578 members have voted

  1. 1. FireFox or Opera ?

    • Firefox
      354
    • Opera
      224


Recommended Posts

I am not convinced that you are aware of all the things Opera can do that Firefox can't (such as changing a theme without restarting), but I simply cannot be bothered to explain this to yet another badly informed Firefox user... Sigh. :no:

585292391[/snapback]

And people wonder why this thread is 22 pages. A few Firefox users spout uninformed opinions about Opera, and they are debunked. Rinse, repeat.

I was incorrect about the Wand earlier, it is indeed nothing more than a password manager and the other fields are seperate from the Wand. I have the wand disabled on my computer, I only have one user account (I have a hidden admin account, but rarely use it) and multiple people use my computer, hence my ignorance about it. After testing it a bit, I still believe that Opera's comparison was accurate because Opera can store several username/password combinations for sites [unlike IE] and it comes with a manager to handle editing [unlike IE.]

Heh, I've observed something about you Opera fanboys. You almost always respond to the question "Why should I pay for Opera when Firefox does everything I need to do?" with "Do you even know how much Opera can do over Firefox?" Do you even realize how dumb that is? He just said "Firefox does everything I need it to do." If he doesn't need the extra features, then why should he pay for Opera? That's what you should be answering.

Heh, I've observed something about you Opera fanboys. You almost always respond to the question "Why should I pay for Opera when Firefox does everything I need to do?" with "Do you even know how much Opera can do over Firefox?" Do you even realize how dumb that is? He just said "Firefox does everything I need it to do." If he doesn't need the extra features, then why should he pay for Opera? That's what you should be answering.

585294232[/snapback]

We were at 5 pages without the word fanboy being pronounced once until you came up. :no:

And if you really want that question answered you should re-read this thread because that's what it's all about. Or use Opera yourself extensively.

Heh, I've observed something about you Opera fanboys. You almost always respond to the question "Why should I pay for Opera when Firefox does everything I need to do?" with "Do you even know how much Opera can do over Firefox?" Do you even realize how dumb that is? He just said "Firefox does everything I need it to do." If he doesn't need the extra features, then why should he pay for Opera? That's what you should be answering.

585294232[/snapback]

You don't need tabbed browsing or any of the features Opera and Firefox have. The point is that Opera OFFERS more features than Firefox, and integrated at that. You won't understand why Opera lovers love it unless you learn these features.

I don't see the point in comparing the installed size. The download size is what matters.

But if you really insist on finding the size of the installed Opera, you should only measure the size of a clean installation, as otherwise, its size will depend on who you as. Just excluding the cache isn't enough either. You have to remember plugins, mail, the download folder, the uninstallation information (it takes backups of everything it replaces during installation), and so on. There's lots of user created info that starts piling up once you start using Opera.

585292297[/snapback]

I'm basing it off both applications, which I run on par with each other. And that is also Firefox with enough extensions installed to put it on par with Opera.

But installer size:

Opera 8 Beta 1: 3.47MB

FireFox 1.0: 4.68MB

+

FireFox Extensions: 1.86MB

=

6.54MB

And before anyone starts screaming "What extensions", I'm using

SessionSaver .2

FoxyTunes 1.0

Adblock v.5 d2

Tabbrowser Preferences 1.1.1

SmoothWheel 0.43.1.20041107

jsLib 0.1.244

Leechget Download Extension

You don't need tabbed browsing or any of the features Opera and Firefox have.? The point is that Opera OFFERS more features than Firefox, and integrated at that.? You won't understand why Opera lovers love it unless you learn these features.

585295333[/snapback]

You don't get to say what somebody's necessities are. I find that, on a 1024x768 screen, tabbed-browsing is a necessity.

Anyway, his needs are met with Firefox, so what does Opera have to offer that's worth the money?

Nebuchadnezzar, would you be happier with the term "zealots?" After all, it is a different word, even though it means nearly the same thing:p:p

You don't get to say what somebody's necessities are. I find that, on a 1024x768 screen, tabbed-browsing is a necessity.

