Author Topic: Web-Browser Review: Opera 10.00 (Read 59,726 times)

Tuxman · « **Reply #25 on:** February 03, 2010, 02:02 AM »

Pah, too many bytes wasted for Opera.

NigelH · « **Reply #26 on:** February 03, 2010, 05:41 AM »

Fair enough. Like I said, more content is good.
Opera ticks me off (occasionally), but really just so much less than the alternatives.
For me, there actually is no practical alternative

Ok, off my high horse

I often wonder how many FF fans have not even tried Opera.

Tuxman · « **Reply #27 on:** February 03, 2010, 05:46 AM »

It's Fx, not FF. I tried Opera several times (recently even on ReactOS), and I never understood what makes it so much better than everything else. To me, it is ugly bloatware.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #28 on:** February 03, 2010, 06:48 AM »

Quote from: Tuxman on February 03, 2010, 05:46 AM

It's Fx, not FF.

Sign of a true Firefox Fan

Tuxman · « **Reply #29 on:** February 03, 2010, 07:00 AM »

Sign that I can read.

hamradio · « **Reply #30 on:** February 03, 2010, 07:15 AM »

Actually its both FF and FX as per...

http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/FF
http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/FX

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #31 on:** February 03, 2010, 08:13 AM »

Quote from: Tuxman on February 03, 2010, 07:00 AM

Sign that I can read.

Fx is actually the least used acronym for Firefox as most people shorten them to the first letter of each word, now even though Firefox is, in its own right, a singular word, it is separated by the 2 known words, Fire and Fox, hence the more used term FF.

Either is good for me though, I recognize either

Josh · « **Reply #32 on:** February 03, 2010, 09:27 AM »

I try opera for a solid 3 day period, after my initial trial back in 1998, with every new release (NOT BETA OR ALPHA, Just major releases). Yes, I am upset at the lack of 3rd party support, but I do try it just to see if it is something I can still work with. I am not against opera, mainly its devs thou, and I do wish I could use it as it seems to be fairly well designed. My issues with it are the developers ignore COMMON feature requests in the guise of security. They act like their decisions are better for the users than choice.

The other fact that I really do not like is no extensibility. This does not have to be in the form of extensions per se, but some sort of code to allow third party tie ins. Toolbars and other basics I do not consider extensions. Extensions are things I consider that add to the browser more than just a toolbar but some form of new functionality. Yes toolbars do this, but not in the same way as forecastfox adds to FF. Extensions or API systems are designed so that the userbase can extend the browser to meet their and others needs where the developers do not see fit. It can actually prove very useful as it would allow the developers to see just which extensions are the most popular and incorporate them in either their own code or by using the extension code directly. This was even demonstrated by opera with their addition of an ad block capability, which isn't very optimal in my opinion.

Anyways, enough for me.

Tuxman · « **Reply #33 on:** February 03, 2010, 03:54 PM »

Quote from: Stephen66515 on February 03, 2010, 08:13 AM

Fx is actually the least used acronym for Firefox as most people shorten them to the first letter of each word, now even though Firefox is, in its own right, a singular word, it is separated by the 2 known fords, Fire and Fox, hence the more used term FF.

1. It's not FireFox.
2. FF is wrong.

Darwin · « **Reply #34 on:** February 03, 2010, 05:10 PM »

Quote from: Tuxman on February 03, 2010, 03:54 PM

Quote from: Stephen66515 on February 03, 2010, 08:13 AM
Fx is actually the least used acronym for Firefox as most people shorten them to the first letter of each word, now even though Firefox is, in its own right, a singular word, it is separated by the 2 known fords, Fire and Fox, hence the more used term FF.
1. It's not FireFox.
2. FF is wrong.

Stephen acknowledged that it's not FireFox here

Quote

even though Firefox is, in its own right, a singular word

and I have NEVER seen Fx used anywhere as an acronym for Firefox. Indeed, the one and only time I have ever seen it used is in this thread. So, right or wrong, FF is much more common in usage than Fx.

Tuxman · « **Reply #35 on:** February 03, 2010, 05:14 PM »

Quote from: Darwin on February 03, 2010, 05:10 PM

Stephen acknowledged that it's not FireFox here

So why the second "F"?

