Opera and Ad-Blocking

Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

Is there a way in opera to block out sites? Like the Hosts file for
MSIE, or a way to stop flash banners working. I heard somewhere that
FireFox can right click on an image and add the originating site to a
blocked sites list.

Does opera have a blocked sites list of some sort? I tried the Opera
help, but could not find anything.
--
Lord Phorse
Remove the number(s) from the email address
for fastest reply. More sig here:
http://phorse.netfirms.com/sig.html
39 answers Last reply
More about opera blocking
  1. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 14:54:06 +0100, Lord Phorse
    <zilaxian-shaman1@yahoo.com> wrote:

    > Is there a way in opera to block out sites?

    Yes, there are lots of ways to do that.

    > Like the Hosts file for MSIE,

    The hosts file is global, for the entire system. It works in Opera and
    all other Internet applications as well.

    > or a way to stop flash banners working.

    You can use URL blocking in Opera to block URLs matching defined
    patterns. Someone even created a program which makes this quite easy
    and convenient:

    http://www.monroeworld.com/operafilter/

    Demo:

    http://www.monroeworld.com/operafilter/flash/operaadfilter.htm

    You can do this manually, too:

    http://www.schrode.net/opera/url_filtering/

    More here:

    http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=160967

    > I heard somewhere that FireFox can right click on an image and add the
    > originating site to a blocked sites list.

    This is possible with OperaAdFilter, in a way.
  2. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    Moen wrote:
    > On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 14:54:06 +0100, Lord Phorse
    > <zilaxian-shaman1@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    >>Is there a way in opera to block out sites?
    >
    > Yes, there are lots of ways to do that.
    >
    Ok....


    >>Like the Hosts file for MSIE,
    >
    > The hosts file is global, for the entire system. It works in Opera and
    > all other Internet applications as well.
    >
    Doesn't seem to for me. Maybe I am not doing it right?
    127.0.0.1 http://www.site.com

    >>or a way to stop flash banners working.
    >
    > You can use URL blocking in Opera to block URLs matching defined
    > patterns. Someone even created a program which makes this quite easy
    > and convenient:
    >
    > http://www.monroeworld.com/operafilter/

    Got it

    > Demo:
    >
    > http://www.monroeworld.com/operafilter/flash/operaadfilter.htm
    >
    > You can do this manually, too:
    >
    > http://www.schrode.net/opera/url_filtering/

    Interesting. Had to make a filter.ini, but we'll see...

    > More here:
    >
    > http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=160967
    >
    >>I heard somewhere that FireFox can right click on an image and add the
    >>originating site to a blocked sites list.
    >
    >
    > This is possible with OperaAdFilter, in a way.

    Ok, we'll see how it goes...

    Weee hey... something worked. Ads are dead, and so are the google ads at
    the top of opera

    thanks...
    --
    Lord Phorse
    Remove the number(s) from the email address
    for fastest reply. More sig here:
    http://phorse.netfirms.com/sig.html
  3. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:00:03 +0100, Lord Phorse
    <zilaxian-shaman1@yahoo.com> wrote:

    > Doesn't seem to for me. Maybe I am not doing it right?
    > 127.0.0.1 http://www.site.com

    Don't include the protocol. Just the hostname.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    "Moen" <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote in message
    news:51vp019uko8dgcmm193e8fb6f9n33h6clm@4ax.com...
    > On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:00:03 +0100, Lord Phorse
    > <zilaxian-shaman1@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    > > Doesn't seem to for me. Maybe I am not doing it right?
    > > 127.0.0.1 http://www.site.com
    >
    > Don't include the protocol. Just the hostname.

    To Help Mr Phorse avoid a stupid question: He means drop the http:// part

    --
    LTP

    When the llama speaks you listen. Unfortunately the llama hasn't spoken
    yet.
  5. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    Luc The Perverse wrote:
    > "Moen" <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote in message
    > news:51vp019uko8dgcmm193e8fb6f9n33h6clm@4ax.com...
    >
    >>On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:00:03 +0100, Lord Phorse
    >><zilaxian-shaman1@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Doesn't seem to for me. Maybe I am not doing it right?
    >>>127.0.0.1 http://www.site.com
    >>
    >>Don't include the protocol. Just the hostname.
    >
    >
    > To Help Mr Phorse avoid a stupid question: He means drop the http:// part

    I know that. P means protocol, right? Hyper Text Transfer Protocol, IIRC
    .....

    One other thing that has changed since i made these changes is that the
    vote links in aegis do nought but load up a new tab in Opera. Not even
    an address in the bar. No part of their address is in the list of things
    to deny in the filter.ini or hosts files...

    Oh, and one more thing: the ads still work in netscape, even after re
    writing the hosts file and restarting netscape... I use opera for most
    everything, so no biggie.

    --
    Lord Phorse
    Remove the number(s) from the email address
    for fastest reply. More sig here:
    http://phorse.netfirms.com/sig.html
  6. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 23:09:02 -0800, Zealot The Crazy Lui
    <ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote:

    > Firefox>Opera>IE>Netscape

    I'd have to disagree with that :)

    Opera's smaller, faster, and more functional out of the box than
    Firefox. Then again, Firefox has extensions. Although they are
    interesting to play with, I haven't found that they really make
    Firefox better than Opera. There are just too many problems with
    extensions to rely on them for serious work, and I actually use my
    browser for most stuff at work.

    It's a good thing we have the choice.
  7. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 14:57:42 +0100, Moen
    <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:
    >I'd have to disagree with that :)
    >
    >Opera's smaller, faster, and more functional out of the box than
    >Firefox.

    Smaller? Whoopie, a whole 1.68 MB smaller download. That takes what,
    like 5 seconds to download? Faster? Neither one is particularly
    blazing fast after clicking the shortcut to launch the program.
    Browsing around is pretty much exactly the same. More functional? I
    suppose, but there are other programs that do other specialized things
    better (like e-mail and IRC) than Opera does. I continue to argue that
    mouse gestures are silly and useless, since keyboard shortcuts and
    extra buttons on my mouse work a lot more reliably, faster, and don't
    feel goofy.


    >Then again, Firefox has extensions. Although they are
    >interesting to play with, I haven't found that they really make
    >Firefox better than Opera. There are just too many problems with
    >extensions to rely on them for serious work, and I actually use my
    >browser for most stuff at work.

