Microsoft should buy Opera!

[Arcademus]

You don't get it do you?

NOT EVERYONE USES EXTENSIONS AND ITS WHY WE HAVE CHOICE

And considering how you didn't reply to that bit of my post, you know the one that includes facts, I'm going to show you another bit of lovely information:

I didn't reply because it was completely irrelevant. Does every Opera user use every single feature in Opera? No? Damn, I guess those features need to get axed. 60% of people use IE and hence don't care about adblocking, DAMN OPERA NEEDS TO ABOLISH ADBLOCKING, PEOPLE DON'T CARE ABOUT IT!

And guess what, you can still have extensions and have a choice at the same time, you've just proved that just because a browser has extensions doesn't mean everyone is forced to use them.

Your point is complete rubbish, spewing numbers doesn't change anything when your logic doesn't hold any water in the first place. And you were the one who started calling people retarded, now another personal insult about me being 5 years old, nice try.

[Mr. Gibs]

I didn't reply because it was completely irrelevant. Does every Opera user use every single feature in Opera? No? Damn, I guess those features need to get axed. 60% of people use IE and hence don't care about adblocking, DAMN OPERA NEEDS TO ABOLISH ADBLOCKING, PEOPLE DON'T CARE ABOUT IT!

Your point is complete rubbish, spewing numbers doesn't change anything when your logic doesn't hold any water in the first place.

What? Where did I say those features need to be Axed? Where did I say that Firefox should axe extensions? OH THATS RIGHT I DIDN'T.

You said if Opera offered extensions their usage would massively increase, and I proved you wrong. That's all. And like I'm going to say for the 5 millionth time, THERES A REASON WE HAVE CHOICE.

Using firefox? Chances are you're doing it because of the extensions, or you didn't like IE and went with what else was popular.

Using chrome? Chances are you're doing it because you love the speed, standards support and how minimal it is.

Using IE? You don't know any better or you just want a simple browser.

Using Safari? It's the best browser on Mac, and the 5th version on Windows is pretty dam good too.

Using Opera? You like the speed, standards support and how minimal it is.

Every browser doesn't need to be equal. If you want to use extensions go use Firefox / Chrome, but don't think that everyone else does and hence everyone else should use it as well.

Grow the **** up.

[Scorbing]

Microsoft + Opera = Disaster

[Arcademus]

What? Where did I say those features need to be Axed? Where did I say that Firefox should axe extensions? OH THATS RIGHT I DIDN'T.

No, you said that 60% of desktop users are on IE which doesn't offer extensions, ergo people don't care about extensions and Opera shouldn't implement them. Except that Opera has implemented a whole bunch of stuff that aren't available on IE and people supposedly don't care about, which blows your logic clean out of the water. Your argument has been busted wide open, there's no use getting angry about it.

You said if Opera offered extensions their usage would massively increase, and I proved you wrong. That's all. And like I'm going to say for the 5 millionth time, THERES A REASON WE HAVE CHOICE.

Stop lying through your teeth. I never said that, I'm not the delusional fan you are that I can't see the whole bunch of other bigger problems that Opera has that I'd make an idealistic claim like that. Feel free to quote where I've said that and prove me wrong... oh wait, that's right, you can't.

Grow the **** up.

Sigh, angry little fanboys. Whatever, dude.

[Mr. Gibs]

No, you said that 60% of desktop users are on IE which doesn't offer extensions, ergo people don't care about extensions and Opera shouldn't implement them. Except that Opera has implemented a whole bunch of stuff that aren't available on IE and people supposedly don't care about, which blows your logic clean out of the water. Your argument has been busted wide open, there's no use getting angry about it.

Considering you still don't get my argument.

My original post:

Have you realized that 60%+ of the world doesn't give a **** about user-scripts?

Which is quite true. Like I said most of the world uses IE, no support for user-scripts. 32 million people MAX use greasemonkey on firefox, yet again not everyone uses user-scripts on firefox. Safari, Chrome and Opera has the same numbers.

