Login:
Password:
Lost Password?
Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

Opera 9 Beta Brings Widgets, Torrents

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

April 20, 2006, 12:38 PM

Opera Software on Thursday made available the first beta of version 9.0 of its popular free Web browser, which has been in testing since last October. The release adds a number of major new features, including widgets and support for BitTorrent downloads.

Widgets are small mini-applications that typically run inside another program. Konfabulator, now known as Yahoo! Widget Engine, popularized the technology, and Apple included widgets as part of the Dashboard feature in Mac OS X 10.4. Stardock's DesktopX has long offered supports for widgets as well.

Even Microsoft is joining the widget bandwagon with the Windows Sidebar coming as part of Windows Vista later this year. The basic idea is to enable developers to quickly build useful applications with simple scripting languages like JavaScript and DHTML.

Opera notes that its widget support -- activated by pressing F6 -- can be used for multimedia, news feeds, games and more.

"We're proud to release this Beta of Opera 9 to Web users around the world," said Opera CEO Jon S. von Tetzchner. "Opera 9 brings powerful new features to enhance the Web browsing experience and empower Web 2.0 developers. Opera 9 unlocks new levels of productivity for the Internet ecosystem."

BitTorrent support, meanwhile, will help Opera target those savvy P2P users who don't want to bother with an external application for their downloads. Users are able to search for files on the BitTorrent network through integrated search functionality, which then would use Opera's Transfer Manager software to handle the download.

The move could anger intellectual property holders, however, who see BitTorrent as a boon to piracy. The technology is currently used almost exclusively for the illegal distribution of copyrighted material by end users, even thought it is simply a communication protocol that facilitates efficient distribution of very large files.

Other new features in Opera 9.0 include a content blocker for removing ads and images from a Web site, improved rich text editing and site-specific preferences. Opera has even taken a feature from AOL's Explorer browser: 9.0 pops up thumbnail previews of a Web site when the mouse hovers over a tab.

Download Opera 9.0 from FileForum and tell us what you think of the new release.

Add a Comment

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By TSThomas

edited Apr 27, 2006 - 1:14 PM

Perhaps Mastertech would care to explain why he lies about what myself & others have said? For example;

"...Good stuff - give it a read." - Asa
Actual comment - "Robert Accettura has a nice response to the poorly constructed & mostly worthless article Firefox Myths. Good stuff - give it a read".

"...all web sites are IE compliant, use a browser with IE engine & tabs, & a fully patched system = 100% security." - FreewheelinFrank (MrFlibble)
Actual comment - "This includes 1 of Mastertech's typical phrases designed to suggest he is not the author ('Makes interesting reading') but then goes on to use the first person. Strange- that would be the first time for Mastertech. The notions are his: all web sites are IE compliant, use a browser with IE engine & tabs, & a fully patched system = 100% security."

"I'm not a big fan of evangelism or hyperbole, so when a page called "Firefox Myths" entered my radar recently, I was very interested." - Tre
Actual comment - "I’m not a big fan of evangelism or hyperbole, so when a page called “Firefox Myths” entered my radar recently, I was very interested. Then sadly disappointed. Rather than a balanced analysis of some of the folklore surrounding Firefox, it is merely a stream of weak arguments against imaginary “myths” supported by misquoting or deliberate misreading of sources. I’m not even going to reference the page".

Fully sourced - http://www.techspot.com/vb/topic44405.html

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 28, 2006 - 10:37 PM

Wow it didn't take you long to spam this in desperation.

Score: 0

By TSThomas

edited Apr 29, 2006 - 10:09 AM

What spam would that be? Your deceptions are well documented & authenticated. Perhaps if you weren't so morally bankrupt you wouldn't be being exposed for what you are wherever you promote yourself.

Score: 0

By anmol.2k4

posted Apr 27, 2006 - 11:16 AM

very very few websites are not rendered properly.

like live.com

and yahoo mail beta.

not a big deal looking at the size of web, and big corporation are behind these and both of them are in BETA so im sure they will get it to work properly after the beta phase ends (of live.com and yahoo mail beta not opera)

Opera is the best.

FF is good too, i advice that to noobs, they find it lot easier and that is why google is supporting it coz it is simple.

i have been using ver9 as my default browser from its first build as far as i can remember in all the builds i have tried i only remember one recent instance when it got unstable , but i dont know if it was opera or something else, dont remember it crashing in past.

for beta it is toooooooooo stable,

Score: 0

By uberfly

posted Apr 25, 2006 - 10:48 PM

Opera is defitiely nice and my main browser. Firefox, being a frankenstein product, is prone to bugs and other issues. Firefox totally beats IE, but having a congruent product that's produced in unison under one roof is really nice and solid. And they make it free! Thank you opera for a nice product. Now if only the monkeys who write crappy non-standards websites would get THEIR acts together.

Score: 0

By Daddy_Spank

posted Apr 25, 2006 - 10:43 PM

I am really impressed with this Beta. I think opera team has done a great job keeping it up, and adding new fuctionalities to an already very impressive browser with version 9. Keep it up Opera team!!!!