    I haven't really found any extensions that cause Firefox to be
    unstable or unusable in any way. Quite a few cause longer launching
    times, but it'd be impossible for any program to load plug-ins
    instantly, I suppose. Firefox has a larger 3rd party plugin developer
    base than Opera, so there's a lot more expandability of functionality
    with Firefox. If one was so inclined, they could customize Firefox
    nearly however they wanted, provided they had enough technical
    knowledge.

    >It's a good thing we have the choice.

    Yup.

    --
    "No I'm saying that I'm a cow dung." - Stephen "Suupernuubie" Ung
    "Eat a bag of hell." - Cyric The Mad
    "I'm all for the girl on girl action, but it could put a strain on the marriage" - LTP

    ICQ:65589349 MSN:ktwilson86@hotmail.com (BUT DON'T SEND E-MAIL!)
    Zealot the Crazy Lui
    Grand 16-Star General and overall director of AGSC operations for the Pronoun Army(and webmaster)
    http://pronounarmy.homestead.com/ http://home.comcast.net/~ktwilson9999/
    re-vamped sig xp Build 2004.6
  8. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 19:28:28 -0700, "Luc The Perverse"
    <sll_NOSPAM_zm@remove.cc.usu.edu> wrote:

    > I do not patronize Opera, because of their money making tactics.

    ?
  9. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    "Moen" <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote in message
    news:11jm11p5p1gtutien399ofot2kna8qh776@4ax.com...
    > On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 19:28:28 -0700, "Luc The Perverse"
    > <sll_NOSPAM_zm@remove.cc.usu.edu> wrote:
    >
    > > I do not patronize Opera, because of their money making tactics.
    >
    > ?

    The ads

    --
    LTP

    When the llama speaks you listen. Unfortunately the llama hasn't spoken
    yet.
  10. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    "Zealot The Crazy Lui" <ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:1109103635.55a6a541cd2a49c3480be5343fbdbe23@bubbanews...
    > I haven't really found any extensions that cause Firefox to be
    > unstable or unusable in any way.

    http://www.overclockers.com/tips00729/

    --
    LTP

    When the llama speaks you listen. Unfortunately the llama hasn't spoken
    yet.
  11. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 21:56:03 -0700, "Luc The Perverse"
    <sll_NOSPAM_zm@remove.cc.usu.edu> wrote:
    >http://www.overclockers.com/tips00729/

    Heh, that's, err, strange. I prefer bugs like that to random crashing,
    though. :)

    --
    "No I'm saying that I'm a cow dung." - Stephen "Suupernuubie" Ung
    "Eat a bag of hell." - Cyric The Mad
    "I'm all for the girl on girl action, but it could put a strain on the marriage" - LTP

    ICQ:65589349 MSN:ktwilson86@hotmail.com (BUT DON'T SEND E-MAIL!)
    Zealot the Crazy Lui
    Grand 16-Star General and overall director of AGSC operations for the Pronoun Army(and webmaster)
    http://pronounarmy.homestead.com/ http://home.comcast.net/~ktwilson9999/
    re-vamped sig xp Build 2004.6
  12. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 11:42:11 -0700, "Luc The Perverse"
    <sll_NOSPAM_zm@remove.cc.usu.edu> wrote:

    > > > I do not patronize Opera, because of their money making tactics.
    > >
    > > ?
    >
    > The ads

    Opera's main source of income is mobile phones, and charging for the
    ad-free desktop browser. The ads don't pay much at all.
  13. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 12:31:02 -0800, Zealot The Crazy Lui
    <ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote:

    > >Opera's smaller, faster, and more functional out of the box than
    > >Firefox.
    >
    > Smaller? Whoopie, a whole 1.68 MB smaller download. That takes what,
    > like 5 seconds to download?

    Actually, most of the world is still on dialup, and 1 MB is not
    insignificant if you want to download something and do other things
    online at the same time. Also, isn't it funny that Firefox is bigger
    despite having very few features built in by default? ;)

    > More functional? I suppose, but there are other programs that do other
    > specialized things better (like e-mail and IRC) than Opera does.

    I was opposed to having an e-mail client in Opera for a long time. But
    when Opera 7 was released, I surrendered, and I now use the built-in
    e-mail client exclusively. It's the only e-mail client which does away
    with the insane folder nonsense of the past. Now I can spend more time
    actually reading mail, and less time moving it around :)

    As for IRC, Opera's chat client is not supposed to be a full IRC
    client. It's a chat client which happens to use IRC.

    So Opera does e-mail better than anyone else, in my opinion, and it
    isn't even trying to compete with other IRC clients.

    > I continue to argue that mouse gestures are silly and useless, since
    > keyboard shortcuts and extra buttons on my mouse work a lot more
    > reliably, faster, and don't feel goofy.

    Then you haven't realized that since you are already using a mouse, a
    flick of the wrist is faster than moving your hand to the keyboard to
    find the right keys... :)
  14. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:59:35 +0100, Moen
    <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:
    >Actually, most of the world is still on dialup, and 1 MB is not
    >insignificant if you want to download something and do other things
    >online at the same time. Also, isn't it funny that Firefox is bigger
    >despite having very few features built in by default? ;)

    Most of the world? I don't know anyone that uses dial-up...

    >I was opposed to having an e-mail client in Opera for a long time. But
    >when Opera 7 was released, I surrendered, and I now use the built-in
    >e-mail client exclusively. It's the only e-mail client which does away
    >with the insane folder nonsense of the past. Now I can spend more time
    >actually reading mail, and less time moving it around :)

    Insane folder nonsense? You mean organization? I guess that could be
    alien to some people... Filters are for moving mails around to
    different folders, why would you do that manually?

    >As for IRC, Opera's chat client is not supposed to be a full IRC
    >client. It's a chat client which happens to use IRC.

    Uh huh...

    >So Opera does e-mail better than anyone else, in my opinion, and it
    >isn't even trying to compete with other IRC clients.

    I don't think Opera is the best mail client, but I guess that's mostly
    a matter of personal opinion.
    If they aren't trying to compete with other IRC clients, then why
    include the feature?

    >Then you haven't realized that since you are already using a mouse, a
    >flick of the wrist is faster than moving your hand to the keyboard to
    >find the right keys... :)

    I do have two hands, you know. One rests on the mouse, one at the
    keyboard, and why would you have to hunt for keys? I know where they
    all are, they don't move around or anything. It's certainly easier to
    hit ctrl-something or other than wave around your mouse like a crazed
    lunatic.

