Opera 12.00 released

SR_Ind said:
Some gents above claimed that Emacs is a desktop environment by itself.
Click to expand...

It was a joke, but any sufficiently advanced editor can become an IDE, or a shell, or a "desktop environment".

I've tried Opera a few times, and it was nice but didn't meet my needs. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it, just that people are different.
 
I appreciate it and find it helpful when others describe how they work. I often learn a lot, so I shared my experience. Based on how I work it's not my top choice for the reasons that have been mentioned. If Opera's rendering engine, presto, was available on it's own like webkit, I'd love to use it with a vim/emacs/pentadactyl-like hybrid interface.

Emacs follows the Unix philosophy in that it does one thing well, interprets Emacs Lisp.
Code: 
% cd emacs-24.1/src
% mkdir srcs
% for i in **/*.[c|h]; do cp $i ./srcs; done
% du -h srcs
9.9M

% cd vim73/src/
% mkdir srcs
% for i in **/*.[c|h]; do cp $i ./srcs; done
% du -h srcs
9.6M

Here's some bloat.
Code: 
% cd emacs-24.1/lisp
% mkdir lisp
% for i in **/*.elc; do cp $i ./lisp; done
% cd lisp
% du -h
38M
Much of this lisp doesn't need to be packaged with emacs (e.g. cedet, calendar, gnus, erc) (especially with the new packaging system) just like Opera doesn't need to come packaged with a bittorent client, irc client, mail client, web server,...
 
SR_Ind said:
For example, as opposed to Emacs lovers here, XFCE user's don't complain about Gnome, leave aside KDE.
Click to expand...
Sure they do, it usually starts out as "I moved to XFCE because I hate the way (Gnome|KDE) does..."
Or lately, "Because of the stupid changes Gnome made..."

Another thing is Emacs lovers brag about it being an IDE as well, so I take it they are accomplished to average programmers. Are they up to the task to put things together for themselves?
I have a desktop environment of sorts hacked together with Qt apps, it is self contained with dependence limited to QtCore, QtGui and QMake. This required lots of programming hours, but the result is very satisfying.
Click to expand...
Explaining why you use Opera instead of porting Firefox to QT would sound like complaining about Firefox.

Why complain about something you don't pay for? I'll release my desktop apps very soon...working on ports. This is how open source works.
Click to expand...
When you get a bunch of compliments after releasing it, you'll have to wonder if they actually meant it, or were just being polite.
 
SR_Ind said:
Why complain about something you don't pay for?
Click to expand...

I am not a fan of this phrase.

Just because something is free doesn't mean it can suddenly do completely insane things. Sometimes when free stuff exists, it prevents a superior (perhaps commercial) solution from being developed due to potential competition. So when the original free software becomes unusable, I am now left with nothing.

I.e When Xfce goes the same way as KDE4, Gnome3 then many desktop users will effectively be without a light professional full desktop environment. Sure you may mention it is open-source, but there is no way in hell a single person can maintain the Gnome desktop. It really might as well be closed source.

Same with Firefox, it is too complex to compile without the (fantastic) ports system so suddenly the closed source Opera doesn't seem so bad.
 
I have been using Opera for 10+ years. I might be committed to it but I have not noticed any problems with 12.00. (;
 
ChalkBored said:
Explaining why you use Opera instead of porting Firefox to QT would sound like complaining about Firefox.
Click to expand...

First of all a Firefox port to Qt exists for one of the Nokia's platform (I'm not not sure which one, but probably for Maemo). So, technically if I wish I need to get that port built on FreeBSD. But that use case doesn't applies for me.

For two reasons.

One, QWebkit exists with a basic browser example right out of Qt installation. I have a tweaked version of this. It far more easier for me (or any Qt developer) to enhance that QBrowser demo than to waste time after a Firefox Qt port (whose fate is uncertain after Nokia's platform flip).

Two, my aim is to run a QtCore+ QtGui based desktop environment...lean and light. QWebkit fails here miserably here with dependencies on dozen other Qt components and numerous external libraries. At the end of the day it does not deliver.

Opera seems to run perfectly over whatever graphic libraries were installed as QtCore + QtGui dependencies. So, that's already much leaner than QWebkit.

Until QWebkit improves or provides an option for leaner version (why do they have the massive Phonon and GStreamer dependency when video or Flash does not work) Opera fits my needs perfectly.
 
kpedersen said:
I am not a fan of this phrase.
Click to expand...
Nor am I.

But I've become used to "RTFM" or "code yourself" greetings ... signature tunes of the FOSS world.

kpedersen said:
Just because something is free doesn't mean it can suddenly do completely insane things. Sometimes when free stuff exists, it prevents a superior (perhaps commercial) solution from being developed due to potential competition. So when the original free software becomes unusable, I am now left with nothing.
Click to expand...
Very true, agreed. To me it looks like a lack of direction in FOSS projects.

kpedersen said:
I.e When Xfce goes the same way as KDE4, Gnome3 then many desktop users will effectively be without a light professional full desktop environment. Sure you may mention it is open-source, but there is no way in hell a single person can maintain the Gnome desktop. It really might as well be closed source.
Click to expand...
Now please go back to my issue with the Emacs users...their request for a familiar environment inside other applications. Please reflect. KDE4 and Gnome3 are at this stage because they tried to incorporate wishlist of every audience group across the board without any thoughts towards suitability of these additions.

kpedersen said:
Same with Firefox, it is too complex to compile without the (fantastic) ports system so suddenly the closed source Opera doesn't seem so bad.
Click to expand...
That too with the benefit of built in Mail and Torrent clients inside Opera.
 
