www.opera.com

I invite you to read this article on the subject of Opera.

http://www.linux.com/feature/139212

I believe mostly that the comments sum up exactly how I feel about the browser and make for the best, I feel, arguments in favor of the Opera browser. Especially those comments addressing the blind fanaticism of open source.

I hope you will read it with an open mind and not see this as an attack on your favorite browser's religion.

Let me see if I understand this: you *seem* to use GNU/Linux, beyond the kernel & GUI, you trust some faceless corp. in telling you they've done their job properly & you should allow them access to your hardware/personal data/net activities (Realplayer)?

The _free_dom that comes in F/OSS, GNU, MIT, BSD, &c., is that *nothing* is hidden from you... combined with the freedom to change anything you don't like.

Really study a standard MS or Apple EULA and tell me what possessed you to look @/run Linux? Why didn't you stay on Windows?

"It's always convenient to make it look like a religious war isn't it? The reality is that picking a martket drug for something as necessary as a web broweser is entirely lame and far from pragmatic. Not considering the long term effects of a decision does not make you pragmatic. Putting blind faith on some random company to keep releasing a browser for free, does NOT make you pragmatic. Should opera remain closed source it will be considered an equivalent to internet explorer, the only difference is that Microsoft didn't make it." --Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 200.105.172.181] on June 21, 2008 01:46 PM

IMO, the best ph browser is Fennec... & it's still in beta.

>>4
I'm not investing time and money into web browsers. I don't get dividends in return for using Opera, Firefox, or IE. If for some reason any of these browsers are discontinued, I just go to the next best thing. I didn't lose anything because IT'S JUST A FUCKING INTERNET WEB BROWSER. Don't get emotionally attached to browsers. Don't worship their fanbase. Use whatever is best for you.

The death of a single browser will not stop you from accessing the internet and/or enjoying web pages. So this religion of yours lacks one thing, I don't *NEED* to practice it to save my soul from eternal damnation.

>> 5

Wow.  If you think FF is just a web browser, I suggest you check out Songbird. That application was created using Mozilla's XUL, which, if running GNU/Linux, is probably already installed (XULrunner). In a nutshell, XUL allows one to create applications that are OS/platform agnostic & separates  the program's engine fr the menu design.

Let's explore a thought here: you have a great idea that's an evolution of or incorporates existing structure/technology. Logically, I'd assume you'd rather spend time working on your development than mimicking existing functionality. Would you waste time in re-inventing the wheel or use open code to expedite a functioning prototype?

Under a closed source model, it would be very difficult if cost was a concern. Of course, this is what commercial entities capitalize on. Ever use Compuserve or Prodigy? Are your aware of the history of HTTPs rival, Gopher?

Open source grants the freedom to adapt anything I wish; even if I never exercise it. Some people want appliances, I want a computer.

Then again, if “IT'S JUST A FUCKING INTERNET WEB BROWSER,” you don't appreciate the gift Tim Berners-Lee gave to the world so that you could spout ill-informed, drone-mentality rhetoric.

Whoops. Must remember to check for typos before posting.

>>6
Haha oh wow. You didn't even take the time to read the fucking post. Way to LOGICAL FALLACY. Here I thought we were talking about web browsers and now you pull this TIM BERNERS-LEE ASS-KISSING out of nowhere.

>Wow.  If you think FF is just a web browser

What the fuck? What does this have to do with anything that has been argued thus far? I was addressing your statement about "what if the browser development suddenly died out." Firefox IS just a browser. Those other programs are not Firefox. But no, you must set up a strawman and argue that Songfire is this and that. Completely out of the subject.

>Logically, I'd assume you'd rather spend time working on your development than mimicking existing functionality. Would you waste time in re-inventing the wheel or use open code to expedite a functioning prototype?

Again, what the fuck are you talking about? This is completely un-related, setting up a strawman once more and arguing in favor of something completely out of the subject...again.

>Ever use Compuserve or Prodigy? Are your aware of the history of HTTPs rival, Gopher?

Are you comparing these things to Opera? Are you familiar with my post? Are you aware that I was arguing that their failure means nothing?

If Gopher failed, that means absolutely NOTHING to me. Now we all use HTTP. Where is my wasted time? Where is my wasted money?

See? That is what I was arguing. I am not a slave to certain technologies. To say that you don't want to use closed source software ONLY because it might not exist tomorrow is fucking ridiculous. Stick to the subject.

You are a fucking tool, comparing Firefox to the WWW and thinking that it's a gift from God and worshipping the ground it walks on. Oh the irony.

Okay, now I've got a better grasp on the intellect I'm dealing with, so I'll make this as easy for you to grasp as possible:

My position, as I'd thought I'd clearly illustrated yet you fail to grasp, is by the opening code, improvements can be made wherein they may not have been considered. Should Mozilla fold, the source could be resurrected, incorporated or forked into a new project. As you have the source code, you're free to explore.

Alternately, the simple example of FF & Mozilla's XUL technology being then “spun-off” allows the Songbird developers *and anyone else* to create their own application using an existing framework.

Your advocacy of, regardless of the brand, commercial closed code is dependant on the whims, innovations & failings of that corporate entity.  Business exist to make money. While the individual entity may fold, this would only place one *back* into the position of finding another commercial application, thus the cycle repeats. Your argument is based on voluntary subjugation.

In other words, when Brand X fails & you must go to Brand Y to get your paint by numbers set, I'll be enjoying expressing what I want.