Anyway, his needs are met with Firefox, so what does Opera have to offer that's worth the money?

Nebuchadnezzar, would you be happier with the term "zealots?" After all, it is a different word, even though it means nearly the same thing. :p

585295781[/snapback]

I think you need to go look up what a 'need' is.

We've already discussed what Opera has to over that's 'worth the money'.

I would not say he sticks with firefox because Opera would not suit his need just as well, if not better, and make him feel like it was money well spent, but rather because he wishes not to spend money when he doesn't NEED to, and because he hasn't experience Opera in full to understand why one might spend the money.

I'm basing it off both applications, which I run on par with each other. And that is also Firefox with enough extensions installed to put it on par with Opera.

But installer size:

Opera 8 Beta 1: 3.47MB

FireFox 1.0: 4.68MB

+

FireFox Extensions: 1.86MB

=

6.54MB

And before anyone starts screaming "What extensions", I'm using

SessionSaver .2

FoxyTunes 1.0

Adblock v.5 d2

Tabbrowser Preferences 1.1.1

SmoothWheel 0.43.1.20041107

jsLib 0.1.244

Leechget Download Extension

585295516[/snapback]

Will people please quit using that stupid argument because it doesn't mean ****. Opera uses a more advanced compression method for the installer and the exe which eliminates any real comparision.
Opera uses a more advanced compression method for the installer and the exe which eliminates any real comparision.

I actually went through the Firefox directory to compress all of the DLLs and EXEs with ASPack and recompressed the directory (zipped with 'ultra' compression using 7zip.) I came around to the size of the Firefox installer; this tells me that Firefox's installer compresses just as good as Opera's installer because aspack didn't make a noticable difference. The only noticable difference between the installers is that after installation the Opera files remain compressed (due to ASPack) while Firefox's aren't. I do have to argue that size is important because some people keep their browser with them on their jump drives which has limited space and can be dreadfully slow to run if you're not on a USB 2 drive. Starting up the program and making cached copied of pages on the drive can slow down browsing drastically (I have Opera's disk cache turned off on my USB and use only computer memory so everything remains fast.) Size is important for some of us, so I'd have to argue that size is fair-game in a comparison.

Will people please quit using that stupid argument because it doesn't mean ****. Opera uses a more advanced compression method for the installer and the exe which eliminates any real comparision.

585298254[/snapback]

Well, first of all, on dialup (~50% of the US), an extra 1.2MB downlaod can mean 5-10 minutes more spent downloading ... SO it matters to us.

Also, that is usually posted in response to claims that FF is slimmer and less bloated than Opera. To me, slimmer would imply size...

How are you (or more specifically the FF people claiming bloat in Opera) measuring bloat?

If it's not size, is it features? Speed? I mean, what do you mean by saying Opera is bloated?

To me, I call applications bloated if some part of them is getting in the way of the core operation. Mozilla Seamonky is something I'd call bloated, so much crap it's slow to load, uses lots of memory and all around is too much stuff causing it to lumber around at web browsing.

Opera doesn't have that issue - it takes about 5 minutes to turn off anything I don't need, and in the next release (8?) I hear nothing is activated until you use it (mail, chat, RSS,etc...) Even better!

Now, clicking to turn things off doesn't take any more time (I claim it takes less time) than searching for, downloading and installing extensions. So the complaints about configuring Opera are hypocritical, unless you use FF without any extensions at all. I find that to be very unlikely - the vast majority of posts about FF configs list 3 to 6 extensions installed.

Now, I'd like to address why I use Opera myself.

Easy to use - integrated features. Secure - no third party toolbar capability to be exploited for spyware or browser hijacking. FAST, the UI, the history, the rendering are all faster and look better(to me) than IE or FF.

The main thing now is inertia. I've used Opera for a long time now - 3 years. v8 is a free upgrade. I see nothing from any of the competitiors that are good enough to even make me wonder about switching. FF has a LONG way to go to make me feel that there are features I'm missing out on. Opera would have to be complicit here, and allow the browser to stagnate like IE did...

