If you tell me "that was a private conversation!" and hate me because of this, I will be confused.

[15:16:53] <Tom> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/18/1713247&tid=95&tid=185
[15:17:38] <Asa> HAHAHA
[15:19:13] <Tom> im glad you like it

Give me a break... There's just one thing to remember.

You've got to PAY to have Opera ad-free.

Let's see here: If the browsers are roughly the same (from the article's conclusion), then why would you choose the one that costs $40 ($20 if you are a student)?

Firefox all the way... ;-)

Yours,
Xavier

Xavier, that's asking for it. I'll expect no less than 5 Opera fanboy posts whithin one hour from now, telling you all about how everything is included in Opera and how you don't need extensions, which all interfere yada yada bleh.

Ok here goes, my 2 cents.

Opera includes everything but the kitchen sink included by default, which is a lot more then I want or actually need. I don't want half that crap, mouse gestures, IRC client, email client, etc etc, included by default in my browser of choice. Because I just don't need it. Firefox gives me the option of installing all that stuff on my own if I do need it. But I don't need it, and like my browser lean. Firefox all the way.

I think the question itself is wrong.
They should ask "what browser is more handy and useful for you".

Then any answer will be correct.

This is absurd.

Both are great. I'd use whichever is more intuitive for ME as a person, and that just turns out to be Firefox at the moment. The important part is that both are chipping away at the evil browser that has taken over the market.

How many times must I say it? FIREFOX IS NOT A RELIGION!!!

We have our share of fans, and we spread it, too. But when we get down to millisecond differences, I get really annoyed.

May I also throw in: Firefox is in version 1.0, and Opera is in version 8.0. If Firefox is competition for Opera now, imagine what Firefox 8.0 would be like :-)

Opera is far better than the evil browser that resides in my system poking jokes at me while on windows. But I will say Firefox all the way.

FYI, people pay for Opera to have features which other browsers will eventually rip off first.

You pay for the innovation. And with Opera, you get what you pay for. :)

Good article. I liked it. No flame, no bullshit, no religion and fanatism, no bias.
That's the way it should be done - without bias and without mentioning in which direction the browser is moving!

"Because it's not open source software, Opera has no "extensions" like those of Firefox."
That Shaffer guy is officially clueless, huh?

"...and without mentioning in which direction the browser is moving!"

What do you mean?

I meant one of Asa's posts - http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/007991.html - "Opera moving in the Firefox direction", which really disappointed me.

Well maybe with Opera moving in the Firefox direction, and Firefox moving in the Opera direction, they'll end up in the same place and merge into one. ;)

2michaell
Yup, Foxera/Opfire/
Singing Fox.
LOL

"You pay for the innovation. And with Opera, you get what you pay for. :)"

Maybe so, but I use extensions with Firefox that give me features that I love, and that don't seem to be available in Opera. Granted, many of the features I use *were* found in Opera first. But creating a new extension seems easier and faster then creating a browser version just for one feature--that only some may want to have to deal with.

"But creating a new extension seems easier and faster then creating a browser version just for one feature--that only some may want to have to deal with."

Yeah ..If you can code! If you can't, Opera's forums actually listen to user requests (cuz that's their job, and that's how they get paid) and usually will implement reasonable feature requests. If you want a new Extension, and you can't code, you are left to a (possibly amateur) coder to hack you up a version that may just be incompatible with other extensions, or crash your browser! YAY!

It takes 30+ extensions to mimic Opera in Firefox. Who wants to wade through all that, just to have "the same" browser, with a bunch of features that aren't compatible with each other? (I know, not everyone wants all those features)

>"It takes 30+ extensions to mimic Opera in Firefox."

More info: http://www.scss.com.au/family/andrew/opera/firefox/

BTW, this post just goes to even further prove that Asa just likes to stir up Opera vs. Firefox flamewars on this blog.

Very mature.

How about a nice comparison of Opera and Firefox?

""Xavier, that's asking for it. I'll expect no less than 5 Opera fanboy posts whithin one hour from now, telling you all about how everything is included in Opera and how you don't need extensions, which all interfere yada yada bleh.""

Just because you predict Opera fans saying something, does not make it any less true or relevant. That is a common debate tactic, and IMHO quite rude to try and pull.

""May I also throw in: Firefox is in version 1.0, and Opera is in version 8.0. If Firefox is competition for Opera now, imagine what Firefox 8.0 would be like :-)""

That argument is used all the time and is a joke. Gecko is older than Opera's engine, and XUL is older is older than Opera's new skinning engine. As well, the extension architecture is quite old.