Quote from: Darwin on February 03, 2010, 05:10 PM

I have NEVER seen Fx used anywhere as an acronym for Firefox.

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/releases/1.5.0.5.html#FAQ

Darwin · « **Reply #36 on:** February 03, 2010, 05:25 PM »

Yes, this is fine, tuxman, but you're missing the point entirely. A photocopier manufactured by Ricoh is a photocopier upon which one makes photocopies, not Xeroxes, no? Likewise, a paper tissue into which one blows one's nose is a tissue, not a Kleenex, and yet in the first instance people the world over refer to making Xeroxes and xeroxing and to carry around Kleenex. The "right and the wrong" of the terms is secondary to the way in which people have become accustomed to referring to products and categories of products. In the case of Firefox the preferred acronym, the correct acronym, is Fx but the reality is that people consistently reduce it to FF. I gather that you're trying to educate people about the correct acronym. Bravo! I have learned my lesson and henceforth shall endeavour to use Fx when I'm too lazy to write Firefox (most of the time), but this does not in any way alter the fact that the most commonly use acronym is FF.

Run a google search for FF and you'll find it in the top five hits as an acronym for Firefox. Type in Fx and It's not in the first 100 hits (that I could see)...

Tuxman · « **Reply #37 on:** February 03, 2010, 05:31 PM »

So if 3 of 4 people say it wrong, wrong becomes right?

steeladept · « **Reply #38 on:** February 03, 2010, 06:10 PM »

Quote from: Tuxman on February 03, 2010, 05:31 PM

So if 3 of 4 people say it wrong, wrong becomes right?

When it comes to communication: Yes.

Remember, communication is just the art of passing ideas between people. That can only occur when they agree on convention, whatever that convention is. If you tell me it is wrong, but I don't understand you, then we are not communicating. The fact that you understood FF as Firefox and not French Fries proves that you understood the convention and therefore communicated successfully.

And for what it is worth, I have never heard of Fx as short for anything other than "Effects".

Tuxman · « **Reply #39 on:** February 03, 2010, 06:14 PM »

I understand that some people use "FF" for "Fire Fox", but I don't actually understand why they call Firefox "Fire Fox". "Firefox" are not two words, it is one word for one animal: The Red Panda.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #40 on:** February 03, 2010, 07:28 PM »

Quote from: Tuxman on February 03, 2010, 06:14 PM

I understand that some people use "FF" for "Fire Fox", but I don't actually understand why they call Firefox "Fire Fox". "Firefox" are not two words[/url].

You seem to be missing the fact, that even though, Firefox, is indeed ONE word, it is only so, in its own right, most people separate it into the 2 known English words, "Fire and Fox, hence the second F (Fox begins with an F)

Fire: open fire: start firing a weapon
Fox: alert carnivorous mammal with pointed muzzle and ears and a bushy tail; most are predators that do not hunt in packs

Basically, what you are saying, is The correct term for this website, would not, in-fact, be DC, but instead, DR, where-as we all know that Donation Coder is not 1 word, it is in-fact two separate words taken from the English Language.

Donation: contribution: a voluntary gift (as of money or service or ideas) made to some worthwhile cause
Coder: programmer: a person who designs and writes and tests computer programs

Tuxman · « **Reply #41 on:** February 03, 2010, 07:33 PM »

A "Donationcoder" (which would be Dr, not DR, of course!) is not an existing thing. A Firefox is.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #42 on:** February 03, 2010, 07:38 PM »

Quote from: Tuxman on February 03, 2010, 07:33 PM

A "Donationcoder" (which would be Dr, not DR, of course!) is not an existing thing. A Firefox is.

So you are telling me, I am not, indeed, using a web-browser, but instead, typing into a Red Panda?...It is still separated into 2 words, because a website browser is NOT a living entity.

Yes, I agree, that this software has been named after an animal (which name is one singular word') but you cannot tell me, with all honesty that this makes you 100% correct?

Its along the same lines as a Blackberry phone, nobody uses the acronym, BY, but instead BB...are all these people wrong to?

