'Upgrading' from O-12 to O-27
-
Deleted User last edited by
Gentlefolks:
From an old guy who isn't at all wowed by bells, whistles and firecrackers comes a question.
I am presently running Opera 12.16, and for most sites and uses it works well. The 12.16 download was 10,260,992 bytes. I just fetched 27.0.1689.7627, which is 32,898,872 bytes. The question: exactly what will I gain that makes it worth "upgrading" to a package that is 3.2 times as big when the "old" version does pretty much everything that I want to do?
I have neither love nor loathing for the latest and greatest software, but I've been a pragmatist for decades and a believer in the old axiom, "If it works, don't fix it." Hell, I'm still using XP SP2 on a 13-year old DIY box, and I can't see a good reason to "upgrade" to any "modern" version of Winblows (aside from not having the horsepower to run them).
So, it is worth the switch to O-27, or should I continue to live in the past with old, reliable O-12?
-
sgunhouse Moderator Volunteer last edited by
Opera 12 especially had problems with the bigger "web apps", such as Gmail and Yahoo Mail, Google Docs, etc. The inability to fix that was one of the main reasons for abandoning Presto. If you're not interested in such things, Opera 12 may be useful for some time to come.
-
lando242 last edited by
Nah, stick with Opera 12. You're system probably doesn't have the power to run the newer versions all that well and if version 12 still does what you want it to do who cares. As you probably already know version 12 isn't that secure anymore (and you're not even running the latest version of it) but you're still running XP, who's update support ran out quite awhile ago. Getting a newer browser for security reasons would be like putting a padlock on a screen door. Just roll with what you've got until your machine finally gives up the ghost and then look over your options.
-
blackbird71 last edited byI agree with @lando242's view. At this stage of the game with a 13-year old system and an obsolete OS that's not itself even the latest service-pack for the OS, I'd pretty much stick with what I had and ride it into the ground. I did something similar with a Win98 First Edition system that I ran for over 12 years... by the end of it, updating a browser was the least of my concerns. I couldn't even find a workable antivirus program for it any more.
However, my further advice would be to not further expose your personal financial data (online purchases, bank accessing, etc) from here on out, since the security of the system is already questionable almost by definition, and will only deteriorate further.
-
Deleted User last edited by
Thank you for your responses. My conclusion is that there is no particular justification for any Opera version beyond 12. I use the foxy browser (always the latest release) for financial activities. As for Windows, I have XP SP3, but have found no pressing reason to intall it.
IAC, the "benefit" of an old OS is that the baddies have no incentive to find exploits for a 14-year-old Windows incarnation. If Redmond decides to stop pandering to the clueless mouse clickers with their Walmart package computers, and to the touch-screen tablet owners, it would be worth building a new box for a grown-up version of Windows.
Peace and blessings!
-
lando242 last edited by
IAC, the "benefit" of an old OS is that the baddies have no incentive to find exploits for a 14-year-old Windows incarnation.
That would be where you are wrong. Its low hanging, plentiful fruit. Its defenses (what little is left) are well understood, existing exploits are common and easy to tweak for your needs, and it still has more market share than Apple does on the desktop. About 1 in 5 desktops still runs XP. You are very much not safe because you're OS is 'too old for anyone to bother with.' People still using XP make up most of the botnets out there these days. Still using that OS is like having a target on your back.
-
blackbird71 last edited by
...
IAC, the "benefit" of an old OS is that the baddies have no incentive to find exploits for a 14-year-old Windows incarnation. ...According to NetMarketshare, XP still had a total market share of 19.15% in February 2015. That exceeds the market share of any other Windows or Mac OS except Win 7. http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0
What you may fail to realize is that many pieces of malware contain exploit kits that automatically customize the delivered payload to the OS of the computer. It's just a bit more code to include even older Os's in such a scheme, and it's certainly worth the attacker's effort, especially if the OS is still in wide usage but no longer being patched by its maker. Just sayin'
-
skipryper last edited by
Thank you for your responses. My conclusion is that there is no particular justification for any Opera version beyond 12. I use the foxy browser (always the latest release) for financial activities. As for Windows, I have XP SP3, but have found no pressing reason to install it.
I am really attached to Opera voice feature so 12.02 is staying. I have XP SP2 + opera 12.02 due to upgrade issues. There is a creeping need for XP SP3 with non-Firefox browsers which is worth being aware of the issue. A lot of sites are being urged to change to the newer SSL certificate signing using SHA-256 hashing (currently SHA1 hashing is widely used). For example (https://www.dropbox.com) has done this, so any Chrome/Internet Explorer browser will fail unless they run XP SP3 or later Windows operating systems. It does not apply to Firefox as they use open source SSL library that supports SHA-256. You can test this by trying (https://www.dropbox.com) in each browser. But what about Opera 12.x and higher - so far I have not found Opera 12.x to have SSL issues it seems to avoid this issue and must therefore be validating the certificate hashing without using Microsoft library code. I think if the site supports both SHA1 and SHA-256 in the certificate it will work. An example of this is also (https://www.dropbox.com) it works in Opera. You may consider applying SP3 for the odd troubleshooting occasion when you need to test with working Internet Explorer or Chrome browser, although Opera fits this role a lot of important sites just wont display well in Opera 12.x and that will get worse over time. A few other Windows components are going to have signing problems on XP SP2 as cited here (http://bit.ly/18SGayU), so if they were important to your usage then SP3 may be a more compelling for your machine. If Opera and Firefox were not around running a workable browser on XP SP2 would be extremely difficult. It will probably be hardware that ends your XP machine before software or needing SP3
-
A Former User last edited by
Off topic, but I'm interested why you think that your machine wouldn't cope with installing SP3 on your Windows XP.
SP3 was a much less drastic upgrade than SP2, which actually replaced a lot of the MS programs with updated versions, whereas SP3 only updated system files AFAIK.
-
-