People sometimes forget that there are features in Opera that are not in FF and not possible with extensions.

Did anyone expect anything other than "I'll stick with Firefox" from an article written on an open source news site?

And I'm sorry, but how can you take this seriously?

""Because it's not open source software, Opera has no "extensions" like those of Firefox. Despite being closed source, Opera is very customizable, via both the preferences menus and the manipulation of the plain-text configuration files.""

That's a farking joke! It's very blatant jabs at Opera and misleading (its almost even a lie) about "extensions". It has NOTHING to do with being open/closed source, but opera's decision to not support something similar for security/compatibility/integration reasons.

As for the extension business and integration of features, this is worth a quick read.

"I meant one of Asa's posts - http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/007991.html - "Opera moving in the Firefox direction", which really disappointed me."

Ok.

"BTW, this post just goes to even further prove that Asa just likes to stir up Opera vs. Firefox flamewars on this blog.

Very mature."

Actually, he said "You know you love it", and by posting here, you showed you do... :-) If you want the F14M3W4RZe to stop (a bit calm right now to be referred to as flamewars, but still) then be "mature" and don't post.

"It takes 30+ extensions to mimic Opera in Firefox."

Obviously, if you want exactly the Opera functionality and feel, it's extremely stupid to force yourself to use Firefox, if you ask me. (If you just want to get rid of the ads, why don't you try a certain site which sounds a bit like altavista.com?) I had a bit of fun though, a while back, making Firefox look like Opera. (To trick my girlfriend, who prefers Opera. She was annoyed that Ctrl+Shift+Click didn't work as it used to, but apart from that she didn't notice any difference ;-)

"hack you up a version that may just be incompatible with other extensions, or crash your browser!"

Actually, to my knowledge, that hardly ever happens. Got an example? (Apart from doing silly things like installing several different mouse gesture extensions, of course.)

"Just because you predict Opera fans saying something, does not make it any less true or relevant. That is a common debate tactic, and IMHO quite rude to try and pull."

My point was that people hooked on Opera seldom realize that less is more for a lot of people, and having everything thrown in from the start isn't automatically a good thing for everyone. (And judging from most of the stat reports, less is more for at least about six times as many people as those who use Opera.)

Also, if you think extension interference is common, give me a reasonable example. I have yet to think of one. (Although, themes and extensions don't automatically mix perfectly, I'll give you that.)

"That argument is used all the time and is a joke."

I totally agree. We're competing now, in 2005. It's not like Firefox took a time-machine from 1996.

"It has NOTHING to do with being open/closed source, but opera's decision to not support something similar for security/compatibility/integration reasons."

True.

I read in the Q&A session with Mr von whatsit over at the big O, that Opera will (or may?) add extension capabilities. (Can't find the page right now.)

I wish Asa would stop trolling to attract Opera users' attention all the time. It's getting boring with all the FUD flying all over the place in the Mozilla community.

Oh yeah, and the obligatory ClueBatting(TM):

"Opera includes everything but the kitchen sink included by default, which is a lot more then I want or actually need."

And yet it's smaller and faster than Firefox, and the features don't get in the way if you don't want to use them...

"May I also throw in: Firefox is in version 1.0, and Opera is in version 8.0. If Firefox is competition for Opera now, imagine what Firefox 8.0 would be like :-)"

By then Opera will be at, say, version 16.0. You are assuming that Opera will not evolve. You are of course dead wrong. Opera will continue to innovate and come up with new features that Mozilla will steal and brag about, as if they invented them :-)

Basically, comparing version numbers is completely useless. Opera has evolved over the years while Firefox has benefitted from what browsers like Opera did before it.

My point was that people hooked on Opera seldom realize that less is more for a lot of people, and having everything thrown in from the start isn't automatically a good thing for everyone. (And judging from most of the stat reports, less is more for at least about six times as many people as those who use Opera.)

Fair enough. The "less" part is a weird perception though. By looking at the default Opera interface vs. default Firefox, one would see that there doesnt appear to be that much more to Opera than Firefox. Which is why I don't understand why people feel Opera is so much more cluttered than FF based on that. You have to admit, that for as much as Opera does, 8.0 does a good job of minimizing the confusion and presenting it all in a well organized and efficient manner.

Also, where did I mention extensions conflicting? I just said they don't integrate well.

