Mozilla execs want change to ballot screen proposal

[dead.cell]

Considering that Opera is the smallest, fastest and most secure browser, this is obviously nonsense. Also, he was referring to the company, not the browser. Nice one, spewing out more bigotry, though.

I said perhaps. I'm not him, so I don't know what he was thinking. I simply figured maybe his opinion of the company reflected the company's products. Still, fact remains that not too many cared to use Opera's browser in the past, before the anti-Opera crap developed. You're not going to use something that isn't simply a pleasure to use. While Opera 10 has improved on that, they've still got work to do if they want to measure up with the competition.

Also, proof of that? Last I checked, Chrome and Safari blew everyone out of the water in terms of speed. I'll download Opera 10 again later today and do some performance tests myself, as I'm always willing to give software another chance. How I gave Safari another chance after beta testing it initially on Windows is beyond me though. Thought I'd never touch it again...

Anyhow, it's apparent that Opera is your browser of choice. Just try not to foam too much at the mouth too much when others beg to differ.

Edited August 22, 2009 by dead.cell

[Athernar]

Who said anything about "world-changing"? You Microsoft cheerleaders are becoming more and more desperate by the second the way you always, with no exception, misrepresent people's comments. It's rather pathetic.

You did, by the way you seem to bring it up every 5 minutes.

No thanks to IE's lack of SVG support.

Hasn't stopped them from using it though. :)

I could say something to the effect of "Silly Opera Cheerleaders", but I won't stoop to your level.

[CuCumber]

XHTML

Most web browsers have mature support[16] for all of the possible XHTML media types.[17] The notable exception is Internet Explorer by Microsoft

SVG

As of 2009, all major Windows browsers have committed to some level of SVG support, except for Internet Explorer even as of version 8.

Silly browser.

[d_ralphie]

I simply figured maybe his opinion of the company reflected the company's products.

:rolleyes:

Claiming that Opera is a bad product is just trolling.

Still, fact remains that not too many gave a flying **** about Opera's browser in the past, before the anti-Opera crap developed.

What "anti-Opera crap"? The "fact" you are presenting is bogus. The actual fact is that most people haven't even heard about Opera. How can you or can you not give a flying **** about something you don't know about?

While Opera 10 has improved on that, they've still got work to do if they want to measure up with the competition.

All browsers have their strengths and weaknesses. Opera measures up very well indeed in many areas.

Last I checked, Chrome and Safari blew everyone out of the water in terms of speed.

Yes, Chrome and Safari have very fast JavaScript engines. That's great. The problem is that JavaScript performance doesn't really affect real world sites to any great degree.

Someone measured how much CPU time is spent on handling JavaScript, and where the real bottlenecks were. JavaScript is at most about 10% of the total CPU time on the most advanced JavaScript pages that exist today. Most of the time it takes to show a page is spent on other things that won't benefit from extremely fast JavaScript engines.

I'll download Opera 10 again later today and do some performance tests myself, as I'm always willing to give software another chance.

If you are going to download it just to run SunSpider and the V8 benchmarks, you are going to be disappointed, because the new super-fast JS engine from Opera isn't going into Opera 10.0. Or so they say.

You should realize that SunSpider and the V8 benchmarks are just for marketing purposes. They specifically test for stuff like JIT. If the engine doesn't do those things, it won't be as fast on those tests. But that doesn't mean that overall JS performance is much worse (JIT and all that stuff does lead to a general increase in speed because those particular parts get so damn fast).

Anyhow, it's apparent that Opera is your browser of choice. Just try not to foam too much at the mouth too much when others beg to differ.

We're not just talking about "beg to differ", we're talking about trolling like "Opera sucks, that's why no one likes it" or things to that effect.

[Leddy]

Wrong, wrong, wrong. For a W3C recommendation to be published, it requires actual implementations in browsers. And you ignored the part where I explained to you how Microsoft not implementing these standards holds back the web.

