578 members have voted

  1. 1. FireFox or Opera ?

    • Firefox
      354
    • Opera
      224


Recommended Posts

NeoTech: Where exactly did I say that I was listing reasons for getting Firefox? It was a response to Chode's post where he claimed that in truth less than 1.7 million people have downloaded Firefox.

d_ralphie: The only independent browser stats provider I know is w3schools, if there's some other that shows considerably higher amount of Opera users I'll gladly pull back my estimates about Firefox/Opera user ratios.

NeoTech: Where exactly did I say that I was listing reasons for getting Firefox? It was a response to Chode's post where he claimed that in truth less than 1.7 million people have downloaded Firefox.

585276222[/snapback]

My post was maths for a post higher up in the thread. READ.

Btw, 200,000 to 300,000 downloads daily? I think not.

They'd have their million mark in only 4 days at that rate. I don't know where you get your figures from but they are either a) Made Up or b) Ridiculously inflated.

elendil doesn't even read what we're actually writing.

585276302[/snapback]

Uh, yeah I do.

Chode: The 200k+ figure was from Asa Dotzler's weblog. He's a Moz.org staff member.

http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/

I don't see anything in this thread that would make your post more accurate..

Uh, yeah I do.

Chode: The 200k+ figure was from Asa Dotzler's weblog. He's a Moz.org staff member.

http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/

I don't see anything in this thread that would make your post more accurate..

585276345[/snapback]

what, pray tell, does this have to do with anything i've written?

i rest my case.

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.

585261868[/snapback]

Only crashed a few times? Too bad...

I used the unstable firefox nightlies for about 6 months prior to 1.0 and I cannot ever remember one of them being unstable. Maybe once or twice, out of 150.

common sense says that he's just jacking Firefox.

585276350[/snapback]

:wacko: :no: :cry:

Ok, I see this is pointless.

As for NeoTech who wanted reasons to get Firefox: Listing reasons to use either one is pretty useless, both are free to download (+ relatively small) and both are very good browsers. Just download them and use whatever feels better.

what, pray tell, does this have to do with anything i've written?

i rest my case.

585276361[/snapback]

I was going to leave this thread be but now I have to ask you the same question.. Did you even read what I said? The whole post started with 'Chode:', why on earth would you think that I was replying to anything you have said?

Only crashed a few times? Too bad...

I used the unstable firefox nightlies for about 6 months prior to 1.0 and I cannot ever remember one of them being unstable. Maybe once or twice, out of 150.

585276389[/snapback]

Hmm.. I tried Firefox 1.0 for a day, and it crashed like every 30min... Atleast 10-15 times during the time I tested it. Opera 8.00 beta 1 which I use now have crashed 1 time since early December.

edit: sorry wrong quote... fixed now.

Exactly. :sleep: If I were you ralphie I would be less concerned with firefox and more concerned with fixing my broken computer.

585276425[/snapback]

my computer works perfectly. firefox is the only program which crashes regularly. and it crashes a lot. this is true for several computers, by the way. I have to do testing on both mac, linux and windows (9x/nt/2k/xp).

I was going to leave this thread be but now I have to ask you the same question.. Did you even read what I said? The whole post started with 'Chode:', why on earth would you think that I was replying to anything you have said?

585276444[/snapback]

uh, because you QUOTED me?

firefox fanboys and pushers are rightfully becoming more and more hated across the web. it is not that they love firefox. it's they way they are completely ignorant about other browsers, and just spew out what they've been brainwashed into thinking about these other browsers, without even trying it out themselves.

Or they compare their current browser with another that they used nearly a year ago and claim that it's still a valid reason to not try the product. One of my favorites is "I've tried Opera 7.11 and didn't like it so I won't bother trying Opera 8.0" (to paraphrase.) I cannot even count how many times I've heard something along those lines, and it's pathetic everytime I hear it.

