578 members have voted

  1. 1. FireFox or Opera ?

    • Firefox
      354
    • Opera
      224


Recommended Posts

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.

585264005[/snapback]

Lots of people claim their browser is the fastest. Doesn't make it true. From my tests, I've found Safari to be the fastest, and I was comparing a Pentium 4 2.8GHz HT running Opera 8 beta 1 on Windows XP to a G4 1.33GHz running Safari 1.3 on Mac OS X 10.3.

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.

585264005[/snapback]

LOL get off your high horse :rolleyes: I simply stated my experiences of Opera vs. Firefox. Sorry if that offended you and you find it hard to believe. I find it hard to believe that some people think Firefox is slower than Opera, but I don't try to attack or denounce their word.

Firefox has been faster for ME. Maybe not for YOU, but for ME.

Opera is definately the fastest browser (at least on the Windows platform, I don't have a mac to play with.) Opera and Firefox are nearly the same speed when it comes to downloading pages (after you've tweaked Firefox to allow multiple connections, which shouldn't even be neccessary); however, Opera has much better memory caching abilities than Firefox which allows instantaneous back/forward navigation which Firefox doesn't have. The JavaScript performance is also better in Opera (this might not be true in the future though because the Mozilla developers have been working hard in bugzilla to squash some of the javascript performance problems.) That's the only real speed differences between the two when it comes to navigating websites. Of course, I'm comparing a stock version of Opera with a tweaked Firefox (having it set to use multiple connections.) There isn't any noticeable difference in the rendering engine, it's down to millisecond-differences. Opera is customized in a way that should be faster than Firefox's default configuration, if it's not then there's likely to be some kind of external interference (like an improperly configured antivirus or firewall application.)

But, this explanation of why-that-is-true is just a waste of time because when 8.0 goes final it will be distributed with a free web accelerator which compresses image files and stuff before sending them to you so you only need to download half as much to view a page, and Opera can definitively call itself the fastest browser without having to draw out these long explanations for why that is true :whistle:

It should also be noted that "fastest browser on Earth" might not even apply to networking, it could be talking about productivity. The built-in features like sessions, paste & go (so simple but so useful!), spell checking, voice browsing, advanced multi-document interface which allows side-by-side comparison of pages, ability to take notes and [quickly] insert them where you want, the ability to copy plain-text URLs (which are not clickable) and then "try as URL," instantaneous back/forward navigation, etc. etc. are all great features which increase productivity over other browsers. Of course, you could probably get all of those features after downloading 10+ extensions for Firefox, but I don't think that would make them look better in the productivity category (spending hours to customize a browser isn't productive.)

But, this explanation of why-that-is-true is just a waste of time because when 8.0 goes final it will be distributed with a free web accelerator which compresses image files and stuff before sending them to you so you only need to download half as much to view a page, and Opera can definitively call itself the fastest browser without having to draw out these long explanations for why that is true :whistle:

585265421[/snapback]

Where did u get that ? :blink:

There is a buge meta-tracking bug on bugzilla that is tracking the performance increasing bugs for Mozilla and Firefox. I think its about 75 bugs. Firefox is already fast as Opera so no point in hugely increasing it right now when its not slow, so the devs spend time fixing actual bugs. Remember Opera has been around for like 7 or 8 years and has had loads of time to work out speed bumps to increase performance. Just wait until those bugs are fixed and watch how fast firefox is. Don't want to wait, then help them out and work on some patches :)

Where did u get that ?  :blink:

585265830[/snapback]

Well.. Opera 8 will be using a tecnology called "SlipStream", to make it load pages even faster than before. But the speed is mostly for users on a slow connection. The speed enhancement for broadband will be small compared.

Its a shame i didnt know about dat :|

Was there any announcement or was it lurking in the documentation somewhere ?

Edit: Found it...its so old that i forgot about it

But data can only by Compressed by the ISP themselves and then sent to the end user

If the ISP aint supported then it kinda useless aint it... or am i missing something

Its a shame i didnt know about dat :|

Was there any announcement or was it lurking in the documentation somewhere ?

Edit: Found it...its so old that i forgot about it

But data can only by Compressed by the ISP themselves and then sent to the end user

If the ISP aint supported then it kinda useless aint it... or am i missing something

585265899[/snapback]

Yes that's true.. there are already many ISPs using this.. and more and more will most likely do so in the future. It would benefit not only PC marked but also the handheld with mobiles etc.

Remember Opera has been around for like 7 or 8 years and has had loads of time to work out speed bumps to increase performance.

And Firefox has been in development for many years as well because it's a spinoff from Mozilla which was a spinoff from Netscape. Firefox isn't new, by any stretch of the imagination, so time isn't really an excuse.

Don't want to wait, then help them out and work on some patches

I'd rather pay $40 and spend my time making money.

Well.. Opera 8 will be using a tecnology called "SlipStream", to make it load pages even faster than before. But the speed is mostly for users on a slow connection. The speed enhancement for broadband will be small compared.

Bingo.

Yes that's true.. there are already many ISPs using this.. and more and more will most likely do so in the future. It would benefit not only PC marked but also the handheld with mobiles etc.

The Slipstream website says it will "accelerate information delivery over any network." Slipstream is basically a proxy which is contacted whenever you want to download a file and it will download the file for you, compress it, then send it to you. It isn't home-2-server compression so it isn't dependant on the ISP.

The Slipstream website says it will "accelerate information delivery over any network." Slipstream is basically a proxy which is contacted whenever you want to download a file and it will download the file for you, compress it, then send it to you. It isn't home-2-server compression so it isn't dependant on the ISP.

