Opera for Linux 170
Migrant Programmer writes "Opera Software has finally announced a prototype of Opera for Linux. It will be shown at the Expo this week.. a speedy, efficient browser for a speedy, efficient operating system. Check their news page and the Project Magic page for more information. "
Die MDI! Die die die!!! (Score:1)
Nice... (Score:1)
Does it have SSL?
and wouldn't we have to PAY for Opera? (Score:1)
You should also say "Death to Opera" if you say "Death to Qt", because Opera is just as "anti GNU" as Qt is (and that is perfectly fine to me).
GTK/Mozilla --- why do we *want* Opera!? (Score:1)
Great, but... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
people still pay for web browsers? (Score:1)
not that ive given much heed to the commercial
software world anway...
WTF are Those!? (Score:1)
what about blinking & animation? (Score:1)
I'm still using netscape 3 over having load images in the menu rather than buried in configuration, and for the alt-num sequence to go back several pages at once.
Ding! (Score:1)
No, actually it hasn't. (Score:1)
Opera Software itself doesn't do the porting generally. They had tried to contract it out to several other people, but no one would finish the work.
Things look much better now that someone at least stepped up to the plate with something. I'd call this the first real announcement.
Ding! (Score:1)
What's the problem with a commercial app using QT? That's what QT was designed for...
No problem at all. In fact, I was wondering if we'd ever see a real commercial app using Qt! I'll willingly pay for an Opera/Linux license. I've already paid for an Opera/Win32 license.
Ding! (Score:1)
MDI in Linux? (Score:1)
Hopefully, this will be configurable. If so, I know I'll try it both ways.
I'll keep an open mind. (Score:1)
Sure does. (Score:1)
Unknown. (Score:1)
Sorry. You'll have to take your chance. (I'm happy to pay for an alternate platform, but I recognize not everyone will be.)
... we dont! No source is bad for everyone (Score:1)
Some people just don't get it. Who cares if AOL
'owns' Mozilla? The SOURCE is available for our
prying eyes to see and digest - we can continue to
implement thing with Mozilla, or take the IDEAS
clearly portrayed in the Mozilla code and re-implement them if AOL goes stupid.
GPL isn't about the ownership if code - its about the freedom to express and convey ideas in ways that only code can.
this is great - NOT (no source is evil) (Score:1)
Linux is not simply about 'making things work better'. Its about making US work better. Without the source, WE cannot learn and improve. WE become victims to some 3rd party developer. We've all already been down that road (MS), lets not keep repeating the past.
Great, but... (Score:1)
Hmm. It'll be interesting to compare Mozilla/GNOME to Opera/KDE in terms of resource usage. Somehow I doubt either of them's going to run on my 486/33 8Mb laptop, more's the pity. Perhaps I'll buy a Thinkpad (once IBM come up with a Windows-not-included package).
--
W.A.S.T.E.
Mozilla? What's that? (Score:1)
Go to the binaries area of mozilla.org [mozilla.org] and download a build. Look for apprunner, like the FAQ/README/whatever it's called, says. Run it. Presto, Mozilla. Well, sort of, anyway. If you still have trouble, try asking someone for an exact file to download, and exact commands to run.
Oh yeah, another thing, it might be a good idea to make a special Mozilla user: that way your existing Netscrape bookmarks, etc. can't get screwed up.
--
W.A.S.T.E.
Mozilla? What's that? (Score:1)
Motif is the standard. There's no getting away from it. Does GTK support X resources properly? Check out Netscape.ad some time to see how & why that sort of thing is useful. I'm not saying GTK isn't good, mind you, but there's a pre-existing wheel, and it's a wheel that's been attached to Unix's axles for a while now. Personally I don't really care: I primarily want Mozilla because there's no decent browser on Linux/Alpha yet.
--
W.A.S.T.E.
Mozilla? What's that? (Score:1)
Daniel
Mozilla Blisters (Score:1)
int main(int argc,char argv[])
{
char *test=0;
printf(test);
}
Daniel
uh, dumbass... (Score:1)
GTK/Mozilla --- why do we *want* Opera!? (Score:1)
Mozilla? What's that? (Score:1)
GTK/Mozilla --- why do we *want* Opera!? (Score:1)
GTK/Mozilla --- why do we *want* Opera!? (Score:1)
The fact that Netscape/AOL still retains ownership of much of the Mozilla code is irrelevent. Mozilla's licence prevents Netscape/AOL from denying us our rights to the code that has already been released.
----
Open source is the choice for me (Score:1)
A free software browser offers much more customizability, feature potential, and long term credibility than a proprietary browser. It's also a lot easier to fix bugs in free software. If other people want to use Opera, that's fine. That's their choice. It's not my choice.
