Opera is dropping FreeBSD, it's (almost) official.

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.
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

Shame we don't have a lightweight browser that looked like something from this century and had the essential functionality with plugins for everything else.
 
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.
Click to expand...

On one of the previous pages of this thread I also was wondering about several similar setups.
 
jb_fvwm2 said:
On one of the previous pages of this thread I also was wondering about several similar setups.
Click to expand...

I would be interested in anything you come up with on that. :)
 
This post might be commented, it seems that there are still hopes to an open source version for Opera, despite they told otherwise :p
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.
Click to expand...
 
cpu82 said:
This post might be commented, it seems that there are still hopes to an open source version for Opera, despite they told otherwise :p
Click to expand...

It sure was smart of them to switch to Webkit and remove a key part of what made their browser different.
 
zspider said:
It sure was smart of them to switch to Webkit and remove a key part of what made their browser different.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that you agree only in case they develop an open source version. IMHO it should matter that the code remains available for everyone ;)

PS. I'm not interested in using or paying for code that contradicts the above. Also, regarding to Blink, I'm using www/chromium.
PSS. Definitely, Opera was converted into Google's mate :e
 
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.
Click to expand...

Well you're wrong. I don't care if www/opera stays closed, proprietary has the advantage of preventing silly fragmentation. I've never had an issue with it being closed source. However I would not be against them deciding to open it either.
 
While I agree that open-source is very important, it isn't the only thing. For example, I am still unable to use GNOME 2 on many modern Linux distributions even though it is open-source. Sure there are clones of it like MATE but I still can't grab the original GNOME 2 source code and expect it to compile and run without a large rewrite.

The most important thing is portability! (Which is given a chance when open-source but not guaranteed.)
 
Hi @kpedersen

It's clear that for the code-monkeys it is essential to have access to the material, whether good or bad. The lords of Opera have gone from this point to the opposite side. I simply wanted to find information which claims that will be possible to have access to its source code.

@zspider disagrees on this stuff, but I admire his position :)

PS. I tried GNOME 2 but it didn't convince me. Now I use MATE, which works quite fine.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
morbit said:
Meh. Firefox is indeed quite crashy in the end.
Click to expand...

I have a situation where the latest Opera (preferred in all except this usage) crashes upon attaching a file in a webmail. ( 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...)

Apologies for posting before finding the not-inevitable workaround. (BTW I just used Firefox again and it worked super, I also found and revised the clear-cache scripts for the two Mozilla browsers, they had changed to $HOME/.cache within the last few years, from when the scripts were first written.)
 
vermaden said:
If OpenBSD will get ZFS and VirtualBox then I may consider using it instead of FreeBSD as Opera is dead anyway ;)
Click to expand...
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 :e
 
@@Oko

HAMMER2 may be a nice alternative to ZFS, I liked the offline deduplication feature in HAMMER1.

Besides ZFS and HAMMER all other filesystems are 'old school' for me (no deduplication/no compression/no data integrity/...).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Thanks
Reactions: Oko
There seems to be some confusion. Chromium uses the Blink rendering engine as does Opera. Blink is open source. But the rendering engine is not what always made Opera stand out. Frequently it was everything that surrounded the engine.

FWIW, I've never had a problem with Firefox crashing or being buggy. I don't use it as my every day browser anymore but I do test my company's web sites in it.
 
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 buffers and this is why I'm so interested in it. NetSurf is the name.
 
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...
Click to expand...

Yep the copy paste/bug is haunting me right now, eventually I'll have to dispose of Opera, regrettably.
 
webkit > xombrero consistently fails to build here (the former, not the latter maybe), not to mention devel/ace, fbsdmon, libxul, pkg, pinot, .... So that is another reason I'd like to have opera continue as it has.
 
drhowarddrfine said:
Why?
Click to expand...

I also replaced my browser of choice (opera) by firefox because the newer version of opera (12.16 if I'm not wrong) is undoubtedly awful. They removed all the useful settings just to be like chrome (do not ask me why they did this since they were the most costumizable browser and that was the main reason that I used opera for many years).

Unfortunately, they will be moving to the new chrome engine, Blink, I already expected this case scenario like raw settings, but, on the other hand I understand their change, their own engine called Presto was really buggy.
 
Yep, it's going away

I've been an Opera evangelist for years (I actually bought 4 or 5 licenses for $35 a piece when they used to sell them). Now, on my Android phone, I've moved back to Opera 'classic' from the newest version, and I'm losing patience with Opera on the desktop. I'm not happy with the alternatives, but I think the writing is on the wall.

It's truly a brain dead move to make a product known for innovation look like everything else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top