|
I've been using the Opera Web Browser now for the past few days and I'm finding it to be very fast and it works quite well.
I can barely tell the difference between it and Chrome (previously used for over a year) and it actually seems a bit faster.
Also, I'm a Google Drive advocate. I own a droid pad and with Google Drive I can get to my documents from anywhere. Very nice.
Anyway, I find that the Google Drive web interface seems to work better in Opera than it even did in Chrome.
I know they're both WebKit, just sayin'.
Anyone else using Opera on desktop? Just curious as not many do, I think.
|
|
|
|
|
Used it for a long time at 12, then upgraded when they finally added bookmarks at (21?). Only having 4GB on my machine, and multitasking a lot, I sometimes run up against my memory limitation. Tried the others and always went back to Opera because it is fast and it frustrates me less than the others.
Before, I used FF, and finally got tired of finding out it had somehow sucked down 1.5GB, and was continually rising in the background. They seem to have fixed that, but the last time I tried it (a month or two ago) there was still some issues that turned me back. Then I went to Chrome. It's memory consumption became outrageous. Even after their finagling, which improved it a bit, it still hogs more memory than Opera. Even using same base engine, Opera seems to take less, and releases it better. IE: boots up slower than a dog with one leg on my machine. Something else bothered me about IE, but can't remember what. Could have been slower page loads even after bootup.
Hope Opera brings back some of the stuff from their previous life, especially customizable mouse gestures (although you can add Chrome extensions, but I don't remember them working on Chrome settings pages - and similar info pages - which Opera's did). Stackable tabs were also a killer feature - WAY better implementation than anyone else's. Hopefully some day. But I'm not going to join the bandwagon of the disgusted ones who bash Opera for changing their engine and eliminating features. This think kicks butt and is compatible with pages the old version wasn't!
|
|
|
|
|
Good analysis of the issues with browsers. I've wrestled with the same problems. Maybe one of the Big 5 (IE, FF, Safari,Chrome, Opera) should create a "small footprint" version or something.
|
|
|
|
|
If you want a smaller memory footprint, one option is to run on a 32 bit OS! My 3GB 32bit Win7 can handle more stuff in memory than my 4 GB 64 bit system. There is evidently A LOT of 0's in the 64 bit version (understandably)!
Having a process for every tab is a memory killer...
|
|
|
|
|
David O'Neil wrote: Having a process for every tab is a memory killer...
Wasn't that loved feature sometime back? One tab hangs but others still work...
|
|
|
|
|
That's what they tried to sell us on. But if they just eliminated hangs it wouldn't matter whether it was a process per thread of not 
(Several times after the switch I had to reboot the entire browser (Chrome) because it didn't work the way they said it would. But lately they seem to have gotten that aspect sorted out.
(Also, I believe Firefox never went to that model. Initially its memory consumption is far lower than Chrome/Opera/IE because of that decision. But since history and everything else is kept in the process, it balloons badly in my experience. The longer it runs the more fragmented its memory seems to get, and the longer it takes for processing. That explanation makes most sense of its characteristics from what I witnessed.
(Overall, I think Opera achieved the best balance, even if it is a process per window (and memory intensive).)
|
|
|
|
|
Windows 8 is running on Xbox.
Recently Windows RT was put on the Windows Phone - in march.
There is an article about Windows putting OneCore on all devices, well it was already done long ago.
There is no such thing is windows 9.
|
|
|
|
|
Colborne_Greg wrote: There is no such thing is windows 9.
Let it go already.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
|
|
|
|
|
He's a MS Fanbois.
And like all Fanbois, blinked to the faults of what he uses - whatever it happens to be. They existed for DOS 4.0 as well, and there is little sign of them dying out or indeed growing up...
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: He's a MS Fanbois. And like all Fanbois...
True, but I've never seen his level of denial before. Even the most zealous Linux, Android, Apple, Microsoft, Blackberry, etc... fanbois don't deny that there is a "next version" coming out in the "not too distant" future. This is really quite remarkable.
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
That's because he isn't an "MS fanboi". He is a "Windows 8" fanboi - even more fanatical!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
The rumors of Windows 9 existed shortly after windows 8 originally had been released, the features in threshold were suppose to be in windows 8.1 update, and Microsoft Virtual Academy videos eluded to consecutive roll out releases before Windows 8.1 and has further continued that trend with the 8.1 update, going to windows 9 is done so only for one reason; to have all the users of windows to pay money to Microsoft, these tactics in threshold are being put in place to try to better market windows 8.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh! Of course! Now I get it.
What?
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cut and pasting a large block of fairly meaningless text in multiple replies to multiple messages is very close to being classed as spam.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
This is spam, someone responding to their tread is called an auto response.
|
|
|
|
|
The rumors of Windows 9 existed shortly after windows 8 originally had been released, the features in threshold were suppose to be in windows 8.1 update, and Microsoft Virtual Academy videos eluded to consecutive roll out releases before Windows 8.1 and has further continued that trend with the 8.1 update, going to windows 9 is done so only for one reason; to have all the users of windows to pay money to Microsoft, these tactics in threshold are being put in place to try to better market windows 8.
|
|
|
|
|
Cut and pasting a large block of fairly meaningless text in multiple replies to multiple messages is very close to being classed as spam.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
This is spam, someone replying to their own post is called an auto response.
|
|
|
|
|
Is this some kind of hipster "stream of consciousness" thing or is English not your native language?
BTW - Its common knowledge that Microsoft (and Apple and Google) are already working on the "next" OS when they release any given OS. As for Windows 9 simply being a way to get money... there is some evidence that Microsoft may make it a free upgrade from Windows 7, 8 and 8.1. Given that Apple has moved to free upgrades on OS X it's not without precedent.
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
There was evidence that windows 8 would be free to windows 7 users but it was not.
I am not denying the existence of the next OS, I am denying the existence of Windows 9.
There was no Windows 6, it was called vista and the Next Version may very well simply be OneCore, but it is also likely to be Windows 8.2, but not windows 9.
I learned to program in C before I mastered English.
|
|
|
|
|
Colborne_Greg wrote: There was no Windows 6
Yes there was. It was called Vista and Server 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
And windows 7 is Windows 6.1 and Windows 8 is Windows 6.2.
Not a marketing name.
|
|
|
|
|
You're the only one who gives a crap what the marketing name is.
No matter what MS Marketing calls the next major version of Windows, we all refer to it as "Windows 9", just as if it was a project name.
|
|
|
|
|
You do or else you wouldn't be arguing other wise.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