Great, but...do you get the linux version as well? (Score:1)
Interesting.... (Score:1)
Die MDI! Die die die!!! (Score:1)
though I dont like the fact it store the pages title in the drop down box, should store the URL
Viva MDI! Viva! Viva! Viva! (Score:1)
Proxy (Score:1)
--
As long as each individual is facing the TV tube alone, formal freedom poses no threat to privilege.
Great, but... (Score:1)
Mozilla? What's that? (Score:1)
| want Mozilla because there's no decent
| browser on Linux/Alpha yet.
Now there's an idea for the Opera folks. Put out an Alpha Linux version. The old (100898) release of Mozilla is usable on Alpha/Linux systems - I mean, that's what I'm writing this message on, but it's certainly not stable and light on system resources.
I've tried compiling Mozilla with GTK on my Alpha and unfortunately all I get is a segfaulting apprunner.
I don't understand (Score:1)
--
Nightly builds (Score:1)
Anyway, what kind of experience have others had with the nightly builds for linux. Is it the builds that are fucked up, or my system?
--
Beowolf Browser... (Score:1)
effect to with one of these...:)
Unfortunately it's QT based, yeah so? (Score:1)
Is that a problem because it's part of the Yet Another X Toolkit Syndrome? YAXTS has been going around for 15 years now, there's no stopping it. Everyone wants a cooler toolkit. That only means once you buy Opera it'll have a bigger footprint on your disk. (So much for the "Browser on a floppy" claim they love so much.)
What's your point?
Interesting.... (Score:1)
Unfortunately it's QT based (Score:1)
Take a look at www.mozillazine.org for screenshots (Score:1)
You might be surprised, but they have progressed very far and have quite a lot to show for it. It will really make a splash when it comes out.
RTFM! (Score:1)
export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/dir/where/mozilla/is
export MOZILLA_HOME=/dir/where/mozilla/is
before you try to run apprunner
this is great (Score:1)
extremely configurable (Score:1)
hackers don't do Windows (Score:1)
Windows does themes too (Score:1)
http://floach.pimpin.net/
http://reveal.unpaved.com/
http://www.customize.org/
http://www.stardock.com/
Reveal and Dimension are only for Windows. Maybe they'll consider porting to linux...
Seeing the Microsoft "E" in windowblinds sends a shiver down my spine...
this is great - NOT (no source is evil) (Score:1)
Die MDI! Die die die!!! (Score:1)
What do you guys use now? (Score:1)
blink tag (Score:1)
Mozilla is NOT GPL'ed (Score:1)
Opera's quality (Score:1)
Stable, fast, and ergonomic. (Score:1)
It also lets you optimize your real estate by killing the scroll bars and menu bars when you don't need them (keyboard users!), and has one-key or one-click ways to turn on/off colors and backgrounds and images and such, which is a huge win for browsing all those unreadable or ad-intensive sites.
It's the only browser that I've felt was developed for me and not for Joe Random or for major corporate entities who want to control the user's experience. Except for Lynx; and, well, sometimes you need images and decent frame support.
Yes, it's not quite as slick as Netscape in some ways. I DON'T CARE. It's so much better 95% of the time that the occasional awkwardness or Javascript glitch (I usually have javascript turned off anyway) doesn't bother me.
Yes, I'd like it to be free, and I don't like Opera's attitude about free software, but life goes on.
Yes, Mozilla may well be a wonderful browser, and I hope it will be, but it's not there yet; while Opera is a port of a browser which is already wonderful.
Whether with Mozilla or Opera, a future without Netscape 4.* sluggishness and bloat and a bus error every 30 damn minutes of browsing will be an excellent thing. My life will be better.
Great, but... (Score:1)
Try getting rid of all the toolbars and just using keystrokes... tres svelte!
Z= back one page
X= forward one page
Q= back one link
A= forward one link
F2 = type in an address
F5 = reload
etc., etc.
Personally, I find keystrokes much quicker and more convenient than pointy-clicky.... that's why use linux when I can!
And Opera is MUCH quicker rendering pages than those OTHER browsers
.
Great, but... (Score:1)
.
Interesting.... (Score:1)
Personally, I can and will use whatever apps I see fit... I have no need for a DE but even if I did what's to stop me from using a QT-based Opera with Gnome? Or Mozilla with KDE?
What's the problem with a commercial app using QT? That's what QT was designed for...
As long as they don't link it with other people's GPL'ed code and try to distribute the binaries
.
Opera's quality (Score:1)
Unfortunately, Opera adheres to W3C standards and doesn't render bad HTML very well...
.
WTF are Those!? (Score:1)
Oh... and Ctrl-V / Ctrl-C work like normal.. duh.
