digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at arstechnica.com

Hands on: Opera 9.5 beta 2 improves speed, adds features

arstechnica.com — Opera has released Beta 2 of the 9.5 version of their web browser, and we've taken a quick tour to see what's in store. First impressions? It's faaaaaast.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • greedoe, on 04/28/2008, -38/+6Worth a look, but wondering if they have the wonderful array of extension that makes Firefox so necessary.
    • xtremesniper, on 04/28/2008, -2/+52There are a lot of features built into Opera that Firefox would need extensions for. I would suggest giving Opera a try, since there are a lot of unadvertised features that go under the radar.
      • nmnnotmyname, on 04/28/2008, -21/+2While that's true, the Adblockish feature is pretty crap because you can't use a predefined filter list.
        • Ramble, on 04/28/2008, -0/+26Yes you can.
        • AgentEntropy, on 04/28/2008, -0/+22That's not true. The urlfilter.ini is just a text file with an include/exclude list. You can fill it in with whatever you'd like. There is a user-made urlfilter.ini file easily found thru Google that I use and it blocks damn near everything.
        • nmnnotmyname, on 04/29/2008, -1/+3Huh, Someone told me It couldn't and I trusted him not to spread FUD
        • zongamin, on 04/29/2008, -4/+2Try searching yourself you BASTARD
          • nmnnotmyname, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Why? I have used Opera in the past and I'm not interested in using it over Firefox. So why would I search? It wasn't even a question I asked. He was talking about why he wasn't using it.
      • jimthenglishman, on 04/28/2008, -1/+15so what you're saying is firefox can get opera's features with extensions?
        hmm…
        • Dongvid, on 04/28/2008, -0/+15but not it's speed. nowhere close.
        • KibibyteBrain, on 04/28/2008, -1/+11But then when Firefox crashes hard, they say that its the extensions fault and not the browser, and not to use too many extensions...
          Opera is great. Its the only browser on the Mac that doesn't have a mental breakdown every so often. If only more sites would support web standards, as Opera's weakness seems to be dealing with non-standard sites, which firefox copes with better.
      • thegreatanti, on 04/28/2008, -12/+2"There are a lot of features built into Opera" isn't that a synonym for bloat?
        • mRku, on 04/28/2008, -0/+15bloat... but still the fastest? =)
        • Terr01, on 04/28/2008, -0/+12What kind of bloat are you referring to?

          I was under the impression Opera has both a smaller binary and does comparably or better on most benchmarks...?
        • KibibyteBrain, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5Opera is written all in native languages, with a modern rendering engine, while Firefox is written in a cryptic way that the developers have been trying to find a way to abandon for ages that involves layers of Javascript on other scripting languages. It also has a dinosaur engine. Bloatware is about code size and the complexity to run the fundamental units of code, not the number of features.
      • mossblaser, on 04/29/2008, -2/+1While yes, opera does offer some features that are simply invaluable, there is one thing Firefox has on its side which opera can't have, and that is that it is open source. That is a non-issue for 99% of the population but for that 1% it is often one of the biggest.
    • zongamin, on 04/29/2008, -3/+1Try searching yourself you bastard
  • 1o1q1, on 04/28/2008, -10/+64it doesn't need the addons just go try it
    • MikeCerm, on 04/28/2008, -7/+15I did, and it does. Out of the box, I'd say it is and has always been better than Firefox, but Firefox wins with it's flexibility.
    • tmart, on 04/28/2008, -9/+8it needs ad-block
    • Spuy767, on 04/28/2008, -1/+12Yeah, just the other day I looked at a co worker's screen and said, "Oh, You decided to give opera a try?" It turned out to be a FF extension to emulate the speed-dial feature of Opera.
      • novemberdobby, on 04/29/2008, -1/+2Although that's no doubt classed as 'innovation' by FFanboys.
        • ElMoselYEE, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2its classed as 'opera speed dial extension' as well as 'flexibility'. we're not mac fanboys, we don't have our head THAT far up our asses.
    • mRku, on 04/28/2008, -3/+7"emulate the speed-dial feature" ...and this is how firefox suck up so much memory and cpu...
      • linkinpark342, on 04/29/2008, -1/+2You know, since Firefox 3 takes more memory than the old opera...
  • LumpOfCole, on 04/28/2008, -4/+31An incredible browser and overall a great beta, but still has issues to be ironed out before Final.
    • Terr01, on 04/28/2008, -0/+10It is a rare Beta that doesn't.
      • Fergy, on 04/29/2008, -4/+1So Firefox beta's are mostly rare?
        • Terr01, on 04/29/2008, -0/+3Pffft. Go ahead, check bugzilla if you don't believe me.
  • malfourmed, on 04/28/2008, -9/+3> There are some new configurable options, such as the ability to set the behavior when closing a tab to switch to the last active tab, the next tab, or the tab that originally opened the tab being closed.
    The fact that Opera currently returns to the last active tab when closing a tab - instead of switching to the NEXT tab - drives me batty. It probably works fine if you only open one new tab at a time, but if you open as many as a dozen tabs from the same parent (as I often do), having to continually click away from the "last active" tab after closing a tab seriously degrades the browsing experience.
    This behaviour was one of the only three things that have stopped me from using Opera as my main browser. (The other two are lack of extension support and inertia.) I'll be giving serious consideration to switching now.
    • TenebrousX, on 04/28/2008, -0/+10Right click and scroll (and set it to cycle in tab bar order - CTRL+F12 > Advanced > Tabs)
    • AmazingAndrex, on 04/28/2008, -2/+9"having to continually click away from the "last active" tab after closing a tab seriously degrades the browsing experience."
      That's only because you're used to Firefox, when you actually use Opera for a while it becomes second hand, making it much easier to switch between two tabs in a sea of others.
      Besides you can tune that in the options menu anyways.
    • cesclaveria, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5I have used opera for years, and I'm pretty sure that is not a new feature, only it was hard to find until now.
    • lwiczek, on 04/28/2008, -5/+0Just minimize "last active" and follow with new ones...
      • StealthTomato, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2But why should there have to be an extra step? Good design practice seems to dictate that you make the experience as simple, yet powerful, as possible for the end user.
    • exclipy, on 04/29/2008, -0/+3Opera has always followed the same convention as in Windows, KDE, GNOME, etc. Each tab resides in a pile that keeps its ordering - when one disappears, you see the one underneath it. Furthermore, Ctrl-Tab is analogous to Alt-Tab in Windows - it lets you switch between two tabs easily. There's also an option (which used to be the default) to let you click on a tab to minimise it, which also lets you switch between two tabs by repeatedly clicking on one.

