If you are freaked by opera's simple use of name completion, (it also involves the destination server DNS, that is how it can resolve BBC, and even GMAIL into the right adress..) then go try the same with the FF adress bar.. I typed in 'quantum theory' and it took me straight to the wiki article on it...

Other features?? do you LOVE carefully selecting a very long URL, that is just plain text, so that when you 'right click, goto url' it does not get an error due to the punctuation that you missed or added???

Or would you rather just move your cursor to the end of that text, and double click, so selecting the *whole url* and stop you tearing your hair out due to a shaky hand missing something???

- after 9.27, this was removed.... :(

Or say you find an interesting link, that *is* 'active', but goes straight to the mediafile, locking up the PC due to the sites bad code???

In 9.27, you can just select the main part of the URL, and 'goto URL'... :)

you cannot do that in V10, for some strange reason...

Unless you LOVE selecting, copy, paste into url, etc...

FF has an extension, that will convert ALL 'text links' into 'real links' :) :) - did opera forget something??

Opera's much loved, ground breaking :P 'speeddial' STILL looks 'beta' due to its lack of functionality...

FF got an idea from this (copyright? protected? no sign of that... :P) and made their own speeddial, with many extras users wanted in the opera forum... multiple groups of speeddials, naming, etc, etc...

Is it any wonder that opera is 'dragging along the bottom' while FF is now threatening IE's share???

I ROFL when they say 'share increased by twice!' -- double a very small number is STILL a small number...)

Since I don't have Opera on the machine here, it'll have to be number two... although you may have a point.

A machine that can resolve "CNN" to http://www.cnn.com/ and "BBC" to http://news.bbc.co.uk/ is getting a bit too clever, in my opinion. It may decide that I'm not pulling my weight in the relationship, and that it's better off without me.

But yes they were quite proud of their auto complete invention that consists of putting "http" and "www" and "com" - now variable to local preference - around arbitrary text in the address bar. But I didn't like to use it. I hope they haven't broken it.

I use bookmarks from the menu, and Opera's bookmarks can also be associated with alias of 1 or more characters in, as far as I recall, the same address bar. Also when you type in the address bar, recently visited sites (if retained) are, or can be, automatically searched - which even IE does after all - but I haven't thought much about how useful that is, or isn't.

I also use the "legacy" keystroke controls for Opera - for instance 1 and 2 to flip tabs - and nowadays I have to select that mode in any new install of Opera. I hope they keep them around as an option. Although ironically I'm using touchscreen software (Fitaly) instead of a keyboard, due to disability.

I have been using & supporting opera since V7... even when features were trimmed - the address bar was the last straw...

so, dig out your copy of opera10.10, and try this...

Type BBC or CNN (just the single word) on the address bar - I use it often to go **straight** to the news - No fiddling with extra stuff, no extra clicks or going via Google!! (er, is that not what the separate, dedicated 'search box' on the right is for???)

- No, it does NOT 'guess'!! Look in 'tools, prefs, network, server name completion' - you can set it to put what you like in front of, and after, the word you type... very simple...

- Yes, I have tried build 3403 of opera 10.6... and it is STILL as bad! The above feature does not work, even though the menu entries are there..
I do believe they were working on a 'smart search' similar to FF for V10.5, but suspect they gave up , or the guy working on it left...
and management dont seem to care for old users, they would rather have new ones, who do not know or need 'functionality' but just want speed...

Until they get tired of that, find it wont do many of their websites, slows down/ overuses ram, freezes flash, etc... so they go back to FF or chrome...

Since clearly you have very low expectations. But high demands perhaps.

I launch search from Opera's address bar by leading with g for Google, followed by search terms. There are several alternat°ves to g, for alternative services. I'd rather tell the computer what I want it to do, not have it guess.

I mean, if they write a test, then they know what the browser should do. So they should be able to make the browser do that.

Well, okay, it isn't always that easy.

...conducted by yours truly prove that the latest Chrome browser STILL beats IE by around 500% in terms of speed of Javascript execution.

MS IE will NEVER have competitive Javascript performance until it loses significant browser market share because it undermines the business case for Silverlight.

ONLY if IE loses enough market share to FORCE MS to improve their Javascript performance will they make these improvements.

I predict this will happen in about 2 years time - summer/Autumn 2012.

H

MS keeps talking about their new browser, and although the IE browser is the most used, it's not because people enjoy it, it's because they don't feel the need to change it, so what I wonder, is there anyone at all looking forward to the new MS IE browser? anyone at all? I used to use Internet Explorer 6 because I was perfectly happy with it, I used Firefox a little as well but even back then it was bloated and in my eyes slower than IE6, I didn't jump up and down that IE7 came, in fact I changed to Chrome about that time because slow browsers sickens me and if there's a browser that's not slow it's Chrome!

I just don't get why they show IE like a product people would download thinking: OH BOY!
the majority who uses IE will just notice their browser is different since last update and possibly buggy as hell.

Maybe I'm just hating I've just yet to see anyone be excited about a new IE browser.

- Its not flash *itself*, but the brainless army of advertisers who make the most awful, obstrusive, noisy, flickery MESS just to push thier product...

Admen, IF you just make simple ad, and DO NOT use the various tracking methods that the above nightmare uses, then your ad will not be blocked...

And as said in above posts, ads have nothing to do with HTML5, that is for
video - another reason why flash will *still* be used(excepting those that use script and css to get the same functions), even when everyone is using HTML5 for the 'tube' stuff...

