Opera 9.5 [modified]
-
The system I'm using right now is old and slow with barely enough memory to run XP (tried putting more in, but MB won't recognize one of the SIMM slots.) IE 6.0 runs fairly decent, but I've gotten used to firefox's tabs. However Firefox 2.0 is a memory pig and causes all sorts of grief on this system. Firefox 3.0 beta was better, but too unstable to be useful. I started using Opera 9 and except for a few quirks, it ran great. I just downloaded Opera 9.5. IT.IS.A.PILE.OF.CRAP. Seriously. It sucks bad. The color scheme is awful. The rendering is all over the place. It keeps stalling on web pages and throwing errors. They made changes to the UI for no damn reason. (Opera does one nice thing I wish Firefox did. I can click on a link with the middle mouse button and it will open the page in a new tab WITHOUT switching to it. Doh, staring my right in the face.) PS. Spun up Opera 9.5 to verify I wasn't just delusional. Nope. Rendering still sucks and some pages fail loading. I tried downgrading to 9.27. It won't run with complaints about mismatched components even after a full uninstall of all versions. They lost me as a customer for life. PPS. I installed Opera 9.5 on a fresh XP Virtual PC installation on a fast computer. I ran into the same problems I reported here. I stand by my statements. (I should also point out that while Opera 9.27 is pretty good, it crashes and/or locks up ON ALL SYSTEMS more than Firefox or IE. Periodically the internal data structure managing links in multiple tabs apparently becomes corrupt and the same link shows up in every tab. It does run good on low memory, low horsepower systems, but the more I used it, the more I disliked it and wouldn't recommend it.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
modified on Friday, June 13, 2008 11:22 PM
-
The system I'm using right now is old and slow with barely enough memory to run XP (tried putting more in, but MB won't recognize one of the SIMM slots.) IE 6.0 runs fairly decent, but I've gotten used to firefox's tabs. However Firefox 2.0 is a memory pig and causes all sorts of grief on this system. Firefox 3.0 beta was better, but too unstable to be useful. I started using Opera 9 and except for a few quirks, it ran great. I just downloaded Opera 9.5. IT.IS.A.PILE.OF.CRAP. Seriously. It sucks bad. The color scheme is awful. The rendering is all over the place. It keeps stalling on web pages and throwing errors. They made changes to the UI for no damn reason. (Opera does one nice thing I wish Firefox did. I can click on a link with the middle mouse button and it will open the page in a new tab WITHOUT switching to it. Doh, staring my right in the face.) PS. Spun up Opera 9.5 to verify I wasn't just delusional. Nope. Rendering still sucks and some pages fail loading. I tried downgrading to 9.27. It won't run with complaints about mismatched components even after a full uninstall of all versions. They lost me as a customer for life. PPS. I installed Opera 9.5 on a fresh XP Virtual PC installation on a fast computer. I ran into the same problems I reported here. I stand by my statements. (I should also point out that while Opera 9.27 is pretty good, it crashes and/or locks up ON ALL SYSTEMS more than Firefox or IE. Periodically the internal data structure managing links in multiple tabs apparently becomes corrupt and the same link shows up in every tab. It does run good on low memory, low horsepower systems, but the more I used it, the more I disliked it and wouldn't recommend it.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
modified on Friday, June 13, 2008 11:22 PM
Joe Woodbury wrote:
(Opera does one nice thing I wish Firefox did. I can click on a link with the middle mouse button and it will open the page in a new tab WITHOUT switching to it.)
FireFox 2 works that way (doesn't switch to the new tab). Don't know anything about Opera 9.5, and if it's as big o pile as you say it is, probably never will.
