FireFox or Opera ?

[worbd]

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.

You are assuming that they have even bothered to try Opera.

[Pallab]

it is true.

Ff users r definitely less informed.

Well look back at this thread and you would find plenty og good eg.

They say like opera sucks bcoz ff it isnt free as da only reason.

ralphi here r two nice links

http://www.gungfu.de/facts/archives/2004/1...y-i-love-opera/

Motivation

Why this post? Well, after Firefox 1.0 was released two weeks ago there was a real hype about it. That’s actually good since it sharpens awareness on the need for good standard support (which Firefox surely provides in a more general way than damned Internet Explorer ever will), security and less vulnerability.?

I fear, though, that in all that hype another great browser will be somewhat overseen. Opera.?

Having compared Firefox’s press-release features with Opera’s it’s now time to tell you why I love Opera and why I am sure it’s the best browser currently available.?

For this purpose I’ve collected a list of features. If you feel overwhelmed or confused by all this - never mind - Opera will take good care of you by default.?

http://www.gungfu.de/facts/archives/2004/1...efox-get-opera/

I like Firefox. But I love Opera. I hereby compare the new version of Firefox with my experiences using Opera. Let’s have a look at the statements published on the Firefox-site for their new version and see what Opera has to offer in comparison…?

Well yeah..these ff fans do spread a lot of lies.

I have no prob if they use FF.But that doesnt mean they should talk crappy lies about Opera.

[Deanjl]

I came to Firefox from Internet Explorer a few months ago and I'm very happy with what I have now. That isn't to say that Opera isn't good, I've tried it before and when I first opened it the GUI confused me. If my experience is common then it's no wonder why Firefox is more popular.

The fact of the matter is that Firefox is more friendly to users coming straight from Internet Explorer. The interface is much the same as its rival, which makes it less of a learning curve. Faster page rendering and standard features vs. extensions don't really matter in the end. Both browsers have excellent support for the standards of web design and both aren't as hole-filled as Internet Explorer.

There are fankids on both sides of the table both claiming that the object of their desire is the best and therefore everybody should use it. Instead of fighting and arguing over who has the best browser, just settle it as Opera and Firefox are too close to call. What we should be concerned with is converting the millions of Internet Explorer and MSN Explorer users. Opera and Firefox users; unite! :)

[Chode]

The fact of the matter is that Firefox is more friendly to users coming straight from Internet Explorer. The interface is much the same as its rival, which makes it less of a learning curve. Faster page rendering and standard features vs. extensions don't really matter in the end. Both browsers have excellent support for the standards of web design and both aren't as hole-filled as Internet Explorer.

585278833[/snapback]

Yes yes yes! Another point I have tried to say and get laughed at. Firefox is so similar to internet explorer that more people prefer it and can easily slide between IE and it.

Opera is so different from the IE style that it takes a lot longer to get used to it.

[gigapixels Veteran]

it is true.

Ff users r definitely less informed.

Well look back at this thread and you would find plenty og good eg.

They say like opera sucks bcoz ff it isnt free as da only reason.

ralphi here r two nice links

http://www.gungfu.de/facts/archives/2004/1...y-i-love-opera/

http://www.gungfu.de/facts/archives/2004/1...efox-get-opera/

Well yeah..these ff fans do spread a lot of lies.

I have no prob if they use FF.But that doesnt mean they should talk crappy lies about Opera.

585278774[/snapback]

Yes. Firefox users are such liars :rolleyes:

[ZZOOzzoo]

it is true.

Ff users r definitely less informed.

Well look back at this thread and you would find plenty og good eg.

They say like opera sucks bcoz ff it isnt free as da only reason.

ralphi here r two nice links

http://www.gungfu.de/facts/archives/2004/1...y-i-love-opera/

http://www.gungfu.de/facts/archives/2004/1...efox-get-opera/

Well yeah..these ff fans do spread a lot of lies.

I have no prob if they use FF.But that doesnt mean they should talk crappy lies about Opera.

585278774[/snapback]

Thanks, those were very good reads. (Y)

[Rapier]

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.

