FireFox or Opera ?

[Elliott]

Opera > Firefox > Safari

At least Firefox gets its rendering right in more cases than Safari. And it's more functional and user friendly than Safari, too :)

585468443[/snapback]

Wrong way around. Safari = Firefox > Opera.

Opera sometimes follows the IE path of the standards, creating, well, things that aren't standards. Opera has some CSS features that Firefox doesn't have, but most really aren't in full use or are even practical. Safari follows the W3C standards the strictest as a matter of fact. Even Firefox follows IE every once in a while. When you find a site that doesn't display correctly in Safari, check to see how bad the code is. If it's valid code to W3C, then maybe Safari does have a problem, but more often than not it's caused by a hack that's browser-specific that Safari picks up on and messes up on.

I also wouldn't say Safari is less functional and user-friendly either. In terms of functionality, OS X provides some of the features Firefox had to put into the program because it's either not easy to tie into them on Windows or they don't exist on Windows. In user-friendliness, Safari is actually much simpler and more user-friendly, at least in my experience.

[Chicane-UK Veteran]

Firefox.. I love it :)

[vcv]

Wrong way around. Safari = Firefox > Opera.

Opera sometimes follows the IE path of the standards, creating, well, things that aren't standards. Opera has some CSS features that Firefox doesn't have, but most really aren't in full use or are even practical. Safari follows the W3C standards the strictest as a matter of fact. Even Firefox follows IE every once in a while. When you find a site that doesn't display correctly in Safari, check to see how bad the code is. If it's valid code to W3C, then maybe Safari does have a problem, but more often than not it's caused by a hack that's browser-specific that Safari picks up on and messes up on.

I also wouldn't say Safari is less functional and user-friendly either. In terms of functionality, OS X provides some of the features Firefox had to put into the program because it's either not easy to tie into them on Windows or they don't exist on Windows. In user-friendliness, Safari is actually much simpler and more user-friendly, at least in my experience.

585477623[/snapback]

Uhhhh... what? Please, tell me, what does Opera have that it made up???

Also, what do you say of the -moz- CSS properties and it supporting XMLHTTPRequest?!??

[Chode]

OKAY...have been reading through this topic and I have to say,as a FF fan myself, that most of the arguments put forth in support ofboth browsersby many here are, to say the least, incredibly ****-poor and in some cases bloody inaccurate. I had to laugh over someone here using a Sony 43 in screen line in defence of paying for Opera.....you do realise that Sony really isn't even close to being top-of-the-line in any type of monitor of tv??

The one that really gets me though is the speed argument between the two. Having had little to do with Opera and hearing that it was faster, I decided toput it to the test after cracking the ****s over my ADSL now being shared between two computers. I do alot of graphics workandthus knowsome pretty chunky sites which I was able to use to compare the speed of the two browsers. What I found (and I was using a stop-watch to accurately compare the two) was that NEITHER browser consistently outdid the other. I found rather that the speed difference depended greatly on the individual site and the browser/s it was optimised for.  Sometimes FF blew Opera away and sometimes the opposite...sometimes they ran the same. Unfortunatelty many web hosts claim it is too expensive to cater for all browsers, so we remain at their liberty. So can people PLEASE stop trying to argue their prefence based on a dodgy and flawed reason.

I personally prefer FF for security reasons. Despite what somewill say, I did a fair amout of research recently, both on  line and at local computer speciallist stores, and Firefox was consistently rated as THE MOST secure browser now available - still not perfect, but I doubt ANY browser ever will be. I asked one guy at a local electronic securities provider if Opera was as secure as FF and he just laughed!!

So can any tell me why anyone in their right mind would PAY for a browser that is no where near as safe and secure as the free one?? Surely in this unsecure environment, a secure browser has to be considered better that a (debatably) prettier one??

585475417[/snapback]

I like this Crayolakid! Besides a mistruth fed to you be that local electronic securities provider, you've got a good head on your shoulders and have actually looked at the situation before screaming "UseFirefox!!!!!1111eleven111firefox" like most people do.

GG (Y)

[worbd]

Wrong way around. Safari = Firefox > Opera.

No, it's:

Opera > Firefox > Safari

Firefox is a stripped down browser, but at least it has interesting things like extensions. While they may be a pain to use in reality, they sure beat using Safari, the violently stripped down and impossible to surf efficiently browser.

Opera is small, fast, yet fully functional. It has ease of use and still lots and lots of power features.

Firefox and Safari are stripped down, and browsing is like swimming with a chain and ball around your neck. At least you can extend Firefox if needed, even though it can never match the polish and smooth integration Opera has.