"Fair enough. The "less" part is a weird perception though. By looking at the default Opera interface vs. default Firefox, one would see that there doesnt appear to be that much more to Opera than Firefox. Which is why I don't understand why people feel Opera is so much more cluttered than FF based on that. You have to admit, that for as much as Opera does, 8.0 does a good job of minimizing the confusion and presenting it all in a well organized and efficient manner."

True. Opera 8 does a pretty good job of that. In fact, I feel Opera 8 has made it really hard to win these Opera vs. Firefox flamewars. Well, I suppose I can always use the fact that Firefox is ad-less. ;-) (I know it doesn't have any effect on you Operanauts, but it makes me feel good at least. :-)

I swear, Davaid (Naylor), you are the only level head left among Firefox users.

Even their Grand Wizard, Asa, regularly goes out of his way to incite Opera users these days. Why he thinks this necessary is beyond me. I guess he just does it because, for now, Firefox has a considerable lead, and he feels the need to flaunt that around, and puff out his chest, even though inside, he knows who the real "winner" is. He says Opera is "copying Firefox" because they slimmed the menus down, and yet routinely ignores the plethora of feutures and innovations they have BLATANTLY copied from Opera (upcoming instant back and forward, just to name one - they say it's to conform to some spec or whatever, but we all know better).

"Even their Grand Wizard, Asa, regularly goes out of his way to incite Opera users these days. ..."

No he doesn't. What he has done, though, is to A) offer constructive criticism on the UI of Opera and B) ask why the download number and market share don't seem to tally, and C) not automatically mention Opera when talking of new features in Firefox, which doesn't make him evil if you ask me.

The fast back and forward has at least been around since IE6 was released, and maybe longer. Now I don't know who had it first, but since almost all other browsers have it by now it would be silly to just say that "Oh, and Opera already has this BTW".

"BLATANTLY copied"

... which is the highest form of flattery (is that correct English?). It would be weird if all browsers had completetly different feature sets. Also, feature copying is nothing unique for web browsers. It happens in all kinds of software.

Asa is not evil for not saying "Firefox has just been given feature X, which already exists in browsers A, B and C". It is up to you and Opera's marketing department, not Asa, to get the message out about which features Opera has. Asa is one of Firefox's marketing guys.

Also, I don't see you complaining at the IE blog about not mentioning Opera, Firefox, Safari and Netcaptor as already having tabs (the last of which introduced tabs even before Opera).

2David Naylor
Asa assessed new version of Opera in his above mentioned post by only UI, which was redesigned and simplified. And said almost nothing about new features of the browser. So it means he took a very perfunctory look at the browser and made such pseudo profound assumptions about the browser.
Good grey (almost black) PR from FF marketing dep-t guys.
Let's be more unbiassed, people of the world!

I use IE6, David, and it comes nowhere close to Opera's back/forward speed..

And as has been stated numerous times, no one expects him to tip his hat to Opera in every mention of Firefox's new features that were copied from Opera. EVERY PRODUCT ON EARTH COPIES FEATURES! I should not have to say this over and over! The thing we Opera users have a problem with is NOT that they copy the features! It is how he claims innovation *all the time* when mentioning the implementation of a new feature that is blatantly copied, or mentioning how Firefox is so innovative (his most recent post, for example) when it really doesn't do much that is innovative at all..

David,

I think the problem is also that he has been increasingly negative towards Opera. He has posted a lot it about, and always to talk about how he wishes Opera did X like Firefox, or Opera is starting to do Y like firefox. It's NEVER positive. It's marketing to make Firefox look better, and nothing more.

I understand this is his personal blog. But people do come here and read and expect Asa is a professional representing Mozilla, and takes what he says more seriously than a random personal blog. His constant pointing out of Opera flaws and praising of Firefox leaves a big impression.

"he claims innovation *all the time*"

He does? Give me a quote. I seriously can't find where he says "It's great we did this before anyone else" or the equivalent. Not for the reporter tool, not for "blazingly fast back", not for spatial navigation.

"I think the problem is also that he has been increasingly negative towards Opera. He has posted a lot it about,"

In his post Opera moving in the Firefox direction he points out what he likes about Opera 8, and what he thinks there is still to improve. What's so wrong about that? That was a month back. And he's hardly been increasingly negative - more like increasingly positive. Give that post a read and compare it to his posts on v7.5 (where he had plenty of valid points, btw), here and here.

