ;)

I think that comparing Opera 8.0 Beta 1 to the latest Firefox nightlies would be fair. And in this comparison, Gmail still works in Opera so I don't understand the purpose of this argument :p

585261547[/snapback]

:yes:

@jagedEdge, i never said you had to run the beta, But if gmail didnt work with firefox, and there was a new beta that did, and i complained that gmail didnt work with firefox, i'd be told to use the latest beta....

Listen dat version (7.54)is several mnths old.

and yes..if u r mad enough to use active x version then get this

http://www.meadroid.com/neptune/

and identify opera as IE!!!

shhh..u haven't been able to give really any valid reason.

And have been extremely arrogant.

Opera previews/betas are perfectly stable and useable just like any official realease. Here we go again through this retarded beta BS, first the FF users always coming up with that excuse in response to bugs and now critic O8.0b1 because it's 'beta'. Sorry but I never saw anybody complain when FF was in 'beta'.

Opera betas are not like firefox nightlies at all. They tend to be very stable. Especially this beta, I have had very few crashes with it, and it is much faster on all accounts. There is nothing in this beta that makes it not usable, unlike the firefox nightlies.

I have to agree with you, they are quite different in nature, but they want up-2-date comparisons so that's what they'll get, hehe. I also have to agree with you about the stability of this beta release (in the previews before it,) it's been incredibly stable for me. In 7.54 I experienced about 2-3 crashes a day; I haven't had a single crash in Opera for almost a week now and I'm loving it.

off-topic: Hey Pallab, where did you get that "Kill Firefox" image? That's funny! I remember when the Mozilla Foundation tried to do a Firefox vs Opera comparison and totally lied throughout the whole comparison. On the "Opera" column, they repeatedly said "not available" for particular features when Opera actually had the features and, in many cases, surpassed the functionality offered by Firefox. Needless to say, the Opera community was all over that like flies on cow crap! The page magically disappeared from their website to reappear later only half-corrected, grrr. I do wish that the Mozilla Foundation would quit spreading lies. One of my favorite lies (this is from the fanboys and not the moz foundation, just to clarify) is "it's open source so it'll be fixed very quickly!" but upon looking through BugZilla you can easily see that there are "moderately critical" security problems which have been present for almost 3 years (such as the "browser history gets lost" bug which was duplicated around 60 times...) And before anyone tries to flame me for this, I understand that problems can take a long time to fix, it's the lie about it which bothers me, not the time...

Did I say there was something wrong with the betas? No. I just said that you should compare final to final. I don't want people to use the Nightlies. If Gmail didn't work in Firefox, I would not be the one to tell you to use the Firefox nightly that did work. Not everybody wants to run a beta, even if its stable.

Oh, and don't compare nightlies to betas. Nightlies are very different. Preview Releases are betas.

The memory usage depends on tabs opened etc. Opera also have memory issues. But if you select other than automatic settings on memory in Opera it gets better. My Opera currently use 148mb of ram...

585254708[/snapback]

38MB here. :p I'm thinking of switching from Firefox. Only thing I hate is Blogger.com support of Opera. It looks crappy. Oh well, switching to MovableType anyway.

Edit:I still love Firefox though as it was my first. Boy I had some great times I won't forget. I think that as long as they aren't using IE then we should all be happy for them.

Question: does Blogger work better with Opera 8 beta 1?

Edited by NeoTech
Oh, and don't compare nightlies to betas. Nightlies are very different. Preview Releases are betas.

I don't see anything wrong with comparing them, as long as you do not dive into stability or speed comparisons (afterall, one mistake and the speed and stability of the program could take a nosedive.) Feature comparisons between Opera betas and Firefox nightlies is perfectly fine IMHO. Just because they are different, that doesn't mean they don't have similarities.

I don't see anything wrong with comparing them, as long as you do not dive into stability or speed comparisons (afterall, one mistake and the speed and stability of the program could take a nosedive.) Feature comparisons between Opera betas and Firefox nightlies is perfectly fine IMHO. Just because they are different, that doesn't mean they don't have similarities.

585263112[/snapback]

Eh, I wouldn't even compare features. Features can evolve from one nightly to the next. It's when you have a Preview Release and a Beta that you should compare features.

I think any version with a direct link on the front-page is fair game for comparison.  Thus, Opera8b1 is fair to compare against FF1.0

585263900[/snapback]

Yea, since my Opera 8.0 beta 1 actually is more stable than any other earlier versions on my computer. Have used it since it was "released" a month ago. Haven't had one crash yet. And I use it almost all the time...

Well, from my experiences, I like Firefox more. I used Opera for quite a while not too long ago and I just didn't really like the way it worked. It seemed far too cluttered and slow for me. Firefox just performs very quickly. I also like how minimal it is even with every feature I need.

To each his own though.

Try them both out... That's the best way to decide which is better for you.