Score: 0

By Zygi

edited Apr 25, 2006 - 6:24 PM

First was Netscape in old times, then IE, Maxthon, Firefox, Opera 8 and now Opera 9 weeklies. I think i'll stay with Opera, yes it don't have extensions like FF, they're powerful and customizable but sometimes problematic when they don't work in new version, and then i'm left without that added functionality. In Opera i'm at least sure new version will have builtin functions working (most of the time ;) ). Whats worst FF at this stage even bare without any extensions, starts longer then Opera with all functions, now it's getting worse if you add Opera functions to FF via extensions, its getting too slow for me... Thats why i changed to Opera, and with O9 its getting even better. It got mail, maybe not as good as Thunderbird but still its good for checkin mail and leaving messages on server for TB ;) Yes Opera 9 borrowed some things from FF, but then FF borrowed even more things from Opera 8 ;)))) Realy i don't care they can borrow whatever they want, i just want fast, small and secure browser, i think i'm gettin it in Opera PERIOD

Score: 0

By diemacht

posted Apr 25, 2006 - 3:47 AM

OPERA RAWKS!!!

Score: 0

By BadIronTree

posted Apr 24, 2006 - 7:43 AM

Opera is the best
i bought it in ver. 6
firefox just copy some of the best ideas of opera .....

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Apr 24, 2006 - 9:15 AM

Nothing wrong with taking already proven ideas and enhancing them. Paradoxically it keeps things fresh!

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted Apr 24, 2006 - 3:45 PM

It's only wrong if the company is calls Microsoft. ;)

Score: 0

By StormyWaters

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 3:15 PM

This latest Opera is very impressive compared to past builds.
I tried Firefox and it was slow on my computer but Opera is quicker so it is my new browser.

Score: 0

By anmol.2k4

posted Apr 26, 2006 - 8:29 AM

true ff is as slow as english granny drinking tea ;)

Score: 0

By Keith Lard

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 1:58 PM

Been using Firefox since before V1, and whilst it's OK, it takes loads of extensions and tweaking to get it how I like it. Performance is nothing to shout home about.

I just tried the Opera 9 beta, and all I can say, is WOW, this is blisteringly fast, it uses very little memory, and has 95% of the functionality I needed as extensions build right in.

Not looking back, Opera really is the way to go. I just tried their Opera Mini on my mobile, and that's awesome also..

Score: 0

By computershack

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 9:04 AM

Man does this render pages fast compared to Firefox.

I've tried to speed up FF but can't get it to go anywhere near as quick. Well impressed.

Score: 0

By Floodland

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 2:12 PM

Boys, we don't need to argue which browser is worse. You can use any of them for free. In fact, I use both of them. The bad boys are in the other side.
I appreciate the install and go and lightweight from opera and the many extensions and fast page render for FF .
And both browsers have their weaknesses too, but with all the bugs/lack of features from Opera or FF they are still MUCH better than the crappy IE.

Score: 0

By plings

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 7:47 AM

BTW:

http://www.slyerfox.com/

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 9:00 AM

This was written by a child.

It's pathetic.

There isn't a single FACT there, just a bunch of whining.

Score: 0

By anmol.2k4

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 4:41 AM

so do YOU have some FACTS to enlighten us ?

your whining is pathetic too.

Score: 0

By fewt

edited Apr 23, 2006 - 9:46 AM

Mastertech's little sister, welcome. There is no whining, I stated a fact.

The one or two facts that you actually may find there are worthless.

Who really gives a flying fsck who had tabs first?

No one does.

Go home.

Score: 0

By anmol.2k4

posted Apr 26, 2006 - 11:17 PM

we are fighting over browsers.

Score: 0

By plings

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 7:45 AM

LOL, DigitalSin is brainwashed :D

"Firefox is anti-big-corporate-entity\rebel-hacker culture"

Haha... right! Firefox is in fact IN THE POCKETS OF MAJOR CORPORATIONS LIKE IBM ;)

In fact, Mozilla IS a corporation!

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Apr 24, 2006 - 9:17 AM

Hmmm....this is true (not the brainwashed part ;)

But I think I was eluding to the culture which the browser appeals to and the following itself, not the culture of the owning entity.

Score: 0

By gkar

edited Apr 22, 2006 - 4:51 PM

I like both Firefox and Opera. I like Firefox's customizing ability and Opera's All-In-One (like Mozilla, but better) approach and size.
Security, they are pretty close according to Secunia:

Firefox:
Currently, 3 out of 29 Secunia advisories, are marked as "Unpatched" in the Secunia database.

Opera:
Currently, 0 out of 13 Secunia advisories, are marked as "Unpatched" in the Secunia database.

I/E is a gamble:
Currently, 19 out of 99 Secunia advisories, are marked as "Unpatched" in the Secunia database.

Opera 9 seems to be slightly quicker compared to Firefox (empty cache), cookie handling (block all but designated sites) is a little more difficult at first try (figured it out) than Firefox but site configuration is more detailed with Opera. Some sites still have problem with the Opera user agent like Ebay, very minor though. All in all Opera is evolutionizing into a better and better browser..If it becomes more popular it will increase Secunia security databases workload on flaws as it should. Opera however has maintained a flawless patch record which is a definite +++ for it's followers and a +++ for it's engineers. Considering the email and browser is close to 1/3 the size of Firefox/Thunderbird and decent functionality, you have to give the boys and girls at Opera a hearty "Nice Job!!"