Another of my favorite claims is "you can't compare apples to oranges" even though they usually do it themselves and the company which makes Firefox does it, but that's slightly off-topic.

at least the opera fanboys have usually tried firefox before forming an opinion. you see, you have to pay for opera, but people prefer something if it's free. so they hear about the free firefox and obviously try it out.

on the other hand, firefox fanbois often don't bother to try out opera, so they just spew out the tired old lies they've heard from someone else who didn't try opera either, but who heard it from someone else who didn't try opera either, who... etc.

Agreed. If people are willing to pay for a product when they could find another that is "just as good" (I hate that claim because they're tailored for totally different audiences, they can't possibly be "just as good" as eachother by any stretch of the imagination,) then that shows that they have an open mind and wouldn't mind trying a product if it will save them money. People like this typically have good reasons to keep paying for a product when there are free alternatives available. The same can't be said for a LOT of Firefox users which try to compare Firefox to Opera though; they are already happy with the free browser and usually have no intentions on reviewing a browser that they'd have to pay for.

I think the developers fell for this as well; it's obvious by the Firefox vs Opera comparison they made which didn't even come close to accurate (about 40% accuracy on the Opera column while 100% accuracy on the Firefox column.)

From reading Firefox vs. Opera threads on various boards (this, mozillazine, opera forums) I fail to see any difference between the fans. Firefox and Opera both have their 'bad apples' and since Firefox is more popular, it's statistically bound to have more this kind of fans. It's the human nature, not the browser.

You can't see any differences between them? Honestly? I'll agree with your more-popular-more-idiots claim, but I also have to say that the price of each adds to the idiocy a great deal. And I don't believe anyone here was saying it was the browser's fault.

Edit: d_ralphie: Never have I seen so much FUD and bull**** concentrated in one post, congrats.

Actually, he's completely correct. Read my response above.

a billion flies can't be wrong. eat ****!

I always loved that saying, hehe.

opera fanboys are infinitely more informed than the disgusting firefox fanboys.

Not always, but usually.

oh please. i see more and more people not using firefox just because of the rabid fanboys that pollute the web. you won't see that with any other browser.

I have almost quit using Firefox for that exact reason, actually. It's hard to stand by a product when the developers themselves openly promote lying by doing it themselves (their firefox vs opera comparison) and letting their affiliates (such as mozillazine) get away with promoting lying. That's also one of the reasons I love Opera so much, they don't openly promote lying. During the whole "let's flood download sites" parade of idiocy by Firefox evangelists, the Opera users were considering retaliation on them and two (if I recall correctly) Opera employees came into the topic and asked that the users not follow the same path. That says something about the people standing behind Opera.

d_ralphie: The only independent browser stats provider I know is w3schools, if there's some other that shows considerably higher amount of Opera users I'll gladly pull back my estimates about Firefox/Opera user ratios.

That's a bad place to pull figures from, as most people that go to that site are technologically-inclined, which skews their results (for firefox and opera) dramatically.

as long as we're sharing useless anecdotal evidence, i can say that firefox crashes a lot more than opera compared to how much i run both of them. i run opera all the time, and it hardly ever crashes. i run firefox only for testing, and it crashes a LOT!

Same for me (using the stable firefox release and opera 8 beta 1) The same couldn't be said of Opera 7.54 though, it was about equal for me. And before anyone asks, my computer is perfectly stable so those crashes were due to coding errors (perhaps not errors but incompatibilities with certain hardware.)

uh, because you QUOTED me?

The only part which was directed to you was "Uh, yeah I do." The rest was toward Chode.

megamanXplosion: Yeah, I can honestly say that I've seen plenty of IE/Opera trolls.. just as obnoxious Firefox trolls, if you are bored just read through some of the deleted/removed posts on mozillazine.

http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewforum.php?f=26

And about the w3schools link, I thought it would be funny to show that actually the huge majority of technologically inclined, or informed if you may (as d_ralphie put it), users prefer Firefox.

And about the w3schools link, I thought it would be funny to show that actually the huge majority of technologically inclined, or informed if you may (as d_ralphie put it), users prefer Firefox.

Argument based on popularity = Argumentum ad populum = Logical fallacy.