BTW, how can you mention Netscape and STANDARD in the same sentence without cracking up? bwahahaha
Used the BLINK tag lately?
Nice... (Score:1)
It is better in my opinion unless you visit a lot of sites with bad HTML (i.e. ZDNet), in which case it may render them funky.
.
Cool (Score:1)
It might be just me but... (Score:1)
BTW, don't believe everything you hear on newsgroups
--
Donovan Rebbechi
One Wonders... (Score:1)
Last time I used it they had a MAJOR problem with buttons that triggered script.
The Pope
Feldercarb. (Score:1)
Opera's quality (Score:1)
Have they cleaned up their act? Are they fast *and* stable now?
All hail lynx! (Score:1)
??? What are you talking about ???
Are you a developer ?
Lynx rules! (Score:1)
This must be Microsoft or Apple minion. You all know that scripting is dead too, right? Bwa ha ha ha!!
And speaking of scripting, lynx makes an awesome http/ftp client for scripting. I have it in a script that automatically downloads all the day's news and reads it to me through my Festival voice synthesizer.
Unfortunately it's QT based - READ THIS about QT. (Score:1)
The real question is . . . (Score:1)
Nice, but... (Score:1)
OTOH, I've never really liked the Opera peoples' attitude ("Free web browsers are worth exactly what you pay for them; pay for ours and use it, it costs money, therefore it doesn't suck"). I've heard good things about Mozilla's progress, and look forward to trying out a stable version of it when it comes out.
Very Cool!!! (Score:1)
Natas
Linux is so pretty! (Score:1)
the new GNOME/Enlightenment.
Windows is one damn ugly O/S IMO, linux is one of
best looking OS's there is (IMO also)...
the CLI has colors (in bash at least) and the GUI
can be customized to any way you want it to..
if its ugly, then you made/kept it ugly.
What's wrong with Troll-Tech? (Score:1)
This guy can not like Troll-Tech and thats fine
he can say he doesn't like it, and thats fine.
Personally, i would have prefered GTK, honestly.
But chances are i'll still get a copy of Opera,
because QT isnt bad either.
Don't have a fit because he doesn't like QT and
you do. Because thats immature shit.
Next time ditch the 'lameass' shit and replace it with something reasonable.
hackers don't do Windows (Score:1)
But in reality, a hacker is a person who edits
source code. Not some 13yr old who thinks hes
cool becuase he can oob win32 boxes on irc.
Ergo, a hacker is less likly to be interesting
in win32 because its not a good coding o/s and
its source is closed. But its not impossible.
(FYI, I use OpenBSD, i'm not a win32 guy)
All hail lynx! (Score:1)
Its fast and stable, not flashy java type shit
just good old text =).
And I totally agree with you, i would sure like
to see tables support with curses, and even
frames. It would be ugly at the lower text resolutions, but a the higher text resos (say, 132x42+) it would be sweet.
Very good news (Score:1)
Opera is basically shareware. I have no problem with that. They bootstrapped a project to hire
programmers and port it to other OSes, now finally Linux will get a shot. I am very pragmatic about this. I didn't mind sending them $35 to get me a browser I can count on, that is fast, that crashes (as they all do) at least with some sensibility, and that is more-standards oriented than the others.
Sure, I would rather have them give it to me for free. But let's get real. Here are two guys operating out of their homes in Norway, offering a not-stupid browser to the world for a fair price.
Eventually I think they may wake up and GPL it, but for the time being give credit where it's due, they provide a reasonable alternative to Netscape and IE. I have hopes for Mozilla but it ain't there yet, not for me anyway.
By the way, because I like Opera a lot, I read through all the comments on this, and it simply reinforced my view that reading AC stuff is not worth the time. Those who have something interesting to say are outblathered by 10:1.
--------
When are you gonna realize... (Score:1)
Of course they aren't. I don't like Opera because of its GUI. I like it because it's HTML standard compliant (more so than either of the heavy-hitters), it has an MDI and the ability to scale pages as they're being viewed, and because it has a footprint smaller than a gnat.
Clearly, a bunch of people here will. Read some of the posts. Read Wired's article on Opera [hotwired.com]. Read anything, for chrissakes.
Great, but... (Score:1)
I'll buy one, though I'm not really crazy that Troll-Tech made it...
Chris
It might be just me but... (Score:1)
platform. It might have been in a newsgroup or something. I have not used it because of these statements, and I probably never will.
Konqueror (kfm) rocks (Score:1)
That said, it's a great tool for reading documentation and looking through directories of HTML files since you can have the tree view on the left side showing all of your files.
Now, if it just had the command line at the bottom like Midnight Commander, it would be nearly perfect.