Score: 0

By Mastertech

edited Apr 22, 2006 - 10:55 PM

The advisory count is incredibly misleading. Advisories do not equal vulnerabilities. This recent Firefox Advisory includes 24 vulnerabilities:

http://secunia.com/advisories/19631

Firefox actually has 5 unpatched out of 97 vulnerabilities. You can see how much more severe the vulnerability situation is with Firefox then the advisory count implies.

Score: 0

By gkar

edited Apr 23, 2006 - 12:25 AM

Thanks for the info. Firefox and Opera are alot safer than Internet Explorer, more than I thought.

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 11:50 PM

5 out of 97 is only in v1.5.0.2.

v1.5.0.1 had 29 unpatched out of 97 vulnerabilities.

And I got them from counting the actual vulnerabilities in each browser.

Opera has 0 unpatched out of 16 vulnerabilities.

Score: 0

By Galway

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 8:08 PM

I have allways used Firefox, since i prefer tabbed browsing and at the time IE didnt have it. But I have noticed that its quite big in its current version. Takes longer to load up than IE and uses allot of resources compaired to IE.

Opera 9 by contast is everything i changed to firefox for and so i tried it for my own curiosity. I like it, its tabbed or windowed, it has allot more features, its faster, its lean and aparrently more secure and does the job excellent.

Its so good, i might take FF off soon.

highly recommended.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 4:29 AM

Did you bother to say that it LOAD faster, but pages render slower and that is has crap for ad blocking, as well as no extensions? I just tried the latest release and all of these are still true for ever person I have asked and tried, well over 100 people. Even this page on BN still doesn't render correctly. Opera still has far to go to just get close to the low side of FF. I have major problems with FF, but it still blow this crap out of the water with every site I have tried and BN being of of them.

Score: 0

By Mark Gillespie

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 6:56 PM

Opera actually has faster startup, faster rendering, faster javascript...

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 7:35 PM

I does NOT render pages faster. Every person that isn't a fanboy that I have asked, have all said the same thing. It loads to ram faster, but it gives you blank grey page until the whole page is downloaded then it will render it. How is that faster?

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 10:59 PM

No Opera DOES render faster and here is the proof:

http://www.howtocreate.c...wserSpeed.html#winspeed

It is more like the Firefox Fanboys cannot accept reality. If soooo many people claim otherwise then it should be very easy to document and prove. The fact is not ONE person has been able to disprove those tests with accurate tests of their own. The fact of the matter is when those tests are run they get the same results.

People incorrectly use extensions such as Fasterfox and Adblock and claim it is faster. If you add a precacher like Fasterfox and enable Adblocking the results would be the same on other browsers.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 1:04 AM

Just because you post a link form a fanb**** such as yourself, with graphic that makes the site scream that it was half assed, and you want me to believe what you say when I know first hand better. How is loading a blank grey page until the whole page, pictures and all have been downloaded, faster at rendering? It's not!

Score: 0

By Mark Gillespie

edited Apr 23, 2006 - 9:58 AM

Seems your having problems accepting fact. The site posted is not a Opera fanboy site, there is no browser or OS bias, just benchmarks.

If that site showed FireFix as being he fastest, fanboys like yourself would be posting it,.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 11:17 AM

Well seeing how I have, yet to say that Firefox or IE are better, I would not call myself a fanboy of Firefox. How many times have I said that another browser was better? Not Once have I have just pointed out that you and other fanboys are making up lies and acting like the Yugo and old crank style cars are faster than the newer cars, because you have to crank it and it make sure it is running before you get in it (downloading the whole page before it will start rendering it, Opera)and the new cars where all you do is turn the key and it ready to go (almost all other browsers).

Score: 0

By fewt

edited Apr 23, 2006 - 10:12 AM

These tests are done on grossly outdated hardware

"800 MHz Intel Pentium 3, 256 MB RAM."

Opera 9 may be faster at rendering pages, but with modern hardware it's not really relevant.

As noted, Opera 9 still doesn't render many pages properly (including Betanews as someone else mentioned) so it's useless.

I'm sure a lot of people like it, and hey that's cool. The issue here is that we have a new resident troll that's selling it like it's crack yet calling everyone else a fanboy LOL.

(BTW, the PDA version of Opera *SUCKS* IE was better unfortunately (boy is pocket IE slow though). Then again, the Firefox port to Pocket PC was even worse.)

Score: 0

By nilicule

posted Apr 24, 2006 - 1:22 PM

Ah.

So rendering speed is not important as long as you throw enough hardware at it?

That said: Opera renders Betanews perfectly. I'm not a fanboy, I just decided to actually *try* it instead of copying someone else's claim.

Score: 0

By plings

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 7:42 AM

Oh dear. gawd21 the Firefox fanboy is at it again.

Opera doesn't have extensions? Maybe not, but it's damn close:

http://virtuelvis.com/ar...-and-firefox-extensions
http://virtuelvis.com/ar...d-firefox-extensions-ii

Anyway, it has all the cool stuff built in, and is still faster, safer and generally just better than the bloated pig Firefox :)

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 3:49 PM

Yeah, 8 megs is just so bloated.