Now please go back to my issue with the Emacs users...their request for a familiar environment inside other applications. Please reflect. KDE4 and Gnome3 are at this stage because they tried to incorporate wishlist of every audience group across the board without any thoughts towards suitability of these additions.
Click to expand...

Yes, let's go back to your issue with Emacs users. Why do you have one? Have you had some bad experiences, where you were like, beaten up by a gang of malicious Emacs users prowling the streets? And how many times does the fact that none of the "Emacs lovers" in this thread were actually "complaining" about Opera. I would also love for you to provide one quote where someone is making a "request" for a familiar environment (namely Emacs) inside Opera.

To me, it seems like you see the word "Emacs" and then substitute whatever is in your head for the rest of the post. It's not even straw-maning with you, it's plain making stuff up.
 
Many pages often don't load properly since Opera 12.10. I've noticed this problem on two different machines (both running FreeBSD).

Sometimes the page doesn't load, sometimes CSS doesn't load, and a few times I've seen the default virtual host pop up on one of my own servers even though it shouldn't (as if the Host header wasn't sent or not sent properly?)

This sucks, because Opera 12.0x also has a number of serious problems (which are solved).
Not having any feedback on my Opera bug reports sucks even more :-(
 
I had been an Opera user since the 5.x when you could only running it under Linux emulation. Lately it seems to have degraded more and more, I think starting around 11.x releases, so much so that over the last few months I've switch to using www/xombrero. The only thing that I really missing from Opera is the mouse gestures.

I've also found that setting the browser string in xombrero to that of and iPad seems to circumvent the "problem" of not having flash support. I was going to try that with Opera, but it looks as if you can no longer set the browser string in the newer versions, or if you can I can't seem to find it.
 
roddierod said:
I've also found that setting the browser string in xombrero to that of and iPad seems to circumvent the "problem" of not having flash support. I was going to try that with Opera, but it looks as if you can no longer set the browser string in the newer versions, or if you can I can't seem to find it.
Click to expand...

Type opera:config in address bar, filter custom user-agent, fill-in field and save. You're Done
 
12.11 preview released ... doesn't fix the issue. code.google.com even told me I sent a 'malformed http request' :-/

This is truly broken & unacceptable. xombrero is worth checking out, but at this point even Firefox is a better option, especially since the new firefox debug tools seem acceptable.
 
roddierod said:
I had been an Opera user since the 5.x when you could only running it under Linux emulation. Lately it seems to have degraded more and more, I think starting around 11.x releases, so much so that over the last few months I've switch to using www/xombrero. The only thing that I really missing from Opera is the mouse gestures.
Click to expand...

Try www/midori which has the same mouse gestures as Opera (at least these basic ones).
 
Carpetsmoker said:
code.google.com even told me I sent a 'malformed http request'
Click to expand...
Do you get this on the home page or what? Does it return an error on the 12.10 release too? Because it's working fine here on 12.10. Have you tried clearing your cache and/or using a profile with "factory" settings (opera -pd testprofile)?

Apart from a few (rather unimportant and tolerable) glitches, every website I use regularly works perfectly fine.
 
Yes. I tried using a new profile directory. The problem isn't consistent, but Wikipedia almost never seems to work on the first try.

This isn't the only problem, just the latest straw... I'm not the only one by the way, on the Opera forums there are more people (incl. people using Opera on Windows).
 
roddierod said:
I had been an Opera user since the 5.x when you could only running it under Linux emulation. Lately it seems to have degraded more and more, I think starting around 11.x releases, so much so that over the last few months I've switch to using www/xombrero. The only thing that I really missing from Opera is the mouse gestures.
Click to expand...


So far, it seems I can give xembrero a serious go.

One large problem I've encounted is the fonts, they're Ugly with a very large U:
http://arp242.net/tmp/2012-11-08-224518_1680x1050_scrot.png

I can't find any option to control this ... :-/ I never configured any of my Opera fonts, they `just work'â„¢
 
Updated today or yesterday from 11.6x to 12.10... that problematic page loads fine; no problems in any page I am used to loading into the address bar... (although *one* site is too slow to be usable, works fine in seamonkey...) (I've Cups/Video set; Kde4/Gtk2 unset..., at least according to the options file.
 
Carpetsmoker said:
One large problem I've encounted is the fonts, they're Ugly with a very large U:
Click to expand...

Xombrero's config files only have settings for UI fonts. The page rendering is probably done with whatever configuration Webkit uses, which Opera seems to handle on it's own.

Try putting this in ~/.fonts.conf (and make sure x11-fonts/fontconfig is installed)
Code: 
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM "fonts.dtd">
<fontconfig>
  <match target="font">
    <edit mode="assign" name="antialias"><bool>true</bool></edit>
    <edit name="autohint" mode="assign"><bool>false</bool></edit>
    <edit name="hinting" mode="assign"><bool>true</bool></edit>
    <edit name="hintstyle" mode="assign"><int>1</int></edit>
    <edit name="rgba" mode="assign"><const>bgr</const></edit>
  </match>
</fontconfig>

It should at least change how the fonts look.
You'll probably have to play with the configuration more to get them to look really good.
 
Carpetsmoker said:
... And lacks just about any other feature ...
Click to expand...

What features does xombrero offer that are so missed in midori? I have tried xxxterm/xombrero several times, but haven't found anything special.
 
Carpetsmoker said:
So far, it seems I can give xembrero a serious go.

One large problem I've encounted is the fonts, they're Ugly with a very large U:
http://arp242.net/tmp/2012-11-08-224518_1680x1050_scrot.png

I can't find any option to control this ... :-/ I never configured any of my Opera fonts, they `just work'â„¢
Click to expand...

For sites who's fonts render ugly, I use a the USER CSS settings activated by pressing S.

In .xombrero.conf set the userstyle to point to the style sheet you'd like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top