For one day only, the popular cross-platform browser, Opera, is free. It’s a celebration for having stuck through trials, tribulations, and Microsoft for 10 years. Click Here to get your free registration (today only).
Alex put together a quick look at why someone might want to choose Opera while there are so many free (and very good) browsers available.
Tera swears by OmniWeb and paid money to use it. Most of us stick with Safari. That brings up a good question: “What do you want in a browser?“
Speed? Fast page rendering? Stability? Those are probably high on the list for most of us. Easy bookmarks? No pop-up ads? Automatic form filling? Those are beneficial, for sure.
What makes you use the browser you use today? GUI? Feel? Anti-Microsoft?
Safari is fine as is. Firefox is OK but looks tooooooo much like the Windows version. Camino is nice but reminds me of Mac Classic. OmniWeb costs money. Opera costs money. Mozilla is sooooo 1999. MSIE is a joke. What’s left? iCab? Nope. Shiira? Anything else?
One thing about Opera that’s cool, though… it runs on almost any platform. I thought I saw QNX on the list (a real-time version of Unix).
Hey, I downloaded Opera and saved ALL the registration keys for EVERY operating system. Way cool! Took it for a test drive earlier today and got the feeling that I need to learn to drive again. It’s just a different way of doing things. I don’t know enough yet to have an opinion concerning its merit. The one thing I noticed is that it interprets screen color/shading/opacity the same way that Firefox does. It doesn’t do semi-transparent in the same way as The Browser That Shall Remain Nameless. Unlike Firefox, it hasn’t trashed my system or triggered the BSOD yet. It’s certainly a different way of working. Oh, there’s one thing I noticed. I took away its reporting to websites as The Browser That Shall Remain Nameless. Instead, I had it report itself as Opera. Why not? I mean, it is Opera! I soon found out why not. Travel to some web sites and all I’d get is a blank screen. Jeez… Re-enable The Browser That Shall Remain Nameless in its reporting and the screen suddenly appears. I’ll bet that must be a bit frustrating for Opera developers.
ad-blocking, pop-up blocking, tabbed browsing, opening groups in tabs all at once, compatability with media files, compatability with my banks website.
Used to use firefox, but it only had the first 4 requirements, so I moved to safari and paid for pith helmet. Now if Safari would just incorporate Firefox’s translate plug-in.
Question: does anyone know if its possible to get safari to display the url of a link when you mouse over it, like happens at the bottom of the browser on firefox?
One thing I’m beginning to demand out of a browser is an optional setting to confirm my intent to exit the app. Firefox provides this but Safari and many other browsers do not. All it takes is an inadvertent key sequence—such as command-Q instead of the intended command-W or a twitch of the mouse—and BOOM. All your tabs are gone and there is nothing you can do about it.
This is u.n.t.e.n.a.b.l.e.
I sent a letter to Steve Jobs telling him how crappy Mac OS X is because of Command-Q and because of the ‘shutdown’ selection in the Apple menu.
First Gripe - Command Q is actually a shortcut for ‘quit.‘ Who knew. Quitting an application should be a seven-step process, just to make sure that’s what I really want to do before I ‘accidentally’ press the secret key sequence of ‘Command key and Q key’ at the same time. Those extra steps are sure to instill confidence and comfort in the 25-million users who have trouble with quitting applications in their Macs.
Second Gripe - Shutdown. What a ridiculous way to set up a computer to shut down. Sometimes I move my mouse to the Apple menu and, without thinking, accidentally select the ‘shutdown’ menu. The only notice that Apple gives you that your computer is about to shut down is a dumb little dialog box that gives you a two-minute warning. Two minutes is not enough. It needs to be 10 minutes (some of us actually leave our computers for awhile) and there needs to be a little ‘beep beep beep beep’ audible warning which steadily increases in volume until just before the shutdown. Then, before shutdown, it should send out an email message and only when you reply to that message will the Mac actually ‘shutdown.‘
Why can’t Apple get those two right?
If Apple really, really wants me to buy Mac OS X 10.5 ‘Leopard’ they’ll also install an ‘Anti-Whining Device’ which will ‘zap and stun’ whining Mac users with a shot of electricity to render them mute for a few days each time they complain about their own inadequacies. The world will be a better place…
Jack, you seem to be taking the position that even if another browser comes along which is significantly better than the free alternatives, you will stick with the latter because they are still “good enough” so to speak. I hope you realilze that this is precisely the rationale of many people who use Windows over the Mac and OS X. They may recognize that OS X is superior but they will never pay for it or a Mac because Windows is—for them—good enough.
To equate my position on a browser ‘purchase’ with other computing purchase decisions is silly and barely worthy of response; still…
For me, a browser needs to render pages correctly, store bookmarks in a simple, straightforward manner, and remain stable (not crash regularly). That’s ‘my’ criteria for a browser. To that end, Safari is more than good enough. Same with Camino and Firefox.