585276288[/snapback]

Chode...He knows the correct figures.. and he was going to post them aswell..

but at the time of posting his 0 key got stuck :laugh:

[RufioPan]

I came to Firefox from Internet Explorer a few months ago and I'm very happy with what I have now. That isn't to say that Opera isn't good, I've tried it before and when I first opened it the GUI confused me. If my experience is common then it's no wonder why Firefox is more popular.

The fact of the matter is that Firefox is more friendly to users coming straight from Internet Explorer. The interface is much the same as its rival, which makes it less of a learning curve. Faster page rendering and standard features vs. extensions don't really matter in the end. Both browsers have excellent support for the standards of web design and both aren't as hole-filled as Internet Explorer.

There are fankids on both sides of the table both claiming that the object of their desire is the best and therefore everybody should use it. Instead of fighting and arguing over who has the best browser, just settle it as Opera and Firefox are too close to call. What we should be concerned with is converting the millions of Internet Explorer and MSN Explorer users. Opera and Firefox users; unite! :)

585278833[/snapback]

I'm a newcomer to this thread, and I have to echo the above sentiment. This silly fighting between the Opera/Firefox camp is a total waste of time. Whether someone is using Firefox or Opera, who cares... at least they're not using IE.

I checked out the Opera vs. Firefox article, and I have to say that was quite a waste of time as well. I've no doubt that Opera has many wonderful features, including many that are not available with Firefox, but credit should be given to the Mozilla Foundation for how far it's come, it's achievements, and the excellent product they've put out.

Firefox and the Mozilla Foundation have two goals, as I see it. One is to create a browser that offers a practical and appealing alternative to IE. That means it has to cater to the Microsoft userbase, which typically consists of your average, technophobe audience. It is a browser that strives to introduce these users to the internet of today, an internet that requires a modern browser like Firefox (or Opera). The fact is, the Mozilla Foundation has just done a better job in creating a simpler, more user-friendly browser with more marketing backup. Like I've said, I'm sure Opera is wonderful, but Moz Foundation has just done a better job getting the browser out there and making it appeal to Microsoft's core userbase (for whatever reasons.. I leave that to the fanboys in both camps to argue). For that matter, I wouldn't be surprised if Firefox itself has contributed to the Opera userbase more than Opera's efforts have! As stated in this thread, I'm sure Opera has learned something from the Mozilla Foundation and will follow suite (grass-roots efforts, spread-by-blogging, ad campaigns, "newer, simpler, easier to use", website buttons, friendly and helpful community... I'm sure Opera will have all of it soon).

The other goal of the Mozilla Foundation is to create an extensible application architecture, and from what I know of Opera (and please correct me if I'm mistaken), I don't see the same in Opera. Forget toolbars and themes, I'm talking about using the core components in the Mozilla app architecture to create small web applications, and then be able to deploy them in a manner made as simple as Mozilla has done w/ Firefox. That extensibility just isn't there, and from what I can tell, Opera is currently just not pursuing that goal. This, in my mind, is the key feature that sets Opera and Firefox apart. Firefox can simply be what any user or developer wants it to become.

Either way, like I've said, i think both are excellent choices for users. My preference is obviously Firefox, but again, who cares. Use anything but IE.

Edited January 12, 2005 by RufioPan

[arrrgh]

I eyed through the links Pallab posted, here are some things I noticed:

"Why use Firefox?" article

1) The author doesn't know the difference between smart keywords and search bar, the search bar is very similar to Opera's search. Adding or removing new searches isn't very noob friendly. Firefox's smartsearch gives you another way to add search engines, all you have to do is right click a search field and add a name and a keyword, in future you can search by typing the 'keyword' <searchterm> into URL bar. Completely different and more usable than Opera's search bar. Did the author even use Firefox?

2) He brings in the mail client. I thought we were comparing browsers? If he wants to compare suites, do it with Mozilla. Firefox isn't meant to be a feature filled package, it provides a browser base on what you can build almost whatever you like with extensions. Like I said in one earlier thread, Firefox is for those who like to choose 'custom install' and select what to have installed instead of the 'express install' option that installs everything automatically.

