578 members have voted

  1. 1. FireFox or Opera ?

    • Firefox
      354
    • Opera
      224


Recommended Posts

Well you guys using the "Kill Firefox" image aren't much better than the Opera flamers.

AFAIK, they didn't start using it until heated debates with Firefox users...

I'll keep on preferring Firefox for its speed and lean feel. That's not going to change any time soon unless Opera drops most of what it has inside of it.

The funny thing is still that Opera is smaller, faster and more memory efficient, despite having more features than Firefox. Also, I bet I can surf at least ten times faster with a default Opera installation than you can with a default Firefox installation.

Anyway, you are one of the people who keep this thread going with your silly insinuations that Opera is somehow bloated, despited being a smaller download than Firefox.

That's a horrible analogy.? Ads aren't the same as brand name.

585328475[/snapback]

No kidding. It wouldn't be an ANALOGY if they were the same, English professor. You're saying that something is not free just because you don't like some particular down side that it includes. Whether that's because it comes with advertisements or because it's cherry red when you wanted lime green or because it's Sony instead of Magnavox, the point is that you're saying it's not free because it comes with something you don't like. If i LIKE the advertisements (i don't, but supposing i did), is it still not free?

Also, I don't know if you're dumb, retarded, or both, but it's Firefox.? I know you think it's cool or funny, but it just makes you look stupid.? Even a kindergartener can master that word.

585328475[/snapback]

I don't know if you're dumb, retarded, or both, but i said 'Firefox' twice in that post. Clearly i've mastered the word.

I call it Firetruck because i think it's a cute nickname. If i used Firefox, i would use Firesomething to rename it Firetruck. It doesn't carry the slightest negative connotation. It certainly has no political motivation, in any case, so it's hardly as bad as M$ or Winblows or anything like that, which are used excessively here and elsewhere.

You pick the features you want and download them.? Firefox is pretty much stripped when you download it.? I fix computers for a living.? I have a 4 year degree to be able to fix computers.? How many degrees do you have?? ZERO, you are still in high school.? Get a clue kid.

585328490[/snapback]

And, uh, Internet Explorer isn't stripped? You're telling me that Opera has the most features, and Internet Explorer has the second-most, and Firefox has the least? I think you're selling your browser of choice pretty short there.

Furthermore, your PhD in 'FIXING COMPUTERS' (whatever that means) is hardly an indication of your intelligence or your mastery of programming jargon. President Bush has a degree from Harvard AND Yale, and half of America still thinks he's a complete moron, so i don't really see why you expect me to be impressed by your 4-year journey through college.

Also, i'm not in high school, thanks. They skipped me a grade. Wish i still was, though. High school beats real life any day.

(For the record, by the way, even though i like Opera a lot and the amount of Firetruck propaganda flooding the Internet is pretty depressing, i do agree that 'Kill Firefox' is kind of childish.)

^ owned.

Personal preference to me is Firefox, never really tried Opera but I was an Internet Explorer user for a long time, and eventually switched after hearing that Firefox was a safer browser, and I just stuck with it, never felt compelled to try Opera, and the fact I had to pay always turned me off as I am a cheapskate :), Firefox always did what I wanted to, and that was be a nice, simple, customisable browser, that I could add functionality to if I needed it. It's fast enough for me, I barely notice a delay between pressing my "WWW" multimedia key [which has the IE logo on it :p] and having it open, as for opening pages faster, I find that my connection does that work for me.

The best way to discover what browser you should use is to try both of them, and see which is most suited to your needs, rather than asking for biased opinions.

So that still doesnt fix the whole not being able to empty the junk mail folder in hotmail issue. The window pops up, but the OK button just does nothing.

585332067[/snapback]

Thats because microsoft need to learn how to code properly :p

You could just select all and choose delete, not really that hard unless u have 500 pages of spam.

So that still doesnt fix the whole not being able to empty the junk mail folder in hotmail issue. The window pops up, but the OK button just does nothing.

The reason this happens is that Hotmail uses server-side browser sniffing, and it fails to send an important JavaScript file to Opera. If you use a proxy and spoof 100% as Firefox, it works fine, because Opera gets the file. But without 100% spoofing, it seems that Hotmail breaks in Opera on purpose.