Opera sometimes follows the IE path of the standards, creating, well, things that aren't standards.

Quit lying. Opera hasn't created anything non-standard. Firefox, on the other hand, introduced the non-standard XMLHttpRequest.

Opera has some CSS features that Firefox doesn't have, but most really aren't in full use or are even practical. Safari follows the W3C standards the strictest as a matter of fact. Even Firefox follows IE every once in a while.

Please, tell me that you are just trolling, and that you are not really serious?

Firefox, like Opera, has an entire rendering mode specifically for non-standard code. But on the other hand, Firefox adds non-standard things of its own, such as XMLHttpRequest.

In user-friendliness, Safari is actually much simpler and more user-friendly, at least in my experience.

"Newbie friendly" != "user friendly"

Opera 8 happens to be both newbie friendly and user friendly. Why? Because the default interface is easy to use even for newbies, but all those built in power features really make it the fastest browser. Speed is more than rendering. The user interface matters! I can open 20 pages in Opera and go through them, and when I'm done, you are still messing around between 1-5.

[lav-chan]

Firefox, on the other hand, introduced the non-standard XMLHttpRequest.

585480306[/snapback]

That is a BLATANT LIE.

Microsoft invented XMLHttpRequest as an ActiveX component in Internet Explorer 5. It was re-implemented sans ActiveX by Mozilla for Mozilla 1.0 before Firefox was barely a twinkle in anyone's eye. Go back to trolling MozillaZine.

[Andrew179]

Uhhhh... what?  Please, tell me, what does Opera have that it made up???

Also, what do you say of the -moz- CSS properties and it supporting XMLHTTPRequest?!??

585477812[/snapback]

Vendor specific extensions are mentioned in the CSS 2.1 specification, though the spec does say that their use should be avoided. Nevertheless, Microsoft, Mozilla, and Opera all have their own extension prefix.

As for the XMLHttpRequest object, it is now supported in IE5+ (as an ActiveX add-on), Safari 1.2+, Mozilla 1.x, and Netscape 7, so you could say that it is well on its way to becoming a standard. Actually, the W3C is working on a spec to provide similar functionality.

For further info, check out:

http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/CR-CSS21-20040225/

http://developer.apple.com/internet/webcon...xmlhttpreq.html

[worbd]

As for the XMLHttpRequest object, it is now supported in IE5+ (as an ActiveX add-on), Safari 1.2+, Mozilla 1.x, and Netscape 7, so you could say that it is well on its way to becoming a standard.

"Standard" the way IE's "standards" are. It's still a non-standard extension introduced by Mozilla.

Actually, the W3C is working on a spec to provide similar functionality.

DOM3 Load and Save, already implemented by Opera. Everyone else is probably lagging behind. As always :)

[Andrew179]

"Standard" the way IE's "standards" are. It's still a non-standard extension introduced by Mozilla.

585480362[/snapback]

The XMLHttpRequest object was introduced by Microsoft as an ActiveX component. Mozilla later added a compatible version in their browser.

http://developer.apple.com/internet/webcon...xmlhttpreq.html

[lav-chan]

At this point i think he's just trolling, and he's not even trying to be subtle about it anymore. Let's everyone just ignore him. -_-

[worbd]

Don't worry about lav. He's just angry because I pointed out that saying that "every time A happens, company B says C" means exactly that, and not "when A happens, company B explains the real cause, which is sometimes C". And that repeating that company B claims something "every time" becomes a lie when I've proven that this is not true.

He doesn't like being exposed as a liar.

[lav-chan]

LA LA LA I'M NOT LISTENING

[vcv]

Vendor specific extensions are mentioned in the CSS 2.1 specification, though the spec does say that their use should be avoided. Nevertheless, Microsoft, Mozilla, and Opera all have their own extension prefix.

Ok. Now can you point out where Opera has non-standard stuff they introduced?

As for the XMLHttpRequest object, it is now supported in IE5+ (as an ActiveX add-on), Safari 1.2+, Mozilla 1.x, and Netscape 7, so you could say that it is well on its way to becoming a standard. Actually, the W3C is working on a spec to provide similar functionality.

And it is supported in Opera 8.0 now too. What is your point??? It is still something not approved by the w3c.

[moogleman]

I'm all for Open-Source software, but I have to admit I like Opera better. There's just so much you can customize in Opera out-of-the-box. That, and it's generally faster. Firefox is still great; there are some really good extensions out there that can make the browser very usable.

[Elliott]

No, it's:

Opera > Firefox > Safari

Firefox is a stripped down browser, but at least it has interesting things like extensions. While they may be a pain to use in reality, they sure beat using Safari, the violently stripped down and impossible to surf efficiently browser.