Also, I'm still very concerned about the security risk of extensions. I know they are ok now, but browser toolbars were where the IE nightmare began IIRC. They are out for FF. And most spyware isn't gotten through browsing to sites, it's through installing weatherbug or the purple monkey...

People do install browser toolbars, from wherever. Some are going to spy on you, maybe do worse. Extensions allow for hijacks through installed programs etc...

I use firefox as my primary browser and also occasionally use Opera 8 Beta 1.

I believe that firefox is the MORE bloated of the two. It starts up slower, it is coded in non-native xul, and when there are too many images on the page, scrolling using the mouse wheel is a little sluggish.

However fx better fits my needs. I don't care about extensions hell because its not hell for me. And I use 35 extensions! I like being able to:

Block ads using regular expressions

View the weather forecast on the status bar

Download all files with specified extensions (eg. PDFs and JPEGs) with just one mouse click

Control foobar or any other media player

Use an intuitive xul app to search amazon uk

Save sessions (Yes this is in opera too!)

Easy access to RSS (in opera, I know)

Receive Gmail notifications (with pop3, operamail could probably also do this)

Scroll a window by holding down the right mouse button

Use a full featured google toolbar with UK localisation

and lots more...without a significant hit on page rendering and system performance on my computer. Firefox is currently using just 25 MB RAM atm on my system with 3 windows and 12 tabs open. In fact with a few tweaks, pages load faster than the default opera settings for me. This may not be the same on all internet connections; mine's 1Mbps cable.

Maybe I am wrong but I don't think opera can do all of these things. Some of you are probably saying "but I don't need all that!". Well good for you. Use the extensions that provide functionality useful to you. Or if Opera does all that you want it to, use that. My only criticism of opera, and i know its not their fault, is that some pages render poorly unless you change the User Agent string, but that will change in time I am sure.

Opera is better for some people, firefox for others, can't we all just get along?

Edited by fpd
To me, I call applications bloated if some part of them is getting in the way of the core operation.

I agree, that's what I've never understood about people saying that the interface is bloated. The way the interface is setup allows all of the features to be used in an effecient manner, it's not like they're just slapping everything everywhere. Most of the changes to the default interface were chosen by the Opera users themselves by posting polls in the Wish-List forum. Bloated, to me, would mean that they add things to the interface which aren't helpful and if that is true then you're probably in the minority because it usually takes the majority of people to vote for a certain change on the forums for it to take place. Sometimes the developers themselves make changes which weren't mentioned at all on the forums and those are usually good changes, if they're not then they're changed in the next release because people talk about the changes on the forums. If there is something about the interface which you don't like then feel free to post a suggestion on their forums, if it's a good suggestion then it'll likely be implemented.

Also, I'm still very concerned about the security risk of extensions.

DLL plugins (like Flash and Java but malicious) which could be installed by malicious software is something else which Firefox/IE users should be afraid of. Spybot Search & Destroy protects Opera from loading those kinds of plugins by modifying Opera's plugin-ignore.ini file; however, it has no hook it could use to prevent Firefox/IE from loading malicious plugins when they start up. Firefox and Internet Explorer users will usually activate these malicious plugins (by opening their browser) before they're removed from their system, unlike Opera users because Opera refuses to load ignored plugins. You can count that as +1 point for Opera when it comes to security.

Will people please quit using that stupid argument because it doesn't mean ****. Opera uses a more advanced compression method for the installer and the exe which eliminates any real comparision.

585298254[/snapback]

It was in answer to another post.

I know it means crap, but read back the number of people in this thread who say Opera is bloated. :no:

Will people please quit using that stupid argument because it doesn't mean ****. Opera uses a more advanced compression method for the installer and the exe which eliminates any real comparision.

