Do you prefer dry food? not even my dog likes it. Only wet canned food.
No wonder you like Mozilla over Opera! (jab)
Try opera, it has so many features over Firefox and Mozilla that you'll feed any other browser like prehistoric.
(hahahaha, no, no, no, I know it's a matter of preference, I'm just happy today)
Questions: best browser, distro, application?
I am not sure that I understand why there is a Mozilla and a Firefox/Thunderbird with any significant differences since they flow from the same organization.rarsa wrote:Do you prefer dry food? not even my dog likes it. Only wet canned food.
No wonder you like Mozilla over Opera! (jab)
Try opera, it has so many features over Firefox and Mozilla that you'll feed any other browser like prehistoric.
(hahahaha, no, no, no, I know it's a matter of preference, I'm just happy today)
I am also troubled that Firefox/Thunderbird are closely linked in Windows but not in Linux and that Mozilla is better integrated than either.
Haven't looked at Opera for years because last time I tried it the app was buggy and the word on the streets was that it was going under. Someone apparently rescued it.
What are the key functional differences between the Mozilla Suite and Opera, please? Also, which is the most efficient with the fewest dependencies under Puppy?
Thanks! doc
- Lobster
- Official Crustacean
- Posts: 15522
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
- Location: Paradox Realm
- Contact:
As we do not have access and control over Opera, Mozilla is the main browser. Mozilla has a web page composer. It also has XUL as does Firefox.
It is possible to take out Mozilla and use Opera as the main browser and John Murga did just that with Opera Puplet. I use Mozilla (which uses FireFox code) and the HTML email program (based on Thunderbird)
Opera is faster and has better scaling and display of multiple open windows. It also has an ad / commercial / closed source basis. On slower hardware I might use it but long term I would aim for Mozilla.
It is possible to take out Mozilla and use Opera as the main browser and John Murga did just that with Opera Puplet. I use Mozilla (which uses FireFox code) and the HTML email program (based on Thunderbird)
Opera is faster and has better scaling and display of multiple open windows. It also has an ad / commercial / closed source basis. On slower hardware I might use it but long term I would aim for Mozilla.
In the third response to this thread I laid out what I think are the main advantages of Opera from my usage profile point of view. This is, I use a browser to browse and I like that Opera makes the brosing experience easy.edoc wrote:What are the key functional differences between the Mozilla Suite and Opera, please?
Other people have mentioned advantages of Mozilla according to their usage profile.
This is, not only the functional differences are important but how are you planning to use the product.
I find that the 'perceived speed' of Opera is faster. I don't know about the real speed.edoc wrote:Which is the most efficient with the fewest dependencies under Puppy?
Regarding the dependencies, I don't think it really matters as both run without a problem under Puppy.
So I would say. Use both for a while learning how to configure them, see which one shines on the taks you use the most.
I like a wide variety of browsers for a number of reasons: Lynx for its pure speed and efficiency, Opera for its easy-to-toggle options, and Firefox for its extensions, just to name a few.
Ordinarily Mozilla would be among those, but unfortunately the recent versions of Puppy bundle a beta version of Mozilla that does not allow me to disable images, making it useless on dial-up.
Does anyone know if the beta Mozilla is easy to uninstall from Puppy? I prefer to stick with Mozilla 1.7x until the image manager issue is resolved. Thanks.
Ordinarily Mozilla would be among those, but unfortunately the recent versions of Puppy bundle a beta version of Mozilla that does not allow me to disable images, making it useless on dial-up.
Does anyone know if the beta Mozilla is easy to uninstall from Puppy? I prefer to stick with Mozilla 1.7x until the image manager issue is resolved. Thanks.
- Firefox, Mozilla, Dillo
- OpenOffice
- Puppy, my first and only , started with 1.0.3 - Many thanks to Barry and the Puppy comunity!
- Currently using: puppy-chubby-1.0.4-mozilla-openoffice.iso, JWM, Emelfm2
- My wish list for ideal distro: Puppy+Firefox+Thunderbird+NVU+OpenOffice.org 2.x+Wine+JWM+Emelfm2
- OpenOffice
- Puppy, my first and only , started with 1.0.3 - Many thanks to Barry and the Puppy comunity!
- Currently using: puppy-chubby-1.0.4-mozilla-openoffice.iso, JWM, Emelfm2
- My wish list for ideal distro: Puppy+Firefox+Thunderbird+NVU+OpenOffice.org 2.x+Wine+JWM+Emelfm2
- Lobster
- Official Crustacean
- Posts: 15522
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
- Location: Paradox Realm
- Contact:
Chubby Puupy is less than 100 meg - full Puppy with Open Office . . .
So with the standard 128 meg or better yet 256 meg Ram Puppy is fine.
Though people are running Puppy on older hardware and from a HD ram disk - and that is great - it is really best on what is a small amount of Ram by todays standards.
What is standard on phones these days in terms of Ram?
Once you have a projected keyboard (already exists) and a projected screen (does not exist yet in a viable form) then the Puppy phone becomes viable . . .
So with the standard 128 meg or better yet 256 meg Ram Puppy is fine.
Though people are running Puppy on older hardware and from a HD ram disk - and that is great - it is really best on what is a small amount of Ram by todays standards.
What is standard on phones these days in terms of Ram?
Once you have a projected keyboard (already exists) and a projected screen (does not exist yet in a viable form) then the Puppy phone becomes viable . . .