| Page 1 of 2 |
SuTuRa
Posts: 2445
Location: NFOHump
|
 Posted: Thu, 2nd Apr 2009 06:15 Post subject: Opera vs. Firefox vs. Internet Explorer |
|
 |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
รber-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 2nd Apr 2009 06:38 Post subject: |
|
|
Chrome.
I also think fisk should be unbanned.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 2nd Apr 2009 20:37 Post subject: |
|
|
Bond ownz them all !1
>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> โช Viva La Vida โช <<<<<< <<<<< <<<<<< <<<
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 2nd Apr 2009 20:41 Post subject: |
|
|
ha ha! good one... Firefox rulz btw 
"Quantum mechanics is actually, contrary to it's reputation, unbeliveably simple, once you take the physics out."
Scott Aaronson | chiv wrote: | | thats true you know. newton didnt discover gravity. the apple told him about it, and then he killed it. the core was never found. |
๏ปฟ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Fri, 3rd Apr 2009 08:46 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 3rd Apr 2009 10:56 Post subject: |
|
|
well, that's not really true - or not really applicable as it's not finished yet
all the real work and features are currently in the core
the point was to design the browser from ground up, and only the core and basic functionality is currently implemented
once they get the extension interface implemented (should be within a few months) it will have potential to beat all browsers due to it's superior core design
but until extension writers implement all the features that make opera as good as it is, i'll stick with that, thank you
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 3rd Apr 2009 11:08 Post subject: |
|
|
No features?
Clueless much?
I also think fisk should be unbanned.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Fri, 3rd Apr 2009 11:10 Post subject: |
|
|
| shole wrote: | well, that's not really true - or not really applicable as it's not finished yet
all the real work and features are currently in the core
the point was to design the browser from ground up, and only the core and basic functionality is currently implemented
once they get the extension interface implemented (should be within a few months) it will have potential to beat all browsers due to it's superior core design |
When this happens, I will update the pic.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 3rd Apr 2009 16:01 Post subject: |
|
|
Check out privoxy if you got issues with banners and shit.
I also think fisk should be unbanned.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Fri, 3rd Apr 2009 16:06 Post subject: |
|
|
Nowhere near as advanced or deep at blocking elements as Adblock Plus. Also, with Element Hiding Helper, it is possible to remove frames, divs and other elements with ease that nothing else can match.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Fri, 3rd Apr 2009 19:26 Post subject: |
|
|
You obviously have no idea what EHH is.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 3rd Apr 2009 20:52 Post subject: |
|
|
I do, they were very nice when I used them. However you should check out what site-filters are. Why identify a bunch of spam on a page and hide them manually when an action-filter already takes care of it for ya without extra addons?
Also, why have an adblock for every computer/browser, when your proxy already does the cleaning, cookie-removing, and ad-removing for ya (I run privoxy on my firewall, that way it's not even using up any resources on my own computer - and thus can be run on any browser (even my slow ass mobile phone internet browser).
But I suppose it might be scary looking to those with light experience. 
I also think fisk should be unbanned.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frant
King's Bounty
Posts: 24636
Location: Your Mom
|
| Posted: Fri, 3rd Apr 2009 22:14 Post subject: |
|
|
Browser-fight, weeeee......
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
"The sky was the color of a TV tuned to a dead station" - Neuromancer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Fri, 3rd Apr 2009 22:25 Post subject: |
|
|
| dominae wrote: | I do, they were very nice when I used them. However you should check out what site-filters are. Why identify a bunch of spam on a page and hide them manually when an action-filter already takes care of it for ya without extra addons?
Also, why have an adblock for every computer/browser, when your proxy already does the cleaning, cookie-removing, and ad-removing for ya (I run privoxy on my firewall, that way it's not even using up any resources on my own computer - and thus can be run on any browser (even my slow ass mobile phone internet browser).