    --
    "No I'm saying that I'm a cow dung." - Stephen "Suupernuubie" Ung
    "Eat a bag of hell." - Cyric The Mad
    "I'm all for the girl on girl action, but it could put a strain on the marriage" - LTP

    ICQ:65589349 MSN:ktwilson86@hotmail.com (BUT DON'T SEND E-MAIL!)
    Zealot the Crazy Lui
    Grand 16-Star General and overall director of AGSC operations for the Pronoun Army(and webmaster)
    http://pronounarmy.homestead.com/ http://home.comcast.net/~ktwilson9999/
    re-vamped sig xp Build 2004.6
  15. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 17:50:34 +0100, Moen
    <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:
    >To make it possible for people to use Opera for free.

    People use Mozilla, Netscape, and IE for free, don't they? (ok, IE
    only works on windows and Mac OS, so nearly all the people that use it
    paid for Windows, but it's available as a free download as well...
    without ads...) None of those have ads. I wonder how that works...
    (</sarc)

    --
    "No I'm saying that I'm a cow dung." - Stephen "Suupernuubie" Ung
    "Eat a bag of hell." - Cyric The Mad
    "I'm all for the girl on girl action, but it could put a strain on the marriage" - LTP

    ICQ:65589349 MSN:ktwilson86@hotmail.com (BUT DON'T SEND E-MAIL!)
    Zealot the Crazy Lui
    Grand 16-Star General and overall director of AGSC operations for the Pronoun Army(and webmaster)
    http://pronounarmy.homestead.com/ http://home.comcast.net/~ktwilson9999/
    re-vamped sig xp Build 2004.6
  16. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:59:35 +0100, Moen
    <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:

    >> Smaller? Whoopie, a whole 1.68 MB smaller download. That takes what,
    >> like 5 seconds to download?
    >
    >Actually, most of the world is still on dialup, and 1 MB is not
    >insignificant if you want to download something and do other things
    >online at the same time. Also, isn't it funny that Firefox is bigger
    >despite having very few features built in by default? ;)

    I'm fairly sure that the majority of people who are geeky enough to
    use Opera or Firefox have a better internet connection than the
    general public. I mean, I include myself in that category, but the
    casual surfers that make up a good part of "most of the world" will
    use IE just because it's there and they know how to use it.

    >> More functional? I suppose, but there are other programs that do other
    >> specialized things better (like e-mail and IRC) than Opera does.
    >
    >I was opposed to having an e-mail client in Opera for a long time. But
    >when Opera 7 was released, I surrendered, and I now use the built-in
    >e-mail client exclusively. It's the only e-mail client which does away
    >with the insane folder nonsense of the past. Now I can spend more time
    >actually reading mail, and less time moving it around :)

    There are clients that handle e-mail a lot better than Opera, and the
    part you said about the simplicity of the folders is just an attempt
    to explain away the actual lack of features in the client. :P

    >As for IRC, Opera's chat client is not supposed to be a full IRC
    >client. It's a chat client which happens to use IRC.
    >
    >So Opera does e-mail better than anyone else, in my opinion, and it
    >isn't even trying to compete with other IRC clients.

    Then why keep it in the first place? I mean, it's not like anyone EVER
    will use it over a real IRC client. It's just implemented in a
    shameless attempt to say "nya nya - we've got chat support! We are teh
    r0x0r!".
    I'm fairly certain that what the majority wants is a browser that can,
    wait for it, surf the internet! This is why 90% of the Opera users
    could care less about the l33t f34tures that you seem to think is the
    Alfalfa and omega of internet browsing.

    >> I continue to argue that mouse gestures are silly and useless, since
    >> keyboard shortcuts and extra buttons on my mouse work a lot more
    >> reliably, faster, and don't feel goofy.
    >
    >Then you haven't realized that since you are already using a mouse, a
    >flick of the wrist is faster than moving your hand to the keyboard to
    >find the right keys... :)

    Yeah, and sometimes you have to wave your hands around like a drunk
    magician to make something happen.
    And sometimes, you accidentally tap a mouse button while doing
    something, and the browser will open 3 new windows, send e-mail to the
    Pope and start doing your laundry.

    --
    byerstheoblivious
  17. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:29:26 +0100, Byers ex machina <don't@think.so>
    wrote:

    > I'm fairly sure that the majority of people who are geeky enough to
    > use Opera or Firefox have a better internet connection than the
    > general public.

    Opera works well on lower-end hardware, and you would be surprised as
    to the number of Opera users that are on dialup.

    > There are clients that handle e-mail a lot better than Opera,

    Not in my opinion. Not for my needs (doing more reading than
    organizing).

    > and the part you said about the simplicity of the folders is just an
    > attempt to explain away the actual lack of features in the client. :P

    Do you really think it would have been difficult to add folders if it
    had been desirable to do so? The programmers could have done a
    standard e-mail client, but this approach is much better.

    > >So Opera does e-mail better than anyone else, in my opinion, and it
    > >isn't even trying to compete with other IRC clients.
    >
    > Then why keep it in the first place?

    Because chat is a natural progression, and integrating it with the
    browser and e-mail client makes sense.

    > I mean, it's not like anyone EVER will use it over a real IRC client.

    Sure they will. First of all, most people don't care if it's IRC or
    ICQ or whatever, if they just want to chat. Secondly, it's very
    convenient to have it integrated with mail and browsing. Notice how it
    shares contacts with the e-mail client?

    > It's just implemented in a shameless attempt to say "nya nya - we've
    > got chat support! We are teh r0x0r!".

    Uh, no. It's part of a bigger picture. The chat client will receive
    more attention in the future, too.

    > I'm fairly certain that what the majority wants is a browser that can,
    > wait for it, surf the internet!

    People want to surf, chat, and read their e-mail. Opera does that.
    Just because you have been brainwashed into thinking that browsers
    should be standalone, that doesn't make it true for everyone :)

    > This is why 90% of the Opera users could care less about the l33t
    > f34tures that you seem to think is the Alfalfa and omega of internet
    > browsing.

    So you know Opera's customers better than Opera? Right.
  18. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:33:29 -0800, Zealot The Crazy Lui
    <ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote:

    >>To make it possible for people to use Opera for free.
    >
    >People use Mozilla, Netscape, and IE for free, don't they? (ok, IE
    >only works on windows and Mac OS, so nearly all the people that use it
    >paid for Windows, but it's available as a free download as well...
    >without ads...) None of those have ads. I wonder how that works...
    >(</sarc)

    Gee, it must be because Opera is so wonderful and unique and will
    improve your life in ways you didn't see possible.
    </sarc>

    --
    byerstheoblivious
  19. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    "Byers ex machina" <don't@think.so> wrote in message
    news:dc3q11t6krid9endpfcdt3f7nbhhimn2jf@4ax.com...
    > >paid for Windows, but it's available as a free download as well...
    > >without ads...) None of those have ads. I wonder how that works...
    > >(</sarc)
    >
    > Gee, it must be because Opera is so wonderful and unique and will
    > improve your life in ways you didn't see possible.
    > </sarc>


    Oh can I have one?