585298254[/snapback]

wrong. opera is smaller even when uncompressed.

but let's compare other operating systems, shall we? these are taken from ftp.opera.com and ftp.mozilla.org:

mac:

- firefox: 8 846 kb

- opera: 4 290 kb

linux (static tar.gz, no installer):

- firefox: 8 032 kb

- opera: 5 442 kb

the numbers speak for themselves.

both Firefox and Opera have their advantages and disadvantages BUT............. :angry:

BUT :D you will all agree $39 :x is not at all worth it. and FIREFOX is FREE :D :D. I am not saying Opera ds not have good things BUT..........

ITS FREE :D :D :D :devil: :woot:

BUT :D  you will all agree $39  :x is not at all worth it. and FIREFOX is FREE :D  :D. I am not saying Opera ds not have good things BUT..........

ITS FREE :D  :D  :D  :devil:  :woot:

opera IS free, actually.

and we don't all agree that paying for opera is not worth it.

oh well, i don't expect you brainwashed firefox fanboy newbies to understand, or to even read the discussion. this has been discussed several times in this very thread, but you just had to jump your 133t open-source fanboy butt in here and start the whole thing all over again.

no wonder firefox is becoming more and more hated all over the place, with all the newbies shouting about things they haven't a clue about.

you will all agree $39  is not at all worth it.

Opera Software are innovators, that is enough reason to spend $39 on their products. There's about 100 more reasons I could mention which would justify a measly $39. The people who bought Opera 7 when it came out have been using it for 2 years and that equals up to 5 cents per day. If you take into consideration that Opera 8 is a free upgrade for customers and will likely be on the market for at least a year then it will be about 3 cents per day for customers to use ad-free. Heck, that's 3x less expensive than using a public copying machine just once per day! I don't see people complaining about shoving a dime into a machine to make a copy of a peice of paper, so why do I see such penny-pinching when it comes to software? It's absolutely pathetic, in all honesty.

While we're speaking about the cost of software, Firefox wouldn't have even been possible if it weren't for AOL sending millions of AOL CDs to people. Firefox is able to continue development because they recieved millions from AOL, which AOL only recieved (and thus, Mozilla only recieved) by sending out millions of CDs. I'd pay 3 cents per day just to ensure I don't get another AOL CD in my mailbox :whistle:

wrong. opera is smaller even when uncompressed.

but let's compare other operating systems, shall we? these are taken from ftp.opera.com and ftp.mozilla.org:

...

585303260[/snapback]