+1

I really don't understand why Apple or anyone else attacks flash.... there is nothing out there with its market penetration that allows programmers the ability to do just about anything. Sure, if there are some canned html5 templates for showing videos/photos, i'll probably use them. But if i need to create elaborate, ornate, interactive, and reusable frameworks, then flash fits the bill and is actually allowed by the market I'm in (government training).

i think it boils down to the fact that apple hates not being in control of the content creation process. the flash could be perfectly efficient and they would still bash it. this isn't about opinion, its about money.

apple really sucks, now. sad... i was a mac guy forever but their culture of control and isolation just doesn't work for true creators.

apple is for the consumer, now.

The MS claims are not as dodgy as the blogger (including the INQ) assumptions and extrapolations made.

The purpose of the tests submitted by MS to the W3C is to assist the working group to define their standards, so that ALL vendors know what is required of them, by eliminating some of the many ambiguities that currently exist.

i.e. So that the working group is able to point at a definitive "this is what we mean" example of the "this is what we said" spec.

It should not be surprising that MS passes all of the new tests it created and submitted to the W3C (why would you submit a test you can't pass?) but not even MS would claim (nor does it claim) that it passes all submitted tests, or that is 100% compatible with standards that are still under development and in a state of flux.

Other vendors will also be submitting tests, and you can be sure that they will pass them before submission, just as you can be sure other vendors will then need to work on their engines to ensure compliance.

make pretty page and photo transitions then you are ignorant on the topic. It does tons more, way more than HTML5 will do. There's got to be a way for it to coexist with HTML5 - I think it will.

New opera huh??? Is the 'smart address bar search' still *hopeless* compared to FF??

IE, when you type in 'google' does it still search GOOGLE for the word 'google' ???

No, adobe didnt deliberately create a buggy resource hog, they did it from sheer incompetence.

Does that ensure an alternative solution like HTML 5 will automatically be superior? Nope. But when you have an open standard and competition between countless browser implementations, chances are someone will deliver a better solution and you will be free to use the best one.

Yes, MS have created the test cases to highlight inconsistencies, but is that inconsistencies between the other browsers and MS's IE9?

In other words, is it still the case that all the other browsers are rendering the same and IE is the odd one out?

I appreciated IE8, as a web developer, but it is still a fussy engine with inconsistencies compared to ALL other standards compliant web browsers, and you still have to be very specific with certain elements because IE8 will still not anticipate what you are trying to do.

[quote]Perhaps too pro-M$ to even weigh the evidence before comment.

Anyway, here's the short version of the controversy from the 2nd link:
"The test-cases have been carefully chosen by Microsoft to give them a 100% success-rate on all test-categories." [/quote]

you are hopeless.

The test-cases were not chosen by Microsoft. these are NEW test-cases, designed by Microsoft, submitted to working group for betterment of web.

For the last time, THESE ARE NEW TEST CASES. NOT SELECTIVE TEST CASES.

No where MS claimed they already support HTML5/CSS3/SVG fully at the moment. they are working on it.

and while working, they found a lot of "inconsistency" in current implementation among various browsers.
that is why they came up with some new test-cases that will help to rectify the issues they identified.

these test cases are not the WHOLE set of html5/css3/svg test-cases.
get that in your head dumbass.

^^same goes to the author of this article.
and stop quoting from some random online multiplayer site.

A post on the news page of an online multiplayer strategy game is now considered "tech news", and regurgitated at face value? The Freeciv post doesn't even contain *any* links to the "tests" it used, giving its claims *zero* credibility!

What is wrong with the INQ these days? Is this what passes as news/journalism here? Did all the old guard abandon this sinking ship, leaving the rats behind? Garbage.

MS lied like this with their new so called ISO standard for .xdoc and the bribery and other crap they pulled to get an ISO standard (is that the one I use Open Office) format.

Perhaps too pro-M$ to even weigh the evidence before comment.

Anyway, here's the short version of the controversy from the 2nd link:
"The test-cases have been carefully chosen by Microsoft to give them a 100% success-rate on all test-categories."

"Do they really believe that Adobe intentionally created an inefficient product?"

Unintentionally, yes.

Also, 20-50% sounds OK. Flash itself is more like 40-100%.

HTML5 now.

wait. make it unbelievably stupid.

Lawrence Latif, go and read the FIRST few lines in the very first link you provided.
Those are not *complete* HTML5/CSS3 tests.
Those are the NEW tests that MS submitted to be included as OFFICIAL test.

Learn some fuck before posting these kinda retarded story.

By http://www.opera.com/docs/changelogs/windows/1053/
Opera 10.53 was just to fix a serious vulnerability - presumably its performance on the tests would be similar to the not much earlier released Opera 10.52. But they're developing Opera 10.54 and 10.60.

M$ has done that kind of thing many times in the past and it has not always proved dumb. Where M$ has been able to establish the de-facto standard it has been able to reap real profits.

How do you establish a de-facto standard? One way is to convince enough people that it exists and that you have it. This has been M$'s method in the past, and it has had some success with it.

Why do people seem to think that creating a standard that mimics flash will use less resources than flash? Do they really believe that Adobe intentionally created an inefficient product?

The only people who even know Microsoft has made this claim, are people who are perfectly capable of downloading a different browser if they discover that IE9 sucks. Browsers are free to the end user, so why would M$ bother lying? To inflate download figures? That's dumb, people measure browsers used, not browsers downloaded.