Here are some suggestions for those looking for alternatives to Opera 12 (and use Opera Mail)
-
lodestone last edited by
Originally posted by leushino:
I happen to like Opera and I happen to believe it needs a voice to counter the hysteria that has gripped many of the whiners. THAT'S what possesses me to write.
I like Opera too. A lot. Only not the latest versions. But I'm not complaining to the givers of free gifts, like so many of the previous versions also were.
Yet does Opera need someone to defend it? If so it would mean that it's quality would not be good enough to speak for itself... (I'm not suggesting that's the case, but don't you suggest it either by attacking everyone who's not absolutely thrilled with the latest versions.)
Opera is not something to identify with. And if you experience upset, have a look at this short clip to remember that:
"Positivity amidst Negativity - Guided Meditation"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyg087xFDZo -
elrice last edited by
Originally posted by sgunhouse:
As far as it goes, Firefox has gone the same way as Opera has - recent versions are based on Webkit rather than their previous engine. I wouldn't bother with it yet. Give it some time to stabilize ... same as Opera.
Um SG, this is the second time I have seen you post this nonsense about FF transitioning to WebKit and it needs to stop. Mozilla has never and never will use WebKit. Mozilla have co-developed Servo but that is yet to make an appearance in their browsers... it's still all Gecko based mate
-
lodestone last edited by
Hopefully Opera 12 will continue to be updated so I can keep utilizing it far into the future. If not, I'll keep it as my default browser for as long as it works well, as it does for me now.
But just for fun I'm looking at this instructive tutorial:
"SeaMonkey - Browse the web, work with mail, chat in IRC - Download Video Previews"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxJe1X_7gNI -
funksoulbro last edited by
Originally posted by Salahuddin1:
You know leushino, if you're tired of reading negative things about the new Opera browser, maybe you should stop reading these forums. Not quite sure what possesses you to respond to everyone who makes an anti Opera sentiment on these forums. Not even sure how one man can commit so much time and energy to such a cause.
Well said. The guy is like some over-defensive fanboy getting angry when people criticise his beloved company. I'm looking around for an alternative to Opera as, like many long-time Opera users, I think the new version is terrible, so I found the OP's post useful.
-
frenzie last edited by
Originally posted by elrice:
Originally posted by sgunhouse:
As far as it goes, Firefox has gone the same way as Opera has - recent versions are based on Webkit rather than their previous engine. I wouldn't bother with it yet. Give it some time to stabilize ... same as Opera.
Um SG, this is the second time I have seen you post this nonsense about FF transitioning to WebKit and it needs to stop. Mozilla has never and never will use WebKit. Mozilla have co-developed Servo but that is yet to make an appearance in their browsers... it's still all Gecko based mate
Never say never.
But yeah, Gecko is alive and well. It's just the Fx interface that received an
overhauldowngrade. Not the engine. -
elrice last edited by
Originally posted by Frenzie:
Originally posted by elrice:
Originally posted by sgunhouse:
As far as it goes, Firefox has gone the same way as Opera has - recent versions are based on Webkit rather than their previous engine. I wouldn't bother with it yet. Give it some time to stabilize ... same as Opera.
Um SG, this is the second time I have seen you post this nonsense about FF transitioning to WebKit and it needs to stop. Mozilla has never and never will use WebKit. Mozilla have co-developed Servo but that is yet to make an appearance in their browsers... it's still all Gecko based mate
Never say never.
But yeah, Gecko is alive and well. It's just the Fx interface that received an
overhauldowngrade. Not the engine.Eh? I keep hearing that but most has simply been tucked away by default (such as the menubar which is only an Alt key away or can be set to display). To be honest I strip the GUI back even further (no back, forward, home reload/stop or new-tab buttons) removing any buttons I prefer to hotkey. Now if they decide to go the path of Australis in its current form I might quickly change my opinion, but until then....
Mozilla has said under no terms will they move to WebKit... the eventual transition will likely be to Servo unless that births a new browser altogether which is rather likely. Don't forget Gecko has a much larger developer pool than Presto ever enjoyed which makes troubleshooting an easier process... I dare say if Presto had had that same dev/user base it may not have been ditched the way it has been.
