G

Guest

Guest
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
 
G

Guest

Guest
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.
 
G

Guest

Guest
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
 
G

Guest

Guest
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.
 
G

Guest

Guest
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.
 
G

Guest

Guest
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
 
G

Guest

Guest
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.
 
G

Guest

Guest
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
 
G

Guest

Guest
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.

?
 
G

Guest

Guest
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.
 
G

Guest

Guest
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.
 
G

Guest

Guest
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
 
G

Guest

Guest
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.
 
G

Guest

Guest
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... :)
 
G

Guest

Guest
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
 
G

Guest

Guest
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
 
G

Guest

Guest
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
 
G

Guest

Guest
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.
 
G

Guest

Guest
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
 
G

Guest

Guest
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.
 
G

Guest

Guest
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
 
G

Guest

Guest
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.
 
G

Guest

Guest
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
 
G

Guest

Guest
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.
 
G

Guest

Guest
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