The funny thing is still that Opera is smaller, faster and more memory efficient, despite having more features than Firefox. Also, I bet I can surf at least ten times faster with a default Opera installation than you can with a default Firefox installation.

585331371[/snapback]

Never said Firefox was smaller, faster and more memory efficient (except on OS X, it definitely is). I just said it felt leaner and faster to me. All the features in Opera seem to give it a cluttered preferences UI. There are also lots of toolbars you can turn on and off. It's just all this stuff I have to do before it's looking exactly like I want it to and acting exactly like I want it to act. I don't want to start a flame battle with these statements. These are specific to my needs. My needs are probably very different from the needs of most Opera users.

vcv, extra features do make a product bloated when they sacrifice ease of use to put them in. That's how I feel with Opera. I know that may not be how you feel, but it's how I feel.

The result of adding new features to a program or system to the point where the benefit of the new features is outweighed by the extra resources consumed (RAM, disk space or performance) and complexity of use. Software bloat is an instance of Parkinson's Law: resource requirements expand to consume the resources available. Causes of software bloat include second-system effect and creeping featuritis.

Well let's see. Do the benefit of features outweigh the extra resources consumed? Absolutely not.

Opera is still beautifully fast. The interface is no longer cluttered. Resource usage is down a ton in 8.0 beta. I'm failing to see where you could even begin to think there is bloat.

Would you consider mIRC bloated? It has just as many options as Opera, if not more.

Would you consider Windows or Linux or BSD os OSX bloated? After all, look at all those features!!!!!!

Software doesn't always work that way. You can add code without sacrificing speed or resources, if done right.

1. They're both secure.

2. They're both lean.

Fx is a fast clean-cut browser, and can be customized with extensions. Period. Extensions != Fx. So it cannot brag about that. Opera have most functionalities of these extensions built-in, with smaller installer. Some people call it good programming. Some call it bloat. Do the run-around...

I don't like the OOB interface configuration of Opera8b1 but I think that's a small matter, and because there's a good chance it will change in the final release.

3. They're both fast. The difference is negligible and affected by many other external factors.

4. They're both free.

Free means not paying for something you use. Opera just happen to have an ad which most of us abhors. It does not SIGNIFICANTLY lessen it's functionality. Some people are fine with it, some aren't. Do the run-around again.

5. They both provide means for powerful customizations and tweaks.

They're both great browsers! It's just a matter of preference. Dance to whatever music suits you. I'm just glad they're available for my use.:woot: I use both btw, often at the same time. ( Opera8b1 , Fx1.0+ )

I did read a lot of posts by Fx+rabid+fanbois spreading half-truths and half-lies, or maybe just plain un/misinformed. Even Fx's site did so too at one point, which is a big turn-off for me. That doesn't affect the quality of the product though.

JM2C

Well let's see. Do the benefit of features outweigh the extra resources consumed? Absolutely not.

Opera is still beautifully fast.  The interface is no longer cluttered.  Resource usage is down a ton in 8.0 beta.  I'm failing to see where you could even begin to think there is bloat. 

Would you consider mIRC bloated?  It has just as many options as Opera, if not more.

Would you consider Windows or Linux or BSD os OSX bloated? After all, look at all those features!!!!!!

Software doesn't always work that way.  You can add code without sacrificing speed or resources, if done right.

585333301[/snapback]

You chose to ignore my statement about ease of use, didn't you? Opera's ease of use was, in my mind, sacrificed when they decided to incorporate all those little browser engine quirks and features in the program. I do think mIRC is bloated. The ease of use is sacrificed for some extra features. Same goes with Windows in my mind. Ease of use is sacrificed for, actually, not many features at all. OS X got it right. Ease of use is not sacrificed in the implementation of all those extra features.

You chose to ignore my statement about ease of use, didn't you? Opera's ease of use was, in my mind, sacrificed when they decided to incorporate all those little browser engine quirks and features in the program. I do think mIRC is bloated. The ease of use is sacrificed for some extra features. Same goes with Windows in my mind. Ease of use is sacrificed for, actually, not many features at all. OS X got it right. Ease of use is not sacrificed in the implementation of all those extra features.

585333543[/snapback]

Well I'm sorry you feel that way. I don't think the ease of use is affected at all in Opera. And mIRC is probably the easiest irc client to use. And windows.. again. OSX is a little better, but windows is still easy to use.