      These are the kinds of features Firefox users are missing out on.
  • zephyr42, on 04/28/2008, -14/+1"SERVICE UNAVAILABLE"

    ...*sigh*
  • peterandbeer, on 04/28/2008, -1/+15Ive tried previous installations of Opera and they operated pretty swiftly
  • alpha19, on 04/28/2008, -4/+17I'm still waiting for Opera to become as versatile as Firefox... so I can make the switch back. Firefox's memory hog issues can get annoying at times. This version could be promising and I think I'll try it.
    • alpha19, on 04/28/2008, -1/+14I forgot to mention, Opera's mobile version is AMAZING. Try it! You will not be disappointed.
      • sadilak, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6I second that; I have the Verizon Blackberry Pearl(8130) and the built in browser is an eyesore. Opera is a must for any blackberry user.
    • MikeCerm, on 04/28/2008, -3/+8Firefox 3 has really closed the speed gap and solved a lot of the memory issues. If you stuck with Firefox through versions 1.5 and 2, there's not much that this version of Opera's going to do to change your mind.
      • skyshock1, on 04/28/2008, -1/+6FF3 still lags by comparison. The rendering engine is still UBER slow when you throw a really AJAX-y site at it.
      • Shawn4168, on 04/28/2008, -1/+5Firefox 3 closed the speed gap on Opera 9. Opera 9.5 leaves both browsers in the dust.
    • Forma, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4What do you want of Opera? Chances are it can do it.
      • alpha19, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1I had lots of problems with pages not redering in Opera that worked fine in Firefox... I'm sure it's not Opera's fault, but lazy webmasters. So I opted to not deal with the problem.
  • uberamd, on 04/28/2008, -20/+1Meh.
  • inlove, on 04/28/2008, -17/+31Opera was my first love, but I decided to marry Firefox.
    • thegreatanti, on 04/28/2008, -16/+4That's a good and responsible choice. You just can't be sure what's in the closed source of Opera. Brrr.
      • Dongvid, on 04/28/2008, -0/+18Like you'd actually check out the source code of anything other than "hello world."
        • StealthTomato, on 04/28/2008, -5/+2OBJECTION! Ad-hominem! Can your argument not stand without insulting your opponent?
        • goldenratiophi, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6OBJECTION OVERRULED!
    • blackrave, on 04/28/2008, -4/+18Perhaps you should consider a divorce now, because Opera 9.5 rocks!
    • yahoofrom, on 04/29/2008, -0/+3false dichotomy. i choose to be a polygamist
  • Torx, on 04/28/2008, -15/+3Crap, hoping this was the mobile version... bleh..
  • SSCrow, on 04/28/2008, -20/+1Explain to me why memory footprints have been the hot topic for browsers for the last two years?
    Last I checked RAM and CPU performance keeps going up. Its not like we need to ration our system resources.
    • alpha19, on 04/28/2008, -0/+13As resources go up, footprints go up because "we can use more now!". When I have 9 tabs open in Firefox and it is using 200MB of memory... that is an issue for me.
    • AmazingAndrex, on 04/28/2008, -0/+12Horrible train of thought.
    • Terr01, on 04/28/2008, -0/+9Tell that to my 233mhz box with 32mb of PC100 Ram where I can run Opera in FVWM :P
  • bejayel, on 04/28/2008, -1/+15Browsing is all around better with opera for the most part. Its fast and the interface is simple. Mouse gestures (forward and back ones) will take a best guess of which link they should click and click it (and it does a damn fine job). Most sites i visit have a bunch of next links and finding (or clicking the right one) is stupid sometimes. Mouse gesture forward and i hit the next article page, even not in the cache. Its the little quirks like that that have made opera my default browser.
    • Terr01, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1The "Next" and "Prev" links are actually something that can be defined in HTML, and Opera just guesses when they're not defined.

