Opera 10.10 (build 4665) nearly unusable?
Helmut Jarausch
I hangs on nearly each web site (even simple ones without flash, etc)
From version to version there are more new (neat) features but it gets more and
more unstable (unusable).
Having used Opera for years now, I'm considering abandoning it altogether.
Has anybody more luck than me?
Helmut.
TimC
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
I haven't braved it for more than a day at a time yet.
There's crash issues with flash (given that flash runs in a
subprocess, I find that a little ... odd, but the flash plugin does
spew out XID collision warnings in both firefox and opera, so it could
be clobbering something), that means that about 50% of the time I try
to jump videos on youtube, it crashes.
Then there's some memory leak or the like, and it chews through 3G of
my 4G of ram a lot quicker than the old version.
Damned if I can find specific enough circumstances to warrant lodging
a fault report though.
--
TimC
"Eddies in the space time continuum"
"Oh. Is he?" -- Douglas Adams
Jorgen Grahn
Yes, it works fine for me[0]. It has become slower and more "jerky"
over time[1], Opera 9 being much worse than 8 and 10 slightly worse
than 9. But Firefox feels even more like that. I wish Opera wouldn't
rework the user interface all the time, though.
/Jorgen
[0] Which doesn't mean I don't believe you -- see Eirik's recent posting
here about how bugs can be rare but still affect some people a lot.
[1] Very subjective feeling, hard to explain and probably impossible
to measure. And I think I am unusually sensitive to delays in the
~10 ms range.
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
Jan van Gent
Is it the IPv6 issue?
See `Slow loading of first page from any site` thread.
or
http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=264785
IMHO Opera 10 is much more stable than 9.xx
Jan
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Jens Schuessler
> What has happened to Opera.
>
> I hangs on nearly each web site (even simple ones without flash, etc)
>
> From version to version there are more new (neat) features but it gets more and
> more unstable (unusable).
>
> Having used Opera for years now, I'm considering abandoning it altogether.
So you consider abandoning cause a *beta* has bugs? Interesting.
> Has anybody more luck than me?
I'm using the stable version without problems. So why should I use every
new beta?
Aaron W. Hsu
<jara...@rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
> Has anybody more luck than me?
I am having great luck with the snapshots. Of course, it's basically
pre-beta software, so there is one annoying instability that I see more
often than I would like, but it certainly doesn't make the whole thing
unusable. I'm also using an alpha version of Flash, so stability isn't
exactly something I expect from this combination, but it has been very
fast, very stable, and very usable. The new interface is very nice.
Aaron W. Hsu
--
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its
victims may be the most oppressive. -- C. S. Lewis
Helmut Jarausch
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:58:18 +0200, Helmut Jarausch
> <jara...@rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
>
>> What has happened to Opera.
>>
>> I hangs on nearly each web site (even simple ones without flash, etc)
>>
>> From version to version there are more new (neat) features but it
>> gets more and more unstable (unusable).
>>
>> Having used Opera for years now, I'm considering abandoning it
>> altogether.
>>
>> Has anybody more luck than me?
>
> Is it the IPv6 issue?
>
> See `Slow loading of first page from any site` thread.
> or
> http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=264785
>
> IMHO Opera 10 is much more stable than 9.xx
Unfortunately, this didn't help much.
e.g.
http://www.amazon.de/
hangs for several minutes using 100% CPU (on a fast machine)
showing Elements: 8/23
At the same, Firefox came up having taken just a few seconds.
In the past, I had quite good experience with beta versions of Opera.
But this time it's totally broken (on my machine : GenToo, AMD64)
Sorry for the bad news.
Helmut.
--
Helmut Jarausch
Lehrstuhl fuer Numerische Mathematik
RWTH - Aachen University
D 52056 Aachen, Germany
Aaron W. Hsu
wrote:
> Unfortunately, this didn't help much.
> e.g.
> http://www.amazon.de/
>
> hangs for several minutes using 100% CPU (on a fast machine)
> showing Elements: 8/23
Loads completely for me in under ten seconds, the first 50 elements were
loaded in under five seconds on the first try. Slackware64 13.0 Opera
10.10-4665-x86_64 QT4 build on a Lenovo T500 with 4GB of RAM and a fast
processor.
GP lisper
>
> [1] Very subjective feeling, hard to explain and probably impossible
> to measure. And I think I am unusually sensitive to delays in the
> ~10 ms range.
Then you should be a fighter pilot.
The best pilots take 13 msec to react to an incoming object.
perhaps you left off a few zeros.
GP lisper
>
> Has anybody more luck than me?
Sure, I didn't upgrade.
I too saw problems over the years, and simply setup a rollback
ability. I'm never an early adopter on Opera anymore, but it's still
better than most alternatives.
GP lisper
>
> Slackware64 13.0 Opera 10.10-4665-x86_64 QT4 build
Great, I'll have to try that.
Jorgen Grahn
No, but I meant to say "two-digit number" in milliseconds, somewhere
below 100ms. And I didn't say I *reacted* like a fighter pilot dodging
heat-seeking missiles, did I?
I think you know what I mean -- if you're scrolling in a page and it
stutters or hangs for a fraction of a second, you *do* notice. To put
things in perspective, a common keyboard repeat rate is ~30ms.
/Jorgen
Jan van Gent
wrote:
> Jan van Gent wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:58:18 +0200, Helmut Jarausch
>> <jara...@rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
a 10 is much more stable than 9.xx
>
> Unfortunately, this didn't help much.
