10.10 qt3/gcc shared 3.5MB bigger than 10.01, why?
Steinar Bang
Does anyone know what makes opera-10.10.gcc3.shared.qt3.i386.rpm around
3.5MB bigger than opera-10.10.gcc3.shared.qt3.i386.rpm ?
Thanx!
- Steinar
Steinar Bang
> Just out of idle curiousness...
> Does anyone know what makes opera-10.10.gcc3.shared.qt3.i386.rpm around
> 3.5MB bigger than opera-10.10.gcc3.shared.qt3.i386.rpm ?
Possibly Opera Unite.
Hm... not something I really need. I prefer a fast and slim web
browser.
But it's still the slimmest one around.
Christian Hoeller
>> Does anyone know what makes opera-10.10.gcc3.shared.qt3.i386.rpm around
>> 3.5MB bigger than opera-10.10.gcc3.shared.qt3.i386.rpm ?
> Possibly Opera Unite.
Yes, I suppose too.
> Hm... not something I really need. I prefer a fast and slim web
> browser.
Full agreement.
> But it's still the slimmest one around.
Yes it is. Nevertheless I hope, that the Opera developer take notice of
the many Opera users who would prefer a slim web browser _without_
Opera Unite. There were many posters in the German speaking newsgroup
<news:opera.deutsch>, who did not agree with an integrated webserver in
a webbrowser. It would be great to have an option to choose: Opera with
Unite, Opera link, MUA/NUA, Bittorrent client, ... _and_ Opera _without_
everything else than a browser. :-)
Ciao,
Christian
--
Christian Hoeller -- PGP Key available at http://www.hoeller.net/key
Linux Hardware Compatibility & Drivers http://www.linux-drivers.org
Linux Distributions, Howtos, Downloads,... http://www.linuxbasis.org
Rijk van Geijtenbeek
<spam-n...@news.linux-drivers.org>:
> Steinar Bang wrote:
>
>>> Does anyone know what makes opera-10.10.gcc3.shared.qt3.i386.rpm around
>>> 3.5MB bigger than opera-10.10.gcc3.shared.qt3.i386.rpm ?
>
>> Possibly Opera Unite.
>
> Yes, I suppose too.
>
>> Hm... not something I really need. I prefer a fast and slim web
>> browser.
>
> Full agreement.
>
>> But it's still the slimmest one around.
>
> Yes it is. Nevertheless I hope, that the Opera developer take notice of
> the many Opera users who would prefer a slim web browser _without_
> Opera Unite. There were many posters in the German speaking newsgroup
> <news:opera.deutsch>, who did not agree with an integrated webserver in
> a webbrowser. It would be great to have an option to choose: Opera with
> Unite, Opera link, MUA/NUA, Bittorrent client, ... _and_ Opera _without_
> everything else than a browser. :-)
Just don't enable these features and they will not bother you. If seeing
the Opera Unite UI annoys you, or you are a sysadmin who wants to
completely remove the capability, set the opera:config option 'Enable
Unite' to off, save settings, and restart.
--
Rijk van Geijtenbeek
Opera Software ASA, Documentation & QA
Tweak: http://my.opera.com/Rijk/blog/
"The most common way to get usability wrong is to listen to what users
say rather than actually watching what they do." - J.Nielsen
Christian Hoeller
> Op Mon, 30 Nov 2009 10:01:37 +0100 schreef Christian Hoeller
> <spam-n...@news.linux-drivers.org>:
>> Steinar Bang wrote:
>>> [ Opera Unite ]
>>> Hm... not something I really need. I prefer a fast and slim web
>>> browser.
>> Full agreement.
>>> But it's still the slimmest one around.
>> Yes it is. Nevertheless I hope, that the Opera developer take notice of
>> the many Opera users who would prefer a slim web browser _without_
>> Opera Unite. There were many posters in the German speaking newsgroup
>> <news:opera.deutsch>, who did not agree with an integrated webserver in
>> a webbrowser. It would be great to have an option to choose: Opera with
>> Unite, Opera link, MUA/NUA, Bittorrent client, ... _and_ Opera _without_
>> everything else than a browser. :-)
> Just don't enable these features and they will not bother you. If seeing
> the Opera Unite UI annoys you, or you are a sysadmin who wants to
> completely remove the capability, set the opera:config option 'Enable
> Unite' to off, save settings, and restart.
Yes, I removed the capability. Opera _is_ still the slimmest graphical
browser around.
BTW I want to use the opportunity to say _thank you very much_ for
your excellent work on Opera. Thanks to you, Rijk and to every other
Opera collaborator, who's reading/writing here in this newsgroup. :-)
Jorgen Grahn
> Rijk van Geijtenbeek wrote:
>> Op Mon, 30 Nov 2009 10:01:37 +0100 schreef Christian Hoeller
>> <spam-n...@news.linux-drivers.org>:
>
>>> Steinar Bang wrote:
>
>>>> [ Opera Unite ]
>
>>>> Hm... not something I really need. I prefer a fast and slim web
>>>> browser.
>
>>> Full agreement.
>
>>>> But it's still the slimmest one around.