      <link rel="prev" href="page5.html"/>
      <link rel="next" href="page7.html"/>
      
      
    • gudnbluts, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6Yeah. All the mouse gesture extensions on Firefox also have a lag that winds me up. The thing I miss most when I'm using Firefox is the space bar. On firefox it just acts as pagedown. On Opera it acts as page down 'til it hits the bottom of the page, then it flicks to the next page. It's great for any kind of searching - you can go through all the results just hitting the space bar. It's full of neat little things like that.
    • Zounas, on 05/04/2008, -0/+0I wonder why no other browser still haven't copied Opera's smooth auto-scroll. It's been that as far as I remember (at least from since version 5.0).
  • jimthenglishman, on 04/28/2008, -3/+22looks like all the new versions of the major browsers are all about speed…
    as long as you don't consider internet explorer a browser
    • Fergy, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Don't worry we don't.
      • Shadow2531, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Yes, seriously. There are modern browsers and there are ancient ones like IE.
  • AmazingAndrex, on 04/28/2008, -7/+39"First impressions? It's faaaaaast."

    Good, I'm sick of Safari touting it's the fastest browser as basically its only feature.
    • BenRoth, on 04/28/2008, -11/+2?? This article is about Opera, not Safari.
    • MikeCerm, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5Apple will probably keep doing that. It's just as unsubstantiated as ever, so why stop now? As far as I know, Opera has always been faster, and nobody cared.
    • StealthTomato, on 04/28/2008, -1/+9Safari is only fast ON A MAC, and that only BY COMPARISON to other apps ON A MAC.

      Apple's argument is similar to a formula 1 race where only the hometown favorites were allowed to drive actual cars, forcing everyone else to shunt cardboard boxes around the track. Yeah, the hometown favorites are faster in that specific scenario, but only because artificial handicaps have been put in place.
      • Shadow2531, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Although I use Opera, Safari Win32 is fast as hell (at loading pages and executing JS, because of webkit at least)!
    • SSUK, on 04/28/2008, -0/+8Ironically "Faaaaaast" sounds like someone speaking rather slow...
    • yahoofrom, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1opera is the fastard.
  • ErikHarrison, on 04/28/2008, -25/+3IE7 FTW.
    Opera is great, just not completely ready.
    • Avocadoes, on 04/28/2008, -2/+9Name me one thing IE7 can do that Opera (and Firefox too, for that matter, though I'm not that huge a fan) can't do better.
      • bejayel, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4Apparently the RSS stuff for IE7 is great. I cant say for sure, i havent had an IE7 icon to click anywhere but program files for ages...
      • spanner, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1IE7 at least has a functional inline spellcheck. Unlike Opera
        • novemberdobby, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1What.
          I just used it to find your comment, seems ok to me.
    • benjorino, on 04/28/2008, -0/+11LOL @ IE7
    • Zounas, on 05/04/2008, -0/+0Been ready since the beginning of this century.
  • Jus7in, on 04/28/2008, -25/+4Why anyone would use Opera over Firefox is entirely beyond me (and yes, I've used it). Graphically, I think it looks like *****. It isn't any faster than FF or IE, and it lacks the universe of add-ons granted to FF (yes, some of us DO in fact need them and some make FF impenetrably safe, such as NoScript).

    But keep drinking that kool-aid, guys.
    • stinkingfish, on 04/28/2008, -1/+16speed, and lower memory.
    • Ramble, on 04/28/2008, -0/+15Well I've been using Firefox since 0.7 and Opera a long time too. Graphically, I think it looks good, it's fast and simple and easily customisable. It's a hell of a lot faster than Firefox and IE (and yes you can tell the difference), it has pretty much everything you need build in (including noscript, greasemonkey, ad blocker, etc.) and still is smaller, faster and more secure than Firefox.

