need to copy Opera more.
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tmx Jan 20, 2010 12:58 PM EDT |
Opera has ability to change color and has many user skins, most of the time nicer than Firefox (I admit Firefox have some great themes as well, I use Strata40 myself). It's good Firefox start doing this, but I they need to copy more of Opera features to make the browser interface more customizable. Firefox interface still remind me of Internet Explorer, left handed and left-to-right oriented. Mostly fixed toolbar and tab bar that can't be locate in all four position compared to Opera, unless additional addons installed. It's a bad marketing decision to do this though, because it confuses users who aren't used to customization. But if they control it and have something like an on and off switch then it could be okay. They also should have implemented speed dial a long time ago. The biggest problem of Firefox now is the terrible way of adding and organizing bookmarks. Although only people who have had maintained many bookmarks on Opera knows what I mean. This problem lead to addons like TabMixPlus where Firefox pro-users claimed to open 500 tabs at once because they can't bookmark efficiently. For starter, the bookmarks should automatically alphabetize itself. |
| jdixon Jan 20, 2010 1:22 PM EDT |
> For starter, the bookmarks should automatically alphabetize itself. Why? What if you don't want your bookmarks alphabetized, but instead prefer some other organizational structure, such as frequency of visitation? |
| tmx Jan 20, 2010 2:04 PM EDT |
Well the thing is by default Firefox doesn't automatically organize the link after you add a bookmark. Also if you want to resort the bookmarks by something other than name, you'll have to go to Ctrl+Shift+B. This is another windows that pops up. In Opera, you just enable the Panel, which is a sidebar in the same window you're currently using. Then you can sort by whatever either by right clicking or clicking on the View button on top. Then hide away the Panel when you're done. Though with all this said, right now I still prefer using Firefox due to NoScript. |
| krisum Jan 20, 2010 3:01 PM EDT |
With firefox 3, I don't recall having to sift through the bookmarks at all -- the search in the location bar has worked wonderfully well for me. With large number of bookmarks I hardly can recall correct titles and no kind of organization helps much, so IMO the search using the location bar is what firefox actually gets much better than Opera or other browsers. |
| hkwint Jan 20, 2010 4:51 PM EDT |
Indeed, Opera skins are good. Also the ability to install them without restart was pretty astonishing a few years back. FF is copying that it seems. Bookmarks are indeed cumbersome. I try to add tags nowadays, and it works reasonably well. A larger problem is that lots of the old bookmars point to outdated / non-existing / hijacked sites. It would be good to have a mechanism to 'tag' those non-existing bookmarks with a different color or so. Also, it would be great to have some sort of MC-commander like Bookmark - manager when you have lots of them. Why not make one bookmark one file? I know it's because of sqlite, but still it sounds like a good alternative. The speed dial extension for FF is pretty OK in my opinion. Mouse gestures in FF are not (tried two extensions), and therefore I stopped using them. Indeed, opening 20 pages of Youtube-vids in Opera is a problem, is there a way to stop autostarting / autoplaying? However, Firefox just starts using 100% CPU time after some time of watching Flash vids, even though I started using a brand new clean profile. |
| Steven_Rosenber Jan 20, 2010 9:00 PM EDT |
Opera eats a lot less CPU than FF. Epiphany, Galeon and Kazehakaze also eat way less CPU than FF. Since I'm in GNOME, I choose Epiphany whenever my Web task doesn't require it (and unfortunately I have more than a few that do just that). |
| tuxchick Jan 20, 2010 9:36 PM EDT |
I don't know why anyone still calls Firefox 'lightweight' or 'fast.' It has not ever been either, not that I can remember. Its biggest strength is handling really awful Websites that kill other browsers, and the meelyuns of plugins. Though I still hold a grudge that this alleged OSS project does not require plugin devs to plainly post their licenses, or let you search by license. Not to mention their idiotic warnings about "Untrusted software can be dangerous!!!!!! Are you sure you want to install this??? Really??" I get that with Adblock Plus, which if it isn't the most popular extension it's in the top 10. |
| gus3 Jan 20, 2010 10:36 PM EDT |
Quoting:I don't know why anyone still calls Firefox 'lightweight' or 'fast.'Well, if one restricts the problem domain to FOSS browsers (excluding Opera and Chrome), Firefox is just about the best when it comes to removing what isn't necessary, being reasonably standards-compliant, and being feature-complete and -extensible. Mozilla Seamonkey has the extra email stuff; Konqueror couldn't even render my own HTML4-compliant website; Galeon is discontinued; Epiphany comes darn close to what I want (personal taste, I know). Plus, working with Firefox gives me the advantage that I can use what I know to help Firefox users on other platforms. After all, it is the #1 suggested alternative to that Swiss-cheese browser known as Internet Exploder. So far, all the Firefox users on Windows that I've met really do care about security, even if they can't yet pull themselves off the Windows addiction. |
| hkwint Jan 21, 2010 7:52 AM EDT |
Quoting:I don't know why anyone still calls Firefox 'lightweight' or 'fast.' It has not ever been either, not that I can remember. Back when it was called Phoenix and I was using Windows, it was pretty lean, though lacking 'feature bloat'. Even back then it was better than IE, that's why I started using it (and because Opera back then requiered to watch ads or pay IIRC). |
| tmx Jan 23, 2010 8:24 AM EDT |
Oh yes, I remembered using Opera with ads. I can not believe the Opera developers are incompetent or don't listen to the users. It has to be some kind of upper control. The management want to keep the quality control the software, but I wish they just open up the browser a little bit. However, their Opera Mobile browser is being more popular, come pre-bundled with phones and all. |
| gus3 Jan 23, 2010 8:29 AM EDT |
Quoting:Oh yes, I remembered using Opera with ads.And I remember subverting that ad mechanism with my "70-year-old Bulgarian widow" profile. Watching the goofy ads was a way to break the monotony of the workday. |
| tmx Jan 23, 2010 8:33 AM EDT |
I'm looking at the Epiphany browser and it seem to run on Gnome and is a WebKit-based browser. This is exactly what I'm looking for since I have been using Konquere. Thanks. I'm wondering if there are KHTML or Webkit-based browser for Windows aswell that are opensource (except Google Chrome). |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!