    --
    LTP

    When the llama speaks you listen. Unfortunately the llama hasn't spoken
    yet.
  20. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 02:28:58 -0700, "Luc The Perverse"
    <sll_NOSPAM_zm@remove.cc.usu.edu> wrote:
    >Oh can I have one?

    Yes, for only $39!

    http://www.opera.com/buy/

    --
    "No I'm saying that I'm a cow dung." - Stephen "Suupernuubie" Ung
    "Eat a bag of hell." - Cyric The Mad
    "I'm all for the girl on girl action, but it could put a strain on the marriage" - LTP

    ICQ:65589349 MSN:ktwilson86@hotmail.com (BUT DON'T SEND E-MAIL!)
    Zealot the Crazy Lui
    Grand 16-Star General and overall director of AGSC operations for the Pronoun Army(and webmaster)
    http://pronounarmy.homestead.com/ http://home.comcast.net/~ktwilson9999/
    re-vamped sig xp Build 2004.6
  21. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:33:29 -0800, Zealot The Crazy Lui
    <ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote:

    > >To make it possible for people to use Opera for free.
    >
    > People use Mozilla, Netscape, and IE for free, don't they? (ok, IE
    > only works on windows and Mac OS, so nearly all the people that use it
    > paid for Windows, but it's available as a free download as well...
    > without ads...) None of those have ads. I wonder how that works...
    > (</sarc)

    Are you really that naive?

    It's not a big mystery. IE is not Microsoft's main source revenue.
    Microsoft has shitloads of money, and they can afford giving IE away
    for free to maintain their monopoly.

    Mozilla was originally backed by AOL, but these days, Mozilla receives
    funding from huge corporations like IBM, Nokia and Google. I think
    they pretty much rely on these megacorporations to make donations in
    order to survive.

    There's Safari too of course, which is part of the commercial Mac OS X
    operating system.

    That leaves Opera as the only independent browser vendor. IE is backed
    by Microsoft. Mozilla was initially owned by AOL, but then came to
    rely on donations from other major corporations instead.

    If you think Firefox is some hobbyist project by a bunch of kids, you
    are dead wrong. Firefox is created by dedicated programmers who get
    paid to do work on it. The difference between Opera and Firefox is
    that Opera's programmers are paid as a result of someone choosing to
    pay for Opera because they want to use it. Firefox's programmers are
    paid because huge corporations want to use Firefox to weaken
    Microsoft, and thereby strengthen their own grip on the market.

    Is it necessarily a bad thing that wannabe monopolists like Nokia fund
    Mozilla? Of course not. But perhaps you understand now how "free" is
    only free as long as someone else is paying for it. In this case,
    Mozilla is a weapon many huge corporations want to use against
    Microsoft. They basically rely on these corporations to keep up the
    pace.
  22. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 12:24:10 +0100, Moen
    <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:
    >Are you really that naive?
    >
    >It's not a big mystery. IE is not Microsoft's main source revenue.
    >Microsoft has shitloads of money, and they can afford giving IE away
    >for free to maintain their monopoly.

    I know this. Microsoft makes plenty of money off of other things like
    windows and now xbox.

    >Mozilla was originally backed by AOL, but these days, Mozilla receives
    >funding from huge corporations like IBM, Nokia and Google. I think
    >they pretty much rely on these megacorporations to make donations in
    >order to survive.
    >
    >There's Safari too of course, which is part of the commercial Mac OS X
    >operating system.

    Being developed by Apple itself now, I believe.

    >That leaves Opera as the only independent browser vendor. IE is backed
    >by Microsoft. Mozilla was initially owned by AOL, but then came to
    >rely on donations from other major corporations instead.

    Mozilla *is* independant. It's not owned by anyone. That's the
    definition of independant.

    >If you think Firefox is some hobbyist project by a bunch of kids, you
    >are dead wrong. Firefox is created by dedicated programmers who get
    >paid to do work on it. The difference between Opera and Firefox is
    >that Opera's programmers are paid as a result of someone choosing to
    >pay for Opera because they want to use it. Firefox's programmers are
    >paid because huge corporations want to use Firefox to weaken
    >Microsoft, and thereby strengthen their own grip on the market.
    >
    >Is it necessarily a bad thing that wannabe monopolists like Nokia fund
    >Mozilla? Of course not. But perhaps you understand now how "free" is
    >only free as long as someone else is paying for it. In this case,
    >Mozilla is a weapon many huge corporations want to use against
    >Microsoft. They basically rely on these corporations to keep up the
    >pace.

    If this were true, then why wouldn't those same corporations pay
    Opera's devs for exactly the same reason? Especially if Opera is so
    much better than Mozilla, as you continually claim. Wouldn't it suit
    them even better to have 3 or 4 competing browsers rather than just 2?
    Every browser that takes a person away from IE helps them, in your
    scenario. How do IBM and Nokia stand to gain if MS loses it's browser
    share? Microsoft obviously doesn't make any money off of IE, why
    should it matter so much to them and benefit other companies so much
    if they do lose browser share? Your conspiracy theory seems a little
    flawed to me.

    --
    "No I'm saying that I'm a cow dung." - Stephen "Suupernuubie" Ung
    "Eat a bag of hell." - Cyric The Mad
    "I'm all for the girl on girl action, but it could put a strain on the marriage" - LTP

    ICQ:65589349 MSN:ktwilson86@hotmail.com (BUT DON'T SEND E-MAIL!)
    Zealot the Crazy Lui
    Grand 16-Star General and overall director of AGSC operations for the Pronoun Army(and webmaster)
    http://pronounarmy.homestead.com/ http://home.comcast.net/~ktwilson9999/
    re-vamped sig xp Build 2004.6
  23. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:31:48 -0800, Zealot The Crazy Lui
    <ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote:

    > Most of the world? I don't know anyone that uses dial-up...

    Maybe you are lucky and live in an area where it is actually possible
    to get broadband, and it's cheap enough for everyone to afford. Or
    everyone is rich enough, so it doesn't matter.

    > Insane folder nonsense? You mean organization?