      Never have I seen more Kool-Aid slurping than in the Firefox camp (and I was an early loyalist), it's just insane.
    • thegreatanti, on 04/28/2008, -18/+1That's very true. But Opera user are wannabe elite users. The simple fact is: even IE 7 is better than Opera 9.5.
      • Zounas, on 05/04/2008, -0/+0Well, simple fact from a simple person using a simple program for simple minds...
    • thecosmicpope, on 04/28/2008, -1/+10It really is faster than IE and FF. Much faster. In terms of application loading times, and page viewing.
    • bejayel, on 04/28/2008, -0/+9Many of the firefox addons that most people use are being built into Opera. So you can run your firefox with a plethora of addons that increase the memory usage to well beyond what it should be, or you can use Opera with the toold built in and have faster execution times. That and firefox has yet to fix a few major javascript flaws that i have come across in my web development, even in the beta versions. click two buttons, one right after another, and firefox will show you whichever one finishes executing LAST where opera and IE both show you according to which button you clicked last, which is how it should be.
    • gudnbluts, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4I like mouse gestures, and Firefox's extensions for that are clunky and laggy.
    • theexitwound, on 04/29/2008, -0/+2Opera can be skinned. You know this, right? Make it look like ANYthing you want to!
  • withoutasol, on 04/28/2008, -2/+25I've been of Opera since it dropped the ads. I couldn't go back to Firefox after being spoiled by Opera's tab handling. The ability to duplicate tabs and retain the tabs browsing history is freakin awesome. The best new feature would have to be the ability to search through the pages you visited in the address bar. It not only searches through the domains but the content as well. Its a shame Opera desktop doesn't get the recognition it deserves because its little things like how it handles tabs, how it allows you to open recently closed tabs (all while retaining the tabs browsing history), lets you create a search from any search field, that make browsing the web more efficient.
  • thecosmicpope, on 04/28/2008, -2/+19I love Opera. I really do. Its so fast that it embarrasses Firefox. But I still use Firefox because its so user friendly. Last time I used Opera it did have ad blocking, but I had to use ini files and all the rest of it. Why do that when Firefoxs Ad-Block extension not only comes with an auto-updating pre-defined list, but is a simple "Right Click - Block Image" or click the block tab above a flash file? I didn't even know Digg had ads until I loaded Opera.

    If Opera can offer me proper easy ad-blocking like Firefox does, I'll use it every time. Until then I have to stick with Firefox. There is quite a lot more I'd like done to it, but proper ad-blocking is the only essential one for me
    • maninalift, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6Firefox lets you open recently closed tabs and retain tab history when you do so but not duplicating tabs and retaining history.
    • skyshock1, on 04/28/2008, -3/+11Opera 9: Right-click, block content.

      There, done.

      Want a pre-defined list? Download a host file that re-directs all the common ad URLs to 127.0.0.1
      • Terr01, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1You can also change the INI file for the filters directly or download one.
      • thecosmicpope, on 04/28/2008, -1/+7But that's the point. Why go look for a hosts file when Ad-Block updates itself? At the end of the day, the Firefox extension is easier than the Opera way of doing things - and as you just said yourself if you want a pre-defined list, you have to find a non-Opera one which doesn't update. Opera has the feature, but FF does it better. Much better.

        Just tested the Opera Block Content feature and like the rest of Opera it is quite crude. Yes it blocked the content, but now I have big white spaces above the Top Topic list, and a grey rectangle underneath it with Sponsored Links written in it. Yet in Firefox it removed all that and adjusted the page accordingly.

        Again, I love Opera, but when it comes to Ad-Blocking, Firefox is just better at it in every way.
        • rhabd0mancer, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3How often do you need to update your ad block list?

          I've been using the same one for over a year, and I still don't see any ads.
    • mRku, on 04/28/2008, -2/+8"If Opera can offer me proper easy ad-blocking like Firefox does"
      You mean "Right Click - Block Content"? Just try it here. Right click anywhere here and you'll get the blocker.
    • StealthTomato, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2I'm glad someone else is sharing the same hivemind as me.
    • DarkDx, on 04/29/2008, -1/+3http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/opera/urlfilter.in ... (use google to know where to put that file, you will nevar see an ad again)
    • jp10558, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1You can download many different ad block lists for Opera. I don't think it would be difficult to set up a script to auto-update the filterlist either (as long as you're not adding things to it manually, that would be harder). I could do it on Windows in AutoIT - and I bet it wouldn't be hard on linux with wget and a bash script...