"I use IE6, David, and it comes nowhere close to Opera's back/forward speed.."

As with Firefox (and Opera?) it depends on which pages you try this on.

"Asa assessed new version of Opera in his above mentioned post by only UI, ... And said almost nothing about new features of the browser."

Maybe that was because he was mainly interrested in the UI, and because that was the main focus of his previous Opera posts.

"... which was redesigned and simplified."

He acknowledged that.

After some quick and basic testing it seems Firefox's and Opera's implementations of fast back works more often than IE's.

... and Opera's works more often than Firefox's.

"or mentioning how Firefox is so innovative"

Sorry, where was that? If you're referring to the title "browser innovation", I don't think he is referring to Firefox in particular, just the activity on the browser field in general. (Asa: what exactly did you mean?) The post certainly doesn't claim Firefox has gotten things moving by being innovative anyway. However it is a fact that Firefox has made a few things happen, be it with copied features or not. In fact, I'd say it is thanks to the fact that Firefox hasn't copied every feature of Opera that it has been relatively successful. Simplicity has been the key to Firefox's success. Now Opera 8 is nice and simple too, but it still has the ads and a (to the ex IE user) slightly weird look and feel, and because of this the not-so-advanced user probably still finds Firefox a more compelling and comfortable alternative. (Call Firefox's theme boring if you wish, but I think it makes users feel much more comfortable.)

"Also, I don't see you complaining at the IE blog about not mentioning Opera, Firefox, Safari and Netcaptor as already having tabs"

Because lies and FUD are expected from Microsoft. People expect better from Mozilla. But still, Asa keeps bashing Opera, either openly, or with thinly veiled jabs about Opera, hinting at how useless and irrelevant it is, and how Firefox is the only browser that has achieved anything, ever.

David,

From the blog post on spatial navigation:

"Doug Turner, the Minimo lead developer, and longtime Mozilla hacker, has created a couple of special Firefox builds with an awesome experimental feature called 'spatial navigation'."

-Notice the quotes around spatial navigation? Gives it a sense of newness. It is not new. I could be over-analyzing here :)

-Notice "awesome EXPERIMENTAL feature"? Awesome + experimental = innovative, basically.

"This feature was designed for television remote control style navigation for Minimo (built for pioneer research[?!?!?!]) but I think it's right at home in a full-featured browser."

-Opera thought the same, years ago, when they designed it for mobile phones and implemented it on their Desktop browser.

This is a clear attempt at claiming innovation, while not actually coming out and saying it.

I am not saying Asa should have mentioned Opera, for those who are still too thick to get the point. I am just saying it's a bit crooked.

"Because lies and FUD are expected from Microsoft."

Ok. Bad excuse. Oh, and not mentioning that a feature is being copied is definately not FUD and lies. (You do know what FUD stands for right? The geek F word is being thrown around these days as if it meant almost anything the user wants it to mean.)

"But still, Asa keeps bashing Opera, either openly, or with thinly veiled jabs about Opera, hinting at how useless and irrelevant it is, and how Firefox is the only browser that has achieved anything, ever."

Ok. You're definately reading too much into his posts. I get the feeling you want him to be evil so you have something to whine about. Give me actual quotes instead of going on like that.

"-Notice the quotes around spatial navigation? Gives it a sense of newness. It is not new. I could be over-analyzing here :)"

Definately over-analyzing if you ask me :-)

"-Notice "awesome EXPERIMENTAL feature"? Awesome + experimental = innovative, basically."

He means it is experimental for Firefox, i.e. the build in question had a particular feature turned on as an experiment, for people to try out and give feedback on. You're reading too much into that sentence. I agree though that it could (obviously!) be misunderstood.

"but I think it's right at home in a full-featured browser."

He's just saying he thinks it works for browsers too. Not claiming Firefox will have it before everyone else.

"I agree though that it could (obviously!) be misunderstood."

Fair enough. :)

David,

I think you're missing the point. At least my point.

Why would Asa be talking about a COMPETITOR so much? Why would he almost always talk about how it could improve (implying its not good enough yet), how its following Firefox's path now (like they're just not doing things right). That gives a NEGATIVE impression unless you are very familiar with Opera already (like you and me). I understand his points (and think he's giving a bad impression, but not knowingly).

Then he turns around and rarely ever talks negatively about Firefox. He almost always talks about what its doing right, and a great new feature its getting.

Do you understand that? The impression thats being given.