    Rigid organization was nice when there were only a few files and you
    could keep it nice and tidy. But research shows that this approach is
    extremely limited. It simply does not scale well. The more data you
    get, the more folders you get, and it becomes increasingly difficult
    to find what you are looking for. Not only that, but data often
    belongs in more than one folder. So if you have a photo from your
    vacation in Brazil, do you put that in your photo folder or your
    Brazil folder? You could duplicate the data of course, but that's a
    hack - a workaround. It doesn't address the real problem: Lots of data
    is difficult to handle with folders, and data doesn't necessarily
    belong in just one place.

    This is why even Microsoft wants to move from folders to a search
    based file system some time in the future. It's easier to tell the OS
    that "I want all my holiday photos" and get everything delivered right
    away, than manually digging through lots of folders to find what you
    are looking for.

    > Filters are for moving mails around to different folders, why would
    > you do that manually?

    Because filters don't always apply to all mails. I should know,
    receiving hundreds of e-mails every day to my work account...

    > I don't think Opera is the best mail client, but I guess that's mostly
    > a matter of personal opinion.

    Indeed it is. Opera gets it right, in that it is based on searches,
    rather than folders. Sure, others are doing the same thing, but it's
    more of a patched folder based system with searches, rather than doing
    it right from the grund up.

    > If they aren't trying to compete with other IRC clients, then why
    > include the feature?

    Because built-in chat is something which makes sense, if you consider
    the fact that Opera is not just a browser, but also does
    communication?

    > I do have two hands, you know. One rests on the mouse, one at the
    > keyboard, and why would you have to hunt for keys? I know where they
    > all are, they don't move around or anything. It's certainly easier to
    > hit ctrl-something or other than wave around your mouse like a crazed
    > lunatic.

    You don't have to wave around like a lunatic. You can hold down the
    left mouse button and click the right one to move forward or log in,
    for example. Easier than clicking the forward button or clicking
    "submit" on the page. I also find it easier to just drag down, right
    to close a page, than to move my hands to do Ctrl+W, or even Ctrl+F4.
  24. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 12:33:44 +0100, Moen
    <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:

    >On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:31:48 -0800, Zealot The Crazy Lui
    ><ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote:
    >
    >> Most of the world? I don't know anyone that uses dial-up...
    >
    >Maybe you are lucky and live in an area where it is actually possible
    >to get broadband, and it's cheap enough for everyone to afford. Or
    >everyone is rich enough, so it doesn't matter.
    >
    >> Insane folder nonsense? You mean organization?
    >
    >Rigid organization was nice when there were only a few files and you
    >could keep it nice and tidy. But research shows that this approach is
    >extremely limited. It simply does not scale well. The more data you
    >get, the more folders you get, and it becomes increasingly difficult
    >to find what you are looking for. Not only that, but data often
    >belongs in more than one folder. So if you have a photo from your
    >vacation in Brazil, do you put that in your photo folder or your
    >Brazil folder? You could duplicate the data of course, but that's a
    >hack - a workaround. It doesn't address the real problem: Lots of data
    >is difficult to handle with folders, and data doesn't necessarily
    >belong in just one place.
    >
    >This is why even Microsoft wants to move from folders to a search
    >based file system some time in the future. It's easier to tell the OS
    >that "I want all my holiday photos" and get everything delivered right
    >away, than manually digging through lots of folders to find what you
    >are looking for.

    My gmail and Yahoo mail accounts have search features that return
    nearly instantly. I don't really use POP3 e-mail anymore, because
    web-based e-mail is just so much more convenient. You have access to
    all of your e-mails no matter when or where they were received
    wherever you are, it's fast, easy, lots of storage... and best of all,
    it's free. The ads in gmail are incredibly non-intrusive (unlike the
    Opera banner...), they show up as a few small lines of text off to the
    side of the screen with a link. Folders and filters keep everything
    organized and where it's supposed to go, though the majority of my
    mail goes straight in the inbox and stays there, if I get one that
    needs special attention or a recurring e-mail group/sender it gets
    shipped off to a specific folder where I can notice it easier and get
    to it faster. If I had no folders or filters, I would have to remember
    to search manually every time I checked my e-mail for those specific
    e-mails, and that's something I wouldn't remember to do.

    >Because filters don't always apply to all mails. I should know,
    >receiving hundreds of e-mails every day to my work account...

    No, they don't, but what doesn't get filtered can just sit in the
    inbox... is there something wrong with that?

    >Indeed it is. Opera gets it right, in that it is based on searches,
    >rather than folders. Sure, others are doing the same thing, but it's
    >more of a patched folder based system with searches, rather than doing
    >it right from the grund up.

    Is there something inherently wrong with folders? They are simply a
    way to organize things. You can search through them just as quickly as
    if there were no folders, so I'm not sure what you have against them.

    >Because built-in chat is something which makes sense, if you consider
    >the fact that Opera is not just a browser, but also does
    >communication?

    Communication? I guess... it makes more sense to group a wimpy IRC
    client with an app like Trillian than with a browser, IMO, but
    whattever floats your boat. :)

    >You don't have to wave around like a lunatic. You can hold down the
    >left mouse button and click the right one to move forward or log in,
    >for example. Easier than clicking the forward button or clicking
    >"submit" on the page.

    Generally, when logging in to something, you have to enter a login
    name and password. In that case, it's much quicker and easier to
    simply hit the enter key. (I don't trust my passwords to be remembered
    by a browser or by any program or plugin) And what if there are
    multiple "login" buttons on a page? How can it always choose the
    correct one? (example: 6 months ago http://games.swirve.com/earth had
    4 separate login/password fields on the same page with 4 separate
    login buttons. You would still have to click the login button that
    went with the appropriate field. They've since changed the system, but
    that's just a for instance.)

    > I also find it easier to just drag down, right
    >to close a page, than to move my hands to do Ctrl+W, or even Ctrl+F4.

    Drag down, move the cursor up and click... what's the difference?