      Not sure why no one has done this already.
  • TheWindBlows, on 04/28/2008, -2/+10AND it still supports Windows 98.
    Opera has skins for it too i've noticed not many but some.
    • blurrie, on 04/28/2008, -1/+3to bad i don't support windows 98
    • Fergy, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Windows 98 should not be connected to the internet.
  • thewump, on 04/28/2008, -3/+2Wot, no 64bit?
    • Forma, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3There will be for the final AFAIK
    • cyberpear, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5ftp://ftp.opera.com/pub/opera/linux/950b2/final/en/x86_64/

      there is 64bit (for linux). I'm running it as my main browser.
    • SSUK, on 04/28/2008, -2/+1What, no 64 bit [version]?

      Sure hope Opera comes with a ***** spell checker.
  • sagat, on 04/28/2008, -4/+9Opera 9.5 is as fast as a scouser with your hub cap. Pretty bloody fast
    • ghm101, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3I think you baffled em with your obscure liverpudlian phraseology
  • betrayed, on 04/28/2008, -2/+5I may be the only one who's stuck between browsers.
    Firefox because it is the one who took me away from thatofwhichweshallnotspeak
    Safari because Webkit > *
    Opera because... it's Opera, damn it.
    • skyshock1, on 04/28/2008, -2/+3No, you're not the only one. I would LOVE Firefox if it weren't so sluggish. I would LOVE Webkit/Opera if they were more extensible. Seems no one in the 'browser war' has done it ALL correctly yet.
    • SSUK, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3Firefox because although it's not quite standards compliment, it's loveable, it's fast and diverse with a range of useful add-ons.
      Opera because it keeps sticking it's fingers up at conventional browser design and pushes innovation and diversity.
      Safari because it looks nice on Macs, uses Webkit and is quite standards compliant.
      Internet Explorer because it's just funny using a browser which can't do anything right.
  • nirav72, on 04/28/2008, -3/+9damn...I just downloaded it. It is fast!!!!

    IMO, it even seems faster than the latest firefox beta. I haven't yet checked the memory utilization though.
  • vacax, on 04/28/2008, -5/+10Opera is the best. Use it.
  • TwoLOUD, on 04/28/2008, -5/+3Ie7 better then Opera? Come on you ***** tool..be for real. Get some education, dont be ignorant. Come back when you know what the ***** you are saying.

    *not a firefox user*
    • SteeleJK, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2- "Get some education (in browsers)"

      Like the class Internet Browsers 101?
  • Lazdude, on 04/28/2008, -1/+9Wow, I didn't realise the beta was twice as fast as version 9.
  • nirav72, on 04/28/2008, -2/+3It is definately fast. However, ran into couple of annoyances. One, while using google reader, clicked on a link to go another page. and then went back..it started google reader from the main start page, instead of the feed I was reading. Probably has something to do with google reader and not keeping track of the history. It is annoying though.

    Second issue- embedded youtube video player hovers over the page when scrolling down the same page.

    I'm sure these are just beta issues and will be ironed out before the final release.
    • SqlByte, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Google is not that great, it is not browser optimized, its more like Firefox optimized. So there are some problems with Opera and Google, but as more people use Opera and find it is such a great browser, Google will have to fix they pages a little.
  • wiiaboo, on 04/28/2008, -4/+3Developer Tools for Opera suck, compared to Firebug or Web Developer addons in Firefox.
  • sixtus99, on 04/28/2008, -1/+13Anybody else have issues with Digg when using the back button? I love Opera, but every time I hit the back button, it just clears the ads on Digg one at a time until no ads are left. I have to hit the back button 3-4 times before it actually goes where I want it to.
    • cyberpear, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3confirmed -- someone should file a bug report (maybe I will when I get around to it)
    • themoose, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4Yes, but only ever on digg.

      And Digg was messed up a tad for me on 9.50b1, much faster now, don't need to go back to firefox!
    • Tocc, on 04/28/2008, -0/+2Yes, I'm hoping the new version works better.
  • skyshock1, on 04/28/2008, -3/+4Fails Acid3 on the Mac. And still lags a bit. :( I've always liked Opera on Windows and Linux, but on the Mac Webkit nightly builds still reign supreme.
    • xtremesniper, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1I kinda agree. I usually use Opera on Windows and Firefox on a Mac, but when 9.5 comes out I'll probably switch on my mac too.
      • skyshock1, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Firefox is god awful on the Mac. Unless there's some obscure extension you can't live without, there's no reason to use Firefox when the Webkit nightlys are so much faster.
  • Tennouheika, on 04/28/2008, -2/+2I switched to Opera from Firefox (been using FF since 1.5, and was using v3b5 up until a week ago) and love it so far, but I really wish there was a NoScript extension or something. And an in-line spell checker.