Are you gonna compare programs by their size? Seriously, what's the damn logic behind this except for the god bless shorter download time? They're 2 different programs coded in completly different ways. For me that's simple fanboyishm.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Why you need to take back control of your synced passwords and how to go about doing that by Paul Hill Credit: Pixabay Last month, when Google decided to introduce daily and weekly caps for Gemini, it reignited an anxiety of mine, that you can’t really depend on service providers to maintain features forever, and it got me looking into free software (as in freedom) in other areas too. One app I quickly came across was KeePassXC on desktop and KeePassDX on Android as an alternative to password manager lock-in within the Chrome or Firefox ecosystems. I personally like to switch around with browsers, and using either password manager is inconvenient, so something like KeePassXC was interesting to me. The main issue with it now is syncing; I was not sure how to do that. After a bit of research, I came across Syncthing, a tool I was vaguely familiar with but had never used because it seemed complicated. However, I was completely wrong, and honestly, I think everyone should use it if they use multiple devices. It essentially lets you share folders peer to peer across all of your devices, no cloud services that you don’t control necessary! And it was fairly simple to set up, if not a bit clunky. Since setting it up, I’ve also started using Syncthing to back up other apps too, so don’t think it’s limited to just saving password databases. You can use it for pretty much anything you use Dropbox or Google Drive for. Before continuing to talk about those apps a bit more, let’s walk back a bit and talk about browser sync. Ever since the late 2000s and early 2010s, really, since we have been using smartphones, browser sync has been a necessity of life. I don’t know about you, but I have hundreds of passwords saved. For the most part, they’re all unique, so I don’t remember them and rely on software to manage them for me. Until recently, I’ve relied on password managers in Chrome and Firefox, but what I always found annoying was that it can be hard to transfer them between browsers. Sure, on Windows it is simple enough, but on Linux, exporting bookmarks has been temperamental. It works OK nowadays, but not too long ago, Chrome required you to enable exporting passwords in chrome://flags. The situation is even worse on mobile; there is no exporting or importing of passwords of any kind. You literally have to do it on a desktop, which is incredibly annoying in our mobile-first world. Sync also lets us take out bookmarks, history, tabs, and autofill data easily. To enable sync, it’s just a matter of signing into the browser once, and it handles the rest. It’s nice and easy. Obviously, all this has some issues, including those I’ve outlined above about it being hard to transfer data between browsers, but also things such as account suspension, lost account passwords, and other lock-in mechanisms, such as passkeys, being tied to a specific browser. On a sidenote, I have just removed all of my passkeys because they can make it harder to move browsers. I think the biggest threat to your synced passwords, especially if doing this with Google, is having your account suspended. I don’t ever expect mine to be suspended, but you do hear horror stories on Reddit where people lose access to their Google accounts. Imagine if you have hundreds of passwords, then suddenly lose access to them because Google froze your account, what would you do? So yes, it can be nice to use these syncing services for their convenience, but they also have risks. You may have seen me going on about free software quite a bit in my editorials. It’s essentially a concept championed by the Free Software Foundation. It’s software under particular licenses that grant you four freedoms: run the program for any purpose (0), study and change the source code (1), redistribute copies to others (2), and the freedom to distribute modified copies to others (3). For example, if there is an app I use and one day it gets abandoned by the developer, I can keep running it or even clone the software and continue developing it. Look at the myriad of cool services Google has run over the years before killing them. You can’t take the source code for those because they are proprietary, for the most part. Both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so I get the freedoms listed above. In my use case where I’m syncing a database full of my passwords, I also get proper ownership over my data, there is no losing access to the database due to a frozen account, I can access the code of the tools I’m using, and I can get support from real people online if I run into issues, rather than having to consult a vague help page from an opaque company. With the KeePassXC password manager, you create a .kdbx file, which is what will be synced between devices. KeePassXC has cross-platform apps and also has browser extensions so that the browser can fetch passwords from the database once it is unlocked. Meanwhile, Syncthing is a peer-to-peer file sync tool where you can select folders to sync between your devices. Just pop files in the folders you choose, and then they will be available across your other devices whenever they come online. Syncthing is resilient as it works over both LAN and the internet and only ever sends content between your devices, never to a third-party server somewhere else. By combining these two pieces of software, you can essentially replicate the browser sync functionality. I have had a weird, conflicting issue where a new file is appearing, but it doesn’t seem to be impacting my main password database, which is updating between devices just fine. If you want to get