Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
OS X Businesses Operating Systems Software Utilities (Apple) Apple

Opera 7 for Mac OS X Preview Released 71

Posted by pudge from the mo-browser-mo-browser-mo-browser dept.
apetime writes "A preview of Opera 7 for Mac OS X has finally been released. The new version brings Mac Opera up to date with the latest Windows and Linux releases, including the Presto rendering engine, Opera Mail client, Opera Chat client for IRC, and integration with Mac OS X's Keychain and Address Book. After fears of cancellation when Safari came out, this is great news for recent switchers and Opera fans, and another great browser choice for Mac users."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Opera 7 for Mac OS X Preview Released More

Opera 7 for Mac OS X Preview Released

Comments Filter:

  • I find it hard to get excited about this (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tiktokfx ( 699424 ) on Friday March 19, 2004 @05:10PM (#8614550)

    I'm not saying the developers aren't providing a useful product, it just raises a question in my mind of how worthwhile it is.

    Looking at this release, it's not a bad program, but it just feels... bulky. The interface isn't remarkably clean... like a large number of crossplatform programs, it's a sort of bastard, unnatural amalgam of design ideas that don't sit very well with me, at least.

    In addition, I continue to not understand the point of writing one application to do several tenuously-linked tasks. Safari, Mail and Address Book are all separate apps, as an example. It's cleaner to provide well-defined applications to do certain functions, and integrate them through communications interfaces than it is to just stick functions X, Y and Z into one ball.

    • It's cleaner to provide well-defined applications to do certain functions ..

      Which is why I prefer mutt, kmail, etc, detest evolution, outlook, other everything+kitchen-sink apps.

      What makes this "can't win" amusing, go back a few versions. Opera was just a browser, arguably the best on the market, yet heavily diss'd for not having .. mail, address book, ...

      While Safari is clearly much better than IE, some of its design decisions are annoying, and don't care for Mac's email client. When I get back to th

      • " go back a few versions. Opera was just a browser"
        That is incorrect. Even Opera 3 had a newsreader and a send-only e-mail client. Opera hasn't been "just a browser" for a very, very long time. If ever.

        • Good catch. Iirc both were new with Opera 3. Send-only email client was for posting news via nntp, relatively minor to also support smtp.

          Re "if ever", expect Opera has always supported ftp. Never tried, maybe even gopher, etc. To me that's still "just a browser". Ymmv.

          Basic "can't win" point stands. Earlier Opera was diss'd for not having Netscape-like support for email, address book, etc. Now it does (?) and people are griping about that.

          Me? I'd prefer they implement as separate programs, integra

    • *sigh*

      Who cares whether you get excited about it? I'm not trolling here, I'm just pointing out that there are lots of people who get excited about using Opera for various reasons. Maybe it's all the accessibility options for persons with disabilities. Maybe they just like certain features you can't find in any other browser (like being able to move tabs around).

      Look, I'm not an Opera fanboy. I was excited about the new release, tried it for awhile, and went back to Safari. Neither of these browsers a
      • That's why I said I don't. As with everyone, my opinions just as valid or invalid as any other. I was commenting on how it FEELS, and I FEEL that it FEELS uncomfortable. I looked at the features, and none of them do anything for me. In addition, customizing the interface to look like other things does nothing for me. There's nothing unfair about what I said. It's all opinions.
    • It's cleaner to provide well-defined applications to do certain functions, and integrate them through communications interfaces than it is to just stick functions X, Y and Z into one ball.

      Cleanier and less buggy too, it might be worthwhile to point out.

      Otherwise I'm in complete agreement with almost all of the early posters here: 288 points Lucide Grande 'BFD'.

    • Re:I find it hard to get excited about this (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Feral Bueller ( 615138 ) on Friday March 19, 2004 @09:54PM (#8617624) Homepage
      "like a large number of crossplatform programs..."

      Hi. Some of us have to develop content for browsers. Not a blog, but content. Work. Jobs (if not careers) are involved.

      Opera is the only browser right now that I'm aware of besides the Mozilla family of browsers( camino, firebird/fox/chicken/etc. ) that is being written for so many platforms. Personally I think Mozilla's becoming a bit of a clusterfuck, but if you like tinkering with 15 browsers, go nuts: I've got work to do.

      I also notice you said "looking" at this release. Have you tried it? One of the developers I work with swears by it and so I've been using it for a couple of weeks now. While I'm not ready to make it my default browser just yet, it's a great product. Try it for a while. You might like it.

      • Your entire post seems to be based on the premise that because a program is cross-platform, that it somehow makes it more pleasant to use, as far as I can tell. Please note that I said program and not web browser, as I was referring to PROGRAMS and not WEB BROWSERS. Nowhere was I talking about HTML rendering. I'm talking about interface design.

  • At last! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Golias ( 176380 ) on Friday March 19, 2004 @05:31PM (#8614912)
    Yet Another Browser!

    Now can at last I can do exactly what I could already do with a slightly different interface.