    Any solution to this? Sure I can ctrl-A > right click > check spelling, but that's dumb.
    And as for NoScript, the closest I found was a java script that allowed me to block scripts on a page AFTER they loaded (or otherwise executed their scripts, which I want to block).
    • mRku, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4You can always disable javascript, extensions, java, etc. from the tool - prferences - advanced.
      (or you can right click the page and select "edit site preferences" if you like to have it only in some pages)
      • Tennouheika, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1I've seen that solution, but what about on pages where maybe I want to allow Youtube.com but not googleanalytics.com? Or pages where I only want to view some content but block anything else.
        • DarkDx, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1block the content, I mean, block googleanalytics. and if you have a site in which you want google analytics enabled just edit the site's preferences and disable the content blocking only for this site.
    • cyberpear, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2you can globally disable javascript, or on a site-by-site basis -- just press F12 for a menu that has this option -- it also has a "edit site preferences" link where you can disable it just for the current site (or whichever site you want)
    • DarkDx, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1LOL, tools > quick preferences > "enable javascript" (or for faster acces, F12 then uncheck enable javascript),
  • RyomaNagare, on 04/28/2008, -1/+9I've been using opera forever, and for our second honeymoon I discovered another great option.
    Just add a web-panel with Gmail's mobile interface http://mail.google.com/mail/x/
    and presto you've got your gmail with one click in a nice side-panel.
    I just love opera
  • Emperial, on 04/28/2008, -2/+8Opera is cool :D
  • JusticeFriend, on 04/28/2008, -1/+6OPERA FTW!
  • themoose, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2Hardcore stumbleupon fans might want this - http://www.operastumbler.com/
    Adds a menu (next to Help) and allows you to stumble as normal!
  • robthom, on 04/28/2008, -6/+9opera is better than firefox.
    • Jerky1312, on 04/28/2008, -5/+6Open Source > Closed Source. This is why Firefox has a bigger market share. I can guarantee Opera would see a bigger market share increase if they choose to go open source.
      • DeathGod321, on 04/28/2008, -6/+9That's why linux has a higher market share, right?
        • mossblaser, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3On the server and embedded hardware market, yes, much larger, manufacturers are able to customize it and make it fit thier needs, that is if it doesn't already.
    • novemberdobby, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1Yeah, and I'm sure you've used the source...
  • wright3279, on 04/28/2008, -5/+2One bug I've reported to Opera but has never been fixed: If you disable the feature called "Speed Dial", when you click on a link on your desktop, right away you've got 2 tabs, a blank tab and one for your link. Plus no customizing like Grease Monkey or Remove it Permanently (in Firefox) which I especially like. And I don't find it noticeably faster. It has nothing on Firefox.
  • PKO17, on 04/28/2008, -3/+9I'm a huge Opera fan but I'm not gonna type out all the usual arguments about Opera. All I'm gonna say is - when I set Opera to open all pages in tabs, it does. Firefox, on the otherhand, still likes to open new windows even after I set it to only use tabs. But hey, "use the browser that suits you", right?
  • madcat033, on 04/28/2008, -1/+7Opera FTW! I love Opera. And about the extensions stuff... Opera might not have as many as FireFox, but it pretty much has all the ones that I need already built in. If you want a million useless extensions, you should get FireFox.
  • spanner, on 04/29/2008, -3/+2STILL NO SPELLCHECK
    Opera continues to run a distant 3rd to Firefox and (gasp) IE7 by not having a functional inline spellcheck.
    Thumbs down....
    • littlerat, on 04/29/2008, -2/+2I don't think illiteracy should be considered a feature.
    • BAMAToNE, on 04/29/2008, -0/+5Just learn to spell in the first place? And if you still have a problem, use integrated Aspell or Ospell userjs.
    • leaflord, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1I hate spellcheck on the other hand. Intentionally abbreviated words are made an issue of..
  • Weejay, on 04/29/2008, -2/+3If it's good and fast, then how come no one uses it?
    • novemberdobby, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1If no-one uses it, why does this article exist?
      • Weejay, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Because it caters to a niche of users who think they know better. Look at uTorrent for example, it's better and it's taking over the torrent world. My point is that if Opera was so much better than other browsers, then everyone would use it, since it's free and has versions for pretty much every dominant operating system.
  • diswilbdlast, on 04/29/2008, -3/+1i like this better than firefox.. :) opera ftw

    http://diswilbdlastaccnt.blogspot.com/
  • Torley, on 04/29/2008, -1/+3I'm hoping this newest version will have better compatibility with Gmail: recent previous versions had an odd text-wrap bug that was quite aggravating.
    • RyomaNagare, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1I've just recently migrated and consolidated all my accoutns into gmail, I check it in opera from either the estandard layout, as a webpanel with the mobile layout, as pop or as imap, they all work great.
  • RyanJones, on 04/29/2008, -4/+2They are just desperate because Fx 3.0 will be released soon if you ask me. Come on guys seriously. If Opera is as grate as the fanboys make out then why isn't it the browser with the second highest market share instead of Firefox? The facts don't go away just because you don't like them people - Opera is not as good as Firefox.

