ok but ie is crap for years

I was disappointed that some default shortcut keys have been changed, but it was easily fixed in the preferences section.

a very worthy beta announce!

The new Opera 9 is awfully promising! I know already, that it's the best, but hopefully soon everybody will think so. :)

One word...errr...acronym: NTLM. Opera doesn't have it at all which makes it useless for windows based corporate intranets. Firefox sort of has it but you have to edit a config file and add any corporate intranet site into it. IE naturally just "works" well with NTLM. Because of that, I find it hard to use anything but IE.

ie is fine if you dont need more than what it has under hood.

But if you need more features then ff or opera is the only choice imo.

I know about maxton or avant browsers but i dont like em.

I find it rather humorous that you people complain about IE. Yet Opera doesn't do add-ins, FireFox has problems displaying ActiveX, Netscape doesn't support many new features and Add-ins, and IE, the only shortcoming is no tabs. Which has now been bolstered by MSN search bar which gives IE tabs..

So I have been deeply involved with Windows since 3.0, and I have been following IE since day one, and I hated it at first, but the last few versions, since about 5.0 are fine. I can surf every website with no problem, pages display, and ALL my add-ins work, and even Roboform.

So how do you continually sit there and complain when IE seems to be the ONLY browser that has support from all sides? I find that truly amazing.

Show me a page that IE doesn't handle well, give me a link. I don't want any lip, just send me a link, show me where the problem is, and I can take a look for myself, because from what I see, IE is better than the rest.. Unless you prove otherwise.

All security problems aside, because ALL browsers have vulnerabilities, so don't even give me that crap, we are talking fundamental programming. IE is fine.

You make good points. Of course part of the reason IE works is because it has so much market share, not many people would make a web page that would work with other browsers and not IE. Many people protest IE, I believe, STRICTLY because it is Microsoft and/or integrated into the OS. Who cares why, or who made it? I mean, unless a specific browser supports and funds terrorists or something, why refuse to use it IF it is the best? If you think Opera or Firefox is the best use it. I think IE is currently the best, so that's what I use...

Yeah, I think you are right! Check this out: http://owasco.co.tompkins.ny.us/its/ :-D

But seriously, I trust http://secunia.com I am sure these dudes know something about security and vulnerabilities.

It's not a matter of links, it's a matter of speed and security, and obviously you know not where of you speak. FireFox doesnt have problems with ActiveX, it doesnt allow ActiveX BY DESIGN and it therefore prevents most of the spyware and malware than floats out there from being installed on your machine. If you had been "deeply involved" in Windows since 3.0 you would know that ActiveX is the debacle that initiated the malware/spyware wars in the first place. You would also know that MSN forced IE on website developers by destroying Netscape in the 90s and insisting that IE be installed as an integral part of Windows. Those web sites that have embraced the new international standard for HTML work just fine in FireFox....the only ones that dont are the ones that still adhere to MSN's standard or require ActiveX so they can spy on your webbrowsing practices. Those sites, thankfully, are becoming less and less in number as the user base embraces other browsers than IE.

This absolutely hilarious, you are citing an article written in April 2005 that acknowledges the fact the problems were fixed in FireFox version 1.0.3 PRIOR to the article being written and directs you a link to get the patches for previous versions. This is the best attribute in FireFox and the least attribute in MSN.....Mozilla fixes their problems with expedience..MSN says they will "study" the problem and then waits 6 mos to get a fix out.

- "Opera doesn't do add-ins"

Yes it does. Toolbars, menus, panels, User JS, etc. Heck, there's a web developer "extension" for Opera.

- "So how do you continually sit there and complain when IE seems to be the ONLY browser that has support from all sides?"

Because it's sucky, slow and insecure. And it has terrible support for new technologies and standards that other browsers are doing well already. Does IE7 support transparent PNGs yet? :D

- "Show me a page that IE doesn't handle well"

It is not IE which handles pages well. It is webmasters that code pages to work specifically in IE. It says nothing about IE's capabilities.

- "All security problems aside, because ALL browsers have vulnerabilities, so don't even give me that crap, we are talking fundamental programming. IE is fine."

Typical IE apologist excuse. IE is far more insecure than Opera and FF, and that's a fact. IE currently has at least one known highly critical security hole that hasn't been patched.

Yawn. Business as usual in IE land! :)

>Show me a page that IE doesn't handle well, >give me a link. I don't want any lip, just send >me a link, show me where the problem is, and I >can take a look for myself, because from what I >see, IE is better than the rest.. Unless you >prove otherwise.

http://vjekoslav.info/opera_rules.htm

Working well here, i'm a sucker for punishment, and upgraded my 8.5 Install to 9.0.

Sweet, some nice improvements, mainly under the bonnet thou...

Opera is still amazing me, even after 3 months of use, there are litte tricks up it's sleeve.

If your running the windows version, try Ctrl+TAB (as you would with Alt+TAB in windows).