3) Firefox doesn't produce javascript alert-boxes as the author seems to suggest, they are logged in java script console and go completely unnoticed by the average user who doesn't have any use for them. He also mentions some webdev tools like they would be only for Opera. There's a web dev toolbar extension for Firefox and a more advanced javascript debugger known as Venkman. I'm sure there are more, these are just couple examples. Again, I'm tempted to ask, did this guy even try Firefox before posting his article?

4) He mentions starting download immediately after clicking link and remembering download locations as if they were unique Opera features. Firefox does both by default, you can select download folder under options->downloads. In addition Firefox's download behavior can be modified with extensions, I'm using download statusbar extension that shows downloads in a slim bar at the bottom of browser window. Again, I have to ask, did this guy even try Firefox?

5) He claims that Firefox being the most customizable browser is a lie? How can it be a lie, you can go extract the .jar packages in Firefox\chrome directory and change anything you want. If that's not enough you can hack the source and build the browser. It really doesn't get any more customizable than that.

"Why I love Opera" article:

1) He mentions mouse gestures but doesn't bother to say that you can add them to Firefox with an extension. There are several mouse gesture extensions so you can customize the browser to exactly what you want.

2) Next he mentions speed. It's kind of funny that both tests he mentions are made by the folks over at Opera forums. Yeah, I have seen the tests before and I know where they come from. I'm sure the good folks at mozillazine could come up with a test where Firefox beats Opera hands down too. What is really funny is that on the BenchJS test (which, btw, doesn't really benchmark javascript performance) Firefox has the number one position at the moment. He does have one good point though, moving back is faster with Opera since its cache stores the already rendered version of the page, where Gecko based browsers render the page every time again. I can honestly say that on my computer Firefox launches and renders pages more quickly than Opera but Opera is faster when browsing backwards in history. Note: I compile my own browser, currently SSE2 optimized and with over different 50 patches. Another point worth mentioning is that I haven't had dialup for 5 years so I can't say which browser is faster on a slow connection on my computer.

3) I don't like setups, I always go for the zip builds. Oh yeah, are there any unzip and you're good to go builds of Opera out there? Granted, that was a bit low, I haven't used Firefox's setup since early beta days but back then it used to suck.

4) The browsers' difference in size doesn't have anything to do with the quality of coding like he claims. They are build on different architectures.

5) He goes on and on about, imo, rather useless features that you can easily add into Firefox with extensions. He also mentions Opera's adblocking capabilities. Of course he doesn't say anything about Firefox's adblocking that would make Opera's version look (which according to devs shouldn't even be used for adblocking) very embarassing.

Conclusion: Opera users don't really know anything about Firefox. The linked articles give you an expression that he has used Firefox, if he has he either a) flat out lies or b) accidentally run some other program instead of Firefox.

Thank you for posting those links, now I know that Opera fans aren't any better than Firefox fans

[d_ralphie]

The fact is, the Mozilla Foundation has just done a better job in creating a simpler, more user-friendly browser with more marketing backup.

there is a difference between newbie friendly and user friendly. newbies may as well stick with internet explorer.

For that matter, I wouldn't be surprised if Firefox itself has contributed to the Opera userbase more than Opera's efforts have!  As stated in this thread, I'm sure Opera has learned something from the Mozilla Foundation and will follow suite (grass-roots efforts, spread-by-blogging, ad campaigns, "newer, simpler, easier to use", website buttons, friendly and helpful community... I'm sure Opera will have all of it soon).

uh, opera has had all that for ages.

[urbanvictim]

My goodness... he's trying to make some peace in the thread and you turn it around and stick it right back at him!? You can't say that someone's stupid just because they're using a different alternative to IE than you are. I happen to use and love both Opera and Firefox, so there's no contest about which is the better browser; they're just catered to different people. You're comparing apples and oranges here...

Elendil makes a very good point about the uninformed parts. I honestly think that debates about which browser is better are pretty ironic, especially since we're all supposed to be working toward providing an alternative to IE. I like FX because of its simple look and functionality; I just need a browser and nothing more. I like Opera when I'm taking it on the road, because I don't need to download Thunderbird and Firefox at the same time - you can't say I prefer one over the other, they have their uses.