There is, because unless the market leader actively follows up on open standards, they don't have much of a chance of being used.

Your ignorance shines through again. Again, a W3C recommendation requires at least 2 implementations (or 3?) before it is published. Yes, that's right. Implementations are needed before they are "ratified".

I'm not going to bother verifying your claims, because standards shouldn't work this way. If W3C has such a policy then they need to change it because it is rather counterintuitive to have developers implement unfinalised standards, in the hope that it will be published unchanged. I don't see this as a MS problem, it's a W3C problem.

In any case, there are more than 2 other browsers that could ratify whatever (unfinished) standard that you're asking for. Given this, we are left with two logical possibilities: 1) that the standard isn't complete and can't be finalised, and hence isn't a standard (duh), and 2) that less than 2-3 browsers have implemented said standard (in which case they aren't any better than MS)

So what's your point?

[hairbawl87]

I just want to know why no ones bitching about OSX/Safari or itunes/iPod yet. IMO they are the same if not worse then IE/Windows. Safari wont even let you change Search engines.

OMG you are so completely right.

I hate the iTunes/iPod monopoly & I'll be damned if I buy MGTEK's $20 one-yr. plug-in for WMP.

[d_ralphie]

You did, by the way you seem to bring it up every 5 minutes.

Huh? I mentioned it ONCE, IIRC. The other times I mentioned it was after you started claiming that I talked about it all the time.

I'm not going to bother verifying your claims, because standards shouldn't work this way. If W3C has such a policy then they need to change it because it is rather counterintuitive to have developers implement unfinalised standards, in the hope that it will be published unchanged. I don't see this as a MS problem, it's a W3C problem.

You don't want it to be this way because it makes Microsoft look bad? Wow, I didn't see that one coming :D

[Leddy]

:rolleyes:

Claiming that Opera is a bad product is just trolling.

Well, actually, it is a bad product. It's done funky things with touchpad drivers since the start of time, and has poor customisability (in terms of addons), and basically doesn't have anything noteable that any other browser doesn't have (i.e. Firefox has addons, IE has GP support + protected mode- IE8 is probably the most secure browser at the moment)

Not to mention the Windows Mobile version of Opera- it's actually terrible.

You don't want it to be this way because it makes Microsoft look bad? Wow, I didn't see that one coming :D

Really? Look bad in what way?

I mean, you know what happens when engineers implement standards before they become standard, right? Ever heard of "draft-n"?

[Lillflinten]

I?m a 51 year old geezer who had been a computeraddict since 1981. Tested everything from Spectravideo MSX to my 4 PC machines i?ve have now. I don?t care what brand or name on my OS/browser aslong they fulfill my purpose. All of my machines have Linux Mint 7 plus Win 7 RC,Vista SP2 and XP SP3 on my weaker machines in dualboot. All of them have the 5 major browsers intstalled. Jump between them because all of them have their pros and cons. My point? We have a choice or are we all retards? We decide not MS,Mozilla,Opera,Google or Apple. Everyone with more than 2 braincells can make his own decicion.

Sorry about my bad english but i think everyone understand what im trying to say.

[dead.cell]

:rolleyes:

Claiming that Opera is a bad product is just trolling.

Um, people are entitled to their opinions. If he thought it wasn't great, then he thought it wasn't great. It's his opinion, which may reflect upon the company that created it.

What "anti-Opera crap"? The "fact" you are presenting is bogus. The actual fact is that most people haven't even heard about Opera. How can you or can you not give a flying **** about something you don't know about?

Yeah, edited my post on that one as it didn't make sense with the point I was trying to make. What I meant was, the people who have tried it, didn't seem to care for it exactly. It has its pros and cons, but apparently, the cons being a nasty UI and various other personal feelings about the browser and how it works in general have kept them from using it.

All browsers have their strengths and weaknesses. Opera measures up very well indeed in many areas.