That's not new. Anyone that's ever used Maxthon, Netscape or Microsoft Office, CTRL+TAB has ALWAYS been there for switching documents or spreadsheets.

Nice try, but those features were STOLEN from Microsoft.

Or ... it's just the standard shortuct key for switching between documents within an MDI app (Alt+Tab to switch apps, Ctrl+Tab to switch documents or whatever witin an app) and tabs in most dialogs.

Oh come on, it's just a shortcut key. AFAIK Opera started the tabbed browsing thingy and they didn't mind Firefox, IE and the other browsers from emulating this feature.

I wish operas was more eager to let 3part tools like roboform to be compatibly.

But if they get plugin to work and use netscape api then roboform prob wil work on opera 9 thats what i hope.

Opera is perfect for me xcept i cant use roboform with it.

So until that work i have to use ff.

WOW lets hope is free
o fre for people like me that pay for it :P

Does it support extensions, yet?

Not yet, but I have a feeling that could be coming soon.

Well when it does, I will give it a second chance.

If they support third-party extensions, I hope that they test and manage them themselves. Many FF extensions can have a serious negative impact on stability and loading time due to inadequate testing.

Agreed, the shear fact that I cant use roboform (a program that far surpasses the wand and notes feature in opera) is enough to stop me from using opera. If I am going to use a browser, it should be able to grow with me, not make me wait until the dev's get around to implimenting something and letting it stagnate (as they did the wand). Opera is a great browser, dont get me wrong, but I think an opera managed extension list would be great and make it appeal to FAR more people

I want my greasemonkey!

bah, greasemonkey doesnt hold a candle to ad muncher (although not free, it doesnt require an extension system and works with any browser).

In which case they do not get used. Hence the peer-review ability on the FF extensions site.

If you use low-rated extensions, don't expect much.

wtf?

Greasemonkey is more comprable to userJS, than it is to admuncher.

I know you hate adblock, but at least save your knee-jerks for it, not greasemonkey.

Would be yummy indeed. Managed by them or not, the ability to add user-created abilities to a browser has proven quite successful...

Hence folks using FF over Opera when Opera renders faster and takes less resources/space.

Some folks think the extensions are worth the trade-off in performance. I am one of them. If opera got some decent extensibility, I'd jump ship in a second.

The problem is that most users aren't qualified to figure out the origin of instability and conflict.

For instance, they might install a plugin, and then the browser crashes. The plugin could perfectly follow the specs. Yet another earlier-installed plugin doesn't and conflicts with the most recently installed one. Most users will say "Boo, this plugin causes the browser to crash." They would be wrong. A minority might actually step it through a debugger to figure out what's going on, but their voices will be swamped out by the majority.

Yes, I guess I'm an authority snob in that I think the Opera developers know more about their code and how to fix something than its users.

duplicate - removed

I feel this is totally appropriate since am can insert javascript into webpages just like greasemonkey

read down in the plugin section, is this the possibility of extensions coming forth into opera?

http://snapshot.opera.com/windows/w90p1.html

"Plug-ins
Added Netscape Plug-in API extensions developed by browser and plug-in vendors.
Fixed an issue when printing from Java.
"

You must be an ad muncher developer.

heh

nope, just a huge fan :) Murray and Jeff are great people thou :)

I use Firefox and fully believe that Opera renders pages faster.

I don't like the way that Opera renders some of my 100% W3C compliant pages that look perfect in Safari, Firefox, and Internet Explorer.

I also make use of many FireFox Extensions and have written a few.

I choose FireFox over Opera for a preferential reason. I choose Firefox over IE because, I strongly believe that from a developer's perspective, it's common sense to use an application that is standards compliant and fully featured with developer tools.

"I don't like the way that Opera renders some of my 100% W3C compliant pages that look perfect in Safari, Firefox, and Internet Explorer."

Me too! It completely ignores some of my W3C compliant CSS code. If it wasn't for that (and lack of plugin support), Opera would be my favorite.

What does greasemonkey have to do with ad muncher?

You weren't even close to on-topic with that advertisement.

Well what does greasemonkey have to do with the article? It is about Opera and its new technology.

you choose FIREFLOP because youre an idiot...

No, this is an upgrade for the built-in plugins, such as Macromedia Flash....

Enjoy your greasemonkey.

Not only that it makes Firefox consume more memory, it also slows down page-load considerably with the s***load of scritps you're probably using.

Go to hel1, dipsh1t.

I guess you are.

I suppose if whatever overseer group you are suggesting can actually help with extension creation instead of just nixing ones they don't like I might be willing to go along with it, otherwise, it's going to create an us-against-them scenario I have never seen function well.

assumption: we use a sh1tload of scripts

assumption: our computers are slow-ass crap-heaps that cannot withstand a 10% increase in CPU usage.

Sorry pal, wrong on both counts. Care to take another swing, dude?

Wow. So any program, no matter how limited that can insert..

...oh forget it.

Have a nice day!