-
frenzie last edited by
Originally posted by elrice:
I keep hearing that but most has simply been tucked away by default (such as the menubar which is only an Alt key away or can be set to display).
Custom toolbars, tabs on bottom, small icons mode, find bar at the bottom, etc. Of course back in Fx 4 they already made e.g. cookies management practically impossible to find, so it's just continuing the trend of obfuscating and removing options.
When I say Opera or Firefox seem to be racing to the Chromium-led bottom, I'm not especially likely to be talking about the default interface du jour. I haven't been especially fond of Opera's default interface since 7.5 or so. With the way Firefox is going and Opera is at least adding back a modicum of features, I can only hope Firefox might still be a potential suitor in half a year or so.
Originally posted by elrice:
Now if they decide to go the path of Australis in its current form I might quickly change my opinion, but until then....
The final release of Australis in its current form is due this week, isn't it? Maybe it's time to start changing your opinion.
-
elrice last edited by
Originally posted by Frenzie:
Originally posted by elrice:
I keep hearing that but most has simply been tucked away by default (such as the menubar which is only an Alt key away or can be set to display).
Custom toolbars, tabs on bottom, small icons mode, find bar at the bottom, etc. Of course back in Fx 4 they already made e.g. cookies management practically impossible to find, so it's just continuing the trend of obfuscating and removing options.
When I say Opera or Firefox seem to be racing to the Chromium-led bottom, I'm not especially likely to be talking about the default interface du jour. I haven't been especially fond of Opera's default interface since 7.5 or so. With the way Firefox is going and Opera is at least adding back a modicum of features, I can only hope Firefox might still be a potential suitor in half a year or so.
Originally posted by elrice:
Now if they decide to go the path of Australis in its current form I might quickly change my opinion, but until then....
The final release of Australis in its current form is due this week, isn't it? Maybe it's time to start changing your opinion.
Australis hasn't made an appearance outside of the UX trunk yet... not even in the regular nightly builds yet so I'll believe that when I see it. Tabs on the bottom went simply through lack of use... I imagine it was an attempt to cater to Opera transitions that didn't pay off. Custom toolbars still a easy option, though custom buttons would be nice... Find bar seems to have returned to the bottom (unfortunately) but might have changed yet again... use a plugin to extend search functions so I might have missed further changes admittedly.
Cookie management also not so hard, but admittedly I do clear cookies mainly on a per domain basis so easy to source through page info....
-
wakingup last edited by
Originally posted by funksoulbro:
Originally posted by Salahuddin1:
You know leushino, if you're tired of reading negative things about the new Opera browser, maybe you should stop reading these forums. Not quite sure what possesses you to respond to everyone who makes an anti Opera sentiment on these forums. Not even sure how one man can commit so much time and energy to such a cause.
Well said. The guy is like some over-defensive fanboy getting angry when people criticise his beloved company. I'm looking around for an alternative to Opera as, like many long-time Opera users, I think the new version is terrible, so I found the OP's post useful.
Ditto to everything you said there. I downgraded to 11.64 which will keep me happy for a good while longer but I found the top post quite helpful. I used to visit this forum every day but when Opera 15 appeared I took a rest on the morning side of the mountain with the occasional look up to see what's been happening, but it seems to have become a much less friendly place to visit these days.
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by wakingup:
I downgraded to 11.64 which will keep me happy for a good while longer
I also suppose the best alternative to v.12 is 11. It will be good forever if you like antique software. With custom styles and user scripts it should be able to run indefinitely. My own preference are certainly inclined this way.
I used Opera primarily for email. Everything else, such as the browser, irc, notes, and whatnot was a nice extra. A very very nice extra indeed that I came to depend on.
Looking for a replacement I had to find a good email program first, and hope it's extensible with some browser, irc, etc. During my few decades on the internet, I have already tried pretty much all the graphical tools, so I have decided to give a serious try to Linux command-line tools.
