www.opera.com

Opera sucks sure there's an ebuild for opera but it just get dropped to /opt, it's statically linked, and it's CLOSED SOURCE, which means that it is a BINARY packag

e

.

i agree. though firefox is full of bugs and AIDS. Seamonkey is best (it's the continuation of the Mozilla project)

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

This /opt/ talk sounds like Linux. Linux doesn't matter.

www.getfirefox.com

I don't know, why that means Opera sucks. The browser itself is great: It's small, fast and offers many features you need an extension for when using Firefox.
Judging from your description Opera under Linux seems to be a major pain in the ass, but since Opera is primary designed for Windows, I don't think you can blame it for that.
Frankly said I don't understand what's so great about open source. Sure: You have the code, you can alter it according to your needs, you don't need to rely on the original authors for fixing bugs. Nevertheless I don't use an open source software that's 10 times slower than the closed source altenative.

I don't know, why that means Opera sucks. The browser itself is great: It's small, fast and offers many features you need an extension for when using Firefox.
Judging from your description Opera under Linux seems to be a major pain in the ass, but since Opera is primary designed for Windows, I don't think you can blame it for that.
Frankly said I don't understand what's so great about open source. Sure: You have the code, you can alter it according to your needs, you don't need to rely on the original authors for fixing bugs. Nevertheless I don't use an open source software that's 10 times slower than the closed source altenative.

opera doesnt have memory loopholes, its small fast and simple with everything inbuilt for the average user.

Firefox...yeah it has tons of useful AND useless things so go figure which is best for your surfin needs.

>>9
If you think Firefox' bfcache is a memory leak, then you're ignorant.
If you think Firefox has significant memory leaks, then you're probably ignorant.
If you think slow memory leaks are a problem with modern paging-happy OSes, then you're ignorant.

If you think Firefox' bfcache is a memory leak, then you're ignorant.
It may not a memory leak, but it's a fucking shitty implementation compared to Opera. (Then again, Opera has had it since forever, so they've had time to fine-tune it.)

Firefox has always had memory leaks and bloat problems, even before the horrible back\forwards cache was put in. Stems from its heritage as the fast, lean Netscape Navigator suite (oh wait.) I don't know when Opera implemented it, but I think it was around 7.0 and it certainly wasn't a problem back then.

Both browsers have their issues, but you shouldn't downplay the fact Firefox can be a huge memory whore and has pretty good reason to.

Firefox doesn't share any significant code with the shitty Netscape Navigator 1.x~4.x . The browser engine (Gecko) is completely new, the JavaScript engine (SmileMonkey) is completely new, and the interface (Firefox) is completely new.

Firefox daily leaks up to 100% memory usage, becoming completely unresponsive, and resulting in me having to restart X with Ctrl-Alt-Backspace.  Of course, I'm using an old version, so it might be fixed, I'll go upgrade and see if it changes anything.

>>14
I've had instances of Firefox running for 3-4 days without problems.  But then, I'm using the latest version.

>>13
If you say so. I don't totally buy that, though. Why is it so huge compared to Opera, KHTML and WebCore, then? Even IE doesn't get as bogged down as Gecko. Even if it was really recoded from scratch, I guess the developers who did it back in 1998 or whatever were the types that thought stuff like XUL was a good idea, so it might just be a pretty badly done rewrite.

>>14
You've failed your Lunix, in mine it doesn't leak.

Oh, yes, why the fuck are you running an old version? Use 1.5.0.4.

>>16
It's memory happy, but at least it's a good performer. Draws faster than MSIE on Windows, and triggers events much faster than Opera on Linux.

>>17
Nope, Opera has been tested time and time again and is the fastest browser.

>>18
Then why does it react slowly to MouseOver events in my Lunix?

And the fact Opera is the fastest graphic browsers doesn't make Firefox slow.

>>19
Mine has about 2ms lag on mouseovers aswell. Can't imagine why, it's very subtle and hard to notice. I just now found out about it

>>19
Yes, it does. Firefox is slower than IE and slower than Opera. Given it's place 3 in a 3 horse race, that means that yes, it is indeed slow.

>>20
I've noticed because mine is quite larger (something around 100ms).

>>21
Firefox is faster than MSIE for most pages. Stop lying. Just try the following (with show windows as they move enabled in Windows): load a web sight, resize the window slowly. Also, perform other stress tests such as loads of nested DIVs.

http://www.firefoxmyths.com/
Has a chart that shows how slow Firefox is compared to the other browsers.

I don't like Opera because its defaults are all fucked up and it's compatible with 4chan. I want a simple, stable browser that I can rely on. Opera hasn't reached that point yet for me. It also has rendering issues with a lot of websites (whether it's standards-compliant or not, websites look worse in Opera.)

The dozens of nonstandard keyboard shortcurts and overcomplex GUI don't help either.

Eh, don't get too ahead of yourselves, Firefoxmyths is a bit difficult to justify as evidence of Firefox's failures as he kinda overdoes things at times.

Firefox will fare much better than IE in CSS stress tests and certain other areas (maybe resize performance), but there are other measures of speed that make Firefox seem kinda slow. IE rapes Firefox in loading time, for example, as well as UI responsiveness, and up until 1.5 back\forward capabilities. Little things like that.

>>24
Opera 8 was supposed to fix a lot of that and mostly did. The only shortcut I hear complained about anymore is Ctrl-H, and while the panels default to that stupid two-segment mode, the rest of the UI is pretty damn simple and is less obtrusive than Firefox's.

As for it not working well with websites, I cannot say I've experienced this in a negative way, though obviously we might visit different websites. I'd urge you to give it another shot if you're basing your assumptions on a past version, because I don't believe any of these are significant problems anymore.

I also feel Opera is very "stable" and "reliable" - Firefox feels otherwise for me. I think that perception tends to be based on what you're used to, so don't take much notice as you'd probably change your mind if you made Opera your default.

>>25
How can I change it from CTRL-8?
How can I disable the panel when opening the History?
How can I make downloading not brutally difficult (my default folder is \Opera\, popups, scrollups, alerts when it's starting and done)
How can I block ads with a blacklist outside of a hosts file?

Opera hasn't reached that point yet for me.

Maybe you should give Opera another try?

www.opera.com

>>27
Don't listen to this retarded troll.

Download www.oprah.com instead