(We all get that you like admuncher...really...we do. But does it *really* have anything to do with this article? Anything at all? Can you see where we're coming from when we call your posts advertisements and then jump all over them?)

When talking about FF extensions we'd like to Opera suppot the ability to create/use, greasemonkey has everything to do with it.

It's a simple progression. Opera article => poster claims (s)he would use opera is it supported extensions like FF => Another user provides example (GM) => You bash user because it's not related to Opera.

In other words, we;re discussing possible "new technology" for Opera. It's *exactly* what this article is about.

I don't need anothing swing, because I took you out the first time, d***wad.

You don't need a s***load of scripts, even 1 will do it. (A poorly written one, but heck, I bet your JS knowledge isn't good enough to check every userscript you download)

Your second assumption is plain wrong, greasemonkey will make a 3.0Ghz computer crawl to death with little effort.
All you need is a couple of scripts and a few tabs.

Wow, those so called standards don't amount to much do they?

Not with Opera apparently.

IE, FF, and Netscape all display the pages the way they're supposed to look. Only Opera has a problem with some of them.

See the comment I was responding to (when I mentioned greasemonky originally). I was every bit on-topic.

Wow. I thought people realized speed has little to do with the processor--it's the chipset, the memory, but much more importantly: THE HARD DRIVE speed. My 486 can run IE 6.0 in Windows 98SE (no kidding I still have it), and the cpu utilisation doesn't pass 40% on it. My hard drive, however, is just an ancient 1.2GB drive that makes IE slower than a Windows XP machine infected with Netsky.P!

EDIT: Actually I just discovered that Macromedia Flash Player plugin of all things uses 99% utilization of the cpu in IE6 on this 1.7GHz Celeron here at work (well it IS a Celeron), so some plugins do suck cpu utilization. Could be right...likely not though.

Dude.

Shut-up already.

I've been using Greasemonkey for over 4 months now. I have 3 scripts installed that were downloaded from Mozilla. I have 2 installed that I wrote myself.

I rarely operate with less than 4 tabs open. Usually to the pages I have scripted. I also have a bad habit of downloading patches for games, patching those games and running them with the FF window still open.

My 2.4 Ghz system has been running just fine.

Apparently, you're full of sh1t.

Got a bad script? Dump it, rewrite it, whetever...don't blame greasemonkey for it.

you are a pure moron who thinks he knows eveything...go back to your crocheting class or drink cyanide, that might just work for you.

I honestly dont see why i cant post about AM when someone else chimes in and posts about their favorite extension (greasemonkey)? Am I missing something here? I realize that I boast AM alot, but to me its well worth getting the public aware of it.

I felt it was totally appropriate to post it here being that someone else had posted an extension that does something that another program can do as well.

I see your point thou about it looking like advertising, I will work on that. Sorry to upset you all :(

First: Have you tested your pages in this preview release of Opera?

Second: Ever consider that code could actually be the problem? Many "web designers" don't take the time to actualy figure out how things like the box model work... I've seen plenty of people who had valid pages, their code was perfect, but they were telling the browser to do the wrong thing. Each browser handles every situation differently, it could be that a minor glitch or misuse of code isn't getting more flexibility in other browsers.

Third: Run the Acid2 test on every browser you can find, including pre-releases, nightlies, whatever and tell me which renders it best? I'm aware internal Safari builds have it 100%, but that's not publically available.

Fourth: Name ANY browser that has perfect support even for (X)HTML AND CSS2.1

Sorry, but I see far too many people claim Opera won't render these apparently perfectly valid pages without providing any links.

Here's an example:

Opera ignores this code on one of my pages:

a img {
text-decoration: none;
}
a:hover img {
text-decoration: none;
}

There's more, but that's the part it ignores.

Opera absolutely insists on underlining the hyperlinked images. It's extremely annoying.

Have you tried posting about this on the Opera forums?

Use User JS in Opera. It's better than GM anyway :)

Nope. Never cared enough to. There is such a small number of visitors to the site using Opera, it's negligible.

Of course, now with Opera going freeware and their user-base expanding, I might have to start caring...

That's part of the reason why Opera doesn't have extension capability similar to FireFox. Firefox extensions are able to warp most of the browser, and this is somethimes done carelessly, leading to dodgy, crash prone extensions.

If Opera includes similar functionality, but Opera Software becomes the only distributor of extensions, most of the benefit would be removed.

Part of the reason of not implementing a similar functionality to FireFox's extensions is that it will bring instability and vunerability to the software. However, Opera is a much more matured program than Firefox, and adding this feature would require a near full overhaul of the code.

That can't be it. I've plenty of linked images and they aren't underlined in Opera.

In fact text-decoration only applies to the text of an element:
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC...l#lining-striking-props
and images don't have any so those rules do nothing.

...I know.

So if you apparently know everything and I don't, why does Opera underline the images then? I only added the text-decoration CSS because Opera was underlining them originally. It would seem Opera is treating images as text when they are not supposed to be.

Wow... I can't wait for final :)

Soo Good