    For the record - speed is not the only thing that makes a good browser and neither is packing in useless features... that's called bloat which Opera has plenty of.
    • RyomaNagare, on 04/29/2008, -1/+6How is being faster and more feature rich, which does not detriment at all from the core functionality bloat?
      isn't firefox more bloated, if it needs twice the HD space for 1/10 the features? at 1/2 the speed?
      the market share issue is just because there is a whole bunch of "cool kidz" that thing firefox is "teh alternative roxxors fukk tha systemz" whatever, instead of bothering to seriously check what other things are there.
      I'll just say the little things I can not live without opera:

      1)Fully customizable interface, no not just skins, why can't I add whatever button i want in firefox, or why can't I modify the menus
      2)Mouse gestures, the open in background mouse gesture is just too convenient
      3)pop-up hot-menu, (go to selected text web-address)
      4)Sidebar web panels, the ability to add web pages as side panels, great for small web-apps like gmail, or some page navigation panel/frame
      5)mail, M2 works great the search is just lightning fast
      6)in-line search, the ability to create custom search assign them a shortcut, and then do in-line search with them.
      7)full in-line history search, the ability to search the contents of visited web pages from the address bar, using the full text from that page.
      8)Per site settings on custom JS, and rendering options
      9)Page zooming, the ability to do zoom to web pages including images, combined with fit to width makes a lot of sites more readable.
      10)note syncing, new to opera 9.5, the ability to have my notes synced through multiple opera installations is just genius.

      Those are just the 10 features i like the most.
      now please make a fresh firefox installation and install extensions to mimic this behavior, ok?... how much ram is you ff using? what you can't tell, because it hang, too bad
      • RyanJones, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1Why include features that are not a requirement for everyone - EVERYTHING that can be done in Opera that is not included as a default Firefox feature has an extension for it so the people that need or want the feature get it WITHOUT having to force the crap on everyone else. That is the whole point of an extension system for gods sake.

        By the way, the latest Firefox nightlies are much faster and consume much less memory resources than the experimental Opera builds that I have (yes. despite what I have said above I do use Opera occasionally if a site does not work in Firefox. That is not me being hypocritical, its me being objective and stating the facts). The developers of Firefox are keeping the application clean and only including the features that LOTS of people will actually use in the default install. Advanced users can always add the extensions if they need but basic users are unlikely to need them.

        Now for your features.

        1. How many percent of the population will actually find that useful? Consider that most users of a browser know very little about computers. I would say few.
        2. Why bother? You have hands so you can use a keyboard shortcut or install the gestures extension. Again applies to relatively few people.
        3. I don't actually know what that is so I cannot comment.
        4. Applies to how many people again?
        5. If I wanted mail I would use a dedicated program. I don't want my BROWSER clogged up with stuff that should be in a MAIL application thank you.
        6. CTRL+F too hard for you then?
        7. Already implemented in Firefox 3.
        8. Again, applies to only expert users and those who need it will find that there is an extension for it already.
        9. Has been implemented for Firefox 3.
        10. I don't actually know what a note is and so I again cannot comment.

        For the record I'm running the latest nightly, 7 tabs open (two high use tabs - one is Gmail and the other is obviously digg) and d that's using about 141MB of RAM (that's not a joke) That good enough for you?
        • RyomaNagare, on 04/29/2008, -1/+4OK fair enough, so you are saying Most people won't need features so they should not be included, but think of this:

          I have 7 open tabs+mail+sidebar 2 tabs are digg stories 1 is gmail, the other are standard web-pages.
          at this moment My opera is using 110MB of ram.

          If i besides not to use Mail, both the menus associated with it WILL disappear, and the memory footprint will come down significantly.

          also half the features I commented you didn't know what they were for, that just tells me, you haven't got a clue, is like someone complaining a Mercedes Benz' got useless features, sure they are not required for driving but they make the experience more comfortable.
        • RyanJones, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Consider also that I am using some 18 extensions, also have the download manager running plus a range of other things that I'm doing right now.