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
-
The system I'm using right now is old and slow with barely enough memory to run XP (tried putting more in, but MB won't recognize one of the SIMM slots.) IE 6.0 runs fairly decent, but I've gotten used to firefox's tabs. However Firefox 2.0 is a memory pig and causes all sorts of grief on this system. Firefox 3.0 beta was better, but too unstable to be useful. I started using Opera 9 and except for a few quirks, it ran great. I just downloaded Opera 9.5. IT.IS.A.PILE.OF.CRAP. Seriously. It sucks bad. The color scheme is awful. The rendering is all over the place. It keeps stalling on web pages and throwing errors. They made changes to the UI for no damn reason. (Opera does one nice thing I wish Firefox did. I can click on a link with the middle mouse button and it will open the page in a new tab WITHOUT switching to it. Doh, staring my right in the face.) PS. Spun up Opera 9.5 to verify I wasn't just delusional. Nope. Rendering still sucks and some pages fail loading. I tried downgrading to 9.27. It won't run with complaints about mismatched components even after a full uninstall of all versions. They lost me as a customer for life. PPS. I installed Opera 9.5 on a fresh XP Virtual PC installation on a fast computer. I ran into the same problems I reported here. I stand by my statements. (I should also point out that while Opera 9.27 is pretty good, it crashes and/or locks up ON ALL SYSTEMS more than Firefox or IE. Periodically the internal data structure managing links in multiple tabs apparently becomes corrupt and the same link shows up in every tab. It does run good on low memory, low horsepower systems, but the more I used it, the more I disliked it and wouldn't recommend it.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
modified on Friday, June 13, 2008 11:22 PM
Joe Woodbury wrote:
Opera does one nice thing I wish Firefox did
Have a look under the tab options in Firefox, [^]there's a checkbox there to enable or disable this behaviour (screenshot is of FF3 but FF2 has the same options).
I doubt it. If it isn't intuitive then we need to fix it. - Chris Maunder
-
The system I'm using right now is old and slow with barely enough memory to run XP (tried putting more in, but MB won't recognize one of the SIMM slots.) IE 6.0 runs fairly decent, but I've gotten used to firefox's tabs. However Firefox 2.0 is a memory pig and causes all sorts of grief on this system. Firefox 3.0 beta was better, but too unstable to be useful. I started using Opera 9 and except for a few quirks, it ran great. I just downloaded Opera 9.5. IT.IS.A.PILE.OF.CRAP. Seriously. It sucks bad. The color scheme is awful. The rendering is all over the place. It keeps stalling on web pages and throwing errors. They made changes to the UI for no damn reason. (Opera does one nice thing I wish Firefox did. I can click on a link with the middle mouse button and it will open the page in a new tab WITHOUT switching to it. Doh, staring my right in the face.) PS. Spun up Opera 9.5 to verify I wasn't just delusional. Nope. Rendering still sucks and some pages fail loading. I tried downgrading to 9.27. It won't run with complaints about mismatched components even after a full uninstall of all versions. They lost me as a customer for life. PPS. I installed Opera 9.5 on a fresh XP Virtual PC installation on a fast computer. I ran into the same problems I reported here. I stand by my statements. (I should also point out that while Opera 9.27 is pretty good, it crashes and/or locks up ON ALL SYSTEMS more than Firefox or IE. Periodically the internal data structure managing links in multiple tabs apparently becomes corrupt and the same link shows up in every tab. It does run good on low memory, low horsepower systems, but the more I used it, the more I disliked it and wouldn't recommend it.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
modified on Friday, June 13, 2008 11:22 PM
Really? Wow, they went from having the best browser on the market to a pile of crap in .23 of release? (I have 9.27 and it's been excellent) I'll have to check that out, hard to imagine such a large screw up in so few releases. :)
"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do." - Walter Bagehot
-
Joe Woodbury wrote:
(Opera does one nice thing I wish Firefox did. I can click on a link with the middle mouse button and it will open the page in a new tab WITHOUT switching to it.)
FireFox 2 works that way (doesn't switch to the new tab). Don't know anything about Opera 9.5, and if it's as big o pile as you say it is, probably never will.
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
Steve Echols wrote:
and if it's as big o pile as you say it is,
Unless it's been damaged highly since the 9.27 release I suspect Joe was exxagerating a little bit because it's an excellent browser and much faster in general than any of the others at rendering pages from initial click. That's what happens though when you have a single company dedicated to a single browser product and not a haphazard open source or haphazard Microsoft effort.
"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do." - Walter Bagehot
-
Steve Echols wrote:
and if it's as big o pile as you say it is,
Unless it's been damaged highly since the 9.27 release I suspect Joe was exxagerating a little bit because it's an excellent browser and much faster in general than any of the others at rendering pages from initial click. That's what happens though when you have a single company dedicated to a single browser product and not a haphazard open source or haphazard Microsoft effort.
"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do." - Walter Bagehot
John C wrote:
Unless it's been damaged highly since the 9.27 release
That's exactly what I'm saying. The rendering quality and speed in 9.5 dropped dramatically. It fails continually even communicating with sites.