Right, and my point is that the areas it is weak are currently affecting the actual USE of the browser. Hell, I even commented positively on Opera 10 before. Yet, my personal problem with it is that they don't seem to have any plans for addons (at least, not any that I've seen or heard about). I don't expect browsers to be exactly the same from one to the other, but there are certain features which I honestly feel should be standard. Those features can easily be seen throughout as the developers themselves copy one another, or third parties develop those similar features. IE8 lacks a download manager, Opera lacks addons. (off the top of my head)

Yes, Chrome and Safari have very fast JavaScript engines. That's great. The problem is that JavaScript performance doesn't really affect real world sites to any great degree.

Someone measured how much CPU time is spent on handling JavaScript, and where the real bottlenecks were. JavaScript is at most about 10% of the total CPU time on the most advanced JavaScript pages that exist today. Most of the time it takes to show a page is spent on other things that won't benefit from extremely fast JavaScript engines.

If you are going to download it just to run SunSpider and the V8 benchmarks, you are going to be disappointed, because the new super-fast JS engine from Opera isn't going into Opera 10.0. Or so they say.

You should realize that SunSpider and the V8 benchmarks are just for marketing purposes. They specifically test for stuff like JIT. If the engine doesn't do those things, it won't be as fast on those tests. But that doesn't mean that overall JS performance is much worse (JIT and all that stuff does lead to a general increase in speed because those particular parts get so damn fast).

Well, I'm not about to use Opera 9, that's for sure. Anyhow, what exactly would you suggest in terms of measuring performance? Err, actually, now that I think about it, I find this questionable that I'd even ask this. My big problem with performance tests is that they cannot measure the amount of time you save simply with unique features found only on certain browsers. The main reason I use Firefox is because of the addons. It doesn't matter how much faster Chrome or Opera could be for me (so long as it's within reason), but that the addons I use make small (and large) tasks that much easier. You simply can't measure that...

We're not just talking about "beg to differ", we're talking about trolling like "Opera sucks, that's why no one likes it" or things to that effect.

Right, as I said before, everyone was just soooo full of enthusiasm about the browser before. Honestly, you need to get around more and figure out what it is about Opera that people don't like. There's obviously got to be a reason no one bothers to use it on their desktop. So what if they're in a positive direction with web standards and so forth? If people don't enjoy using the product, what's the point?

It shouldn't be, "Oh, let's use this browser because it follows standards more than anyone else, despite not being all that great!" It should be, "Hey, let's use this browser because it kicks ass! And it's also the leader when it comes to being a fully standard compliant browser! :woot: "

Okay, maybe less prozac on the last part, but you catch my drift. Opera needs to focus on their actual... what the hell... I'm using Opera 10 to post this, and hitting ctrl+z starts making me back up one letter at a time. Ugh. I'll keep using this for a few days to see if maybe, just maybe, I can actually take it seriously in terms of use. Lack of customization doesn't seem appealing, but I'm still letting it slide. (too much bulk)

Edited August 22, 2009 by dead.cell

[Athernar]

Huh? I mentioned it ONCE, IIRC. The other times I mentioned it was after you started claiming that I talked about it all the time.

I'm not just talking about this thread, in past threads every time the discussion about IE8's HTML4 and CSS2.1 support comes up your next reply inevitably mentions SVG.

[Pc_Madness]

Your ignorance shines through again. Again, a W3C recommendation requires at least 2 implementations (or 3?) before it is published. Yes, that's right. Implementations are needed before they are "ratified".

Again, link to proof? Theres no requirement that a standard be implemented before hand. Its preferable for testing purposes. CSS 2 was released well before everyone begin to implement all of the accessibility parts of the spec.

Are you really this thick or are you just trolling?

And no, I'm not a Microsoft cheerleader, I'm a big Firefox fan, but as a Web Developer I do know that IE 8 is perfect.

Again, proof or stop derailing this thread.