    --
    "No I'm saying that I'm a cow dung." - Stephen "Suupernuubie" Ung
    "Eat a bag of hell." - Cyric The Mad
    "I'm all for the girl on girl action, but it could put a strain on the marriage" - LTP

    ICQ:65589349 MSN:ktwilson86@hotmail.com (BUT DON'T SEND E-MAIL!)
    Zealot the Crazy Lui
    Grand 16-Star General and overall director of AGSC operations for the Pronoun Army(and webmaster)
    http://pronounarmy.homestead.com/ http://home.comcast.net/~ktwilson9999/
    re-vamped sig xp Build 2004.6
  25. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 12:24:10 +0100, Moen
    <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:

    >> People use Mozilla, Netscape, and IE for free, don't they? (ok, IE
    >> only works on windows and Mac OS, so nearly all the people that use it
    >> paid for Windows, but it's available as a free download as well...
    >> without ads...) None of those have ads. I wonder how that works...
    >> (</sarc)
    >
    >Are you really that naive?
    >
    >It's not a big mystery. IE is not Microsoft's main source revenue.
    >Microsoft has shitloads of money, and they can afford giving IE away
    >for free to maintain their monopoly.
    >
    >Mozilla was originally backed by AOL, but these days, Mozilla receives
    >funding from huge corporations like IBM, Nokia and Google. I think
    >they pretty much rely on these megacorporations to make donations in
    >order to survive.
    >
    >There's Safari too of course, which is part of the commercial Mac OS X
    >operating system.
    >
    >That leaves Opera as the only independent browser vendor. IE is backed
    >by Microsoft. Mozilla was initially owned by AOL, but then came to
    >rely on donations from other major corporations instead.
    >
    >If you think Firefox is some hobbyist project by a bunch of kids, you
    >are dead wrong. Firefox is created by dedicated programmers who get
    >paid to do work on it. The difference between Opera and Firefox is
    >that Opera's programmers are paid as a result of someone choosing to
    >pay for Opera because they want to use it. Firefox's programmers are
    >paid because huge corporations want to use Firefox to weaken
    >Microsoft, and thereby strengthen their own grip on the market.
    >
    >Is it necessarily a bad thing that wannabe monopolists like Nokia fund
    >Mozilla? Of course not. But perhaps you understand now how "free" is
    >only free as long as someone else is paying for it. In this case,
    >Mozilla is a weapon many huge corporations want to use against
    >Microsoft. They basically rely on these corporations to keep up the
    >pace.

    Ah, yes, and the people behind Firefox killed JFK too! And Elvis! And
    they shot JR! And the Sheriff!

    Oh brother...

    --
    byerstheoblivious
  26. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 12:33:44 +0100, Moen
    <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:

    >You don't have to wave around like a lunatic. You can hold down the
    >left mouse button and click the right one to move forward or log in,
    >for example. Easier than clicking the forward button or clicking
    >"submit" on the page. I also find it easier to just drag down, right
    >to close a page, than to move my hands to do Ctrl+W, or even Ctrl+F4.

    I find it easier to press the little cross in the corner...

    --
    byerstheoblivious
  27. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 17:59:01 +0100, Byers ex machina <don't@think.so>
    wrote:
    >I find it easier to press the little cross in the corner...

    lol... ditto. :)

    --
    "No I'm saying that I'm a cow dung." - Stephen "Suupernuubie" Ung
    "Eat a bag of hell." - Cyric The Mad
    "I'm all for the girl on girl action, but it could put a strain on the marriage" - LTP

    ICQ:65589349 MSN:ktwilson86@hotmail.com (BUT DON'T SEND E-MAIL!)
    Zealot the Crazy Lui
    Grand 16-Star General and overall director of AGSC operations for the Pronoun Army(and webmaster)
    http://pronounarmy.homestead.com/ http://home.comcast.net/~ktwilson9999/
    re-vamped sig xp Build 2004.6
  28. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    "Zealot The Crazy Lui" <ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:1109267700.7a167d1e6de4721861bdd3126c6d32b7@bubbanews...
    > On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 02:28:58 -0700, "Luc The Perverse"
    > <sll_NOSPAM_zm@remove.cc.usu.edu> wrote:
    > >Oh can I have one?
    >
    > Yes, for only $39!
    >
    > http://www.opera.com/buy/


    Should it influence my decision that this amount of money is 1$ less than my
    means of living for the next week?

    --
    LTP

    When the llama speaks you listen. Unfortunately the llama hasn't spoken
    yet.
  29. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    "Zealot The Crazy Lui" <ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:1109193678.478cecf63c7e94427d66b10def949266@bubbanews...
    > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:59:35 +0100, Moen
    > <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:
    >>Actually, most of the world is still on dialup, and 1 MB is not
    >>insignificant if you want to download something and do other things
    >>online at the same time. Also, isn't it funny that Firefox is bigger
    >>despite having very few features built in by default? ;)
    >
    > Most of the world? I don't know anyone that uses dial-up...

    I do, mainy due to the term nature of broadband here.

    --
    Marsh Lion
    Life is an audition
    The show is heaven
    Are you in?
  30. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    "Marsh Lion" <bbarnes@SPAMParadise.net.nz> wrote in message
    news:4220e7d4$1@clear.net.nz...
    >
    > "Zealot The Crazy Lui" <ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
    > news:1109193678.478cecf63c7e94427d66b10def949266@bubbanews...
    > > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:59:35 +0100, Moen
    > > <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:
    > >>Actually, most of the world is still on dialup, and 1 MB is not
    > >>insignificant if you want to download something and do other things
    > >>online at the same time. Also, isn't it funny that Firefox is bigger
    > >>despite having very few features built in by default? ;)
    > >
    > > Most of the world? I don't know anyone that uses dial-up...
    >
    > I do, mainy due to the term nature of broadband here.


    I have NEVER heard of anyone who can't pay for their own equipment and get
    going that way without a contract. It's the same with Cell phones, you
    don't need a contract, people sign up for a contract because they don't feel
    that they want to own their equipment. (Of course, cell phones will be
    outdated much sooner than broadband equipment)

    --
    LTP

    When the llama speaks you listen. Unfortunately the llama hasn't spoken
    yet.
  31. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    "Luc The Perverse" <sll_NOSPAM_zm@remove.cc.usu.edu> wrote in message
    news:38c9noF5od1hsU1@individual.net...
    > "Marsh Lion" <bbarnes@SPAMParadise.net.nz> wrote in message
    > news:4220e7d4$1@clear.net.nz...
    >>
    >> "Zealot The Crazy Lui" <ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote in message
    >> news:1109193678.478cecf63c7e94427d66b10def949266@bubbanews...

    >> > Most of the world? I don't know anyone that uses dial-up...
    >>
    >> I do, mainy due to the term nature of broadband here.
    >
    >
    > I have NEVER heard of anyone who can't pay for their own equipment and get
    > going that way without a contract. It's the same with Cell phones, you
    > don't need a contract, people sign up for a contract because they don't
    > feel
    > that they want to own their equipment. (Of course, cell phones will be
    > outdated much sooner than broadband equipment)

    While yes I can pay for the equipment etc, I just don't feel that it is
    worth it for my position in life. Dialup suits me for the time being, and I
    don't want the extra finanical commitments that broadband requires here.
    --
    Marsh Lion
    Life is an audition
    The show is heaven
    Are you in?
  32. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 10:10:59 -0800, Zealot The Crazy Lui
    <ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote:

    > >That leaves Opera as the only independent browser vendor. IE is backed
    > >by Microsoft. Mozilla was initially owned by AOL, but then came to
    > >rely on donations from other major corporations instead.
    >
    > Mozilla *is* independant. It's not owned by anyone. That's the
    > definition of independant.