Score: 0

By Galway

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 7:57 AM

compaired to opera which is 4.5mb with more features and is more secure is almost half the size. I dont want to give u the soapbox techno breakdown, but you cant fail to realise that its half the size with more functionality.

im a convert, FF is uninstalled and i can NOTICE a difference.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 11:21 AM

Calling 8MB bloated with a million times the quality is just retarded. Yes, Opera maybe a little over half the size, but it is also less than half the quality. Version 9 and it still can't render as many pages as most of the other browsers and the Wand still doesn't work right. Now if you have 9 freaking versions and it still doesn't work right, it NEVER will. Thanks and have a good day.

Score: 0

By Galway

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 4:13 PM

I have heard opera doesnt render all pages, and while this maybe true, i have yet to find them, this site also renders fine.

If we are looking on a ethical view, i still prefer opera. Microsoft want to dominate everything, and if that means bending the rules of html to suite its browser then thats onother story, but when people write for it so that browsers that stick to the rules have problems then that is another. In the end its the users choice, and my main concern is security and the ability to goto where i like without exploites writen for unpatched browsers. Firefox is a good alternative for IE, but opera is also a good alternative.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 4:29 PM

I don't use IE, because it's so outdated that it isn't worth using. It was out dated when XP came out. There has not been a major change to IE in going on 8 years now. A few security patches and a face lift. IE 7 is just out dated junk they are taking from other browsers (and it's still in beta and you have to pay for any good extensions for IE) so I won't use that. You are one of the few that see BN correctly on Opera, but I think it maybe that you don't know what it's suppose to look like. However, if they took Firefox and the few Linux browsers that I use from time to time, I would use Opera before going back to IE. IE would be close to last on my list.

Score: 0

By fewt

edited Apr 21, 2006 - 8:56 PM

IVE BEEN CONVINCED OP3R4 IS DAH R0X0RS.

Edit:
Well, I'm bored now, adios fud-packeros (Yes, this means you Master fud packer err "tech").

heh

Score: 0

By guti

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 2:01 PM

Best browser ever!
But the best, is that is getting ever better!

Score: 0

By digitalking

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 1:20 PM

They have a newer version out today with more bug fixes.
http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/
"The weekly build today should contain the best of both: The stability enhancements from the last build, but without the regressions since the beta. Oh, and mouse gestures don't crash in Widgets anymore..."

Score: 0

By FataL

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 1:48 PM

Great! Downloaded!

Score: 0

By digitalking

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 12:57 PM

Extensions Rule!!!! So, Firefox rules also!!!! Everyone hates the big guy. People were all on the bandwagon for Firefox for a long time, now they have grown bored with it, and have jumped on Opera. Opera is owned by a large company, which has the funding to dump millions to programmers to work with Opera. Firefox is mostly open source, and did not have the funding, until recently, to work with Firefox. So I would expect Opera to be better, but to me it is still not, due to the confusing way of configuring it to your liking.

Score: 0

By plings

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 7:44 AM

Uh.

Opera is actually a small company. My guess is that Mozilla actually has more cash than Opera since it is in the pockets of big corporations.

Opera is a small and independent company, unlike Mozilla.

Yes, Opera is a lot better.

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

edited Apr 21, 2006 - 12:37 PM

I just don't see how anyone can complain much about Opera. It truly is one of, if not the, best browser out there.

I'm still using 'fox, but only because there are still quite a few websites out there that just don't fully support Opera. I hope that changes soon. Not that firefox is at all a bad browser, I mainly just love the speed of Opera. The Opera dev team is pretty stand-up to boot.

Score: 0

By Orbitration

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 9:25 AM

I see you noticed how hard it is for people to be objective. ;)

I try everything here and there. Currently, I use FF with only a handful of extensions.
Opera is OK, but nothing to rave about. It refuses to display pages here and there. You can blame the website designer, OR, you could make a browser that doesn't break trying to stick to strict rules.
Kinda, sorta like traffic in India or Saigon. If you absolutely followed the lines in the road, you'd be dead quick.

Checking the stats on my websites, I notice Opera doesn't even rank a 1 percentile. Now, either that means nobody is using Opera to view my sites, or the browser's User-agent is set to something else... perhaps IE ?

Now, if they could just combine all the good elements of all the browsers into one working browser, I'd be a fanboi of that, but until then, NOTHING has shown itself to be the perfect browser.

As for you who keep crying about FireFox's extensions and their vulnerabilities, I just have to disagree. In fact, it is because of the extensions that make FF more secure than IE or its clones. (Adblock and NoScript, for example)

Rather seems funny to me that some people MUST show allegiance to a bunch of code.... OMG... (insert favorite program here) ROXXORS, and everyone else just SUXXORS !!

Score: 0

By DigitalSin

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 12:43 PM

It's not the code people have allegiances to, it's the culture. Firefox is anti-big-corporate-entity\rebel-hacker culture and we know IE culture is the opposite. Opera I think is kind of the neglected red headed stepchild of the browser cultures. Bad code, bugs, vulernabilities, etc all play a role as ammunition for each culture to use to justify their standing.

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 7:41 PM

Firefox isn't just a different culture it is a Religion:

http://poptech.blogspot....refox-new-religion.html

Score: 0

By MrFlibble

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 4:17 AM

Spamming your blog again, Mastertech?

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 11:00 PM

Lying again Frank? It is not my Blog.