Now after trying mutt, pine, lynx, elinks, irssi, their likes and derivatives since the beginning of this year or so, I can say I have found a complete replacement for Opera. Having gotten them to work for myself, I can now recommend them, but let's be open about the cons
Cons:
- Very steep learning curve. Absolutely not for someone who is not ready to invest time and effort into configuring their own tools.
- Given above, these tools are obviously not for someone who is not going to actually use them. The time and effort of configuring them will only pay off if you really need them or at least plan/want to use them a lot.
- Unintuitive interoperability when you migrate from a graphical desktop. On a graphical desktop, you switch programs by switching windows. In command-line shell you switch programs/operations/tasks by quitting them and opening up another. Or by having multiple shells. Or: there's a tool called 'screen' which allows you to open up and switch "virtual shells", giving you some of the feel of "working in multiple tabs in one window" which has been one of the main attractions of Opera for me.
This multitude of choice may seem good on one hand, but on another it can be confusing, adding to the learning curve, totally unhelpful when you are trying to figure out what's best for you and when struggling with the basics.
One more choice for interoperability is to use a graphical desktop where you shoot up terminals for every program and then switch between the terminals, but this is departing from how Opera works, multiple tabs neatly in one frame.
- Extremely difficult to harmonise the interfaces. Command line means the interface is keyboard-driven. There are no buttons. Menus in some programs (elinks) but not in others (irssi, mutt, lynx), and are usually not editable, unless you rebuild from the program from the source. Same with keyboard shortcuts - may not always be editable in every program. Thus when harmonising the interfaces to achieve better interoperability, it can only go so long.
Pros:
- Extremely rewarding when you finally manage to make them work. Rewarding emotionally, intellectually, rewarding for productivity, etc. A total experience.
- Economical in every way. Friendly to the resources of the computer and friendly to your eyes, when you set the fonts adequately too.
- The way I use them, it largely replicates the experience with Opera. I can easily see where the makers of the original Opera got their ideas from.
Other remarks
Opera's email client borrowed many single-key shortcuts from mutt. The downside of mutt is that it's very difficult to set up with multiple accounts. Works when you use external tools (more learning) for downloading, sorting, and sending email. I am still not sure it's able to send email when I'm elsewhere than my home network. And viewing HTML e-mail means creating a plugin in mutt for a command-line browser/HTML-viewer.
Elinks allows to edit the keyboard shortcuts to better emulate Opera (Opera in turn used to have an "emulate text browser" userCSS). Elinks does bookmarks and history (obviously). It renders HTML and CSS and can be extended to operate Javascript too (I haven't gone through this hassle). For viewing images and dealing with downloads, use external tools (more learning).
Irssi (the irc client) was the easiest to set up. It has a very helpful and active community where they change the settings and configurations which are easy to try out and learn from.
The 'screen' is a program that may provide a nice frame or "window manager (of sorts)" to all the other programs. It allows switching between other programs as if between tabs in a single window. However, it has its own glitches and quirks, which, in combination with the glitches and quirks of the programs themselves may only add to the confusion. Good though when you can make it work. I did
The most difficult of Opera's functions to replicate thus far has been Notes. Linux has an easy editor called nano, but copying and pasting stuff in shell is yet another steep learning curve I have to surmount.
-
frenzie last edited by
Originally posted by ersi:
- Unintuitive interoperability when you migrate from a graphical desktop. On a graphical desktop, you switch programs by switching windows. In command-line shell you switch programs/operations/tasks by quitting them and opening up another. Or by having multiple shells. Or: there's a tool called 'screen' which allows you to open up and switch "virtual shells", giving you some of the feel of "working in multiple tabs in one window" which has been one of the main attractions of Opera for me.
Incidentally tmux is better. You can thank ruario for introducing me to it. Also be sure to check out byobu, previously an enhancement for screen, but now also for tmux.
And here's something you might also find useful: http://fransdejonge.com/2011/06/more-fun-with-screen-and-ssh-with-byobu-automatic-reattaching/
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by Frenzie:
You can thank ruario for introducing me to it. Also be sure to check out byobu, previously an enhancement for screen, but now also for tmux.