a setup similar to what I have, you will need to go here to download KeePassXC for your computer. Once you have that, you will need to download your passwords from your web browser to a CSV file. In Chrome, you can type chrome://password-manager/settings into the URL bar, and you should see an option to download your passwords under Export Passwords. This will give you the CSV file you need for importing into KeePassXC. If you use a different browser, just use a search engine and type “browser-name export passwords” and muddle along. In KeePassXC, you’ll want to press Import File from the home screen, select the CSV file, and create a new database from it. On one of the screens of the wizard, there will be a Title field with a drop-down selected to none. Change this to Title and continue. You’ll select a name for the database, the encryption level (the defaults are fine), and then you will pick a password. I would choose four unrelated words that are easy for you to remember, as you’ll be typing them fairly often to access your passwords. When you have all your passwords in your new database, you will want to set up the browser extension so that your browser can fetch passwords from KeePassXC. Rather than explain how to do that here, refer to KeePassXC’s guide on how to set it up properly. Once you’ve got that set up, you want to install KeePassDX on Android. You can grab it on the F-Droid store and the Google Play Store. For iPhone users, there are other .kdbx-supporting apps, but I haven’t tried any of them, so have a look around and use what suits you. Once you have that done, you will want to install Syncthing on your computer and find a third-party app for your mobile device. On Android, I use an app called BasicSync; there are also options for iOS, but again, I’ve not tried these. Once you’ve got SyncThing, you’ll want to set it up and connect all of your devices together and share a folder between your gadgets. PCWorld has a good tutorial on setting up a synchronized file between your devices using SyncThing. Once you’ve set it up, congrats, you’ll never have to touch that stuff again except for adding or removing devices. I’ll be honest, I didn’t particularly like setting up Syncthing. It didn’t take me a massive amount of time, but I think I had to check online because I found it a bit confusing. That said, I’ve had it running for several weeks now and never need to touch the Syncthing settings, so that’s very nice. I also mentioned a conflicting file. I’m not sure why this is appearing, but the main .kdbx file seems to be updating and syncing just fine. What’s nice is that both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so they won’t just vanish one day; you can take the code and fork the project or use a range of alternative implementations that others have made. It’s also nice that it works over LAN, so even if your ISP is having problems, your passwords will still sync. One area where you will want to be a bit more careful with this setup is if you only have one device. I am OK because I have a computer and two phones, all synced up. If you just have one device, you will probably want to store a backup of your .kdbx file somewhere else. Obviously, you’ll also want to remember your password really well, too. If you get locked out, it's game over. Overall, if you want to take back control of your computing from big tech, taking control of your passwords is an important part of this. You don’t need to immediately clear out your browser’s password manager; try running KeePassXC and the password manager concurrently for a while to see if you run into any problems. If you do try this out, let us know some other creative ways to use Syncthing. I haven’t really come up with a solution about what to do with my bookmarks, for example.
    • If the price was a dollar, someone would complain "Why isn't it free?" If it was free, someone would complain they weren't being paid to play it.
    • That lens of history will burn if you hold it at the right angle... Warn users too late: Shame, Microsoft! That extremely minor update to an obscure Control Panel widget required 2 years of warning. Warn users too early: Shame, Microsoft! We've got better things to do. Pipeline and process be damned, we'll just always be disappointed, eh?
    • Microsoft Paint used to be my favorite Windows app as a kid, and it's still pretty good by Usama Jawad I have been using Windows since the early 2000s, when I was around 10 years old or so. I vaguely remember playing around with Windows 98 and Windows 2000, but that may have been on school PCs which had old operating systems installed. My main OS on the home PC, and the one I recall spending most time with, was Windows XP. At that time, I used the home PC to create Word and PowerPoint documents for school, but a lot of the time, I simply used it to play games. My dad would bring game discs which we would try and install on the PC, sometimes unsuccessfully, and sometimes, we would rely on flash games in the browser, like Bubble Trouble on Miniclip. However, the problem with the latter approach was the internet speed. On a good day, our dial-up internet would offer us speeds of 56 kbps, but on most days, it was closer to 33 kbps. This did not facilitate online gaming as I would often have to wait minutes for a game to load or "draw" on the screen, and trying to download pirated games wasn't simple either. I remember getting tired of waiting for online games to load and just downloading simulator games from the Big Fish Games website instead, only to be disappointed after finding out that I was just being given access to trial versions of the title, and I needed to fork out money to pay for the full version. All of this is to say that it wasn't very easy to find entertainment options on the home PC when I was a kid, due to a number of reasons, mostly outside of