If Opera, the world's fastest browser, seemed slow to you then that is likely the fault of your antivirus or firewall software and not Opera itself (there are many many many topics about this on the myopera forums and these are the culprits about 75% of the time.) I should also mention that the 8.0 beta has many interface (mainly uncluttering and reorganizing) changes.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Creative Sound Blaster AE-X PCIe review: your headphones will love it by Steven Parker If you have been reading Neowin for any length of time, you may remember that I reviewed the Sound Blaster Audigy FX Pro back in April. I found it to be an excellent budget sound card, even though it lacked support for formats such as DTS over the included SPDIF port. Anyway, Creative reached out to me again asking if I was interested in reviewing the Sound Blaster AE-X. It is a card mainly targeted at headphone wearers, which I'll get into a bit later. Before we get underway, here is a disclaimer: Creative Labs provided a free sample without any review pre-approval. Here are the full specs of it: Creative Sound Blaster AE-X Dimensions: 179 x 126 x 18 mm Weight: 263g / 9.28 oz Platform: PCI-e DAC: ESS ES9039Q2M Connectivity Options Side: Rear: 1 x HD Audio Front Panel Connector, 1 x ⅛“ Headphone port, 1 x RCA Line-out (Left) port, 1 x RCA Line-out (Right) port, 1 x Coaxial SPDIF-out port, 1 x ⅛“ Mic in/Line-in port, 1 x TOSLINK SPDIF-in port Surround: No DNR / SNR: THD+N: 0.0001% Dynamic Range 130 dB Recording Resolution: PCM up to 32-bit / 192kHz (Stereo) Direct Mode: Line Out (Stereo): PCM up to 32-bit  384 kHz Coaxial SPDIF Out: PCM up to 24-bit 192.0 kHz Headphone Amp: PCM up to 32-bit / 384kHz (Stereo) Native DSD: DSD64, DSD128, DSD256 Output Impedance: 1Ω, Supported Headphone Impedance: 8–600Ω, IEM: 0.5Vrms, Low: 1.5Vrms, Mid: 3Vrms, High: 6Vrms, Maximum output power: 350mW @ 32Ω (High), Maximum output voltage: 6Vrms (High) Front Panel Headphone Amp: PCM up to 32-bit / 192kHz (Stereo) Native DSD: DSD64, DSD128 Output Impedance: 10Ω, Supported Headphone Impedance: 32–300Ω, Maximum output power: 40mW @ 32Ω, Maximum output voltage: 1.9Vrms ASIO: ASIO 2.3 Total Harmonic Distortion: THD+N: 0.0006% Dynamic Range: 114 dB Scout Mode: Yes EMI shielding: No (but it passed all the FCC emission tests) Operating temperature: 0–45°C Input Power: 12V⎓0.5A Warranty: 1 Year (MSRP) Price: $179.99 / £169.99 The Sound Blaster AE-X was announced at the end of May, and it becomes clear that it is mainly for headphone wearers. I should also note that the card does not support DDL/DTS encoding technology, but it is said to support decoding through the coaxial SPDIF port. I was able to test this working with the classic Windows Sound properties, but I could not get a DTS (decode) signal through my Logitech Z906, it defaulted to 3D sound whenever I played DTS content through Plex or Emby. In addition, this card only supports two channels (stereo) over the speakers. The surround support is limited to the Headphone Amp, so before I get underway, what we have here is a card mostly intended for headphone use, especially with its SPDIF In (Toslink) port where you could connect another device like a console. So what about the highlights of this card? The AE-X is powered by the ESS SABRE DAC (ES9039Q2M), which is capable of a 130 dB dynamic range. In addition, it supports 32-bit/384 kHz playback for deeper detail and clarity. The headphone amplifier delivers up to 350 mW @ 32Ω, which admittedly far surpasses standard onboard audio, offering support for studio-grade headphones. DSD256 and ASIO 2.3 are also supported. What doesn't it have? No support for What-U-Hear, Super X-Fi, or the SmartComms Kit No EMI shielding, but it passed all the FCC emission tests (from the FAQ) I also want to make it clear that I am no audiophile. For me, it's purely subjective and it should just "work" out of the box. First impressions As I said in the introduction, I was a bit sad to see that the AE-X only supports stereo output, meaning it would not be on par with my ALC1220 over my speakers, as I mentioned it seems like this card is marketed toward headphone users. Since I am not an avid gamer that would rule me out as a potential customer, but I can still test its capabilities! The card arrived in a nice-looking box, as shown above. It's quite a bit larger than the Audify FX Pro that I reviewed back in April, and at first I thought the covering meant that it was EMI shielded, but it isn't as mentioned above in the highlights section. What's in the box: 1 x Sound Blaster AE-X PCIe card 1 x 3.5 mm CTIA TRRS to Dual TRS Headset Splitter Cable 1 x Quick Start Guide Aside from the Quick Start Guide, which someone at my age (I guess) needs a magnifying glass to read thanks to the tiny fonts, Creative Labs also has the manual online, which first requires you to prove that you're human in order to access it (so I can't direct link it). Anyway, the box is mostly made up of cardboard, and the only plastic in it is the anti-static bag for the card itself. Design Top Bottom The card itself looks pretty cool and actually wouldn't look out of place in an all-white build. There's only one connector, and for some reason it is awkwardly placed on the side (front-facing) that is for the front panel audio connector, which will let you use the headphones through the front PC audio jack. Since the front panel Headphone Amp has fewer capabilities than the rear headphone port, I decided not to use it. Rear of card PCI-e interface The rear of the card is completely open and is normally where you would find the front panel connector. The PCIe interface side is completely covered, which initially made me think it was EMI shielded. I/O