kpedersen said:Bloat for me isn't about speed. It is about maintenance and stability. The larger the software, the less portable it is and the more bugs it is likely to have. Since FreeBSD is not a very mainstream OS, it is a shame that bloated software wastes the precious time of the porters.
zspider said:I went back to www/opera, It's quite fast, it looks modest and has few non standard dependencies. Shame I won't be to able to stay on it indefinitely. Unless someone has a way to sandbox it.
jb_fvwm2 said:On one of the previous pages of this thread I also was wondering about several similar setups.
Is Opera planning to go open source?
Opera has no current plans to go open source. Opera has great respect for the open source movement, and Opera’s products run on the various open source platforms. Opera believes that the most important thing is open Web standards. If web sites and browsers are created based on open standards, you get an ideal environment for innovation and healthy competition. Furthermore, Opera believes that the most efficient way to get Opera out on as many platforms as possible rapidly is to manage the central code base in such a way that improvements made for Opera on home media devices benefit the mobile and PC products as well. Opera’s unique differentiator in the market today is that it is the same Opera core that runs on everything on which Opera ships.
zspider said:It sure was smart of them to switch to Webkit and remove a key part of what made their browser different.
cpu82 said:I'm sure that you are agree only in case that they develop a open source version. IMHO it should matter that the code remains available for everyone
PS. I'm not interested in using or paying for a code that contradicts the above. Also, regarding to Blink, I'm using www/chromium.
morbit said:Meh. Firefox is indeed quite crashy in the end.
seamonkey
never completes the attaching, so also cannot send.) Firefox (five tabs open), in which I tried just now to use the webmail as a third recourse, froze (40 seconds until the error message appeared "a script on this page..."), no tab could be closed nor switched to, and the blank-white reload of whatever Firefox page, obscured all else below it. It is gone now (I've closed its xterm
, but this is another "wondering what browser/sandbox/virtualization can replace Opera if it continues to upgrade past its present usability" postulation...) OpenBSD will never get ZFS because that would require reimplementation of a large part of the Solaris kernel. However after getting FUSE and SSHFS I would not be surprised to see Hammer in the next release of OpenBSD Your point is well taken and the lack of a modern file system is the Achilles tendon of OpenBSD. There is an old sysadmin saying: "If you need a great network stack go with OpenBSD, if you need great file systems go with NetBSD (I would say DragonflyBSD)". Maybe we could add something to it and say if you need VirtualBox but you could live without Opera go with FreeBSD :evermaden said:If OpenBSD will get ZFS and VirtualBox then I may consider using it instead of FreeBSD as Opera is dead anyway
taz said:Well this is just great...the reason why I use Opera is because it has no GTK nor Qt dependencies. I could have lived (and I did) with the fact that it works purely on heavy javascript pages, has/had some kind of copy/paste bug and crashes when I try to upload a file (new version fixed this) etc. But now I'm definitely dropping Opera and the question is what to replace it with?
For now I think I'm going to go with xombrero but for some time now I have been watching over one project that I have always had a plan switching to. It's not not ready yet for nowadays internet but, in time, it will be.
It has the ability to run on frame frame buffers and this is why I'm so interest in it.
NetSurf is the name...
taz said:But now I'm definitely dropping Opera
drhowarddrfine said:Why?
drhowarddrfine said:Why?