> e.g.
> http://www.amazon.de/
>
> hangs for several minutes using 100% CPU (on a fast machine)
> showing Elements: 8/23
>
> At the same, Firefox came up having taken just a few seconds.
>
> In the past, I had quite good experience with beta versions of Opera.
> But this time it's totally broken (on my machine : GenToo, AMD64)
>
Helmut,
Try in a terminal and compare:
`dig AAAA google.com`
to
`dig google.com`
When there is a difference, it's related to faulty IPv6 somewhere, im my
case it was `new improved` firmware for my modem.
Helmut Jarausch
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:12:34 +0200, Helmut Jarausch <jara...@skynet.be>
> wrote:
>
>> Jan van Gent wrote:
>>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:58:18 +0200, Helmut Jarausch
>>> <jara...@rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
> a 10 is much more stable than 9.xx
>>
>> Unfortunately, this didn't help much.
>> e.g.
>> http://www.amazon.de/
>>
>> hangs for several minutes using 100% CPU (on a fast machine)
>> showing Elements: 8/23
>>
>> At the same, Firefox came up having taken just a few seconds.
>>
>> In the past, I had quite good experience with beta versions of Opera.
>> But this time it's totally broken (on my machine : GenToo, AMD64)
>>
>
> Helmut,
>
> Try in a terminal and compare:
>
> `dig AAAA google.com`
>
> to
>
> `dig google.com`
>
> When there is a difference, it's related to faulty IPv6 somewhere, im my
> case it was `new improved` firmware for my modem.
>
>
Jan van Gent
wrote:
> Just for the records, I don't see a difference, here.
> Helmut.
>
Hmm
loads within 3 seconds
settings:
urlfilter.ini ?
cookie ?
Blocked content
Otherwise I dunno
Markus Enax
Do you use KDE4 (which uses Qt4) and did you do package upgrades during the
last days?
If yes: The Opera version which is linked against Qt4 became unusable a few
days ago after one recent Qt4 package update.
Try to use the version which is linked against Qt3 - that one works fine for
me:
ftp.opera.com
Regards
Markus
--
Markus Enax
-------------------------------------------------------
Debian/Sidux (i386) with KNode
Hannover/Germany (CET/CEST)
Helmut Jarausch
I'm using a bleeding edge Gentoo system and therefore
qt-4.5.3
Goto back to qt-3 seems the solution.
Many thanks again,
Helmut.
Markus Enax wrote:
> Do you use KDE4 (which uses Qt4) and did you do package upgrades during the
> last days?
> If yes: The Opera version which is linked against Qt4 became unusable a few
> days ago after one recent Qt4 package update.
>
> Try to use the version which is linked against Qt3 - that one works fine for
> me:
> ftp.opera.com
>
> Regards
> Markus
>
--
Markus Enax
> Many thanks, that helped a lot.
>
> I'm using a bleeding edge Gentoo system and therefore
> qt-4.5.3
>
> Goto back to qt-3 seems the solution.
>
> Many thanks again,
> Helmut.
>
>
> Markus Enax wrote:
>
>> Do you use KDE4 (which uses Qt4) and did you do package upgrades during
>> the last days?
>> If yes: The Opera version which is linked against Qt4 became unusable a
>> few days ago after one recent Qt4 package update.
>>
>> Try to use the version which is linked against Qt3 - that one works fine
>> for me:
>> ftp.opera.com
>>
>> Regards
>> Markus
>>
>
>
Btw:
Opera developers are aware of this problem:
http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=294599
That thread should keep you up-to-date or at least provide some more infos.
GP lisper
The stuttering you point out has many causes, Opera is merely one of
them. BTW, your ear picks up 'stuttering' far better than your eye
ever will.
--
Humans are allergic to change. "We've always done it that way" is not
a good reason to continue to do so. That's why I have a clock on my
office wall that runs backwards. It forces visitors to think.
They hate me for that. - Admiral Hopper.
Jorgen Grahn
> On 13 Oct 2009 12:34:17 GMT, <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 2009-10-13, GP lisper wrote:
>>> On 12 Oct 2009 11:38:44 GMT, <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [1] Very subjective feeling, hard to explain and probably impossible
>>>> to measure. And I think I am unusually sensitive to delays in the
>>>> ~10 ms range.
>>>
>>> Then you should be a fighter pilot.
>>> The best pilots take 13 msec to react to an incoming object.
>>>
>>> perhaps you left off a few zeros.
>>
>> No, but I meant to say "two-digit number" in milliseconds, somewhere
>> below 100ms. And I didn't say I *reacted* like a fighter pilot dodging
>> heat-seeking missiles, did I?
>>
>> I think you know what I mean -- if you're scrolling in a page and it
>> stutters or hangs for a fraction of a second, you *do* notice. To put
>> things in perspective, a common keyboard repeat rate is ~30ms.
>
> The stuttering you point out has many causes, Opera is merely one of
> them.
Well, I was speaking about an *increase* in stuttering. If I upgrade
Opera and change nothing else (including static versus dnamic linking
to Qt) then Opera is the cause.
But as I said, it's a very subjective feeling, and it's not a big
deal. To get scientific measurements I would need a clean box,
historic releases of Debian, and one of those high-speed cameras the
Mythbusters use ;-)