          Just because I don't know what something is does not mean that "I have no clue" - it just means that in all probability the features are of no real use to 99.99% of people. If the developers wanted to cram all the hundreds of extensions into Firefox, they could, but that would also be bloat. Why add crap that is useless to most people JUST to satisfy the few who may use them.

          If Opera had an extension system I would bet that they would have exactly the same thinking BUT as they are closed source its quite difficult to implement a decent extension system and thus they have to cram everything that someone may or may not need into one place. That is just bloat.

          I would prefer not having all that junk crammed into program that I may or may not use. If I wanted a non-default feature then I would download the extension that does it instead of forcing that upon everyone else who will not want it. Most of the features you class as important DO NOT make browsing more helpful for the majority of people and they are therefore bloat. Is the concept so difficult to grasp?
          • asteris, on 04/29/2008, -0/+2For me, I tried Opera first and used it as my default. When I tried Firefox, I switched over and used that. When I updated Opera and tried it a second time, I think that's when I really saw Opera for what it was and what all was there. There's probably still a lot I don't know how to use.
            Right now it seems like your main argument against Opera is that it has a lot of features you don't want while you'd rather get Firefox and download a ton of features you do want. However, for me, I wouldn't call Opera necessarily bloated. To me, it's all about preferences. Stuff I don't want, it's as simple as going to preferences and de-clicking that option. Other stuff you can't remove, don't use it. Just because it's there and you don't want it is no reason to write off a great browser.
            I'm not saying Opera is perfect. I obviously don't use their irc, torrent, or mail features, etc. I still miss my favorite feature in Firefox that I don't think Opera has, the add-on to copy on highlight. Plus Firefox has downthemall, which is why I still have Firefox so I have that add-on when I need it.
            But for all other purposes and that is all my browsing, Opera does exactly what I want. It does it fast, smooth, and pretty. Plus my favorite feature in Opera is probably how if for whatever reason my browser/windows crashes or I need to reboot, all my open tabs are saved for the next time I load Opera. That reason is probably the sole reason why I stopped using Firefox in frustration (too many crashes and wtf all my pages I opened are gone). I have a short attention span, so I rarely finish one page at once and end up opening a ton of tabs.
            Like I said, I'm still not too sure what your gripe is. Seems like too much anger for not a big deal. All the stuff you consider bloat (mail and mouse gestures and panels), I agree most people probably don't know they exist and might never use. However, they might be like me and find them and grow into the browser. In any case, having them built-in is no real loss. Opera's folder is still smaller than Firefox's. Plus I saved a lot of time cause I don't have to spend hours searching for all the extensions for Firefox to mimic what I want Opera to do (or crying that there is no extension).
            Anyway, Opera and Firefox are both great browsers. Firefox does what you want, and Opera does what I want.
          • asteris, on 04/29/2008, -0/+0oops wanted to edit but missed it. :S Sorry for the long blob of text.
          • blah667, on 04/29/2008, -0/+0I hope that you'll read it :P

            About that downthemall extension... I you use Opera wisely, then you don't need it. Just enable the "Links" side panel, which is off by default(in right click -> customize -> panels). You then have every link on current site displayed. With the built in searchbox you can filter what you want.

            If you find what you want, just select it using ctrl++left click, or shift+left click. Then, right click and click save as or save to download folder(which you can customise in the preferences under advanced tab -> downloads).

            About that copy on highlight, there is no real solution, apart maybe form a userscript, but I don't know if one exists.

            Hope that helps.
  • diegocg, on 04/29/2008, -1/+2In my system Firefox 3 nigthlies are eating less memory than opera beta 2 when working with many tabs, and the sunspider benchmark is way faster in firefox. For me, switching to opera would mean worse resource consumption...
  • LANjackal, on 04/29/2008, -3/+2Firefox just has more features, and Opera has trouble with some Web 2.0 sites
  • parkernicky50, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1good informative post
  • l815, on 05/04/2008, -0/+0Opera runs, feels, and is smoother than Firefox. I like both browsers and switch on occasion between each.

    Each have their own Issues

    Each aren't final releases

    I have to say, Opera is winning me over once again. I like the idea of plugins, but the only one I ever use is adblock and I can easily be fine with a urlfilter.ini from fanboy or admuncher. Oper has all the features I need, plus looks sleeker on Vista.

    Once Opera is final and 99% of all the web problems are tinkered out, I will have no problem going over completely!
    FF also has issues with websites, but not as much as Opera up to date.
  • akor, on 05/08/2008, -0/+0Great post. I decide to review this version of Opera too http://releasenotes.org/opera
  • dearmansoor, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1This version is useless... here is my side of story

    http://www.traveltowork.net/index.php/2008/06/20/5 ...
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.