All I'm saying is not everyone uses extensions. Not that features should be cut because people don't use them.

I don't use extensions, so Opera lacking them doesn't make a difference to ME. If you use them, then yes Opera isn't the browser for you. And yet again THATS WHY YOU HAVE CHOICE. Hence you go and use Firefox.

Stop lying through your teeth. I never said that, I'm not the delusional fan you are that I can't see the whole bunch of other bigger problems that Opera has that I'd make an idealistic claim like that. Feel free to quote where I've said that and prove me wrong... oh wait, that's right, you can't.

So lacking a feature that another browser has is called a problem? Well I guess its sad that my parents Benz doesn't have a 1000HS engine of a bugatti veyron, obviously this benz is a terrible car that needs to be thrown out.

No. It's just that I don't need extensions so it lacking on a browser doesn't make it a deal breaker for me. And as for a lot of other users of any browser, it isn't a deal breaker for them either. Or every one of the 500 million firefox users should be using extensions.

Sigh, angry little fanboys. Whatever, dude.

Sadly unlike you I have Chrome 7, Firefox 4, Opera 10.7 and IE9 all installed on my computer. And before Opera I used Chrome, and before that I used Firefox.

So I'm not a fanboy to any one single browser. If one starts to appeal to me, I'll switch to it until I find another that works better. For now, that's Opera for me.

[Zeet]

If Microsoft bought Opera, every Opera user would switch to FF/Chrome.

[Arcademus]

Which is quite true. Like I said most of the world uses IE, no support for user-scripts. 32 million people MAX use greasemonkey on firefox, yet again not everyone uses user-scripts on firefox. Safari, Chrome and Opera has the same numbers.

All I'm saying is not everyone uses extensions. Not that features should be cut because people don't use them.

So why does Opera implement user script support as well (even though its primitive compared to Fx/Chrome) in the first place? Only 32 million people MAX use it, assuming your numbers are correct. I'm not arguing that user script support to be cut. I'm just telling you that your logic is inconsistent. So Opera doesn't support extensions because the majority of people don't use it, then please explain why they support a bunch of other XYZ features that people supposedly don't use either.

Choice doesn't have anything to do with it. We already have browsers that support user scripts, and browsers that don't. Even for the browsers that do, people still have a choice whether to use that feature. Opera isn't adding any more choice to the table regardless of whether it decides to support user scripts or not.

I don't use extensions, so Opera lacking them doesn't make a difference to ME. If you use them, then yes Opera isn't the browser for you. And yet again THATS WHY YOU HAVE CHOICE. Hence you go and use Firefox.

Except that we're not talking about you. We're talking about Opera. If you're the only person who uses Opera, and Opera's potential users will forever be limited to just you, then fine. But it's not.

So lacking a feature that another browser has is called a problem? Well I guess its sad that my parents Benz doesn't have a 1000HS engine of a bugatti veyron, obviously this benz is a terrible car that needs to be thrown out.

Sometimes car analogies work, sometimes they don't. There's a difference in cost for cars, all browsers are free. Plus Opera has bigger problems than features TBH, getting webpages to work properly would be a start.

[Mr. Gibs]

You still don't get it.

Sure Opera can increase it's userbase by implementing Extensions, but it isn't a deal breaker for a lot of people. Hence most people will continue to use whatever they're already using. People aren't just going to jump over to Opera because it suddenly supports extensions.

From a tech perspective, sure they might. From an average user perspective? They'll just use what they've always been using. Firefox and Chrome gained a lot of marketshare because of the vast number of ads that are around the web, not because of extensions support, or standards compliance. The average Windows user doesn't know what extensions are, doesn't know what standards compliance are and doesn't care about them.

They see an ad saying "use this for a better, faster, web experience" they might just give it a shot. If they see an ad going "firefox gives you improved javascript performance, extensions, and userscript support" they will just go wtf and skip over it.