  • ugh` (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by seven5 ( 596044 )
    Opera is pretty crappy, costs money, and renders poorly and slowly. Gimme a cocoa browser any day, it looks a ton better. And exactly why should i get excited about all those new features? If i wanted a bloated browser like that i'd use Mozilla, its free. Opera needs to take a look at what Mozilla is doing, and forget about a mail, irc, etc client inside their browser, we dont need it.
    • Flamebait? Whoever modded this doesn't own a mac on OS X. Trust me when I say Opera is probably the sloppiest port of a good program I've ever tried. I used to use it on Windows and Linux before Firefox won my approval, but on the mac the thing's horrible. It just doesn't feel like a mac program. We've already got some great cocoa browsers (Safari, OmniWeb, Camino, etc), so why should we bother with this mess?

  • I Like Opera (Score:5, Interesting)

    by lotsofno ( 733224 ) on Friday March 19, 2004 @06:01PM (#8615332)
    Though I'm not entirely sure what the Opera 7 browser brings to the Mac world as I'm mostly a PC user, nor could I say how it stacks up against Safari, but I can vouch for it's performance on Windows.

    1. It's VERY customizable. Aside from the hundreds of skins you can download... Buttons, toolbars, panels, etc., can be dragged anywhere you want. There's even a window you can open with all the possible buttons that you can drag'n drop onto where you want them on thr browser. This may not be as much of a selling point for Mac users (i.e. iTunes brushed metal look vs. Winamp's nearly unlimited possibilities for it's GUI/appearance), but being able to alter the browser to fit my needs, instead of having to learn to adapt to the browser's limitations, was very much appreciated.

    2. Want to search for something on google? Type "g query" in the toolbar, and you're here. Amazon? "z query". Ebay? "e query". I can barely program, but even an idiot like me figured out how to alter a few lines of code so "t query" gave me the results at thesaurus.com for a word I needed synonyms for.

    3. DAMN GOOD implementation of mouse gestures--which of course are highly customizable. I can open windows in the background, open links in new windows, go back a couple pages, with the quickest of movements. I barely even touch the navigation buttons.

    4. This is what F12 quickly lets you do [tntluoma.com].

    5. It's frickin' FAST.

    6. I can turn off images/stylesheets with a quick click.

    7. Userful for when web designing: Opera shows current size of window in it's title bar. Also, checking if a page's code is validated can be accessed by hitting ctrl-alt-v.

    • Re:I Like Opera (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Udo Schmitz ( 738216 )
      It's VERY customizable.

      Using Safaris Webkit I can build my own browser :)

      There's even a window you can open with all the possible buttons that you can drag'n drop onto where you want them on thr browser.

      This sounds very Mac OS Xish.

      • This sounds very Mac OS Xish.

        That's funny, what I thought of was MS Office. Still haven't seen a toolbar customization system that matches it, or even comes close. (plus, the buttons in Office XP look pretty darn neat)

  • Meh. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mikedaisey ( 413058 ) on Friday March 19, 2004 @06:16PM (#8615592) Homepage
    It just isn't very exciting. Between Safari, Camino, Firefox and Omniweb there aren't any browsing needs that remain for me to have filled...and Opera looks like boiled crap on the Mac.

    • Don't forget about the Mozilla app suite and iCab - they also have their uses. If people are willing to put in the effort, I'll take all the choices I can get. Here's a list in my order of preference:

      1. Camino (use a nightly, not 0.7)
      2. Safari
      3. Firefox
      4. Mozilla app suite
      5. OmniWeb
      6. Opera
      7. iCab

      • That's my preference order as well--I just don't need more than 5 or so.

  • Bzzznt! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Gropo ( 445879 ) <groopo@yah o o .com> on Friday March 19, 2004 @06:39PM (#8615853) Homepage Journal
    Open fresh Opera 7.5 window, single click on the address bar--selects all text in the string rather than inserting the cursor.

    Goodbye Opera, Maybe I'll see you again when you hit 8?

    • Re:Bzzznt! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by FFFish ( 7567 ) on Friday March 19, 2004 @07:19PM (#8616318) Homepage
      Of course it selects all the text in the string. Not too often one's wanting to actually insert text instead of type a brand new URL that reuses the window.

      A second click sets the insertion point. Groovy.

      • Re:Bzzznt! (Score:4, Insightful)

        by great throwdini ( 118430 ) on Friday March 19, 2004 @07:35PM (#8616458)
        Of course it selects all the text in the string. Not too often one's wanting to actually insert text instead of type a brand new URL that reuses the window.

        I call bullshit. Speaking for myself, at least, I pretty much click on the string within the location bar to add (or remove) characters. Complete URL replacement is usually accomplished by pasting (after Cmd-L'ing), through a bookmark, or in a new tab/window with a clean location bar. Could just be me, but I generally only fiddle with a populated location bar to edit, rather than replace by overtyping.

        In the grand scheme of things, this isn't onerous though. Firefox behaves similarly, though Safari and MSIE on a Mac sets an insertion point on first click instead (though Cmd-L selects the whole string in Safari). However, were I in Opera's shoes, it would probably make more sense to emulate the behavior of Mac's bundled browsers (past and present) and set behavior to insertion rather than selection on first click.

        To each their own.