They’re all free, so I won’t be spending money for Opera or OmniWeb regardless of how many ‘features’ they may have. Why? Because my criteria has been met and exceeded and the value of the extra features is not sufficient to part with money.
Jeff Mincey - 30 August 2005 04:50 PM
The standard of “good enough” is, well, not good enough (for me). I can foresee the possibility that a particular browser could be SO much better than the free alternatives as to justify a modest price. I’m quite astonished that you can’t foresee or imagine such a thing.
I’m astonished that you care about me that much. I’m astonished that I’m responding to someone who gets astonished so easily and on something that is so obviously a ‘taste’ issue, not Computer User Law as dictated by Supreme Court Justice Mincey.
Wow, this has really turned into the “got up on the wrong side of the bed” thread. So, here’s my question again incase you missed it.
shadoe - 31 August 2005 11:11 AM
Question: does anyone know if its possible to get safari to display the url of a link when you mouse over it, like happens at the bottom of the browser on firefox?
To equate my position on a browser ÎpurchaseÌ with other computing purchase decisions is silly and barely worthy of response; still÷
I was not equating these things. Instead I was speaking of the mentality which underlies them—this idea that one need not pay for anything, even if it adds value, so long as what one has already is “good enough.“ It’s no crime if you want to take this approach; I was just surprised that Mac proponents would think in those terms.
That’s exactly what you did, Jeff. You equated the two and in an accusatory tone, and in an assumptive manner. For example, ‘the mentality which underlies them.‘ That implies poor thinking, which is obviously not the case (except to you).
Then, to say that you’re surprised that Mac proponents would think in such a way, implies an ‘elitist’ attitude on your part.
For me, a browser needs to render pages correctly, store bookmarks in a simple, straightforward manner, and remain stable (not crash regularly). ThatÌs ÎmyÌ criteria for a browser. To that end, Safari is more than good enough. Same with Camino and Firefox.
Okay—whatever floats your boat. But from my point of view, that’s like saying that what I want in a car is that its engine runs properly, it drives and handles well, it’s reliable and doesn’t break down, and so long as I find a car that meets these criteria, no other car could add value to me.
There you go again. ‘Whatever floats your boat’ could be viewed as inflammatory, and certainly smacks of a mind that’s really closed when it professes to be open to other possibilities.
Can you be open to the possibility that, 1) other people have valid opinions that differ from yours, 2) your opinion/perspective/view might be wrong?
Again, this is not about right or wrong but only one’s orientation. This “good enough” approach is not what I expected to find in a Mac devotee.
You must be a Linux user because you don’t know much about the rest of the unwashed masses that exist in the world.
See? You just got poked. How’d it feel?
TheyÌre all free, so I wonÌt be spending money for Opera or OmniWeb regardless of how many ÎfeaturesÌ they may have. Why? Because my criteria has been met and exceeded and the value of the extra features is not sufficient to part with money.
I’ve got it. Even if another browser has amazing features and performance compared to Safari and it charges only $25 for it, you won’t pay for it because what you have is good enough. No need to seek out improvements or reward developers (with even a modest sum) who work hard to supply it. Got it.
Now you’re being sarcastic and intimidating. I’m reporting you to the Administrator.
What you think is an exchange of views is really ‘if you disagree with me then I’m going to insult you into submission.‘
IÌm astonished that you care about me that much. IÌm astonished that IÌm responding to someone who gets astonished so easily and on something that is so obviously a ÎtasteÌ issue, not Computer User Law as dictated by Supreme Court Justice Mincey.
What on earth are you on about? Take a breath Jack—it’s just an exchange of views.
An exchange of views? I don’t think so. This is the Jeff Mincey Show. The show where Jeff displays intolerance and insults others with intimidation and badgering.
“ThatÌs exactly what you did, Jeff. You equated the two and in an accusatory tone, and in an assumptive manner.“
When someone tells you their intent is not to accuse or insult, and when someone tells you that his words are being misunderstood, and yet you persist with your original thinking, then you are looking for a fight where one is not offered. Put yourself in my place for a moment. You and others are refusing to accept my clarifications at face value and in effect you are disbelieving my honesty. This puts me in a no-win position.
I’ve gone out of my way to say Jack’s position is no crime to take and that I simply (1) disagree with his approach and (2) am surprised to find that a Mac proponent would take it. That’s it. That’s my whole point. Now someone please tell me how this translates into insults and intolerance. Are we not free to take different points of view here—so long as no insults are given?
We are all entitled to our opinions, and I choose to believe that others in this forum are being honest and straightforward in taking their positions. It’s a pity you and perhaps others don’t do me the same courtesy.
Jeff, you do have a tendency to poke at other’s views while not being able to take pokes to your own views.
When someone tells you their intent is not to accuse or insult, and when someone tells you that his words are being misunderstood, and yet you persist with your original thinking, then you are looking for a fight where one is not offered. Put yourself in my place for a moment. You and others are refusing to accept my clarifications at face value and in effect you are disbelieving my honesty. This puts me in a no-win position.