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
The system I'm using right now is old and slow with barely enough memory to run XP (tried putting more in, but MB won't recognize one of the SIMM slots.) IE 6.0 runs fairly decent, but I've gotten used to firefox's tabs. However Firefox 2.0 is a memory pig and causes all sorts of grief on this system. Firefox 3.0 beta was better, but too unstable to be useful. I started using Opera 9 and except for a few quirks, it ran great. I just downloaded Opera 9.5. IT.IS.A.PILE.OF.CRAP. Seriously. It sucks bad. The color scheme is awful. The rendering is all over the place. It keeps stalling on web pages and throwing errors. They made changes to the UI for no damn reason. (Opera does one nice thing I wish Firefox did. I can click on a link with the middle mouse button and it will open the page in a new tab WITHOUT switching to it. Doh, staring my right in the face.) PS. Spun up Opera 9.5 to verify I wasn't just delusional. Nope. Rendering still sucks and some pages fail loading. I tried downgrading to 9.27. It won't run with complaints about mismatched components even after a full uninstall of all versions. They lost me as a customer for life. PPS. I installed Opera 9.5 on a fresh XP Virtual PC installation on a fast computer. I ran into the same problems I reported here. I stand by my statements. (I should also point out that while Opera 9.27 is pretty good, it crashes and/or locks up ON ALL SYSTEMS more than Firefox or IE. Periodically the internal data structure managing links in multiple tabs apparently becomes corrupt and the same link shows up in every tab. It does run good on low memory, low horsepower systems, but the more I used it, the more I disliked it and wouldn't recommend it.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
modified on Friday, June 13, 2008 11:22 PM
Ok, I was curious and upgraded, I see they *have* changed the colour scheme etc, but it's only the default. Aside from that it seems exactly the same as before, I'm not seeing any problems, I'm posting this from it etc. Maybe it's just funky on your computer for some reason.
"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do." - Walter Bagehot
-
Really? Wow, they went from having the best browser on the market to a pile of crap in .23 of release? (I have 9.27 and it's been excellent) I'll have to check that out, hard to imagine such a large screw up in so few releases. :)
"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do." - Walter Bagehot
I found 9.27 to be okay, but with enough bugs and quirks that it wasn't work making it my browser on anything but limited systems (and for that it's been pretty good, especially if I turned off several of the history type features.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
Steve Echols wrote:
and if it's as big o pile as you say it is,
Unless it's been damaged highly since the 9.27 release I suspect Joe was exxagerating a little bit because it's an excellent browser and much faster in general than any of the others at rendering pages from initial click. That's what happens though when you have a single company dedicated to a single browser product and not a haphazard open source or haphazard Microsoft effort.
"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do." - Walter Bagehot
John C wrote:
That's what happens though when you have a single company dedicated to a single browser product and not a haphazard open source or haphazard Microsoft effort.
Too true. I'll have to check it out. Item 1,435 on my ever growing, never shrinking to-do list.
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
-
Ok, I was curious and upgraded, I see they *have* changed the colour scheme etc, but it's only the default. Aside from that it seems exactly the same as before, I'm not seeing any problems, I'm posting this from it etc. Maybe it's just funky on your computer for some reason.
"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do." - Walter Bagehot
On my system, it not only failed on every other page load (I brought up Firefox 2.0 and it hasn't failed to load any pages). Just on code project, it spreads the rendering out as though the browser were maximized for a wide aspect ratio screen, which it is not. The important point is that I was using Opera 9.27 just before installing 9.5 and it had none of these problems.