[x-byte]

Thank you for posting those links, now I know that Opera fans aren't any better than Firefox fans

585280148[/snapback]

And how many people was that? Two? :D I guess they represent the "whole" fanbase :rolleyes:

Of course there will be comments like that on each side... Some people is just ignorant of nature.

[AudioDope]

i used to like firefox, etc...but i still recommend internet explorer....i know it has vuns i know......but disable activeX and apply a few other glitches and you're set.

ie loads faster and opens webpages faster. (For me) compared to firefox

[arrrgh]

And how many people was that? Two? :D I guess they represent the "whole" fanbase  :rolleyes:

Of course there will be comments like that on each side... Some people is just ignorant of nature.

585280526[/snapback]

Sorry, generalizing seems to be the main point of many posts in this thread, I just thought to try some too.

[megamanXplosion]

1) The author doesn't know the difference between smart keywords and search bar, the search bar is very similar to Opera's search. Adding or removing new searches isn't very noob friendly. Firefox's smartsearch gives you another way to add search engines, all you have to do is right click a search field and add a name and a keyword, in future you can search by typing the 'keyword' <searchterm> into URL bar. Completely different and more usable than Opera's search bar. Did the author even use Firefox?

You can use bookmarks for that functionality in Opera, simply assign a "nickname" to the bookmark and use "%s" where you want your search term to appear in the URL. You can also add search fields by clicking certain buttons on customization webistes (URLs appear as "opera:/edit/Search,URL_PLUS_QUERY") or by using the Search.ini Editor. Opera and Firefox can use the same search fields or by typing in nicknames and terms into the address bar.

2) He brings in the mail client. I thought we were comparing browsers? If he wants to compare suites, do it with Mozilla. Firefox isn't meant to be a feature filled package, it provides a browser base on what you can build almost whatever you like with extensions. Like I said in one earlier thread, Firefox is for those who like to choose 'custom install' and select what to have installed instead of the 'express install' option that installs everything automatically.

I agree, he should've been comparing Mozilla to Opera if he wanted to include the email client in his review.

3) Firefox doesn't produce javascript alert-boxes as the author seems to suggest, they are logged in java script console and go completely unnoticed by the average user who doesn't have any use for them. He also mentions some webdev tools like they would be only for Opera. There's a web dev toolbar extension for Firefox and a more advanced javascript debugger known as Venkman. I'm sure there are more, these are just couple examples. Again, I'm tempted to ask, did this guy even try Firefox before posting his article?

I believe the reviewer was talking about the javascript console and not exactly an alert box. I agree that he missed an opportunity for a fair comparison. I do have to agree with him about the sheer convenience of simply clicking a button because it doesn't need to be downloaded after you click it (it was already downloaded inside the page's HTML.)

4) He mentions starting download immediately after clicking link and remembering download locations as if they were unique Opera features. Firefox does both by default, you can select download folder under options->downloads. In addition Firefox's download behavior can be modified with extensions, I'm using download statusbar extension that shows downloads in a slim bar at the bottom of browser window. Again, I have to ask, did this guy even try Firefox?

Yes, they both behave basically the same, except for a few differences. Opera's download manager is a panel instead of a new window like Firefox's is, so it doesn't clutter the Windows taskbar. You can use Opera's download manager as either a side bar, a new tab, a new window, and completely hide it and you'll be informed by a tooltip that a download has completed. You can also select the default download folder in Opera (preferences -> programs and paths,) not to mention that you can set a different download folder for each file-type so you can do a "quick download" directly to a different folder for Word documents, Pictures, Music, whatever.

5) He claims that Firefox being the most customizable browser is a lie? How can it be a lie, you can go extract the .jar packages in Firefox\chrome directory and change anything you want. If that's not enough you can hack the source and build the browser. It really doesn't get any more customizable than that.

I agree with you, Firefox is ultimately more customizable (via extensions,) but I wouldn't necessarily say that being open source means it's more customizable because the sheer majority (99.99%) of users will likely never look or use the source code.

1) He mentions mouse gestures but doesn't bother to say that you can add them to Firefox with an extension. There are several mouse gesture extensions so you can customize the browser to exactly what you want.