I went back to read this part of the thread.
Looks to me like Jack said he wouldn’t pay for a browser because the free browsers were pretty good.
Jeff disagreed with that (duh) and insulted Jack. Reading other threads by Jeff, that seems to be his standard MO.
Jeff Mincey - 31 August 2005 01:01 PM
I’ve gone out of my way to say Jack’s position is no crime to take and that I simply (1) disagree with his approach and (2) am surprised to find that a Mac proponent would take it. That’s it. That’s my whole point. Now someone please tell me how this translates into insults and intolerance. Are we not free to take different points of view here—so long as no insults are given?
You’re surprised that a Mac proponent would prefer excellent free products over excellent products with a price tag? What planet are you from?
What you fail to understand is that your ‘surprise’ is insulting. And to say that you went ‘out of my way’ indicates an elitist position, too.
Yes, apparently we’re free to take different points of view. From what I read of your posts on this forum, the only point of view that’s worthy of consideration is yours.
Jeff Mincey - 31 August 2005 01:01 PM
We are all entitled to our opinions, and I choose to believe that others in this forum are being honest and straightforward in taking their positions. It’s a pity you and perhaps others don’t do me the same courtesy.
Maybe other readers and posters don’t agree with your positions. So what? No one is insulting you or intimidating you for your opinion on a particular topic. The ‘noise’ generated here has to do with your blatant and obvious intolerance of the opinions of others.
While I loathe labeling, I’m going to succumb to this one. Are you a Linux system administrator? I ask that because I’ve seen similar responses (those that write like you) on other forums from… da da… Linux folks.
“Jeff, you do have a tendency to poke at otherÌs views while not being able to take pokes to your own views.“
Pokes to my views are fine. Sometimes I even enjoy them. I appreciate a good zinger as much as the next guy and sometimes I’m an easy target for them. But a post which “suggests” that I’m accusatory, intolerant, and insulting—please, Ron. That’s hardly about taking a poke at my views. Surely you can grant me that. Now come on guys—let’s talk about web browsers, okay?
Noooooo! Let’s talk about Jeff. It’s MUCH more entertaining and he’s such a good, willing, eager participant.
All seriousness aside, Jeff. There’s a tendency for your so-called ‘elitist’ views to pop through your commentary. I’m surprised you haven’t had someone drive by your house late at night…
BACK TO THE BROWSERS
OmniWeb is the best browser for the Mac or any platform. Period. End of discussion. No more debate.
Now if you don’t allow someone to apologize and if you don’t allow someone to say his views are being misunderstood, then it is you who is ungracious and you who is actually out of line.
There you go again, calling someone ‘ungracious’ and ‘out of line.‘
Sooooo, the truth is out. You ARE a Linux system administrator!!
Mommy, make the flaming stop! What’s wrong with those grown ups - tell them it’s just the internet.
Oh, and what I want from a browser is SPEED, please. Dang mumble mumble Safari man, so slow, mumble makes the durn T3 run like a d-dang mumble ole stick in the mud, man.
This will go a long way toward restoring the platform-independent spirit of the web so that we will be free to choose the hardware, OS, and browser of our preference and not be forced into one particular platform simply because nothing else will work with most web sites.
Jeff’s absolutely right. The more that web designers work toward XHTML 1.0 Transitional and CSS in web design, the less Microsoft will control the web.
Though web standards for CSS and XHTML have been around for about five years, those standards cannot (as in NOT) be fully adopted and implemented purely because of Microsoft. Internet Explorer is the worst offending browser on the market, regardless of version or Windows version or platform.
Tera and Bambi have grumbled for years about the inability to use all that XHTML and CSS can provide in web design because of poor (or none) implementation of mature standards in Microsoft’s browsers.
Truly, I have come to believe that Microsoft is an evil company. They’re certainly a criminal company.
Back to the browsers—speed, stability, faithful page rendering are my first tier. Safari, Firefox, Camino handle that just fine. Then, features that are useful and go beyond basics of Bookmarks. There, OmniWeb, Firefox (via extensions), and Opera will the game.
Rather than introduce confirmation dialogs what Safari really should be doing is “save last state,“ where it saves downloaded html content in open windows before it quit, to be reopened on relaunch. Similar features are present in OmniWeb if much more developed, but that simple level of functionality would be nice, for more than just the occasional accidental quit.
As far as what I want in a browser, I want a browser that not only supports standards, but also works with W3C to rapidly advance standards for better functionality.
I agree, a confirmation before quitting should be a selectable option. I dont mind one extra click to confirm that I really did want to close all my open tabs instead of just minimizing them. Now everyone who likes this idea, go to the apple website and give feedback on Safari asking for this feature. If enough people want it, we just might get it. http://www.apple.com/macosx/feedback/
