51–60 of 64 posts
Immediately used 160MB upon starting the program. Firefox is lean compared to that.
I'm guessing you have at least 1-2 GB RAM.
Immediately used 160MB upon starting the program. Firefox is lean compared to that.
I guess you have to credit Opera for sticking it out this long, years after they dropped off the radar of basically everybody. I just checked for a few of my sites, and I'm seeing about 1.3% of my visitors using Opera. I keep hearing that their mobile browser is big, but it seems that nobody has ever visited any of my sites using it. The one thing I always liked about Opera as a developer is that they used IE as thei…
I don't get it. They were never on the radar. They are now. They've got more than 140 million users.
> I keep hearing that their mobile browser is big, but it seems that nobody has ever visited any of my sites using it.
It has 1/4 of the mobile browser market, and mobile browsing is expected to be bigger than PCs in a couple of years (it's actually growing that fast).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow! Thanks for that. I really need to break the habit of assuming the world follows US patterns because Google, Silicon Valley, etc are in the US.
Also Germany, Scandinavia and parts of Japan I have found uses this browser. Europe more in percent than America. I am not sure why this is. If any one knows or guesses, I would be curious to find out.
[1] On machines with lots of RAM it tends to be a memory hog, but it works perfectly fine in tighter environments. They claim their memory strategy changes depending on local conditions.
Immediately used 160MB upon starting the program. Firefox is lean compared to that.
I figure that unused RAM is wasted RAM. If I've got 4GB of RAM and all that caching allows to browse faster (going back a page in Opera is lightening fast), then I applaud it.
Immediately used 160MB upon starting the program. Firefox is lean compared to that.
You can manually set the memory cache in Preferences. I figure that unused RAM is wasted RAM. If I've got 4GB of RAM and all that caching allows to browse faster (going back a page in Opera is lightening fast), then I applaud it.
To Osiris: Given I'm not aware of that 150+ MB being dynamic, I assume that's 150MB I'm not getting back if and when I need it. I play memory-eating video games and use VMs; 150MB for a web browser looks like a lot when you've got to trim the fat off your running processes.
Does Opera reduce its memory footprint when you are low on RAM?
Scores only 179 on html5test.com. Chrome dev: 241, Webkit nightly: 243, Firefox 4 beta: 217
HTML5Test doesn't pay too much attention to stuff like SVG, which is Opera's strong point. One area where opera is lagging behind is webGL support and that reflects on the tests.
Scores only 179 on html5test.com. Chrome dev: 241, Webkit nightly: 243, Firefox 4 beta: 217
That site isn't very useful since it only reflects what the author thinks is important. It doesn't show actual standards compliance. He chooses tests and assigns scores according to his own priorities. So it's misleading to call it "html5test."
I guess you have to credit Opera for sticking it out this long, years after they dropped off the radar of basically everybody. I just checked for a few of my sites, and I'm seeing about 1.3% of my visitors using Opera. I keep hearing that their mobile browser is big, but it seems that nobody has ever visited any of my sites using it. The one thing I always liked about Opera as a developer is that they used IE as thei…
In India, where smartphone penetration has just started, pretty much Opera Mini is defacto here. Especially with the cheap, underpowered Chinese smartphones which come pre-installed with Opera Mini.
In fact, a significant percentage of Nokia phones out here are preinstalled with Opera Mini (or Opera Mobile). I'm pretty sure there is a per-device licensing that is making money for them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
(disclaimer: Opera Employee, Core QA) If you are having problems with javascript in Opera, I would really like to hear about them so that they can be fixed. There is a bug report form at [1], or reply here. Obviously it is nice if you have a reduced testcase, but just knowing that a site fails is immensely useful. [1] https://bugs.opera.com/wizard/
http://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-js-api-v3/browse_... http://www.questionhub.com/StackOverflow/3899985 Aggressive opera caching and different behavior from others browsers is not what I like.
This is a known issue. No promises, but it looks like a fix might be ready sooner rather than later.
http://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-js-api-v3/browse_...
It's not instantly obvious to me what the problem is here, so I will need to investigate further.
Thanks for the bug reports!