[petrossa]

but as a Web Developer I do know that IE 8 is perfect. ?

As a user i do know it's crap. Only use it for ActiveX infected pages.

We can't be both right now can we??:laugh:h:

[Pc_Madness]

We can't be both right now can we??:laugh::

Indeed, because its scientifically impossible for me to be wrong.:))

Ok, apart from having ActiveX support, IE 8 is perfect.:pp

You don't see much ActiveX though these days, which is a good thing.:))

[petrossa]

Indeed, because its scientifically impossible for me to be wrong. :)

Ok, apart from having ActiveX support, IE 8 is perfect. :p

You don't see much ActiveX though these days, which is a good thing. :)

tell that to my bank?:angry:: Can't even login on my cellphone.?

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

.

[d_ralphie]

Well, actually, it is a bad product. It's done funky things with touchpad drivers since the start of time, and has poor customisability (in terms of addons), and basically doesn't have anything noteable that any other browser doesn't have (i.e. Firefox has addons, IE has GP support + protected mode- IE8 is probably the most secure browser at the moment)

So because of some problem you have had personally and because you personally don't like it, no one else likes it either? Amazing logic.

Firefox doesn't have something other browsers don't.

Chrome doesn't have something other browsers don't.

Safari doesn't have something other browsers don't.

IE doesn't have something other browsers don't.

Your point being?

Opera is very customizable indeed. For example, there's no need to restart it to apply stuff. Also, features are actually integrated into the browser, which means that you get a complete and integrated package instead randomly bolting on third-party software which doesn't even integrate properly.

BTW, Opera has Opera Turbo. No one else has that.

But all of this is besides the point. I don't give a **** if you like it or not. The problem is that you are pretending that your personal opinion represents everyone else's.

Not to mention the Windows Mobile version of Opera- it's actually terrible.

Nah. Opera Mobile 9.7 with Turbo is just great. No skyrocketing bills, and extremely fast because of the compression. But I'm sure you hate it, and that's fine. Just stop the trolling here, and stop pretending that your personal problems represent eveyone else. This thread is not called "do you like Opera or not". In fact, it's a thread about a long list of complaints from Mozilla!

Really? Look bad in what way?

They aren't following the normal processes, so you want the processes to change instead of Microsoft doing the right thing. Quite pathetic.

Edited August 22, 2009 by d_ralphie

[d_ralphie]

Um, people are entitled to their opinions. If he thought it wasn't great, then he thought it wasn't great. It's his opinion, which may reflect upon the company that created it.

Except it wasn't presented as someone's personal opinion. It was presented as if everyone thought so. And that is just trolling.

What I meant was, the people who have tried it, didn't seem to care for it exactly.

How do you know? The user base has more than doubled in less than 2 years, so clearly quite a few people seem to like it.

It has its pros and cons, but apparently, the cons being a nasty UI and various other personal feelings about the browser and how it works in general have kept them from using it.

More trolling. "I don't like the UI, and I represent everyone else." How about you stop it with these silly comments?

Right, and my point is that the areas it is weak are currently affecting the actual USE of the browser.

Maybe you think that. But that's irrelevant. You do not represent everyone else. Making these general statements based on your own bias against Opera is just trolling.

Anyhow, what exactly would you suggest in terms of measuring performance? Err, actually, now that I think about it, I find this questionable that I'd even ask this. My big problem with performance tests is that they cannot measure the amount of time you save simply with unique features found only on certain browsers.

Exactly. There's more to speed than rendering time. The user interface is very important here, and Opera has the most responsive user interface out there. It always responds immediately, whereas other browsers lag slightly, e.g., when opening a new tab. If you haven't used Opera before you probably won't notice it. But if you have, you definitely will notice just how fast Opera's UI is compared to the rest.

Right, as I said before, everyone was just soooo full of enthusiasm about the browser before.

What on earth are you going on about? "Everyone"?