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
The system I'm using right now is old and slow with barely enough memory to run XP (tried putting more in, but MB won't recognize one of the SIMM slots.) IE 6.0 runs fairly decent, but I've gotten used to firefox's tabs. However Firefox 2.0 is a memory pig and causes all sorts of grief on this system. Firefox 3.0 beta was better, but too unstable to be useful. I started using Opera 9 and except for a few quirks, it ran great. I just downloaded Opera 9.5. IT.IS.A.PILE.OF.CRAP. Seriously. It sucks bad. The color scheme is awful. The rendering is all over the place. It keeps stalling on web pages and throwing errors. They made changes to the UI for no damn reason. (Opera does one nice thing I wish Firefox did. I can click on a link with the middle mouse button and it will open the page in a new tab WITHOUT switching to it. Doh, staring my right in the face.) PS. Spun up Opera 9.5 to verify I wasn't just delusional. Nope. Rendering still sucks and some pages fail loading. I tried downgrading to 9.27. It won't run with complaints about mismatched components even after a full uninstall of all versions. They lost me as a customer for life. PPS. I installed Opera 9.5 on a fresh XP Virtual PC installation on a fast computer. I ran into the same problems I reported here. I stand by my statements. (I should also point out that while Opera 9.27 is pretty good, it crashes and/or locks up ON ALL SYSTEMS more than Firefox or IE. Periodically the internal data structure managing links in multiple tabs apparently becomes corrupt and the same link shows up in every tab. It does run good on low memory, low horsepower systems, but the more I used it, the more I disliked it and wouldn't recommend it.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
modified on Friday, June 13, 2008 11:22 PM
But it doesn't look like anything recent runs well on that system and if that system barely handles XP then maybe it's not the fault of Opera. You have something bad to say about each other browser you mentioned and you really body-slam Opera. Yet I'm looking at all your comments and they seem very similar across products. Were I a judge or a member of the jury... based on your own words I'd say it's yours system.
-
But it doesn't look like anything recent runs well on that system and if that system barely handles XP then maybe it's not the fault of Opera. You have something bad to say about each other browser you mentioned and you really body-slam Opera. Yet I'm looking at all your comments and they seem very similar across products. Were I a judge or a member of the jury... based on your own words I'd say it's yours system.
Did you even read what I wrote? IE runs fine, just don't like it. Firefox's memory usage makes it unusable (even on my main systems, Firefox 2.0 memory usage can get annoying) and Opera 9.27 ran great. (I tried Firefox 3.0 beta 4. The memory usage was much less than Firefox 2.0. It was a little too buggy--I wrote "unstable"--so I decided to not use it. Are you proposing that Firefox 3.0 beta was stable?)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
Did you even read what I wrote? IE runs fine, just don't like it. Firefox's memory usage makes it unusable (even on my main systems, Firefox 2.0 memory usage can get annoying) and Opera 9.27 ran great. (I tried Firefox 3.0 beta 4. The memory usage was much less than Firefox 2.0. It was a little too buggy--I wrote "unstable"--so I decided to not use it. Are you proposing that Firefox 3.0 beta was stable?)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
Yeah I did and I hope I didn't sound dry. I just meant that based upon what you are saying and John's own results I'd have to go for your system. Now... having said that... If you uninstalled it completely, all versions, deleted the folders associated with it in program files and documents and settings and then removed the registry stuff that got left behind and reinstalled it maybe things would get better.
-
Yeah I did and I hope I didn't sound dry. I just meant that based upon what you are saying and John's own results I'd have to go for your system. Now... having said that... If you uninstalled it completely, all versions, deleted the folders associated with it in program files and documents and settings and then removed the registry stuff that got left behind and reinstalled it maybe things would get better.
But that's one of the issues: it doesn't uninstally clean. ...not that IE uninstalls. At all.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
But that's one of the issues: it doesn't uninstally clean. ...not that IE uninstalls. At all.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
I run all my stuff in different virtual machines and by doing that my performance rocks. With snapshots I can undo a SNAFU in one click. VMWare Workstation is a godsend. I have improved my system performance a ton by partitioning my installed applications into various VMs or snapshots. It reduces my system load so much. Plus I can cap a VM by limiting it's memory and processor usage and it's just unreal. If I need to rebuild my box I simply copy my VMs off to a NAS, reformat and I'm back working in under an hour. It's wonderful. I realize the OP doesn't have that option but I uh... just had to brag.:cool:
-
On my system, it not only failed on every other page load (I brought up Firefox 2.0 and it hasn't failed to load any pages). Just on code project, it spreads the rendering out as though the browser were maximized for a wide aspect ratio screen, which it is not. The important point is that I was using Opera 9.27 just before installing 9.5 and it had none of these problems.