Score: 0

By MrFlibble

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 4:42 AM

If the fact that you link to the Poptech blog/forum at the top of the OptimizeXP/Firefox myths site, post there as Andrew, identify yourself as Andrew at the bottom of the OptimizeXP/Firefox site, and say exactly the same things on both sites isn't enough to convince anybody that your are either a)schizophrenic or b)lying, here is the proof:

1) You have posted a reference to Firefox Myths on the Poptech forum, where one of the forum members identified you as the author:

http://standards.spiralmindsinc.com/misc/Priceless/

2) You refered to the OptimizeXP site as 'my' guide on the forum:

http://72.14.203.104/sea...uk&ct=clnk&cd=1

3) You used the name GeneralAres for an image folder on the Poptech blog site. This is the other name you use for posting pages from OptimizeXP/Poptech on forums like TomsHardware, PCMech and AnandTech, and is also an email address you use when posting as Mastertech.

http://images.google.co....F-8&sa=N&tab=wi

After all of these facts were poited out to you, you tried to cover up the truth by deleting pages or renaming folders, but unfortunately Google retains a record of your guilt.

Give it up Mastertech. Wouldn't it just be easier to admit what you have said?

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 28, 2006 - 10:39 PM

Man you are desperate. I must be the only one in the world named Andrew! Talk about proof!

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 7:45 PM

Sounds like Opera is the religion, you are the only one here selling it like it's crack.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 4:34 AM

Yes, again we agree on something, No the world still haven't ended. It's not 2011, yet.

Score: 0

By fewt

edited Apr 22, 2006 - 8:20 AM

LOL

At least Mastertech provided me with a bit of amusement being such a persistant troll.

heh

Score: 0

By MrFlibble

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 6:42 AM

Funny thing is, he used to be an anti-Opera troll:

http://my.opera.com/comm...show=0&perscreen=50

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 28, 2006 - 10:43 PM

Man you are so desperate it is not even funny. Reporting a bug in Opera from 3 years ago and defending Windows from fanboy accusations has nothing to do with being anti-opera or a troll. But if a Firefox fanboy said it we know it must be true! Please.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 3:59 PM

That is to funny. I just read it and it just can't be the same person. LMAO.

Score: 0

By pc.pain

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 12:17 PM

Ouch!!!

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 7:48 PM

No Opera is a web browser. I am simply debunking misinformation about them, use whatever browser you want:

http://mywebpages.comcas...D/FreewareBrowsers.html

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 7:52 PM

The problem here is that there WAS NO MISINFORMATION until you showed up and started posting it.

I know what your title is.

Ghetto browser dealer

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 8:13 PM

You have some seriously twisted logic.

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 5:52 PM

hm.. musing.. That is a very valid point.

It isn't code, its culture. nice.

Score: 0

By Orbitration

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 1:08 PM

"...neglected red headed stepchild"
now that's funny, I don't care who you are ;)

Score: 0

By jackamus

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 9:11 AM

Good grief! Do you folks throw enough sand at each other? Each have there own preference. We can stop by trashing everything you don't like and accept that your opinion is NOT FACT and is just that, you’re OPINION. For each study you can use to say your opinion is fact, someone else can come up with another study to show there's fact. So agree to disagree and stop acting like 2 year olds in the sand box!!!!!!

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 5:54 PM

Get a grip. This is BETA news, we haven't formed a proper tolerance yet, so we are TESTING the waters, don't you know...

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 9:18 AM

I am not speaking about opinions but facts that are irrefutable.

http://www.FirefoxMyths.com

Opinions are if you like how the Opera skin looks compared to Firfox. What I am dealing with are cold hard facts.

Opera is faster, more secure and more Compliant (Acid2) than Firefox. Those are undeniable, irrefutable facts.

Score: 0

By Nanobot

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 10:32 AM

And by the way, what do you call this sentence: "Internet Explorer has very good support (81-86%) for the most important web standard, HTML 4.01." That sounds like two opinions to me: that Internet Explorer has very good support for it and that it is the most important web standard. I don't know how you do in school, but I don't consider a B grade "very good", especially when *everyone else* has a higher grade. And then the statement that HTML is the most important web standard is very questionable. Yes, it provides the foundation for the others, but most of the real web development work is in CSS and DOM, not HTML itself. HTML is easy and simple. CSS is the area with all of the bang-your-head-on-the-desk bugs that consume most of our time. Therefore, from a productivity point of view, CSS is the most important web standard for browsers to catch up on, and even Microsoft acknowledges this.

As for Acid2, that test was designed specifically to illustrate at least one bug in every major browser. Opera development specifically focused on that one test for a while until it passed it in development builds a while back, and now Firefox passes it in the reflow branch which will be incorporated in Firefox 3, the next version of Firefox with layout engine improvements. As far as currently released final versions of the browsers, Firefox generally seems to be more standards compliant in areas other than print CSS and some picky details in some HTML attribute handling that seem to be almost ready for a fix targetting Firefox 3.

My tables, a source that you yourself used on your article, show Firefox to be generally more standards compliant than Opera in most major areas (and equal or within less than 1% in the others). You say your sources are undeniable and irrefutable, so why do two of your sources appear to contradict each other? It's interesting to note that even sites like Secunia make changes and corrections over time, so obviously their information isn't undeniable and irrefutable. You've even been forced to make significant corrections to your page over time because you've been found to be flat-out lying or mispresenting your information (like you're currently doing with the Secunia data), so clearly your article is not undeniable and irrefutable. All you're doing is spewing out more myths and fanboyism and passing off everyone who disagrees with you -- even Internet Explorer developers -- as Firefox fanboys. When will you grow up?