    It depends on money to continue developing its products. That money,
    again, comes from major corporations.

    > If this were true, then why wouldn't those same corporations pay
    > Opera's devs for exactly the same reason?

    No idea. Opera doesn't accept donations? Opera is closed-source? Who
    knows?

    > Especially if Opera is so much better than Mozilla, as you continually
    > claim.

    I think it's better, but of course, different people have different
    tastes.

    > Wouldn't it suit them even better to have 3 or 4 competing browsers
    > rather than just 2?

    Opera's main market is the mobile market these days, but it's still
    going strong on PC too. Actually, if you look at Opera's list of
    customers/partners, you can see companies like Google, IBM and Nokia.
    But Opera's funds don't come from donations.

    > Every browser that takes a person away from IE helps them, in your
    > scenario. How do IBM and Nokia stand to gain if MS loses it's browser
    > share?

    They stand to gain a lot. Nokia is terrified of Microsoft in the
    mobile market.

    > Microsoft obviously doesn't make any money off of IE

    They make shitloads of money off IE. Not because they are selling it
    separately or directly, but because it has become an important part of
    "the Microsoft world". It helps them maintain their monopoly. Why do
    you think Microsoft saw the Internet as a huge threat to their
    monopoly, and decided to do something about it?

    > Your conspiracy theory seems a little flawed to me.

    It is not a conspiracy theory that a lot of people want to see
    Microsoft dead, and that Mozilla gets money from other huge
    corporations.
  33. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 10:24:36 -0800, Zealot The Crazy Lui
    <ktwilson9999@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote:

    > My gmail and Yahoo mail accounts have search features that return
    > nearly instantly.

    Funny you should mention that, seeing as Google's Gmail mimics Opera's
    way of handling mail and all ;)

    > The ads in gmail are incredibly non-intrusive (unlike the Opera banner...)

    Funny you should mention that, too, seeing as you can choose to use
    Google ads in Opera :)

    > If I had no folders or filters, I would have to remember to search manually
    > every time I checked my e-mail for those specific e-mails, and that's
    > something I wouldn't remember to do.

    Or you could use labels in Opera.

    > Is there something inherently wrong with folders? They are simply a
    > way to organize things. You can search through them just as quickly as
    > if there were no folders, so I'm not sure what you have against them.

    I just explained that. They don't reflect the fact that mails don't
    typically belong in just one single folder. It can belong in several.
    Also, searches *can* be fast, but they aren't. Opera's searches take
    less than a second, even with a hundred thousand e-mails in the
    storage. I've tried it myself :)

    > >You don't have to wave around like a lunatic. You can hold down the
    > >left mouse button and click the right one to move forward or log in,
    > >for example. Easier than clicking the forward button or clicking
    > >"submit" on the page.
    >
    > Generally, when logging in to something, you have to enter a login
    > name and password.

    Not if you are using Opera's password manager, the Wand, to save your
    login information for you :)

    > I don't trust my passwords to be remembered by a browser or by any
    > program or plugin

    That's not a problem. You can just use a master password to add strong
    encryption to your stored passwords. They are encrypted even if you
    don't use a master password, though.

    I use the Wand for just about everything, except my netbank.

    > And what if there are multiple "login" buttons on a page?

    Dunno? Wand probably saves the right button that needs to be pressed.

    > > I also find it easier to just drag down, right
    > >to close a page, than to move my hands to do Ctrl+W, or even Ctrl+F4.
    >
    > Drag down, move the cursor up and click... what's the difference?

    With a high resolution? It's quite a big difference to drag across a
    tiny part of the screen, as opposed to all the way up to the corner.
    Not to mention having to watch the cursor to hit the damn X up there.
  34. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:33:33 +0100, Moen
    <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:

    >> Mozilla *is* independant. It's not owned by anyone. That's the
    >> definition of independant.
    >
    >It depends on money to continue developing its products. That money,
    >again, comes from major corporations.

    Name one product that doesn't depend on money to continue developing
    products?

    [...]
    >> Every browser that takes a person away from IE helps them, in your
    >> scenario. How do IBM and Nokia stand to gain if MS loses it's browser
    >> share?
    >
    >They stand to gain a lot. Nokia is terrified of Microsoft in the
    >mobile market.

    Nokia should frankly be afraid of other companies than MS. Their
    market share is going to hell in a handbasket, and their pathetic
    gaming consoles aren't going to turn that trend.

    >> Microsoft obviously doesn't make any money off of IE
    >
    >They make shitloads of money off IE. Not because they are selling it
    >separately or directly, but because it has become an important part of
    >"the Microsoft world". It helps them maintain their monopoly. Why do
    >you think Microsoft saw the Internet as a huge threat to their
    >monopoly, and decided to do something about it?

    Not everyone wants to take the time downloading a different
    application for every little thing. They expect the computer to be
    ready to allow them access to most services as long as the operating
    system is set up. IE is a natural part of Windows, especially now when
    many if not most computers have internet access. If Microsoft had the
    smarts to see that far ahead when browsers were still a niche market,
    that's your problem, not theirs.
    And even if MS stopped including IE in their standard Windows
    packages, and instead had it as a download from their website, most
    people would still just download it from there instead of chasing
    around for other broswers with quirky names and annoying fees.

    >> Your conspiracy theory seems a little flawed to me.
    >
    >It is not a conspiracy theory that a lot of people want to see
    >Microsoft dead, and that Mozilla gets money from other huge
    >corporations.

    I'm fairly certain that the number of companies that benefit from
    making applications or services for the Windows operating systems far
    outweigh the ones that would rather see the company dead and buried.

    --
    byerstheoblivious
  35. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:41:26 +0100, Moen
    <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:

    >> Is there something inherently wrong with folders? They are simply a
    >> way to organize things. You can search through them just as quickly as
    >> if there were no folders, so I'm not sure what you have against them.
    >
    >I just explained that. They don't reflect the fact that mails don't
    >typically belong in just one single folder. It can belong in several.

    Yes, let's be overly confusing.
    [...]