Last time I checked there were 7 different mouse gesture extensions and all behave differently from eachother so it may take 7 extension installations and a LOT of testing before you can find something that is usable, this isn't a problem with Opera because it's built-in and you can always add your own gestures (or modify existing ones, of course,) if you want to toggle a certain part of the application interface (turning on or off the web developer toolbar, for example,) then it's as simple as opening the mouse settings and clicking the "new" button and adding the gesture commands and then setting the action(s) to be performed.

3) I don't like setups, I always go for the zip builds. Oh yeah, are there any unzip and you're good to go builds of Opera out there? Granted, that was a bit low, I haven't used Firefox's setup since early beta days but back then it used to suck.

And what would the point be? Opera's installer (the actual installer program, not the whole file) is very small and it already compresses all of the files inside it and the application files are already compressed before that with ASPack (exe/dll compressor.) Opera's setup would only be about 20kb smaller with the zip file method, there wouldn't really be any benefit in maintaining two versions of each distribution they offer.

Post split in two peices to avoid IPB's 10-quotes-max bug...

[megamanXplosion]

2) Next he mentions speed. It's kind of funny that both tests he mentions are made by the folks over at Opera forums. Yeah, I have seen the tests before and I know where they come from. I'm sure the good folks at mozillazine could come up with a test where Firefox beats Opera hands down too. What is really funny is that on the BenchJS test (which, btw, doesn't really benchmark javascript performance) Firefox has the number one position at the moment. He does have one good point though, moving back is faster with Opera since its cache stores the already rendered version of the page, where Gecko based browsers render the page every time again. I can honestly say that on my computer Firefox launches and renders pages more quickly than Opera but Opera is faster when browsing backwards in history. Note: I compile my own browser, currently SSE2 optimized and with over different 50 patches. Another point worth mentioning is that I haven't had dialup for 5 years so I can't say which browser is faster on a slow connection on my computer.

On my home computer (56k) Opera is faster for me. At the county library and the colleges I also found Opera to be faster (of course, my home comp has a custom-compiled Firefox nightly while the institutions have a stock 1.0.) When it all comes push to shove, the networking capabilities of each browser can be customized to be as fast as possible and the application itself has no major control over the networking (since this is done by the OS drivers,) the only application-specific differences is caching control and the rendering engine. Both rendering engines are blisteringly fast so it's pointless to compare them (both have customizable rendering delays as well.) The cache control is the primary factor for speed in the two browsers, and Opera wins that category.

4) The browsers' difference in size doesn't have anything to do with the quality of coding like he claims. They are build on different architectures.

Using a particular architecture is important because it definately does influence the size, quality, and performance of the application.

5) He goes on and on about, imo, rather useless features that you can easily add into Firefox with extensions. He also mentions Opera's adblocking capabilities. Of course he doesn't say anything about Firefox's adblocking that would make Opera's version look (which according to devs shouldn't even be used for adblocking) very embarassing.

I agree with you here, Firefox's adblocking capabilities do outweigh the capabilities of Opera's. However, I think it is important to note that the filter.ini file is supposed to be used for kiosk mode and not for blocking ads (it's misused,) Opera doesn't have an ad-blocker (mainly because they would be hypocrites if they included one.) Setting up a proxy is an effective way of blocking online ads across the whole operating system, kiosk-filters are misused to resemble ad-blocking, and CSS can also be used for ad-blocking, so an actual ad-blocker isn't too big of an issue.

Conclusion: Opera users don't really know anything about Firefox.

I'm glad you feel compelled to say that all Opera users know nothing about Firefox when you only recieved input from 0.002% of the user base.

there is a difference between newbie friendly and user friendly. newbies may as well stick with internet explorer.

Good point; there is a significant difference because intuitivity and usability. Intuitivity can be explained by examining the "Go" button in Internet Explorer, it's not really usable at all but it's intuitive. Opera has always been VERY usable, being intuitive is where they have lacked (and that's changing quickly.)

uh, opera has had all that for ages.

Yep.