Score: 0

By Mastertech

edited Apr 23, 2006 - 12:02 AM

Ah the #1 Fanboy arrives.

So now according to YOU a "B" grade is not very good? That is laughable. Without HTML the world wide web would not exist. That is reality and you have already conceeded it is the foundation for the other standards making it the most important. The rest is YOUR opinion and irrelevant.

Anyone can see for themselves about Acid2. Stop making excuses, Firefox v1.x does not and v2.x will not pass the Acid2 test and claiming some hacked dev build as proof Firefox 3.0 "may" pass it is seriously pathetic. Funny how much standard support is pandered by Firefox Fanboys as being important until it is proven another browser (Opera) bests it.

None of the sources contradict each other. The one source is used to show that Firefox does not fully support standards, which is does. The other shows that Firefox does not fully support standards considered most important for the future of the world wide web.

Nothing has been misrepresented about the secunia data. It is completely accurate and anyone can count the vulnerabilities themselves. I understand that exposing the facts about Firefox's security is not something you want to be made public as you have shown by recently removing the vulnerability count on your myths page to cover up the facts because it showed how bad Firefox is doing with the vulnerability count.

I have and always will make corrections on the page to be more clear, get over it.

Score: 0

By Nanobot

posted Apr 24, 2006 - 9:21 PM

So you're saying that Secunia lists an extremely critical vulnerability for Firefox on Windows? Link me to it. I guarantee you it doesn't exist.

And of course standards support is one of the top priorities. Which is why I'm glad Opera 9 will finally fix some of the really annoying bugs that don't exist in Firefox 1.5. Compare this system I'm developing in Firefox 1.5 and Opera 8.5: http://nanobox.chipx86.com/desktop/ (note: this system is likely to change over time). Firefox 1.5 handles it fine, but Opera 8.5 chokes on it. You need Opera 9 to view it correctly. Firefox got to supporting these features first. I could easily call my system a test suite like Acid2 and say that Firefox is better than Opera because Opera doesn't support the standards I most want to use. But a simple test suite like that and Acid2 is a terrible indicator for the relative levels of standards support, as anyone with an ounce of logic (as in, not you) can understand. A better comparison is if you compare the support of *all* standards, say in a standards support comparison table like, oh I dunno, the one you linked to for your "Firefox isn't fully standards compliant" section, which puts Firefox 1.5 ahead of or virtually equal to Opera 9 in every general category. So this is clear and factual counter evidence against the claims you make on your page, but you still act like your claims are irrefutable.

Everyone with half a clue and a minute to fact check your page knows that you're spouting nonsense, but the sad thing is that some people who don't know better actually buy into your rubbish. I follow you around because I don't like people like you who spread myths and fanboyism. Remember, I have my own Firefox Myths article which has gained a lot of acceptance and I haven't heard a complaint yet. On the other hand, most people recognize the bias in your article. The poll you set up on Ars Technica showed that over 75% of the people thought your page was biased. Your technique is to say that other people are doing the things you're actually doing and you act like everyone who disagrees with you, including your own sources and the Internet Explorer developers themselves, is just a Firefox fanboy. Well heck, I didn't realize that over 75% of the population use Firefox, let alone are Firefox fanboys.

I will repeat: Your opinion is irrelevant. You say a B is good, I say a B is bad. Each claim is our own opinion, but stop acting like your opinion is fact.

I will repeat: You misquote me twice and misquote several other people to make it sound like they said the opposite of what they did. You lied about actions I have done on my website and what I have said. Several people have publicly complained about you lying about things they have said on your page.

I will repeat: Secunia does not list an extremely critical vulnerability that affected Firefox on Windows. It doesn't exist. Not there. None. You're making it up. The only extremely critical vulnerability Secunia lists for Firefox never affected Firefox on Windows, which your article says is the only thing you're talking about. I quote from the Secunia vulnerability report: "This vulnerability can only be exploited on Unix / Linux based environments."

You call everything I say "laughable". Well everyone around you sure is laughing, but it's not at me. Tell me, what public discussion forums *haven't* you left with everyone's boot in your rear?

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 28, 2006 - 11:10 PM

No you keep saying this in hopes the extremely critical vulnerability will disappear from the page. The extremely critical vulnerability exists no matter how bad you want to cover it up. I find even funnier that it exists only on Linux, the OS you support.

What is said about Acid2 is very clear on the page:

"The Acid 2 Browser Test is a test page, written to help browser vendors ensure proper support for web standards in their products. Although the Acid2 Browser Test does not test every web standard, it tests the features considered most important for the future of the web. This test clearly shows Firefox does not fully support the most important web standards."

Firefox doesn't fully support standards and it doesn't fully support the standards considered most important for the future of the web (Acid2). Making excuses does not change these facts.

Thus you are countering imaginary information that does not exist on the Firefox Myths page.

Why not get it right only 1 of the sources authors disagrees with me and no IE developers have ever made any disagreements about the page known. You disagree with me because your mad your data is used to show Firefox doesn't fully support standards except I don't include the pages of excuses you need to try and cover it up.

Tell everyone in school how irrelevant their B grades are.

