3 ms·
Why not Opera? The new Opera is Chromium with what I think is a better design[1] that respects your OS[2]. You don't have to sign in to sync, but you can if you
by hadrien01 11y ago
Why not Opera? The new Opera is Chromium with what I think is a better design[1] that respects your OS[2]. You don't have to sign in to sync, but you can if you want. It's not open, but they're not an ad company. And finally, it's said to be faster than Chrome.
[1] I prefer Firefox so I use the FxOpera theme
[2] Well, it tries its best on Linux (unlike Chrome), but it's near perfect on Windows and Mac OS
- V-2 11y agoPersonally I don't use Opera because it doesn't let you customize mouse gestures. They consider it too geeky a feature :) http://i.imgur.com/fDSjYZq.png http://i.imgur.com/fDSjYZq.png
- sup 11y ago>but they're not an ad company I got bad news for you
- hadrien01 11y agoTIL: http://operamediaworks.com/ http://operamediaworks.com/ But still, I don't think they track searches and history like Chrome.
- OnleMeMeMe 11y agoTrying Opera now, turned off after 5sec b/c it uses an 'installer' in OS X instead of drag&drop to apps.
- hadrien01 11y agoWeird, I have an iWork DVD with an installer. Should I just throw it up after discovering it doesn't use drag&drop, without even trying the app? Many programs do that, even Apple ones: iLife, Microsoft Office, Adobe Creative Suite, etc.
- OnleMeMeMe 11y agoYes, because it manipulates the system in some way beyond copying the app to app, it's often hard to deinstall without traces, hard to keep two versions side by side etc. So if the pain of the installer is larger than the added benefit of using Opera vs. Chrome, then yes.
- 1stop 11y agoReally? An app can still freely write to ~/Library and cause all the problems you just said. The installer is the wrong thing to object to...
- OnleMeMeMe 11y agoThe installer is a strong indication of this behavior.