[blowMeNeo]

First off, I use IE as my primary (with activex turned off and yes it works if you know what you are doing)) and Firefox as my secondary. Opera won't make any ground on the "Big 2" because it isn't free (the free version is a joke because of the ads). The average web user isn't going to pay for something if they can find something else that does the same thing for free. Firefox and IE are every bit as good as Opera (some say better than Opera) and they are free. Plus, with activex turned off, my Internet Explorer blows both Firefox and Opera out of the water speed wise and now its just as safe. I haven't had a virus since turning activex off. Just add the sites that need activex to your trusted sites and you are good to go. Here is an example of IE's speed on my comp, I can go through 13 bookmarks in 11 seconds. No browser on the planet can do that. Before I get the "you are full of sh*t" responses, I have fixed computers for a living for the past 10 years, so, yes, I do know what I'm talking about.

[arrrgh]

And what would the point be? Opera's installer (the actual installer program, not the whole file) is very small and it already compresses all of the files inside it and the application files are already compressed before that with ASPack (exe/dll compressor.) Opera's setup would only be about 20kb smaller with the zip file method, there wouldn't really be any benefit in maintaining two versions of each distribution they offer.

No point there, really. Just saying that Firefox's installer sucks and that luckily there are different ways to get Firefox up and running.

I'm glad you feel compelled to say that all Opera users know nothing about Firefox when you only recieved input from 0.002% of the user base.

Yes, yet this is the main point of many of yours and d_ralphie posts. Because small part of Firefox fans shout marketing bs and propaganda all Firefox users have to be less informed and less technologically inclined than Opera users. The problem with this kind of arguments is that they are easily turned around.

[megamanXplosion]

Opera won't make any ground on the "Big 2" because it isn't free (the free version is a joke because of the ads). The average web user isn't going to pay for something if they can find something else that does the same thing for free.

I agree with you, but I don't think market share really matters. All the marketshare that Opera needs is just enough to be noticed by webmasters so that more websites will be corrected for any incompatibilities (such as using proprietary features and stupid browser sniffing,) the desktop market isn't very important to Opera because Opera dominates the mobile phone market. Opera's desktop browser isn't really being made to compete with IE or Firefox, it's more-or-less just a side project to help bring in a few bucks here and there.

You also confirmed my comments earlier about how there would be more Firefox users (percentage wise) which don't know about Opera than the other way around, people don't really care to check out a product if they'd have to pay for it when they already have a free alternative which makes them happy.

Firefox and IE are every bit as good as Opera (some say better than Opera) and they are free.

Just as good as Opera? How can that be true when they are tailored for different audiences? Neither Firefox or IE are tailored to the same audience that Opera is, so they couldn't possibly be "just as good" as Opera from an end-user perspective. And yes, Firefox is free, that's been repeated a million times already lol. And no, Internet Explorer isn't free, you're paying for it when you buy Windows and you'll have to buy Windows again if you wish to use a new version of it.

Plus, with activex turned off, my Internet Explorer blows both Firefox and Opera out of the water speed wise and now its just as safe.

IE is just as safe as Firefox or Opera? Nonsense, do you ever read security sites? All of the vulnerabilities they find in Internet Explorer they also try for other browsers (and vice versa) and Internet Explorer has a LOT of security issues which remain unpatched and they have nothing to do with activex. And if Internet Explorer is faster than either Firefox or Opera then there's definately something (antivirus/firewall/proxy) misconfigured which causes the slowdown.

Here is an example of IE's speed on my comp, I can go through 13 bookmarks in 11 seconds.

And it takes even less time in Opera and Firefox to load up 13 bookmarks because of their user interfaces and especially Opera because it's caching capabilities blow IE and Firefox out of the water. IE even has problems caching dynamic websites which use compression, many websites which send compressed data to Internet Explorer fail to cache properly in Internet Explorer (yet another unpatched bug) and this causes massive browsing slowdowns where Firefox and Opera zip ahead at full speed. I had to stop compressing pages for Internet Explorer on one of my past websites because NOTHING on it would cache (the CSS, Images, JavaScript, HTML, NOTHING cached) properly due to Internet Explorer's caching bug, so I was sending about 100kb total to Internet Explorer while Opera and Firefox only had to download about 15kb (images/css/js need not be redownloaded and the content of the page was compressed.) Not only does Opera not have problems caching dynamic websites but also caches using RAM instead of the hard-drive (which is, at minimum, 70x faster.)

No browser on the planet can do that.