But your definition of bloat is wrong. Try using another word that actually applies to what you are trying to say, NOT bloat. That gives Opera a bad image based on bad information.

Well I'm sorry you feel that way.  I don't think the ease of use is affected at all in Opera.  And mIRC is probably the easiest irc client to use.  And windows.. again.  OSX is a little better, but windows is still easy to use.

But your definition of bloat is wrong.  Try using another word that actually applies to what you are trying to say, NOT bloat.  That gives Opera a bad image based on bad information.

585334658[/snapback]

My definition of bloat comes directly from the one you stated.

The result of adding new features to a program or system to the point where the benefit of the new features is outweighed by the extra resources consumed (RAM, disk space or performance) and complexity of use.

I agree with VCV, bloat is adding features where the complexity outweighs their usefulness and I really can't put my finger on any of Opera's features which fit into that category. All of the features there are to remove tedious activities (notes built-in for easy researching, sessions to avoid typing in multiple addresses at startup, rss to stay updated on news/updates without effort, advanced tabbed browsing for comparing multiple documents at once instead of flicking between tabs constantly, etc) and do not add complexity much, if at all. Anyone with an IQ higher than a fridgerator's temperature can use Opera without much effort.

I agree with VCV, bloat is adding features where the complexity outweighs their usefulness and I really can't put my finger on any of Opera's features which fit into that category. All of the features there are to remove tedious activities (notes built-in for easy researching, sessions to avoid typing in multiple addresses at startup, rss to stay updated on news/updates without effort, advanced tabbed browsing for comparing multiple documents at once instead of flicking between tabs constantly, etc) and do not add complexity much, if at all. Anyone with an IQ higher than a fridgerator's temperature can use Opera without much effort.

585335399[/snapback]

Unless they by any chance mosey on into the detailed preferences. Then you're bombarded with choices. It's like the first version of Adium. Lots of features, lots of preferences. Confused everybody.

Unless they by any chance mosey on into the detailed preferences. Then you're bombarded with choices. It's like the first version of Adium. Lots of features, lots of preferences. Confused everybody.

585335511[/snapback]

I'm not confused. Maybe your brain can only process so much information at once?

I just said it felt leaner and faster to me.

that's completely irrational, and cannot be justified.

All the features in Opera seem to give it a cluttered preferences UI.

you mean 'flexible'. i never open the preferences dialog anyway. just use f12 and quick preferences.

There are also lots of toolbars you can turn on and off.

uh yeah, and in opera 8 most of them are off by default. what's the problem?

It's just all this stuff I have to do before it's looking exactly like I want it to and acting exactly like I want it to act.

and firefox? do you use it without any extensions what so ever?

vcv, extra features do make a product bloated when they sacrifice ease of use to put them in. That's how I feel with Opera. I know that may not be how you feel, but it's how I feel.

how you 'feel' is irrelevant. you only say that because you think it means that you don't have to justify your anti-opera fud.

opera 8 is streamlined and has a much better ui than firefox. that's not just how i 'feel'. to me, browsing with opera is a lot faster with firefox because of all the built in features. and guess what, some of the best ones, like resuming the session after restart, built in keyboard shortcuts, mouse gestures, etc. don't even add anything to the visible ui!

see? i explained my opinion. it is not just a vague 'feeling'. but you have no arguments against opera, so you rely on those vague 'feelings' which you feel that you don't have to justify, so you spew out lies about opera like there's no tomorrow.

I'd rather tweak some configurations with Opera than downloading ten or twenty extensions on Firefox and configure them one by one.

Firefox with no extension is just not usable for me, no features at all at very slow speed.

585336270[/snapback]

I dont know how you can say that. I have Fx and Opera on a pII 450mhz and opera is slower than molasus on the north pole. I use Fx with no extentions and i can have 20+ tabs open without it slowing.

I dont know how you can say that. I have Fx and Opera on a pII 450mhz and opera is slower than molasus on the north pole. I use Fx with no extentions and i can have 20+ tabs open without it slowing.

585336606[/snapback]

It's REALTIVELY slow compared to other browsers such as Opera, IE, Maxthon, Avant, and K-Meleon.