my control. This situation pushed me towards a rather unconventional ally: Microsoft Paint. Whenever the internet wasn't working as good as I expected, I would simply spin up Paint and draw complete rubbish on the canvas. Of course, that wasn't always the intention, but it usually happened when I messed up drawing a straight line or something, and then I would give up on that particular piece and simply draw a random collection of objects. Microsoft Paint was extremely accessible and easy to use. Even if you weren't an artist, you could quickly understand the tools at your disposal and how to leverage them on a canvas. The absolute breadth on offer ensured that each painting was truly unique, as you could utilize various combinations of tools like the pencil, paint, spray paint, and more to truly personalize your creation. Since I wasn't particularly good at drawing both on digital screen or a physical screen, I remember that my main style of art would be to insert a bunch of randomly intersecting lines and then fill them with random colors through the paint can. I have trying to replicate that art style in the latest version of Paint below, and as you can see, it's truly Pablo Picasso-esque. The human imagination truly knows no bounds Microsoft Paint kept me occupied for hours and was my best friend when video games on the home PC were inaccessible for one reason or the other. There was no academic or professional reason for which I would need to use Paint, but I still loved using it in my personal time, even if what I created wasn't worth being shown to anyone. It was simply fun. Fast-forward to today, and the situation is mostly the same. Now that I am almost 29 years old, and I still have no reason to use Microsoft Paint in a professional capacity. In fact, I don't even use it in a personal capacity, except to dabble with it from time to time, just to see if core functionalities are still intact. And I'm happy to say that I think Microsoft Paint still offers the same accessibility and inviting experience that it did to me a couple of decades ago, even though its UX has been refreshed and it's been integrated with Copilot features. Interestingly, things could have been a lot different, had Microsoft had its way. Microsoft Paint was marked for deprecation with the Windows 10 Fall Creators Update in 2017, and even began displaying a product retirement alert, urging customers to shift to Paint 3D instead. Fortunately, after consumer backlash, Microsoft reversed course on this decision, and Paint continues to be a native app inside Windows installations that can also be updated quite frequently through the Microsoft Store. Instead, Paint 3D ended up on the chopping block, which is for the better, I think. I have intermittently played around with Microsoft's refreshed Paint experience in the past few years, and I do think it has received worthwhile upgrades. the UI and the UX has been modernized while retaining core functionality, and the app is still fairly easy to use. It doesn't meet any of my use-cases, but I've never really had any use-cases ever, as described previously. Of course, the elephant in the room is the Copilot integration. Personally, I believe that this is one place where Copilot does make sense, environmental concerns aside. I know that a lot of creatives use AI to generate images, and while some may be using professional alternatives, Paint still offers a decent casual experience, with the power of Copilot. Of course, you do need to have a valid Microsoft 365 Copilot license and available credits to use it, but even if you don't, you still get the big Copilot button in the toolbar, unfortunately. All in all, I am glad that Microsoft Paint continues to be a native feature in Windows 11, and a piece of software that has evolved to meet modern needs without cutting off its own roots. It's just an iconic piece of Windows history that was an essential part of my childhood, and while I don't use it anymore, I'm just glad it is still there.
    • 2TB WD_Black SN7100 PCIe Gen4 NVMe SSD drops to its lowest price in over three months by Fiza Ali Amazon is currently offering the 2TB WD_Black SN7100 internal solid-state drive at its lowest price in over three months, so you may want to check it out, if you have been considering a storage upgrade, before the deal dries up (purchase link is toward the end of the article). Featuring a PCIe Gen 4.0 interface and M.2 2280 form factor, the SN7100 promises to deliver sequential read speeds of up to 7,250MB/s and sequential write speeds reaching 6,900MB/s, offering as much as a 35% improvement in performance compared with the previous generation. It also achieves random read speeds of 1,000,000 IOPS and random write speeds of 1,400,000 IOPS. The drive uses Western Digital’s TLC 3D NAND technology for reliable performance and is further supported by a five-year limited warranty. It also offers strong endurance, rated at up to 1,200TBW, making it suitable for demanding workloads such as gaming, content creation, and high-speed recording. Moreover, its DRAM-less architecture claims to improve power efficiency (the SSD relies on system memory for caching via HMB), while the WD_Black Dashboard software enables users to monitor drive health, install firmware updates, and activate Game Mode for potentially better performance. Finally, it operates within an operating temperature range of 0°C to 85°C, and can withstand storage temperatures from -40°C to 85°C. 2TB WD_Black SN7100 PCIe Gen4 NVMe SSD: $242.96 (Amazon US) Check this deal out if you want a 4TB option. Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
  • 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
      514
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      87
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      73
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!