You have obviously not used Opera or Firefox for any reasonable amount of time so I fail to see how you think you can speak of their capabilities.

Before I get the "you are full of sh*t" responses, I have fixed computers for a living for the past 10 years, so, yes, I do know what I'm talking about.

I have been doing web design for 9 years, computer programming for 5 years, and in a couple of weeks I'll be a Cisco Certified Networking Associate. So, I will call your bluff and say that you are, indeed, full of it.

Yes, yet this is the main point of many of yours and d_ralphie posts. Because small part of Firefox fans shout marketing bs and propaganda all Firefox users have to be less informed and less technologically inclined than Opera users. The problem with this kind of arguments is that they are easily turned around.

I never said anything remotely close to that. What I said is that it is more likely that more Firefox users (percentage-wise) would be clueless about Opera than Opera users would be about Firefox for the simply reason that people who pay for software are usually more interested in saving money than people who have freeware are interested in paying money; thus, the Opera browser is typically reviewed less extensively than Firefox is. I also said that more technologically-inclined users visit W3Schools than normal users, but not in relation to which group is smarter. I never stereotyped anyone like you're claiming I have.

[arrrgh]

I also said that more technologically-inclined users visit W3Schools than normal users, but not in relation to which group is smarter. I never stereotyped anyone like you're claiming I have.

Maybe not directly but you were agreeing with posts like this, I think your exact words were 'Actually, he's completely correct'

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.

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.

firefox fanboys are completely different from opera fanboys. while opera fanboys, rabid as they may be, are usually well informed, especially about the over-hyped firefox, firefox fanboys are usually completely ignorant about other browsers, but that has never stopped them from spreading fud about them

Nice way to label anyone who prefers Firefox an ignorant, FUD spreading liar.

Also the point about people not trying Opera because you'd have to pay for it, where does that come from? Both browsers are free downloads. The argument definitely isn't logical.

And can anyone point me somewhere where Firefox devs lie about Opera, or similar content on Mozillazine?

[vcv]

1) The author doesn't know the difference between smart keywords and search bar, the search bar is very similar to Opera's search. Adding or removing new searches isn't very noob friendly. Firefox's smartsearch gives you another way to add search engines, all you have to do is right click a search field and add a name and a keyword, in future you can search by typing the 'keyword' <searchterm> into URL bar. Completely different and more usable than Opera's search bar. Did the author even use Firefox?

When did you mention a difference between smart keywords and search bar? He didn't.

4) He mentions starting download immediately after clicking link and remembering download locations as if they were unique Opera features. Firefox does both by default, you can select download folder under options->downloads. In addition Firefox's download behavior can be modified with extensions, I'm using download statusbar extension that shows downloads in a slim bar at the bottom of browser window. Again, I have to ask, did this guy even try Firefox?

Firefox downloads immediatly? Odd, I have 1.0 and I just tried it. I clicked a link, and waited 15 seconds after the download dialog came up. I then chose save.. and the file was at a whopping 25kb after I clicked save! It then shot up to 300kb, 500kb, 700kb..

1) He mentions mouse gestures but doesn't bother to say that you can add them to Firefox with an extension. There are several mouse gesture extensions so you can customize the browser to exactly what you want.

Wrong. The mouse gesture extensions for Firefox are extremely limietd. With Opera's, you can define any gesture to any combination of internal commands. I have seen no firefox extension that you can do that. As well, you can define gestures for all parts of the browser, including widgets, mail, browser, etc.

4) The browsers' difference in size doesn't have anything to do with the quality of coding like he claims. They are build on different architectures.

I beg to differ! Opera is developed for multiple architectures as well! it comes PACKED with awesome features, where firefox is barebones. And yet still, it is 1mb less download size. That says a LOT about Opera. Their code is very efficient. Not to say the Firefox code is bad, but I don't think the code is as efficient.

5) He goes on and on about, imo, rather useless features that you can easily add into Firefox with extensions. He also mentions Opera's adblocking capabilities. Of course he doesn't say anything about Firefox's adblocking that would make Opera's version look (which according to devs shouldn't even be used for adblocking) very embarassing.

Useless? I use most of the features every day, and loev them. Just because you don't use them, does not make them useless.