Amen !! (Score:1)
Opera is ugly, it may be fast but I refuse to spend hours using the product, and why no tabs. I admire the two pigs in the garage myth but the product is trash. Considering its relative youth the product should have been better - must be taking lessons from M$. I have yet to see why anyone would want to use Opera much less pay for it. For 30 I can get the LinuxMall smorgasborg and have change for a Banks (actuall at 180 to 1 a case of Banks). Give me lynx instead.
Mozilla seems to be the messiah coming to save us, we will soon see if Netscape (and the nice people at http://www.mozilla.org ) can mend their profligate ways and produce a stable browser.
Opera's quality (Score:1)
I've been really happy with Opera 3.51. It's crashed on me less than a handful of times (maybe 3 or 4) but I could never remotely claim to have been crash free with Netscape. Opera is more configurable and faster.
Nicest of all, Opera lets you disable embedded sounds. It makes the web almost irritant free. I did say _almost_. ;]
what about blinking & animation? (Score:1)
You can turn off animation. I would like to be able to go back more than one page at a time; that's probably the feature I miss most. But image loading is supersweet in Opera. You don't have to dig it out of the config to change the option. Just one click (on the camera icon in the document window) or hit the 'g' key to toggle to one of the three image options. On the fly three-way toggling, baby!
Can't render the Mega HTML periodic table (Score:1)
Bus error every 30 minutes? (Score:1)
Great, but... (Score:1)
Great, but... (Score:1)
I will definitely support the Linux version!
--
- Sean
Yeah, that's the problem. (Score:1)
Unfortunately, Opera adheres to W3C standards and doesn't render bad HTML very well...
That seems to be the problem right there. As soon as you get a page that has more than one <HTML> tag in it (like if someone forgot the / in the </HTML>), it starts screwing up inside. I have found that 3.21 is the most stable. 3.5x's support for CSS is nice, but not worth the drop in stability, IMHO. Luckily, I saved a copy of 3.21, which I still use.
I dunno if you can still get a copy on the official site or not -- just haven't bothered to check.
--
- Sean
Eh? Whassat? (Score:1)
Where? Gimme!
--
- Sean
Opera's quality (Score:1)
Using it now, as a matter of fact.
--
- Sean
Mozilla is NOT GPL'ed (Score:1)
Mainly so that GPL'd packages can be included in Mozilla. But it means that people can make a fully GPL browser yourself (although the mozilla team would probably be able to make a better one)
Great, but... (Score:1)
When are you people gonna realize that a nice GUI and Quality software are NOT mutually exclusive?
If noone is gonna use it, why do you mak it?
All hail lynx! (Score:1)
..I wish it had everything the OTHER GUYS have had for years!
Grow up the command line is dead!
When are you gonna realize... (Score:1)
What is a browser used for? Browsing! Who cares if its HTML compliant (which it apparently isn't) if the MDI makes cluttered and hard for the average user to use (an like it or not THAT'S who we are designing for - not nerds like us who hang out in \.). That's all a "Browser War" (remember those?) should really be about.
AC #1 above, you remeid me of a guy I knew in University...he loved this alternative band until they got a hit then into the trash they went. I suspect there are people out their who tout Opera not because they think its a real good (quality that is) alternative to other browsers, but because it's NOT one of the other browsers. How many of these same people will be around when Opera is as big as NS or IE? None of them.
If you really use Opera because you beleive its a better product, great keep doing it. Otherwise...
When are you gonna realize... (Score:1)
P.S. a 12 Gig hard drive goes for $300 (Canadian!). So unless I intend to run Opera on a Palm Pilot, who cares about footprint? (And before you blow a gasket RAM is even cheaper).
If I didn't read a lot I wouldn't be writing here..
When It come's down to it compliance and speed of page loading etc don't mean dick if the product is not easy to install and use for most people..unless of course you only want it to be used by Linux/Unix hackers. If thats the case, Never Mind.
All hail lynx! (Score:1)
And yes I do develop for Windows...not because I LIKE Windows, but because its really the Only game in town (Apple/Mac is a hermit living in the woods nearby). I would much rather use my talents developing for a better, GUI based platform (GNOME or KDE etc on Linux) so that EVERYONE,yes EVERYONE, can benefit form FSF and Open Source, not just command-line commandos who don't seem to like regular people.
Frankly, if you want to be the "Amish of the Internet" go ahead, that's your choice. What I'm saying is that for the rest of the world, the command line is dead (it died in 1987, didn't you get the memo?) and if it isn't dead, it needs to be killed quickly before it breeds again. Otherwise Linux will never be use by more people than those that frequent this site. You do want everyone to use Linux, don't you?
Then DIE, COMMAND LINE DIE!!!!
uh, dumbass... (Score:1)
john
Douglas Engelbart once said... (Score:1)
I think this says a lot about todays users...