Tuxman · « **Reply #43 on:** February 03, 2010, 07:41 PM »

The web browser is named after the animal, so why is it FF for "Fire Fox", but not for the Red Panda?

Yes, these people are wrong. There is no second "B" in Blackberry.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #44 on:** February 03, 2010, 07:45 PM »

Quote from: Tuxman on February 03, 2010, 07:41 PM

The web browser is named after the animal, so why is it FF for "Fire Fox", but not for the Red Panda?

Yes, these people are wrong. There is no second "B" in Blackberry.

What you just said made absolutely zero sense..."But not for red panda" because the browser is called Firefox, not Red Panda, if it was called Red Panda, it would be RP and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

"There is no second B in blackberry" Agreed, but Black and Berry are 2 separate words, made into one word for this fruit. so the acronym is BB. Although the most known usage for BB is Ball Bearing it is still widely used between the Blackberry community.

Tuxman · « **Reply #45 on:** February 03, 2010, 07:48 PM »

There is no official statement that BB is wrong, but there is an official statement that FF is wrong.

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #46 on:** February 03, 2010, 07:53 PM »

Fx: http://www.google.co.uk/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=Fx&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Firefox is nowhere to be found...

http://www.google.co.uk/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=FF&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Firefox shows up third...

You cannot tell me, that because <100 people use the term Fx, it is correct?

Fx should be pre-fixed with 'Special' or 'Sound' - this is the most known term for FX

JavaJones · « **Reply #47 on:** February 03, 2010, 08:06 PM »

Note: anyone wanting content besides argument about the FF name, please skip down!

Waiiiit... are you suggesting that Firefox the browser is so named because of this relatively unknown common name for the Red Panda? First, I've never heard of that being the case. Maybe it is, but I highly doubt most Firefox users are thinking of that when they think "Firefox". I'd wager instead that, as the logo itself implies, they think of a fox (red) and fire. The logo shows a fox with a fiery tale. It doesn't really look like a Red Panda...

Besides, according to this page: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/firefox-name-faq.html
the official name is Mozilla Firefox, so if anything it should be MF, or MFx

Aaaaaanyway, speaking of Opera, I like it too, but I don't use it as my main browser anymore. I found too many things I didn't like in the 9.x series (many of which I honestly can't remember now, but was annoyed then), so I stopped using it after 8.x I think. I still have it around and use it occasionally as a 3rd/4th browser (I use Firefox and Chrome mostly). And I do still miss its speed and some of its features. I found its tab restore functionality not only ahead of its time, but more reliable even than Tabmix Plus or any Firefox solution I've used yet.

Unfortunately I have to agree that the devs and their policies really rub me the wrong way. I like a lot of what Opera has built-in, and the fact that things like "Paste and Go" have been in for a long time, by default (not to mention "right-click, search selected words" and more useful stuff) is great. They have some good ideas and having them built-in is nicer in general than having 10 extensions dangling off the app framework just to get most commonly used functions. That being said, even if the devs don't think a particular feature or level of modification is important, many, many users do, and I don't think it's reasonable that they don't have a well-implemented, easy-to-use, well-documented plugin system yet. Yes, you can write plugins, with complex custom code and semi-documented hooks and hacking. But it's not nearly as easy as it is for FF and Chrome, maybe even IE.

The main things that always attracted me about Opera were speed and built-in features. I hear with 10.5 "pre-alpha" Opera once again takes the speed crown in all respects, not just regular browsing (i.e. javascript too).
http://www.betanews.com/article/Its-a-threeway-race-Opera-preview-clings-to-lead-over-Safari-4-Chrome-5/1265150085
That's pretty exciting. Has anyone tried it?

- Oshyan

KynloStephen66515 · « **Reply #48 on:** February 03, 2010, 08:10 PM »

Quote from: JavaJones on February 03, 2010, 08:06 PM

Note: anyone wanting content besides argument about the FF name, please skip down!

w00p, time to get back on topic lol

Tuxman · « **Reply #49 on:** February 03, 2010, 08:12 PM »

Quote from: Stephen66515 on February 03, 2010, 07:53 PM

Fx should be pre-fixed with 'Special' or 'Sound' - this is the most known term for FX

You still mix up uppercase and lowercase letters.