    >> Generally, when logging in to something, you have to enter a login
    >> name and password.
    >
    >Not if you are using Opera's password manager, the Wand, to save your
    >login information for you :)

    Never once has that worked with any of my passwords. Of course, you
    can make some wisecracks regarding my inability to use it correctly,
    but I doubt my handling of the thing is any different from most other
    users.

    >> Drag down, move the cursor up and click... what's the difference?
    >
    >With a high resolution? It's quite a big difference to drag across a
    >tiny part of the screen, as opposed to all the way up to the corner.
    >Not to mention having to watch the cursor to hit the damn X up there.

    You don't have watch the cursor hit anything. If you drag your mouse
    as far as it goes to the upper right corner of the screen and click,
    it will always hit the cross, regardless of the fact that the cursor
    might visibly be outside the screen. Much easier than waving your
    hands around like a flailing idiot.

    --
    byerstheoblivious
  36. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:14:48 +0100, Byers ex machina <don't@think.so>
    wrote:

    > Name one product that doesn't depend on money to continue developing
    > products?

    Exactly. And while Opera is a commercial company, Mozilla has a
    reputation of being the little David fighting Goliath, when the fact
    is that Mozilla has several Goliaths behind it. Mozilla is not "the
    people", it is backed by major corporations. It exists because of
    these corporations.

    > >> Microsoft obviously doesn't make any money off of IE
    > >
    > >They make shitloads of money off IE. Not because they are selling it
    > >separately or directly, but because it has become an important part of
    > >"the Microsoft world". It helps them maintain their monopoly. Why do
    > >you think Microsoft saw the Internet as a huge threat to their
    > >monopoly, and decided to do something about it?
    >
    > Not everyone wants to take the time downloading a different
    > application for every little thing.

    Wow, guess Opera is perfect for them, then, having all these nice
    things built in ;)

    Not sure what this has to do with Microsoft not making money off IE,
    though. That IE is a natural part of Windows does not negate the fact
    that they've profited immensely from it.
  37. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:26:07 +0100, Byers ex machina <don't@think.so>
    wrote:

    > Never once has that worked with any of my passwords.

    What passwords? Do you have a specific site it isn't working on?

    > Of course, you can make some wisecracks regarding my inability to use it
    > correctly, but I doubt my handling of the thing is any different from most
    > other users.

    Most other users don't seem to have problems saving their passwords.
    That goes for complete newbies too. Of course, you have been known to
    exaggerate just to make a point, and in this case you probably haven't
    even given it a real go :)

    > If you drag your mouse as far as it goes to the upper right corner of the
    > screen and click, it will always hit the cross, regardless of the fact that the
    > cursor might visibly be outside the screen.

    You are still moving the cursor across the screen, as opposed to just
    doing a flick of the wrist.

    > Much easier than waving your hands around like a flailing idiot.

    Mouse gestures are not about waving one's hands around, actually.
  38. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:22:33 +0100, Moen
    <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:

    >> Never once has that worked with any of my passwords.
    >
    >What passwords? Do you have a specific site it isn't working on?

    Yes. EVERYTHING! :P

    >> Of course, you can make some wisecracks regarding my inability to use it
    >> correctly, but I doubt my handling of the thing is any different from most
    >> other users.
    >
    >Most other users don't seem to have problems saving their passwords.
    >That goes for complete newbies too. Of course, you have been known to
    >exaggerate just to make a point,

    Ehrm. I resent that!

    >and in this case you probably haven't
    >even given it a real go :)

    Bah, if it requires that much experimentation, it just isn't
    user-friendly enough. :P

    >> If you drag your mouse as far as it goes to the upper right corner of the
    >> screen and click, it will always hit the cross, regardless of the fact that the
    >> cursor might visibly be outside the screen.
    >
    >You are still moving the cursor across the screen, as opposed to just
    >doing a flick of the wrist.

    Uh, moving the mouse from one point of the screen to another isn't the
    massive undertaking you make it out to be.
    And whenever I've tried mouse gestures like that, it's had a high
    probability of backfiring, i.e., Doing something else than I was
    looking to do, because my movements weren't precise enough, or some
    such, upon which I have been forced to close yet another window, or
    navigate myself back to the window I was viewing.

    >> Much easier than waving your hands around like a flailing idiot.
    >
    >Mouse gestures are not about waving one's hands around, actually.

    It's waving your hands around, holding a mouse...

    --
    byerstheoblivious
  39. Archived from groups: alt.games.starcraft (More info?)

    Byers ex machina wrote:

    > On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:22:33 +0100, Moen
    > <h-news@operamail.dot.com.invalid> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>Never once has that worked with any of my passwords.
    >>
    >>What passwords? Do you have a specific site it isn't working on?
    >
    >
    > Yes. EVERYTHING! :P

    Never been a problem for me. though I have noticed https sites do not record

    Give us a 'for instance' ... a site, even

    >>>If you drag your mouse as far as it goes to the upper right corner of the
    >>>screen and click, it will always hit the cross, regardless of the fact that the
    >>>cursor might visibly be outside the screen.
    >>
    >>You are still moving the cursor across the screen, as opposed to just
    >>doing a flick of the wrist.
    >
    >
    > Uh, moving the mouse from one point of the screen to another isn't the
    > massive undertaking you make it out to be.
    > And whenever I've tried mouse gestures like that, it's had a high
    > probability of backfiring, i.e., Doing something else than I was
    > looking to do, because my movements weren't precise enough, or some
    > such, upon which I have been forced to close yet another window, or
    > navigate myself back to the window I was viewing.

    I feel the same way about the mouse gestures, which for some reason
    still seem to happen even though i told opera i did not want to use them.

    And I use folders extensively in both my email and drive organization.
    It is not a technical feat to duplicate something if required, or have a
    root folder for stuff that could be a little broader. For example I have
    a 'Yahoo' folder on my email client, which has sub folders for the
    groups, and is where i put anything that is related to Yahoo (the site)
    and not me personally or the groups or the sites i run.

    Folders make things easier to find, not harder. And searching, at least
    in netscape, is quick enough for me. And I have tried it with bucket
    loads of emails on the system too.

    If MS comes out with a database based OS (as is being suggested), which
    does not have files or folders, I doubt very much that I will use it. No
    matter how much it suggests to give me ecstasy, I like using folders and
    files! It's not a matter of familiarity, it is a matter of logic! If
    folders were not logical, why would they have come into existence in the
    first place???

    --
    Lord Phorse
    Remove the number(s) from the email address
    for fastest reply. More sig here:
    http://phorse.netfirms.com/sig.html
Ask a new question

Read More

Opera Games Starcraft Video Games