Okay. Thanks to ruario for this
-
frenzie last edited by
Here's some relevant links
http://my.opera.com/ruario/blog/show.dml/34932762#comment69393072
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/linux-and-open-source/is-tmux-the-gnu-screen-killer/1901/ -
serious last edited by
Originally posted by ersi:
In command-line shell you switch programs/operations/tasks by quitting them and opening up another. Or by having multiple shells. Or: there's a tool called 'screen' which allows you to open up and switch "virtual shells"
or you can run stuff in background, suspend and resume them, etc, no need to get complicated
-
lodestone last edited by
Originally posted by ersi:
I downgraded to 11.64 which will keep me happy for a good while longer
I also suppose the best alternative to v.12 is 11. It will be good forever if you like antique software. With custom styles and user scripts it should be able to run indefinitely. My own preference are certainly inclined this way.
For just a regular run-of-the-mill user like myself -surfing, posting, watching YouTube, and emailing- has 11.64 advantages on the 12.16 I'm using?
(I must have used 11 in the past, but don't remember anything about it. I only remember once having had a few beautiful pictures as backgrounds -like Bing- but I can't get them on 12.16. But I don't really care about that.)
Will 11.64 -or 12.16- not become unusable in the near future due to changes on the Internet?
(If so, I would really like that.) -
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by serious:
or you can run stuff in background, suspend and resume them, etc, no need to get complicated
The way I understand it, this applies to processes rather than programs. How do you run a browser in the background? You need to actually see the webpage for the browser program to be meaningful. Same with irc and email.
You can put to background something like a downloader and then check the list of processes from time to time. Yet the list of processes (such as 'top') needs to be up front again, not in background.
This just the way I myself understand the shell.
Edit:
Originally posted by LodeStone:
Will 11.64 -or 12.16- not become unusable in the near future due to changes on the Internet?
(If so, I would really like that.)You would like to know if internet changes soon so as to become unusable in 11.64? I'd like to know this too
Anyway, access to text won't change, I'm sure. Youtube and Facebook might change.
I suppose it will be quite okay to use Opera 11.* for email indefinitely and shoot up occasional links in it. When the link doesn't work in Opera, try in some other browser. This is what I always did and I don't think there's any threat to this usage, ever.
-
leevi last edited by
Originally posted by LodeStone:
(I must have used 11 in the past, but don't remember anything about it. I only remember once having had a few beautiful pictures as backgrounds -like Bing- but I can't get them on 12.16. But I don't really care about that.)
Opera 12.16 has that. Right click a picture > Use Image as Speed Dial Background.
-
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by ersi:
The most difficult of Opera's functions to replicate thus far has been Notes. Linux has an easy editor called nano, but copying and pasting stuff in shell is yet another steep learning curve I have to surmount.
I discovered that Nano contains a file browser, accessible by Ctrl+T when outside file-editing mode, and it can extract contents of a text file into the current buffer by Ctrl+R when inside file-editing mode. So, an incremental notes function is possible. I created a folder called notes, put a bunch of useful snippets there, and I'll just keep adding to and extracting from there when reading-writing.
-
makavcio last edited by
Hey, Salahuddin1
I tried to contact you through private msg system but it requires some kind of an account I'm unable to create... Hope you'll read this.Could you list the addons you used with SeaMonkey? Two years ago or so I tried to recreate Opera in Firefox but I failed miserably. All I got was a slow browser with a lot of lacking addons, and extremely prone to crashing. You boast of success
As for now, I'm clinging to Opera 12 and cannot waste a whole day (it's how much time it took last time) to recreate Opera's functionality somewhere else. I don't know much about this stuff mainly because for over a decade, Opera was all I needed, and both vanilla Chrome and Firefox seem extremely lacking in all areas. I've been using them lately for websites that do not work properly with Opera 12 anymore and I'm more than disappointed. I need a browser with integrated mail client, STACKABLE TABS!!!, speed dial and preferably a RSS and IRC clients.
I've never heard of this SeaMonkey and if it really works like Opera, I could finally arrange an official funeral-uninstallation with candles, weeping women and a grim priest. The old friend deserves it.
PS.
I also tried the new "opera" and I don't even want to talk about it. At least devs had the decency not to name that bastard child a direct successor of Opera 12.