>
>>> Yes it is. Nevertheless I hope, that the Opera developer take notice of
>>> the many Opera users who would prefer a slim web browser _without_
>>> Opera Unite. There were many posters in the German speaking newsgroup
>>> <news:opera.deutsch>, who did not agree with an integrated webserver in
>>> a webbrowser. It would be great to have an option to choose: Opera with
>>> Unite, Opera link, MUA/NUA, Bittorrent client, ... _and_ Opera _without_
>>> everything else than a browser. :-)
>
>> Just don't enable these features and they will not bother you. If seeing
>> the Opera Unite UI annoys you, or you are a sysadmin who wants to
>> completely remove the capability, set the opera:config option 'Enable
>> Unite' to off, save settings, and restart.
Well, these features still mean the Opera developers are working on,
fixing bugs, and spend their spare time thinking of features I'm not
interested in. The same energy spent on the browser itself could have
benefitted me (new ideas for nativation maybe?).
I'm not demanding you shouldn't do Unite and stuff -- just pointing out
that these features *do* affect me even though I don't use them.
> Yes, I removed the capability. Opera _is_ still the slimmest graphical
> browser around.
>
> BTW I want to use the opportunity to say _thank you very much_ for
> your excellent work on Opera. Thanks to you, Rijk and to every other
> Opera collaborator, who's reading/writing here in this newsgroup. :-)
Well put. I agree!
/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
Remco Lanting
Opera has a lot of different teams working on the browser and all it's
features. It's very likely that someone that is working on for example
Opera Unite has nothing to do with the rendering core. From the outside it
looks like one big group and then it makes sense what you say. But with
different teams the comparison is not valid any more. A developer on team
A can stop working on feature A, but that doesn't mean he/she will start
working on the core rendering engine. Nor would it mean that he/she would
even be hired in the first place if it weren't for that single feature.
Of course, exactly how it works is better left to someone from Opera to
explain, but I think I'm very close.
--
Remco Lanting
[Unofficial Opera bug tracker links]
http://opera.remcol.ath.cx/bugs |
http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=217364 |
remco.lanting...@gmail.com
Eirik Byrkjeflot Anonsen
Probably true. Also, to the extent that these features increase opera's
general market share and revenue it allows us to hire more people to
work on the browser in addition to the other reasons why more users can
improve a product.
As long as the "unnecessary" features do not add significant burden
(download size, disk space, memory consumption, performance), we're
probably all better off with a single version. Multiple versions are
notoriously harder to debug, analyze and tune.
> Of course, exactly how it works is better left to someone from Opera
> to explain, but I think I'm very close.
I actually do work for opera, but that doesn't mean I know what I'm
talking about here :)
eirik
Naruki Bigglesworth
From the Network Nazi standpoint, they may not want to allow users to download or install
products containing a web server, regardless of whether they intend to use it or not.
Having that forever embedded in the software makes it a security risk in their eyes, and they
may just ban Opera.
Something to think about.
Aaron W. Hsu
>From the Network Nazi standpoint, they may not want to allow users to download or install
>products containing a web server, regardless of whether they intend to use it or not.
>Having that forever embedded in the software makes it a security risk in their eyes, and they
>may just ban Opera.
>Something to think about.
If they are like that, then they need to also make sure that they don't
have the other tools that enable this sort of behavior installed by
default on their installations. Almost no network I know takes this
precaution, which makes discriminating against Opera rather unfair.
Aaron W. Hsu
Steinar Bang
> If they are like that, then they need to also make sure that they
> don't have the other tools that enable this sort of behavior installed
> by default on their installations. Almost no network I know takes this
> precaution, which makes discriminating against Opera rather unfair.
"Fair" isn't neccessarily an adjective associated with network nazi
sysadmins...
Jens Schuessler
You do know much networks, don't you?
Jorgen Grahn
I think you mean the people they work for (think Dilbert's boss).
As I understand it, it's easy to administratively disable that server
feature.
Naruki Bigglesworth
Yes, but you think Dilbert's boss is going to read the help file to find out how to disable
something he thinks is a threat? He's just going to ban it and blame Dilbert.
Jorgen Grahn
I don't know. I wasn't talking about that issue.
Felix Karpfen
>> Steinar Bang wrote:
>>
>> It would be great to have an option to choose: Opera with
>> Unite, Opera link, MUA/NUA, Bittorrent client, ... _and_ Opera _without_
>> everything else than a browser. :-)
>
> Just don't enable these features and they will not bother you. If seeing
> the Opera Unite UI annoys you, or you are a sysadmin who wants to
> completely remove the capability, set the opera:config option 'Enable
> Unite' to off, save settings, and restart.
>
A very-belated follow-up!
The above advice showed how to disable "Opera Unite" and "Bittorrent
client".
What needs to be done to disable "Opera Link" and M2?
The larger download-size of the Linux Opera package has ceased to be a
serious issue since the advent of "broadband". But, I still do not want
to clutter up my RAM with routines that I never use.
Felix Karpfen
--
Felix Karpfen
Public Key 72FDF9DF (DH/DSA)
Naruki Bigglesworth
Neither was I. Alternative answer: yes you were. It's an analogy, and I was extending it while
keeping it relevant.
In more direct speech, there are a large number of administrators who are not going to bother
learning Opera settings just to resolve a potential security issue.
To them, Opera is a web browser that is trying to act as a server, and thus is a threat. Since
they will not perceive any overall benefit to keeping Opera (plenty of other browsers to choose
from), they will just ban it.
If Opera made the server part a separate download, this situation would not arise. But because
they stubbornly choose to make an all-in-one browser as the _only_ option, they will inevitably
butt heads with that type of administrator. Opera will not win such confrontations.