You have admitted to your actions of redirecting visitors from my page to a specially created warning page. You even begged me to link back to the source directly, well that is not going to happen.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 4:38 AM

Opera LOADS FASTER IN THE RAM, but is much much muuuuuuuch slower on rendering pages! Ever page I have seen, is much slower, and I have the new version that came out TODAY! Mark that as a fact that I can prove!

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 11:02 PM

More nonsense. You have no facts. Please provide documented reproduceable proof of this and stop wasting everyone's time with what you want to be true.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 1:08 AM

Ok here is your proof. Open Opera and Firefox or IE and see which page show first, I am not talking about the blank grey page that is there every time with Opera but Text and pictures. Opera waits until the WHOLE site is downloaded before it will render the page, that is not faster! Opera on version 9 still can't render BN correctly.

Score: 0

By Nanobot

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 1:46 AM

I already refuted your so-called "irrefutable facts". Your page says that Secunia lists an extremely critical vulnerability for Firefox on Windows. That is a lie. Secunia lists an extremely critical vulnerability for *nix (which, by the way, was fixed the very day after it was discovered), but not a single one for Windows. I've told you this about a dozen times in public channels and you ignore me every time. You know you're lying and misleading and you simply don't care.

You embody every aspect you claim to hate about fanboys. Everyone around you knows this. You lose every argument you engage in. You resort to outright lies, misquotes, fallacious logic and rhetoric to pretend that people around you aren't making points.

And the funny thing is that over time, you've added things to your Firefox Myths pages that make readers immediately question your credibility. You go on and on about how biased I am and how much I've been manipulating my tables, even though my changelogs are publicly available and anyone can test the data and see that it's correct. You go on and on about how the reader should just ignore any argument pointing out errors on your page and that you've only been banned from websites because the admins couldn't handle the so-called truth. You've done a very good job at totally smashing any form of credibility you've ever had.

But man, are you persistant. I've honestly never seen such a rabid fanboy as you. I don't know why you are so intent on trying to make Firefox fail, but those intentions are very clear to anyone with half a clue (and unfortunately for you, most people in most places you go do seem to have a clue). Firefox users, IE users, and Opera users alike have called you out on your B.S. and your deception, but you just go on spamming more sites on your mindless crusade.

Firefox is a very good browser. Opera is a very good browser. Safari and Konqueror seem a bit unbalanced in the areas of standards they support, but they're getting to be pretty good. Relative to the competition right now, Internet Explorer is pretty awful simply because there was no significant development work done for so long, but I believe it may become a decent browser again a few versions down the road if Microsoft commits enough resources to the project. You basically claim that I'm a mindless Firefox fanboy. You're entitled to your opinions, but please stop lying about me and things that I've done or said. Unlike you, I don't repeatedly threaten people with lawsuits, but what you've written about me is called libel and it is illegal.

Score: 0

By Mastertech

edited Apr 22, 2006 - 11:36 PM

You haven't refute anything. You merely spam excessively long replies and think by using excessive wording you can refute something. You claiming something is refuted does not make it so.

I find it shows your true colors in how desperate you have been to cover up the extremely critical vulnerability in Firefox merely because it only affects Linux. I don't cover up Firefox's insecurity situation like you do.

I haven't lost a single argument. Here you go making declarations again. What kind of statement is this "Everyone Around Me"? You mean everyone around YOU. Your few Fanboys in no way associate anyone around me. I have never lied about anything but again you make these declarations. The fact is you don't make points you make excuses. You know the facts and make pages of excuses to cover them up all because you hate Microsoft and IE. That is YOUR problem.

Everything on the Firefox Myths page is properly sourced. My credibility is only questioned because I have to defend myself from the lies you fanboys spread about me.

As for you, you have proven how biased you are by deceptively redirectly visitors only from my page to specially created warning pages, not only did I catch you, you asked me to link directly again promising you would never do it again. Please, like I could ever trust someone who does something deceptive like that again. Now there it is impossible for that to happen again and people can see the facts unaltered themselves.

The reader should always ignore arguments like yours filled with rhetoric and excuses but no facts. I've only ever been banned by a very few Fanboy admins who know they cannot win the argument and thus want to silence it. Again you making declarative statements about me does not "smash" my credibility.

My intentions are to stop the spread of misinformation which is incredibly rampant with Firefox. If Firefox is so great then it should have no problem suceeding with the truth being told. The fact is Firefox is nothing more then a basic browser with an extension system that is overly hyped with misinformation and propaganda by rabid fanboys such as yourself.

The only person posting libel is you and your fanboy posse.

Score: 0

By Nanobot

edited Apr 24, 2006 - 9:51 PM

Aha! So you admit that your page lies. You just said that the extremely critical vulnerability only applies to Unix/Linux based environments, yet your page clearly says "All Myths relate to running the default install of Firefox in Windows with no extensions." You said before that you aren't going to add anything to your page that doesn't concern Windows because you're only dealing with Windows on your page, yet you just added something that has nothing to do with Windows just because you can use it to make Firefox look bad.

And you think I'm desperate for pointing out your flaws everywhere? Why have you spammed your site hundreds of times on dozens and dozens of websites? Why did you spam the Firefox Myths page on digg 24 times, *not* counting comments, the vast majority of which were copied/pasted templates?