        • Re:Bzzznt! (Score:4, Insightful)

          by .com b4 .storm ( 581701 ) on Friday March 19, 2004 @09:00PM (#8617224)

          However, were I in Opera's shoes, it would probably make more sense to emulate the behavior of Mac's bundled browsers (past and present) and set behavior to insertion rather than selection on first click.

          Not only that, but it's the little things in a UI that can get on your nerves. In pretty much any OS X app, clicking in a text field will place the insertion point. Double-clicking will select the word under the mouse, and triple clicking will select the whole line. When an application (especially one you would potentially use very often throughout the day, like a browser) ignores these simple conventions that you don't even think about, it can be disconcerting. Case in point, many Java apps that look like Cocoa apps, but often don't behave like them in small (but noticeable) ways.

        • Right, now who's not too lazy and wants to send in an idea report?

          (not it!)

          On a related note, I don't seem to be able to add linebreaks in my comment through use of the enter key any more... I need to use a br tag. Bug in Opera or bug in Slashdot?

      • Re:Bzzznt! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Gropo ( 445879 ) <groopo@yah o o .com> on Friday March 19, 2004 @08:53PM (#8617135) Homepage Journal
        No, I disagree. I want all text entry fields across the entire frickin' OS to act identically, tyvm. Counteracting behaviors cause me undue thought processes, and in turn disdain towards the careless developer that made the decision to break the interface guidelines.

        I'm quite in the habit--wether it be in a word processor or browser--of triple-clicking to select an entire string/paragraph.

      • Also Opera is a commercial browser which makes money from selling browsers to ordinary people.

        Read: If 99% of people clicks there to replace whole text, it will ship that way.

        Mac IE 5.2 gives user a chance via its preferences (not hidden) how it should act when that field is clicked. Guess what is default? ;) complete text.

  • Why Opera: (Score:4, Informative)

    by Illissius ( 694708 ) on Friday March 19, 2004 @07:22PM (#8616352)
    For those wanting an *exhaustive* (and yet likely incomplete) description of what it has to offer, look here [tntluoma.com].

    Oh, and the trolls whining about bloat should get a clue. It's only 3-4MB, browser, mail, and everything else included. It's one of the least bloated apps I've ever seen (possible exception of windows/total commander). When your browser alone is twice that (firebird/fox/?), I don't see what grounds you have to complain.

    And while I'm at it, although Opera *is* ad-or-payware, might I mention that it does its advertising in the best way possible: a context sensitive Google text ad in the toolbar. Not annoying at *all*, and it can even be useful occasionally.

    And I could go on, and on, and on. But I'll just mention that the default configuration (both UI and otherwise) is halfway braindead (popup blocking *off* by default, when it's one of the main selling points? wtf?), so just make sure to customize it (which is rather simple, and takes only a few minutes).

    And since this is a Mac forum, some good OSX-esque skins are Safrad (which I use myself, not because I want to emulate a mac, but because it actually looks good), Sofa King, and Lars Kleinschmidt's various OSX and iMac skins. They're available here [opera.com]. (Oh, and by the way, this is a preview release, and there is supposedly a new default skin in the works, just so you know.)
  • I have to use Opera for the now until i can figure out why the firefox keeps crashing and it's the only other browser out there with mouse gestures. I have to say that the new version looks much better than the old. I still mis my fox, though.
  • http://www.geocities.com/david_garamond/opera7-ran ts.html.

  • I'm getting tired of the whole 'Mac user as second class citizen' thing, having to patiently wait for features found in Windows versions of software to get ported over to my platform.

    I mean really, where the hell's my Bork [opera.com]?

  • Finally Opera 7 is out for my apple as well!
    Been testing it... looks very, very good!
    I hear some people here dissing it, but IMO
    it's way better than safari and the various
    mozilla-variants.

    • Re:Hurray! (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Ilgaz ( 86384 )
      /. isn't a good place to read reviews about following:

      1) Real, Realone, even opensource stuff coming out from Real Networks like Helix
      2) AAC
      3) Non open source, paid programs like Opera.

      Especially on Mac SW. Don't believe? Check back this posts points 1-2 days later ;)

  • Too Late? (Score:3, Informative)

    by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Saturday March 20, 2004 @09:02AM (#8620229) Journal
    Before I got a Mac, Opera 7 was my primary web browser. I used it in Windows, Linux and FreeBSD, and really liked it. When I got a Mac, I emailed Opera and asked if they were going to release version 7 on the Mac. They said yes, but not yet. So I started using Safari. I missed mouse gestures, but fortunately cocoagestures can provide them to any Cocoa application. There are only three features I miss on Safari now.
    1. The ability to re-order tabs. In Opera you can drag and drop tabs
    2. The ability to re-open a browser window with the same tabs it had before it was closed. I frequently hit command-Q instead of command-W, and end up closing Safari instead of the current window.
    3. The user/author mode toggle in Opera. Some people seem to think that making your background colour as close as possible to your text colour is a good idea. In Opera, a single button press can switch to black-on-white.
    I'll probably try this version of Opera, but I'm not sure that the benefits will out-weight the fact that it doesn't properly follow the HIGs and has a very cluttered UI.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."

Close