panel Side (front-facing) with Front panel connector On the outer rear bracket side we have the TOSLINK SPDIF in, Coaxial SPDIF out, RCA line out (Right), RCA line out (Left), Headphone out, and Mic/Line in ports. On the front facing portion of the card itself is the F-panel connector. Usage Test System Our test system consists of the following: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D Gigabyte X870E AORUS MASTER (BIOS F12) Corsair RM1000x (2024) Thermal Grizzly Kyronaut (33x33x0,2mm) 2x 32GB Kingston Fury Beast RGB DDR5 6000MT/s CL36-38-38-80 T-Force Z540 2TB (PCIe Gen5) NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Founders Edition (NVIDIA) Creative Sound Blaster AE-X Windows 11 25H2 Pro I installed the card into the Gigabyte X870E AORUS MASTER which includes the RealTek ALC1220 onboard audio. For our subjective listening tests, I used the Coaxial SPDIF port to my Logitech Z906 speakers. For headphone tests I used the OneOdio Studio Max 2 Wireless DJ Headphones that I reviewed last month. After installing the audio driver, I installed Creative Nexus, which is a relatively new app designed for the latest Sound Blaster cards. Then I discovered the AE-X needed both a driver update from 1.00.15.0001 to 1.01.09.000 and a firmware update from 1.00.06.0000 to 1.00.06.0002, then I was set to go. It should be noted that the card did not work without the driver (not Plug and Play). As you can see above, you can manage the firmware, driver, and inputs via Advanced Settings on the Device tab. By default Nexus enabled "Direct Mode". Upon clicking on Acoustic Engine, the Equalizer can be enabled and set to four different presets, which are: Gaming Music Movies Footsteps Enhancer There's also a dedicated Scout Mode for gamers. I mainly used Tidal and Spotify in the past week to listen to some of my Liked Songs (which now total over 700) in Shuffle mode; there were no pops or interference that I could hear. I also found a 5.1 Surround Music playlist on Tidal that sounded really great over Studio Max 2 headphones. When I reviewed the Audigy FX Pro, I went out and purchased a Logitech Z906 set second-hand for €100 specifically to use with the card, but in this instance all I could get on the AE-X was the 3D output of surround sound through Coaxial SPDIF and although it still sounded great, it isn't quite as good as DTS Interactive via my onboard Realtek ALC1220. Conclusion So what have I learned? The AE-X lacks multi-channel support for 5.1/7.1 setups and drops support for modern surround technologies like Dolby or DTS, functioning strictly as a stereo output device. So to really benefit, you will need Studio-grade headphones to "hear" the benefits of this card. With that being said, I can imagine it will appeal to gamers who are switching between console and PC. By utilizing the SPDIF in port, you could just plug your headphones into the AE-X (front or rear port) and then switch between PC and Console without having to move the headphones to a different port. As I said in the Sound Blaster Audigy review, the EQ in the Creative Nexus app offers safe presets, which allows a user to further tweak the lows, mids, and highs for a personal listening experience. Of course it all depends on the headphones you hook up to it. Speaking of headphones, I kind of wish I had higher-quality Studio-grade headphones to really test this card with; I'm not usually wearing headphones in my day to day duties. The only time I will wear them is if I want to listen to music very late at night and I don't want to disturb my neighbors, so my rating (verdict) is based on this fact. Someone with a PC/Console setup and wears headphone religiously to game, and consume media will benefit much more than I from the high-quality Headphone Amps that are included in the AE-X. Once again, I do feel like Creative could have gone the extra mile to support the S/PDIF port a bit more. Why include it if you're not supporting the main popular digital formats? It seems like the decision was more of a legacy-based one, offering uncompressed 2-channel PCM audio, for users with high-fidelity audio systems and external DACs. Maybe I will be lucky enough to review a card that truly includes all these features in the future. I am sure readers with far more knowledge on audio systems than me will correct me in the comments below. I'll just say I am happy to learn what I don't know! Where to buy The Sound Blaster AE-X is available to purchase now in preorder for $179.99 on the U.S. Creative website, or for £169.99 on the Creative UK website and will start shipping to customers from June 25.
    • $80 or 90%, anything else would be financial suicide one way or another.
    • Or... just use Bitwarden. Free, and has on-prem option as well. Works both on desktop and mobile, wherever you are. The age of local password files is over.
    • Thanks
    • I actually got to use one of those so called "backup codes" once. It was for a customer, I choose the backup code option, and by the grace of god, they actually hade them printed out. Imagine my surprise, when after using the backup code, Google then told use we had to enter a code they just sent to the gmail address we currently did not have access to. I was not amused, Google backup codes should be the end all get out of jail free card, because you had to have access to the account to even get them.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      hhgygy earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      AMV earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      164
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      88
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      73
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!