On StumbleUpon, your Firefox Myths page has 10 negative comments out of 13 total. The Firefox Myths page I wrote has 6 positive comments out of 6 total. On the Ars Technica poll you posted, 75 people out of 96 total voted that your page is biased. The popular opinion about your page is clear, and it's not just Firefox fanboys, as you can see by how people have responded to my version, which points out several of the same things.

Now stop lying about things I have done. I never redirected anyone away from the page you linked to. Meanwhile, you lied more than once about what my page even said. And we caught you lying about your identity and relation to the article. Here's a good quote from one of the threads where you spammed Firefox Myths, and someone asked if you were the author of Firefox Myths and the Popular Technology weblog: "No, My name is Vincent AKA Mastertech. Maybe the sites are by the same author neither is my site or one site copied another?" When I e-mailed Robert Accettura saying that I believed some of the different commenters on his weblog who supported the Firefox Myths page were actually the same person and I provided him with your known IP address, Robert responded, "Yup, that's him. I matched the both, as well as 2 others." You've also posed as someone named GeneralAres, FFeLEET, Realist, and others, all claiming not to be the author of the page, but all discovered to have the same IP address -- the same one you use. You say that I'm being deceptive? Wow.

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 28, 2006 - 11:25 PM

The page doesn't lie about anything. I am not going to hide security issues simply because they may only affect Linux. Posting an extremely critical vulnerability in Firefox on Linux is information any Windows user would want to know. They should know that Firefox is even more insecure on Linux. You on the other hand are desperately looking for anything and in the process have done nothing but promote the fact that Firefox is even less secure on Linux. Too funny.

I love you declarations with no evidence, "flaws everywhere". That must work on the naive people you deal with and don't have to provide proof. The site hasn't been spammed anywhere, and it was posted to Digg anytime a new version of the guide came out which was not 24 times, many other people also posted the guide. Notice my account and history are completely erased to cover up the truth so the fanboys can use digg for more propaganda.

A handful of fanboys does not account for the hundreds of millions of Internet users.

Oh you were caught red handed redirecting people and I put a stop to that real quick. Your desperation about who I am is getting really pathetic and bordering on delusional.

Score: 0

By The Finger

edited Apr 23, 2006 - 7:33 AM

I would love to see what would happen if you two propellor heads met for real! lol You'd either rip each other apart, or you'd be really polite. Keep up the good fight!

Excuse please I've been drinking again... Molson.

Score: 0

By Upsilon

edited Apr 21, 2006 - 4:55 PM

Yeah, the guy says he's not associated with Comcast, but his site is hosted by them and if you look at his email: OptimizeXP@comcast.net

If he's not associated with Comcast, he's certainly biaised. Of course Firefox have weaknesses. You try writing a completly flaswless software. Perfection doesn't exist. And about the 'Firefox is the fastest, lighest...' : IT'S A PUNCH LINE. Mozilla wants you to use their browser, and they are going to promote it. That's how it works, everyone does that.

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 7:10 PM

It is a punch line my ass. It is deliberately misleading and proven to be a lie. I've never seen more people being misled with false information to use a piece of software before and then the same people when proven wrong continue to blindly support it.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 22, 2006 - 4:40 AM

And you voted for Bush, why?

Score: 0

By fewt

edited Apr 21, 2006 - 7:23 PM

http://www.google.com/se...&btnG=Google+Search

How long have you worked for them?

Hmm

"More illegal activity from Andrew K.

Andrew K., the author of the Firefox Myths article, has deliberately misquoted me on that page. He cut pieces of things I said and glued them together with no indication that such modifications were made. His page claims that I said the following:"

http://nanobox.chipx86.c...ivity-from-andrew-k.php

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 7:27 PM

Worked for who? I don't work for anyone. I see you found another fanboy link of lies. Good work. Now trying arguing a single fact.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Apr 23, 2006 - 11:25 AM

"By Mastertech

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 7:27 PM

Worked for who? I don't work for anyone. I see you found another fanboy link of lies. Good work. Now trying arguing a single fact."

That is the problem, he doesn't work and has no idea of what work is, so he thinks just because it loads that it must work.

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 7:28 PM

Lies?

HAHAHAHA

The only liar here is you bubba.

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 7:36 PM

Lets repeat this some more, magically it might become true. Unfortunately this is not fantasy land.

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 7:38 PM

Damn it man, isn't it past your bedtime yet?

You are getting boring.

Score: 0

By Mastertech

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 7:42 PM

same.

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 7:47 PM

WOW, SUCH A COOL COMMENT!

"same."

BOI I NEVER WOOD-UH COME UP WIT DAT!?!

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 5:19 PM

Wow...

Anyone who uses Comcast for internet access gets free webspace and an @comcast.net email address.

Were you actually unaware of this?

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 5:29 PM

Apparently, he is one of those *AOL* types, that they don't get such french benefits.

Score: 0

By dfyfe

edited Apr 20, 2006 - 3:52 PM

I have been using Opera for several years and even paid for the licensed version. I have been testing their weekly builds and finally, the beta is here. Great browser!! Fast, stable, secure, small download and very east to customize. SPREAD THE WORD!!

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Apr 21, 2006 - 4:48 PM

*I have been using Opera for several years and even paid for the licensed version*

So, YOU are the one .. ah.

Score: 0