Honestly, you need to get around more and figure out what it is about Opera that people don't like.

Here we go, more trolling. Now you are just getting childish. Maybe YOU don't like Opera, but that doesn't mean that you represent everyone else.

There's obviously got to be a reason no one bothers to use it on their desktop.

Uh, Opera reached more than 40 million users on the desktop a few months ago, and the user base more than doubled in less than 2 years. Clearly, a lot of people DO start using it. Soo again, stop trolling.

And remember, most people haven't even HEARD about Opera, but you ignored that part and went on with your trolling instead.

It shouldn't be, "Oh, let's use this browser because it follows standards more than anyone else, despite not being all that great!" It should be, "Hey, let's use this browser because it kicks ass!

Sigh. This is getting pathetic. This is about the COMPANY, which pushes standards. Whether the browser is great or not is a subjective thing. And my point was not "use Opera because it's standards compliant". It was completely unrelated to whether you should be using it or not. Please pay attention.

Lack of customization doesn't seem appealing, but I'm still letting it slide. (too much bulk)

That's interesting, because Opera has a clean UI by default, and I won't even mention the fact that it's a smaller download than all the other browsers. So if you want to talk about BULK, look at the browsers with LESS functionality which somehow manage to be much bigger than Opera! Quite amazing, don't you think?

[d_ralphie]

I'm not just talking about this thread, in past threads every time the discussion about IE8's HTML4 and CSS2.1 support comes up your next reply inevitably mentions SVG.

Really? Links, please! Also, why would one NOT mention SVG? It's a very good example of a standard not supported by IE. Just because SVG destroys your illusion that IE is amazingly standards compliant doesn't mean that it's an invalid example.

[Athernar]

Really? Links, please! Also, why would one NOT mention SVG? It's a very good example of a standard not supported by IE. Just because SVG destroys your illusion that IE is amazingly standards compliant doesn't mean that it's an invalid example.

A bit like IE8's support of HTML4 and CSS2.1 destroys your illusion of Microsoft being some sort of baby-molesting behemoth that supports nothing? You're hilarious. :rolleyes:

Just take a look at your post history, as you only ever seem to comment on topics like these. (Aka, Involving Opera)

And for a browser that doesn't support XHTML and your precious SVG, it hasn't exactly prevented use of either now has it? Especially not the former.

Edited August 22, 2009 by Athernar

[dead.cell]

Sorry, ralphie, but I couldn't even take the time to stomach your post this time. I merely glanced through it and you know what I saw? Someone who's out of touch with people. Amazing that you're on a public forum to have discussions with other people, but none of their opinions matter. We're supposed to use what you think is "the right choice" and totally disregard our own personal likes and dislikes. You know what that is? It's bull****.

It's not trolling to have an opinion. It's trolling to say a product sucks without even giving it the time of day. Hell, I've constantly tried to like Opera, IE7 (before 8), Chrome, Safari and a few lesser known browsers. I'm sitting here posting on this browser though (Opera 10)... and you know what? I probably shouldn't be. Even if I sat here for a week, used it, and posted a list of my likes and dislikes, you know what would happen? You'd probably just tell me that I'm wrong anyway. Even if I LIKED it and ended up using it, any dislikes I have would have would simply get thrown out the window.

You're beyond a simple software user. You're completely blind to the Opera as a company, and anything negative said about the company is simply "trolling". I admired the fact that you took time to help people understand their misguided opinions, including my own. Yes, I admit to being wrong. Still, just as well, you disappoint me in the fact that you can easily be so foolish and close minded yourself.

[Subject Delta]

Seeing Microsoft cheerleaders running in circles is amusing, but not very useful. Empty claims from Microsoft are useless.

You are calling Softpedia a Microsoft cheerleader? Jesus, your ignorance doesn't know any limits, does it?