Firefox is just a gateway browser to Opera.

Oh, BTW, mods are against any public opinion (arguments are bad), and will close this thread.

585276789[/snapback]

They are against personal attacks, not debates. If they are against all debates or "any public opinion" then this topic should've been closed at least 2 months ago and the rules should be updated.

Argument based on popularity = Argumentum ad populum = Logical fallacy.

585276757[/snapback]

Ah, but it wasn't an argument in such sense, originally it was to support my post about Opera/Firefox user ratios. I wasn't saying at any point that Firefox's popularity makes it better.

It also servers as a counter to your and d_ralphie's claim that Opera users are more informed/technically inclined. W3schools' is a site where this would clearly skew stats in Opera's favor. However, since the stats give Opera it's usual 2-3% cut I'm tempted to say that your argument doesn't hold water.

I use Firefox at home, because it's so cute. ;)

At school I use Opera. You should see these teenages freakout. WTF?!?!11/!? is that? A Game?!?@!1/1?

LoL!

Both are great! Like a big bowl of that Tony the Tiger cereal. yum! hehehehe :laugh:

I must leave now :ninja:

Ah, but it wasn't an argument in such sense, originally it was to support my post about Opera/Firefox user ratios. I wasn't saying at any point that Firefox's popularity makes it better.

I thought that you were implying that Firefox was superior because more "technically inclined" users have it; I assume that you were referring to the more-downloads-more-idiots theory? I don't recall anyone disagreeing with it so it wasn't really obvious when reading your post, you were just repeating yourself. What my point earlier was that the price has an involvement in the idiocy because most people who are happy with freeware aren't going to extensively review alternative they'd need to pay for. Would you extensively review a product you'd need to pay for when you're happy with the free software you have? I don't think you would, and I don't think many others would.

It also servers as a counter to your and d_ralphie's claim that Opera users are more informed/technically inclined. W3schools' is a site where this would clearly skew stats in Opera's favor. However, since the stats give Opera it's usual 2-3% cut I'm tempted to say that your argument doesn't hold water.

Well if it was also a counter-argument to our "more informed" claim then my above comment still rings true, that's a logical fallacy; and you lack the evidence to link those percentages with the "more informed" user base because there's a load of random factors which needs to be considered but are unknown. You must also remember that some Firefox users are also Opera users, the same is true vice versa (probably moreso because everyone likes to save money if they can,) plus they could be viewing the site with both browsers because they're using the CSS preview tools and wish to test both browsers, etc. You also forget that "technologically inclined" doesn't imply that the person is willing to pay for software when they're happy with the freeware. You also, conveniently, forgot to include Firefox in the skewing-factor when it's obviously true that they would be skewed because the majority of people who visit that site are webmasters and those webmasters will likely be using Firefox for the simple reason that it does have more market-share (prioritizing the process of browser compatibility on their websites.) I'm sorry but your argument doesn't hold water.

I'd also like to point out that Opera will likely have at least 5% (among the "technically inclined" user base) by the end of 2005, which won't be "the usual." Opera is about to release a major new version of their browser (mass publicity,) they're lowering the price, they're making the license more user-friendly, they're going to include a web accelerator which could accelerate browsing by 500%, and they're starting an effective grass-roots marketing campaign in the United States at college universities/banks/wherever (which will be successful due to all of the recent interface changes to simplify the program for the not-so-technically inclined.) Opera's putting good use to that $28 million (if I recall correctly) they recieved from Microsoft over that court-case where Microsoft was practicing a monopoly (which was one of the things which held their marketshare back when they released 7.0; people couldn't use their MSN homepages due to browser sniffing.)

Maybe but neither does yours. They are simply opinions without any concrete evidence to back them up.

I don't have concrete evidence but I think my claim is very logical; I seriously doubt that many Firefox users are going to extensively review an application they'd pay for when they already have something that makes them happy and it's free, which leads to a lot of ignorance about Opera's capabilities. I don't think concrete evidence is really needed to support my claim, it's logical.

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!