Opera is small, fast, yet fully functional. It has ease of use and still lots and lots of power features.

Firefox and Safari are stripped down, and browsing is like swimming with a chain and ball around your neck. At least you can extend Firefox if needed, even though it can never match the polish and smooth integration Opera has.

585480306[/snapback]

You act like you need extensions to view the web. I don't use any extensions in Firefox, and I find browsing much easier than Opera. I only use one SIMBL (yes, Safari [well, OS X] does have an extension system; it's just third party) plug-in in Safari, and that's for find-as-you-type and modifying the Google search field (something that Apple really should have implemented into Safari and I'm sorry they didn't).

[worbd]

You act like you need extensions to view the web.

I don't. I get all the best features, smoothly integrated in a small and fast package: Opera.

I don't use any extensions in Firefox, and I find browsing much easier than Opera.

Good for you. I find browsing much more efficient in Opera than any other browser, simply because it has things like an extensive set of keyboard shortcuts, mouse gestures, proper MDI, hotclick, fast forward, continue from last time when restarting, and so on.

Maybe you don't need power browser features because you don't care much about efficiency. But I do.

[drgrudge]

Hmm, I just use extension to get rid of those irritating ads.

I have just a few good extensions:

1. Adblock (Y)

2. mouse gestures

3. Session saver (Y)

4. BBcode (helper)

5. Bandwidth tester.

By installing extension, the efficiency of the browser dont get reduced...

And the popularity is FF is growing day by day... 25 MN. Downloads and 65-35, in this poll.

FF rulez! (Y)

Spread the fire....

[worbd]

Ugh, having to mess around with buggy extensions doesn't appeal to me at all :(

[Tungsten T]

Opra is faster and it has a clean UI (8 Beta) but i still like firefox best . i Just am used to it and i have been sice it was called Phenix

[x-byte]

And the popularity is FF is growing day by day... 25 MN. Downloads and 65-35, in this poll.

FF rulez! (Y)

Spread the fire....

585486692[/snapback]

Oyea... popularity makes it better..NOT :rolleyes:

You don't need extensions in Opera because it's integrated. And most of the extensions in Firefox is made to simulate Opera, how ironic is that?

[drgrudge]

Oyea... popularity makes it better..NOT  :rolleyes:

You don't need extensions in Opera because it's integrated. And most of the extensions in Firefox is made to simulate Opera, how ironic is that?

585486803[/snapback]

Man, i just said, it was popular..., it has more downloads than opera. :cool:

I cant pay money to use a browser....

[x-byte]

I cant pay money to use a browser....

585486932[/snapback]

Arg.. how many time do this have to be repeated?!?!?

OPERA IS FREE TO USE! How ignorant could you be?!?

edit

Man, i just said, it was popular..., it has more downloads than opera.

How do you know that FF have more downloads than Opera? Opera 7 was downloaded 10 million times in like 6 month when it was released. And how long ago is that? 2 years ago :rolleyes:

EDIT2: Sorry the correct number is 10 million downlods of Opera 7, from januar 2003 - august 2003...

Edited February 17, 2005 by [X]-bYtE

[Ji@nBing]

Why is this thread still going?!?!? This is an argument that no one is going to win because neither browser is better than the other one. It's just personal preferance. I guess the mods want to keep it open so all the fanboys keep they're pointless arguments to one thread and not have a million of them but damn, this thing is like 33 pages long already. Is there anything to say that hasn't been already? Just use the browser you prefer and let it rest!!!

[worbd]

I love the "I use Firefox because lots of people have downloaded it" crowd. If that's your reason for using Firefox... well... :D

Guess it feels good to be "in" and "hip" and "use the cool browser everyone else is talking about". Me, I use what works best for me. That's Opera.

[drgrudge]

Arg.. how many time do this have to be repeated?!?!?

OPERA IS FREE TO USE! How ignorant could you be?!?

585486954[/snapback]

Opera is free to use , but it has some very irritation ads at the top (nagware ,in my opinion) , which now supports GIF's and google ads. (N)

Do i need a browser, which is to be sponsered? :no:

   

How do you know that FF have more downloads than Opera? Opera 7 was downloaded 20 million times in like 6 month when it was released. And how long ago is that? 2 years ago  :rolleyes:

585486954[/snapback]

LoL :rofl:

99 days and 25 million downloads for FF! And did opera v. 8 create any sort of sensation like FF did?

I love the "I use Firefox because lots of people have downloaded it" crowd. If that's your reason for using Firefox... well..

Did i ever tell like that? I like FF, so i use it, not because of 25 million downloads.