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
The system I'm using right now is old and slow with barely enough memory to run XP (tried putting more in, but MB won't recognize one of the SIMM slots.) IE 6.0 runs fairly decent, but I've gotten used to firefox's tabs. However Firefox 2.0 is a memory pig and causes all sorts of grief on this system. Firefox 3.0 beta was better, but too unstable to be useful. I started using Opera 9 and except for a few quirks, it ran great. I just downloaded Opera 9.5. IT.IS.A.PILE.OF.CRAP. Seriously. It sucks bad. The color scheme is awful. The rendering is all over the place. It keeps stalling on web pages and throwing errors. They made changes to the UI for no damn reason. (Opera does one nice thing I wish Firefox did. I can click on a link with the middle mouse button and it will open the page in a new tab WITHOUT switching to it. Doh, staring my right in the face.) PS. Spun up Opera 9.5 to verify I wasn't just delusional. Nope. Rendering still sucks and some pages fail loading. I tried downgrading to 9.27. It won't run with complaints about mismatched components even after a full uninstall of all versions. They lost me as a customer for life. PPS. I installed Opera 9.5 on a fresh XP Virtual PC installation on a fast computer. I ran into the same problems I reported here. I stand by my statements. (I should also point out that while Opera 9.27 is pretty good, it crashes and/or locks up ON ALL SYSTEMS more than Firefox or IE. Periodically the internal data structure managing links in multiple tabs apparently becomes corrupt and the same link shows up in every tab. It does run good on low memory, low horsepower systems, but the more I used it, the more I disliked it and wouldn't recommend it.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
modified on Friday, June 13, 2008 11:22 PM
-
John C wrote:
That's what happens though when you have a single company dedicated to a single browser product and not a haphazard open source or haphazard Microsoft effort.
Too true. I'll have to check it out. Item 1,435 on my ever growing, never shrinking to-do list.
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
Too bad there are some web apps which don't work well with Opera. I also miss a central repository of addons (or I don't know of it...). For me, Firefox is the perfect web browser, or would be if they fixed its memory management.
-
Too bad there are some web apps which don't work well with Opera. I also miss a central repository of addons (or I don't know of it...). For me, Firefox is the perfect web browser, or would be if they fixed its memory management.
Pawel Krakowiak wrote:
there are some web apps which don't work well with Opera.
There are lots of things that don't work well with Opera.
Pawel Krakowiak wrote:
For me, Firefox is the perfect web browser, or would be if they fixed its memory management.
Well, I wouldn't say it's perfect but it's better than everything else. The extensions model is the killer feature. The memory management sucks, as does startup time but I can live with the latter. Let's hope that FF3 has cured or at least dramatically improved the former.
Kevin
-
The system I'm using right now is old and slow with barely enough memory to run XP (tried putting more in, but MB won't recognize one of the SIMM slots.) IE 6.0 runs fairly decent, but I've gotten used to firefox's tabs. However Firefox 2.0 is a memory pig and causes all sorts of grief on this system. Firefox 3.0 beta was better, but too unstable to be useful. I started using Opera 9 and except for a few quirks, it ran great. I just downloaded Opera 9.5. IT.IS.A.PILE.OF.CRAP. Seriously. It sucks bad. The color scheme is awful. The rendering is all over the place. It keeps stalling on web pages and throwing errors. They made changes to the UI for no damn reason. (Opera does one nice thing I wish Firefox did. I can click on a link with the middle mouse button and it will open the page in a new tab WITHOUT switching to it. Doh, staring my right in the face.) PS. Spun up Opera 9.5 to verify I wasn't just delusional. Nope. Rendering still sucks and some pages fail loading. I tried downgrading to 9.27. It won't run with complaints about mismatched components even after a full uninstall of all versions. They lost me as a customer for life. PPS. I installed Opera 9.5 on a fresh XP Virtual PC installation on a fast computer. I ran into the same problems I reported here. I stand by my statements. (I should also point out that while Opera 9.27 is pretty good, it crashes and/or locks up ON ALL SYSTEMS more than Firefox or IE. Periodically the internal data structure managing links in multiple tabs apparently becomes corrupt and the same link shows up in every tab. It does run good on low memory, low horsepower systems, but the more I used it, the more I disliked it and wouldn't recommend it.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
modified on Friday, June 13, 2008 11:22 PM
I already use Opera for a few years now and am still very fond of it (despite the fact some pages still do not render properly, but hey ... being a web developer I am also aware of the fact a lot of people and companies do not build web pages in a way it looks properly on most browsers anyway. But after upgrading to 9.5 today it still works very fast with me and I see no delay in loading pages (yet). The new look and feel is not my favorite too, but I always used another skin anyway so I will do so again (though it looks like the site containing the skins has some difficulty at this moment). All in all I do not see any noticable problems so far.