And 20+ tabs with no slowing down? Please be honest.

that's completely irrational, and cannot be justified.

585336566[/snapback]

As you seen in this thread, there are reports on some people's systems that Firefox truly is leaner and faster. On my PowerBook, Firefox with two tabs takes up 38.82MB of RAM. Opera, 48.73MB of RAM.

you mean 'flexible'. i never open the preferences dialog anyway. just use f12 and quick preferences.

585336566[/snapback]

That's like Microsoft calling a bug a feature. The preferences are usually the first place any person goes to customize their software. If Opera scares them off immediately with its jumbled up mess of preferences, that's not a good thing. Opera should reorganize them and clean them up. If Adium can do it, so can Opera.

uh yeah, and in opera 8 most of them are off by default. what's the problem?

585336566[/snapback]

Because having them mostly turned off means I need to trek into customizing them to see what I want.

and firefox? do you use it without any extensions what so ever?

585336566[/snapback]

Only extension I sometimes use is Web Developer because it helps me to debug sites. Opera, internally, doesn't have the features the Web Developer toolbar gives to Firefox. I did hear Opera had an plug-in, but that would defeat the purpose of Opera, wouldn't it?

how you 'feel' is irrelevant. you only say that because you think it means that you don't have to justify your anti-opera fud.

opera 8 is streamlined and has a much better ui than firefox. that's not just how i 'feel'. to me, browsing with opera is a lot faster with firefox because of all the built in features. and guess what, some of the best ones, like resuming the session after restart, built in keyboard shortcuts, mouse gestures, etc. don't even add anything to the visible ui!

see? i explained my opinion. it is not just a vague 'feeling'. but you have no arguments against opera, so you rely on those vague 'feelings' which you feel that you don't have to justify, so you spew out lies about opera like there's no tomorrow.

585336566[/snapback]

All browsers are based on feeling. If a browser feels clunky to me, it feels clunky to me. I don't care how "streamlined" it is in your mind. I don't like it.

You might not acknowledge it, but the only reason you chose Opera over the other alternatives is because of your personal taste. Now you think it's the best. Just like I chose OS X for my personal taste. I also think OS X is best now. That happens all the time to people. They want the things the like most to automatically be the best, and everyone has to use the best, don't they?

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
    • Just to understand: your solution to getting rid of an online password manager is...another online password manager?
    • Cjam 2.5.0.0 by Razvan Serea Cjam is a lightweight and fast MP3 editor for Windows that lets you cut, join, and edit MP3 files without re-encoding. This means your audio quality remains untouched, and edits happen instantly. Cjam is ideal for quick, lossless edits—whether you're trimming music, combining tracks, or preparing audio for learning tools or podcasts. It features batch processing, scripting support, cue and playlist file handling, and a simple interface. Cjam is perfect for anyone who needs efficient MP3 editing without the complexity of full audio suites. Cjam requires a PC running Windows 10 or later and Microsoft .NET 6.0 or later. Key features for Cjam: No Re-encoding: Edit MP3 files without losing quality. Cut and Join MP3: Easily cut, trim, and combine MP3 tracks. Batch Processing: Edit multiple files at once for faster workflows. Scriptable Interface: Automate tasks with a custom command language. Cue and Playlist Support: Handle CUE and playlist files for seamless audio management. Fast and Lightweight: Quick processing with minimal system resources. Lossless Audio Editing: Ensure your edits don't affect audio quality. Simple User Interface: Clean, intuitive design for easy navigation. File Format Support: Works with MP3, Cjam-specific file formats (CJAMC, CJAMJ, CJAM). Cjam 2.5.0.0 changelog: Added clipboard-based import/export support for mp3DirectCut Added clipboard-based export support for REAPER Added support for naming IMP3 elements Changed the Reset behavior to preserve Undo/Redo history; use Shift key + Reset button to clear it Added a new command parameter (qcp) Added 8 new entries to lang.txt (main_c124-126, main_d150-151, main_m082, vme_c014, vme_d005) Fixed a bug where the il parameter was incorrectly applied when pasting VMP3s into the main list Fixed several other minor bugs Download: Cjam 2.5.0.0 | 1.4 MB (Freeware) Links: Cjam Home Page | Cjam Manual | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      91
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!