Also, proof of that? Last I checked, Chrome and Safari blew everyone out of the water in terms of speed. I'll download Opera 10 again later today and do some performance tests myself, as I'm always willing to give software another chance. How I gave Safari another chance after beta testing it initially on Windows is beyond me though. Thought I'd never touch it again...

In testing, yes. In real world usage, I haven't found Safari and Chrome to be any better than Opera and Firefox

You don't want it to be this way because it makes Microsoft look bad? Wow, I didn't see that one coming :D

No, it is because it makes absolutely no sense. If a major product like IE goes into production, with an incomplete standard implementation in it, then it is changed at the last moment, it will cause issues for users. It's a simple premise really, why do you have such trouble grasping it?

You're beyond a simple software user. You're completely blind to the Opera as a company, and anything negative said about the company is simply "trolling". I admired the fact that you took time to help people understand their misguided opinions, including my own. Yes, I admit to being wrong. Still, just as well, you disappoint me in the fact that you can easily be so foolish and close minded yourself.

Well Said

[Leddy]

BTW, Opera has Opera Turbo. No one else has that.

But all of this is besides the point. I don't give a **** if you like it or not. The problem is that you are pretending that your personal opinion represents everyone else's.

Nah. Opera Mobile 9.7 with Turbo is just great. No skyrocketing bills, and extremely fast because of the compression. But I'm sure you hate it, and that's fine. Just stop the trolling here, and stop pretending that your personal problems represent eveyone else. This thread is not called "do you like Opera or not". In fact, it's a thread about a long list of complaints from Mozilla!

They aren't following the normal processes, so you want the processes to change instead of Microsoft doing the right thing. Quite pathetic.

Opera Turbo is really slow for me. And it doesn't support file downloads while it's on, not even a passthrough. (wtf!)

Somehow, I think the moment that you leave this thread, we'll all stop talking about Opera.

[Growled Member]

You are obviously lying. Quite pathetic.

I don't like you at all and I said I wasn't going to respond to you again but I really don't like to be called a liar. Can you prove I'm lying? If so, I'd be happy to see that.

My story is true. I'm sorry if you don't believe me. I do know few Opera employees who are actually very nice. Some not so nice. That's like any company, I guess. Overall, I find them not so nice. I do have a friend who actually worked there at one time. I had some inside info for a while. I sure miss that. Sigh. I guess you will misquote all of this.

For the record, I use Linux mostly and I dislike Microsoft immensely. They have done a bunch of evil things in their time and they do hold the web back and they have broken the law in doing so. I live in the US and I really don't give a damn about what happens in Europe. You guys can make Microsoft strip Windows down to it's socks if you want. It still won't change how I feel about Opera and their software.

I'm going back to ignoring you if I can.

[redfish]

Apple is not a monopoly.

It shouldn't matter. If Microsoft is doing the same thing as its competition in the OS market, Apple, its being competitive, not anti-competitive. When a judge makes a ruling on anti-trust law, he has to make a judgment on whether the monopoly's behavior is in nature about simply keeping up with competitors or destroying competition. That's why if , for example, Ford had a near monopoly like Microsoft, it would probably not be considered anti-competitive for them to make their own car radios. Its also why its not considered anti-competitive that Microsoft includes Notepad in Windows. In the original US case about IE, Microsoft was only found guilty of abusive behavior because the judge was convinced by internal e-mails that the strategy to include IE was about destroying Netscape. However, the fact that every OS in existence now includes a browser should show people something else was going on.

And getting beyond the law, to common sense, It's illogical to say it's not a problem if Apple does it but its a problem if Microsoft does it just because they have higher market share. If Apple had 50% market share and Microsoft had 50% market share and both of them included their own browser, would it be perfectly legal for both of them? I hope so! 90% vs 10% shouldn't change anything on this issue. And what if Microsoft not including a browser or a media player or anything else harms its market position and that leads Apple to become a monopoly. Do we wait until then that to say its wrong for Apple to do it?

Edited August 23, 2009 by brianshapiro