[d_ralphie]

Yes, yet this is the main point of many of yours and d_ralphie posts. Because small part of Firefox fans shout marketing bs and propaganda all Firefox users have to be less informed and less technologically inclined than Opera users. The problem with this kind of arguments is that they are easily turned around.

this is nonsense.

even mozilla.org spreads lies about opera ('not as portable' - hah).

it is obvious that opera fans are generally more informed about firefox than vice versa. again, opera costs money, while firefox doesn't. people will of course try out firefox since it's free and overhyped.

[megamanXplosion]

Maybe not directly but you were agreeing with posts like this, I think your exact words were 'Actually, he's completely correct'

His posts were about Firefox fanboys (which relates to extremists/evangelists/trolls, not all firefox users.) I stand by my statements earlier, he was completely correct about how fanboys (extremists/evangelists/trolls) are brainwashed by media propaganda and I still stand by my statement that I never stereotyped all Firefox users. I have even explicitly stated that it doesn't matter which browser someone uses, if they are happy then they have made the right choice (I even gave kudos to one of the firefox users who didn't spit out lies to justify the reasons he likes Opera); I couldn't have possibly claimed that if I were also trying to claim that all Firefox users are stupid. I think that you are reading too much into my comments, in all honesty.

Also the point about people not trying Opera because you'd have to pay for it, where does that come from? Both browsers are free downloads. The argument definitely isn't logical.

It has ads in it, people don't want ads, it IS logical. If you have a free browser, without ads, that makes you happy then why would you search for an ad-supported alternative? There wouldn't be a reason to, so there's not much incentive for someone to extensively review Opera (this is, like I've already said, one of the reasons why so many Firefox fanboys do not know about Opera's capabilities but rely on the media propaganda.) If someone is using Opera and is either bothered by the ads or wishes to save money then they have a bigger incentive to find free alternatives. This is completely logical, I don't see how you could possibly say that it isn't.

And can anyone point me somewhere where Firefox devs lie about Opera, or similar content on Mozillazine?

Copy of the browser comparison (read the comments at the top to learn why I couldn't link to the REAL original): http://nontroppo.org/test/why_original.html

Corrected version of the browser comparison: http://nontroppo.org/test/why.html

[megamanXplosion]

Firefox downloads immediatly? Odd, I have 1.0 and I just tried it. I clicked a link, and waited 15 seconds after the download dialog came up. I then chose save.. and the file was at a whopping 25kb after I clicked save! It then shot up to 300kb, 500kb, 700kb..

It does for me in one of the recent nightlies. I went to opera.com to download opera and when I clicked to download the dialog popped up asking where I wanted to save to, I wait for 12 seconds, and when the download manager popped up it immediately said 63kb, and 63/12 = 5.2kbps on 56k (of course the initial connection can take a second or two so it likely jumped up from 6.5kbps and dropped down lower as the 12 seconds went by.) I don't have a stock 1.0 to test with at the moment, so it may or may not be available there.

I beg to differ! Opera is developed for multiple architectures as well! it comes PACKED with awesome features, where firefox is barebones. And yet still, it is 1mb less download size. That says a LOT about Opera. Their code is very efficient. Not to say the Firefox code is bad, but I don't think the code is as efficient.

Size has nothing to do with effeciency (if that is what you are implying.) In fact, it is often the opposite. Processors like really short commands so it might take 5 lines of code to achieve the same thing as 1 line of code but it will give the compilers more to work with during the optimization/stripping process. It should also be noted that compilers typically have 3 optimization options, two of which will optimize the program as much as possible without increasing filesize and one which will do a trade-off of size for performance (you can try the gcc compiler if you want a real demonstration.)

[RufioPan]

there is a difference between newbie friendly and user friendly. newbies may as well stick with internet explorer.

585280468[/snapback]

And with that attitude, Opera may as well stick to 5% of the browser market.

uh, opera has had all that for ages.

585280468[/snapback]

Really? Then why don't I know about it? In fact, why doesn't everyone know about it? I consider myself only a somewhat above average skill user. Apparentely Opera hasn't done as good a job in getting the word out. No shame in that, they just need to improve, as I'm sure they will.

Peace.