Sometimes car analogies work, sometimes they don't. There's a difference in cost for cars, all browsers are free. Plus Opera has bigger problems than features TBH, getting webpages to work properly would be a start.

Except my analogy has nothing to do with cost. It has to do with features.

Just because X lacks Y, doesn't mean X is bad. It just means X lacks this. HOWEVER, if X lacked something the vast majority of people use, then yes X is bad.

Plus Opera has bigger problems than features TBH, getting webpages to work properly would be a start.

Opera already works on a good number of websites quite well. And support increases everyday.

A lot of the times it comes down to people not debugging for Opera, not because of the browser itself. And sometimes it comes down to people use prefixes for certain things, but not implementing them for Opera ( moz- , o- etc).

Opera supports the standards better than any browser out there, with Webkit being a very close second. In an ideal world this should translate to every single website working 100%. But we don't live in an ideal world. A lot of websites are still coded for just IE, a lot of websites still use old prefixes or miss out on them.

And there isn't much Opera can do about that. If people don't debug their websites with Opera, sometimes it may just not work that well with Opera.

[MR_Candyman]

Sometimes car analogies work, sometimes they don't. There's a difference in cost for cars, all browsers are free. Plus Opera has bigger problems than features TBH, getting webpages to work properly would be a start.

Everybody keeps spewing this out but the fact is Opera DOES render pages properly. It does a better job than any other browser. If somebody can't code their web page properly, then that is their fault, not opera's. You should complain to the people who can't code the sites you go to. Honestly, I have never actually noticed when a site didn't have a curve border instead of a block border. It's just not noticeable and not important.

[Arcademus]

You still don't get it.

That's odd, I'd swear I can say the same about you.

Sure Opera can increase it's userbase by implementing Extensions, but it isn't a deal breaker for a lot of people. Hence most people will continue to use whatever they're already using. People aren't just going to jump over to Opera because it suddenly supports extensions.

So why did Opera implement urlfilter.ini? User script support? Mouse gestures? A faster Javascript engine? Or even risque stuff like Turbo and Unite? Did people suddenly jump to Opera because it supported those? Please, humor me, take a break from pushing your opinions and try to answer my questions for a change, then maybe you might see the gross inconsistency in your logic.

Except my analogy has nothing to do with cost. It has to do with features.

Just because X lacks Y, doesn't mean X is bad. It just means X lacks this. HOWEVER, if X lacked something the vast majority of people use, then yes X is bad.

In cars, more features and higher quality usually = higher cost. This does not apply for browsers. And no, I've never said that Opera is bad because it lacks extensions, I'm saying that, relative to the competition, it's an inferior choice in the features aspect.

A lot of the times it comes down to people not debugging for Opera, not because of the browser itself. And sometimes it comes down to people use prefixes for certain things, but not implementing them for Opera ( moz- , o- etc).

Debugging for Opera is a pain, especially when it comes to Javascript. Dragonfly is a sore point. Regardless, Opera needs to stop playing the blame game. It may be their fault that pages don't work, it may not be, but it sure as hell is their problem. In an ideal Opera utopia people would love Opera enough that they would take the time and trouble to contact webmasters and wait for the problem to be solved, or just live with it, in the real world people just switch to any of the other 4 major browsers that work without problems.

[Mr. Gibs]

So why did Opera implement urlfilter.ini? User script support? Mouse gestures? A faster Javascript engine? Or even risque stuff like Turbo and Unite? Did people suddenly jump to Opera because it supported those? Please, humor me, take a break from pushing your opinions and try to answer my questions for a change, then maybe you might see the gross inconsistency in your logic.

/facepalm.

All I'm saying is Opera wasn't designed for extensions. Hence people who use Opera obviously aren't bothered by it otherwise they would be using Firefox. Hell chrome didn't get extensions until Jan 2010, and not many many people were bothered by it.

People use programs that work for them. That is all. As for people jumping to opera because of its built in adblock, userscript, mouse gestures, unite, turbo? I highly, highly doubt it.