But I suppose it might be scary looking to those with light experience. |
Anyway you spin it, you can't hide individual elements within pages (aside from frames) with Privoxy. Element removing isn't limited for me to ad blocking, but hey that's just me (and thousands others who use EHH). It seems you are trying to convince yourself your silly solution of jumping through hoops is better. What you need to do in 5 minutes, I do with Ctrl + Shift + K -> Left Click. Didn't know experience leads to half-ass solutions, but in that case, I'm glad to be less experienced. 
Also, two other extensions I use are Stylish and Greasemonkey. I want to hear what other silly hoops one needs to jump through, to get 5% of their functionality on Chrome.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 4th Apr 2009 01:47 Post subject: |
|
|
I don't have to close any 'elements' as the elements I need closed are already removed when visiting the page. No extra clicking is needed.
Yes, Chrome doesn't have Stylish or Greasemonkey yet. Nor did Firefox near it's conception. What Firefox has is a browsing-engine built on old standards, and if one website 'hangs', Firefox hangs. That does not happen in Chrome.
I agree with you that the plug-in market for Chrome is nowhere near the one for Firefox. But the basic engine for Firefox has been in existence virtually since the birth of Internet-browsers. (Mozilla that is). Give it some time, and I'm sure you can switch between your own stylesheets and whatever it is Greasemonkey does for you. Personally I prefer a lean, swift non-bloated browser. But that's not for all. ^-^
I also think fisk should be unbanned.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 4th Apr 2009 12:45 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Sat, 4th Apr 2009 12:54 Post subject: |
|
|
| dominae wrote: | I don't have to close any 'elements' as the elements I need closed are already removed when visiting the page. No extra clicking is needed.
Yes, Chrome doesn't have Stylish or Greasemonkey yet. Nor did Firefox near it's conception. What Firefox has is a browsing-engine built on old standards, and if one website 'hangs', Firefox hangs. That does not happen in Chrome.
I agree with you that the plug-in market for Chrome is nowhere near the one for Firefox. But the basic engine for Firefox has been in existence virtually since the birth of Internet-browsers. (Mozilla that is). Give it some time, and I'm sure you can switch between your own stylesheets and whatever it is Greasemonkey does for you. Personally I prefer a lean, swift non-bloated browser. But that's not for all. ^-^ |
But this is what I have been saying all along. Once the extensions are supported and favorites (or alternatives) are there, I'm moving. Don't know why people think I'm always against something, just because I criticize one or some of its features. Must be the way I criticize. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kumkss
Posts: 4834
Location: Chile
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Apr 2009 17:20 Post subject: |
|
|
Explorer: its the only one that opens certain goverment pages that i constatly need for my job. For browsing video sites, i like Safari.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 7th Apr 2009 22:02 Post subject: |
|
|
but ofcourse, they couldn't install cia-ware on you through other browsers
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 8th Apr 2009 02:50 Post subject: |
|
|
FF3 sucks dick. IE ftw
Ryzen 5 5600, ASUS ROG STRIX B550-F GAMING WIFI II, Corsair Vengeance RGB RT 32GB 3600MHz C16, MSI RTX 5070 Ti Ventus 3X OC , Corsair RMx Series RM750x. AOC AGON AG324UX - 4K 144Hz 1ms
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 8th Apr 2009 03:19 Post subject: |
|
|
| Newty182 wrote: | | FF3 sucks dick. IE ftw |
HERECY! BURN HIM!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frant
King's Bounty
Posts: 24636
Location: Your Mom
|
| Posted: Wed, 8th Apr 2009 04:10 Post subject: |
|
|
I'll just present my penny...
IE is Microsoft.
Opera is okay, but I prefer Firefox, it's just a matter of taste.
Firefox is independent, open source and all that.
Chrome is adware (even though they've had to add the possibility to opt out after much complaint) that will track users (only tech-savvy people will opt out anyway, or know how to) and deliver targeted advertizing.
My choice is simple, Firefox. I see absolutely no reason to use Chrome or the other browsers. It's my personal choice and I won't expect anyone else to change his/her browser because of what I use.
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
"The sky was the color of a TV tuned to a dead station" - Neuromancer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Sun, 26th Apr 2009 12:17 Post subject: |
|
|
There isn't even "Bookmark all tabs" feature in Chrome. What a fantastic software!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