585265931[/snapback]

Thanks for clearing that up :)

Me wonders how many more threads like this will be created this year

585266005[/snapback]

I'm sure a lot :yes: anyway it's best to try out all of them and decide from there what works best for you ;)
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]

Your precious firefox was in the beta stage for god remembers how long, and now you're having a whinge about a version of Opera been beta?

Can't blame a person for trying, but pull the other leg :sleep:

Your precious firefox was in the beta stage for god remembers how long, and now you're having a whinge about a version of Opera been beta?

Can't blame a person for trying, but pull the other leg  :sleep:

585266539[/snapback]

Ah, but those were Firefox's development stages. It's first steps. Opera had been out for a quite a while and was 6-7 versions in. Anyway, I'm not going to compare Firefox 1.1 PR to Opera 7.54, or tell you to use version 1.1. I also didn't push that hard into getting people to use Firefox's pre-1.0 releases. I knew they were beta, and I knew lots of people didn't like betas.

Ah, but those were Firefox's development stages. It's first steps. Opera had been out for a quite a while and was 6-7 versions in. Anyway, I'm not going to compare Firefox 1.1 PR to Opera 7.54, or tell you to use version 1.1. I also didn't push that hard into getting people to use Firefox's pre-1.0 releases. I knew they were beta, and I knew lots of people didn't like betas.

585266736[/snapback]

First steps? Well, mozilla didnt really have to do much to the Mozilla code to turn it into firefox, remove mail/chat, tweak it around a little, the engines the same.

There is a buge meta-tracking bug on bugzilla that is tracking the performance increasing bugs for Mozilla and Firefox. I think its about 75 bugs. Firefox is already fast as Opera so no point in hugely increasing it right now when its not slow, so the devs spend time fixing actual bugs. Remember Opera has been around for like 7 or 8 years and has had loads of time to work out speed bumps to increase performance. Just wait until those bugs are fixed and watch how fast firefox is. Don't want to wait, then help them out and work on some patches :)

585265843[/snapback]

Uh.. Opera has gone through a few rewrites with both the rendering engine and the core UI. When you do that, it's almost like starting from scratch. Performance issues have to be readdressed. So don't try to feed me that BS. And the Gecko rendering engine has been around for a LONG time anyways.
Ah, but those were Firefox's development stages. It's first steps. Opera had been out for a quite a while and was 6-7 versions in. Anyway, I'm not going to compare Firefox 1.1 PR to Opera 7.54, or tell you to use version 1.1. I also didn't push that hard into getting people to use Firefox's pre-1.0 releases. I knew they were beta, and I knew lots of people didn't like betas.

585266736[/snapback]

When Opera has the beta on their front-page for download and many many people recommending it.. I think it's pretty safe to use and compare.
One more thing to ponder upon....

10 million downloads of firefox in a very short period of time.

Can opera boast of such milestones?

Have? these 10 mn ppl made the right choice?

585268395[/snapback]

I wonder how many of those actually know to use FF to it's potential, or have downloaded because of the features? Let's face it, Firefox is cool and is 'in' and Explorer sucks goat balls nowdays (Excluding the totally 'ignorant' people who will use whatever works, even if it works awfully > IE). Personally, I only know only 2 people who KNOW Opera, others never heard of it and are most only computer illiterates. That's a big plus for the FF userbase, even if it comes with the price of having users like this smart specimen:
Opera sucks donkey dick

585265964[/snapback]

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • 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.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
    • Just to understand: your solution to getting rid of an online password manager is...another online password manager?
    • Cjam 2.5.0.0 by Razvan Serea Cjam is a lightweight and fast MP3 editor for Windows that lets you cut, join, and edit MP3 files without re-encoding. This means your audio quality remains untouched, and edits happen instantly. Cjam is ideal for quick, lossless edits—whether you're trimming music, combining tracks, or preparing audio for learning tools or podcasts. It features batch processing, scripting support, cue and playlist file handling, and a simple interface. Cjam is perfect for anyone who needs efficient MP3 editing without the complexity of full audio suites. Cjam requires a PC running Windows 10 or later and Microsoft .NET 6.0 or later. Key features for Cjam: No Re-encoding: Edit MP3 files without losing quality. Cut and Join MP3: Easily cut, trim, and combine MP3 tracks. Batch Processing: Edit multiple files at once for faster workflows. Scriptable Interface: Automate tasks with a custom command language. Cue and Playlist Support: Handle CUE and playlist files for seamless audio management. Fast and Lightweight: Quick processing with minimal system resources. Lossless Audio Editing: Ensure your edits don't affect audio quality. Simple User Interface: Clean, intuitive design for easy navigation. File Format Support: Works with MP3, Cjam-specific file formats (CJAMC, CJAMJ, CJAM). Cjam 2.5.0.0 changelog: Added clipboard-based import/export support for mp3DirectCut Added clipboard-based export support for REAPER Added support for naming IMP3 elements Changed the Reset behavior to preserve Undo/Redo history; use Shift key + Reset button to clear it Added a new command parameter (qcp) Added 8 new entries to lang.txt (main_c124-126, main_d150-151, main_m082, vme_c014, vme_d005) Fixed a bug where the il parameter was incorrectly applied when pasting VMP3s into the main list Fixed several other minor bugs Download: Cjam 2.5.0.0 | 1.4 MB (Freeware) Links: Cjam Home Page | Cjam Manual | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • 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
      91
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!