Sure Opera could get extensions for those people that do desire it, but I doubt it will mean that many more people would jump to Opera and it doesn't make opera a bad browser. It just makes it a browser that lacks extensions. THAT IS ALL.

In cars, more features and higher quality usually = higher cost. This does not apply for browsers. And no, I've never said that Opera is bad because it lacks extensions, I'm saying that, relative to the competition, it's an inferior choice in the features aspect.

But firefox has less webstandards compatibility (until 4, and now its up there), its slower, it uses more memory.

So does that make it an inferior browser in the features aspect? No. Does it make it an inferior browser in speed, for example? Yes.

Likewise, Opera isn't an inferior browser in terms of features because it doesn't support extensions. It's an inferior browser for extensions. That is it.

[Athlonite]

Ah hell no, don't want that crappy browser crowbarred into my OS, let it stay standalone so I can avoid it.

What exactly is wrong with it?

[Arcademus]

People use programs that work for them. That is all. As for people jumping to opera because of its built in adblock, userscript, mouse gestures, unite, turbo? I highly, highly doubt it.

Exactly. Opera went through the trouble of implementing all those even though it didn't result in a significant user base increase. So why not extensions as well?

How will Opera alienate its existing users or become a less appealing choice if it implements extensions? Just because people want extensions doesn't mean they want Fx/Chrome, they may want Opera's speed and all those dials and buttons to fiddle around with in the options window. If you as an Opera user don't want extensions, just don't use them, Opera isn't going to degrade in value for you.

Likewise, Opera isn't an inferior browser in terms of features because it doesn't support extensions. It's an inferior browser for extensions. That is it.

Um, you're just resorting to theoretical arguments like an earlier poster did. Opera is inferior in terms of features. Do you really want to compare what Opera can do vs what Firefox/Chrome with extensions can do?

[Mr. Gibs]

How will Opera alienate its existing users or become a less appealing choice if it implements extensions? Just because people want extensions doesn't mean they want Fx/Chrome, they may want Opera's speed and all those dials and buttons to fiddle around with in the options window. If you as an Opera user don't want extensions, just don't use them, Opera isn't going to degrade in value for you.

I never said that it would become a less appealing choice or alienate its user base.

All I said was that people who use extensions use Firefox, not Opera. And as such, that doesn't make Opera a bad browser. That is it.

Um, you're just resorting to theoretical arguments like an earlier poster did. Opera is inferior in terms of features. Do you really want to compare what Opera can do vs what Firefox/Chrome with extensions can do?

Sure go ahead.

But ease of use of an adblocker doesn't count. Hell if you want an easy to use adblocker for Opera you can just download Ad Muncher, which is the same as getting ABP for Firefox.

[Frylock86]

Why would Microsoft buy that hulk of garbage? No one uses it!

[Woelfel]

YOU HAVE JUST WON THE INTERWEBS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jebadiah]

IE9 stunning design + Opera speed and smooth scrolling will be amazing :)

...not to say that all bad coding websites will be gone very fast.

Copying features is a way cheaper option than buying out Opera.

[Arcademus]

I never said that it would become a less appealing choice or alienate its user base.

All I said was that people who use extensions use Firefox, not Opera. And as such, that doesn't make Opera a bad browser. That is it.

Well, of course people who want extensions use Firefox. Opera doesn't have extensions, and it looks like you're in favor of keeping it that way. But who's to say people who want extensions won't use Opera if Opera includes extensions? You're the one who's talking about choice, but what's strange is that you're actually promoting something that gives users LESS choice. What gives?

Sure go ahead.

But ease of use of an adblocker doesn't count. Hell if you want an easy to use adblocker for Opera you can just download Ad Muncher, which is the same as getting ABP for Firefox.

Wait, I thought you said Opera wasn't inferior? Why do you need to bring Ad Muncher into the picture then just so that it's on par with Firefox, then? Not to mention that you need to pay for Ad Muncher, while ABP is free.

[Mr. Gibs]

Well, of course people who want extensions use Firefox. Opera doesn't have extensions, and it looks like you're in favor of keeping it that way. But who's to say people who want extensions won't use Opera if Opera includes extensions? You're the one who's talking about choice, but what's strange is that you're actually promoting something that gives users LESS choice. What gives?

That makes absolutely no sense. I said you have CHOICE of browsers to use the one that suits you the most.

I don't see the point of having extensions, so its not a dealbreaker for me (and plenty of other people) to use Opera. For someone who does, then Opera isn't the right choice for him.

Likewise. if I wanted to use Unite and that was a dealbreaker for me..I use Opera. Obviously, in this case Firefox isn't the right browser.

Goes back to my original post about user preference.

Wait, I thought you said Opera wasn't inferior? Why do you need to bring Ad Muncher into the picture then just so that it's on par with Firefox, then? Not to mention that you need to pay for Ad Muncher, while ABP is free.

In terms of adblocking Opera is on par with Firefox. In terms of ease of use of the adblock, its completely different.

To get it working on Opera, you copy and paste a file. To get it working on Firefox you download an extension. Hence if you want to make it the same as firefox in terms of ease of use, go get ad muncher.

[ncc50446]

I love Opera...I has all the features I need, without having to and search for an extension that I need...Looking for extensions is a pain in the butt.

It's nice to just load a browser and go.

But, that is just my opinion. Do I use a lot of Opera's features? Nope. Do I think it's bloated? Nope.

But MS should never buy Opera...They would ruin it. Opera gets updated far more often than IE.

[Arcademus]

I don't see the point of having extensions, so its not a dealbreaker for me (and plenty of other people) to use Opera. For someone who does, then Opera isn't the right choice for him.

And maybe if Opera implements extensions, then it'd become the right choice.

In terms of adblocking Opera is on par with Firefox. In terms of ease of use of the adblock, its completely different.

To get it working on Opera, you copy and paste a file. To get it working on Firefox you download an extension. Hence if you want to make it the same as firefox in terms of ease of use, go get ad muncher.

I can't really be bothered to continue, so I'll just say that there are a bunch of other things extensions can do that can't be done by installing another (pay-for) program. And ease of use is arguably a feature, not just for adblocking but a bunch of other things as well. Which goes back to my earlier point of Opera still being so primitive in 2010 when everyone else has moved on to point-and-click.

[Mr. Gibs]

And maybe if Opera implements extensions, then it'd become the right choice.

By that logic, maybe Firefox should implement Unite then? Maybe they should suck it up and implement h.264 (I can't remember if they decided to add that in yet or not over licensing costs). Maybe they should put in a built in mail client? Maybe they should support separate processes for tabs? Maybe they should get the security record Opera / Chrome has? maybe firefox should support ASLR?

Maybe then firefox will become the right choice. You see how stupid that sounds?

I can't really be bothered to continue, so I'll just say that there are a bunch of other things extensions can do that can't be done by installing another (pay-for) program. And ease of use is arguably a feature, not just for adblocking but a bunch of other things as well. Which goes back to my earlier point of Opera still being so primitive in 2010 when everyone else has moved on to point-and-click.

lol. giving up? You were the one who made the "challenge"

But lets take an average user shall we? If he wanted to know how to adblock on firefox, he will go to google and found out theres an extension and download it.

If he wanted to know how to do it on Opera, he would go to google and find out he has to copy and paste this file. As for updates? I haven't updated mine for the past 2 months and I've not seen an ad that I didn't want to see.

Hell you could argue Opera's is more space effective since you don't have to run an extension and the framework that comes along with it. Just a .ini file.

[Ravensky]

Why would they do that? Opera is a piece of ****!

[mintbiskit]

Nice debate.

I vote for Opera as best browser, but Microsoft shouldn't touch it.

To block ads i just right click and block them as i come across them, no need for addons, or copying files.

Continue debate...

[Jase]

Never liked opera.. I can see AOL or Yahoo buying them soon.. and then say byebye to loyal fans.