Otter Browser (Opera 12 reloaded)
-
Of course QtWebkit is not as compact as Presto β¦
What do you exactly mean by "not as compact as Presto"?
Whatever, forget about Presto. You know as well as I do that Presto is muerto.Never read the "lost Opera features" thread? In some environments Presto is still the only stable browser engine - when memory or other resources are limited most of all.
Point taken
From the description, Otter is now to be "What Opera 15 should have been", not to truly replace or supersede Opera 12. Shame β¦ we still need something which does fill that role.
You can't expect an one-man team to develop a new rendering engine that will supersede the work of a software company like Opera ASA (was)
-
In some environments Presto is still the only stable browser engine - when memory or other resources are limited most of all.
we still need something which does fill that role.
Agreed.
As one who makes regular use of old technology I am in the same position. Limited memory.
-
You can't expect an one-man team to develop a new rendering engine that will supersede the work of a software company like Opera ASA (was)
That could depend on the (wo)man or the people who do it. If I remember right, the first Opera version was developed by 2 people β¦
... OK, it was somewhat easier, by far not that many standards that had to be followed and probably not so much stupid broken code in the web at that time that had to be repaired - but with a little head start and basing on one of the open source engines it might be quite possible for a small team to build a new and better fork of the existing browsers.
I personally would tend to Gecko at the moment (pure gut feeling, I stopped programming a decade ago and I am not up to speed in that regard). Gecko seems to be way more effective in limited environments than the Chromium based browsers and in terms of real world speed it seems to be up to par - but looking at the many derivatives of chromium, those seem to be a somewhat easier choice for programmers ...
-
I would choose gecko to stop this WebKit/Blink dominance. Remember when ie had the monopoly.
-
Thanks God I found this Otter Browser (and this place), so there's hope.
This may be the replacement for a good browser Opera once was.
It will be easier since it uses webkit engine (end the creator of Otter should stick with it), so only the user interface is an issue to resolve. BTW. This mambo jumbo coming from the Opium 15+ fanboys about security issues is just pure nonsense.
I think people should help as much as they can in Otter development. This doesn't have to be a popular browser. If it's a browser for sophisticated users, it's a success. -
BTW. This mambo jumbo coming from the Opium 15+ fanboys about security issues is just pure nonsense.
I think people should help as much as they can in Otter development. This doesn't have to be a popular browser. If it's a browser for sophisticated users, it's a success.Opinions are fine and we're all entitled to them. I wonder, however, if you might consider using a softer tone for those with whom you happen to disagree? Just a suggestion, mind you.
-
Opinions are fine and we're all entitled to them. I wonder, however, if you might consider using a softer tone for those with whom you happen to disagree? Just a suggestion, mind you.
Geez.. An hour didn't pass and the same guy, who stalks everybody on Opera forums shows up and starts bossing around⦠It looks like this guy thinks that he owns every forum there is. He tells people what to do on Opera forums like he was the owner or a moderator, and now he comes to the site of Opium critics and does the same... Just unbelievable.. But that's what one can expect from religious fanatics who bring their religion even to computer topics. Wait for "Buddhist" Pesala to show up and there will be the religious fanatic club here. The religious zeal resonates on every level of their existence.
-
Maybe someones from Vivaldi (esp. from management) should help him to develop fast and more
-
β¦ This mambo jumbo coming from the Opium 15+ fanboys about security issues is just pure nonsense. ...
I have real hopes for browser initiatives like Otter, Qupzilla, and a few others, but with all due respect, concern over "security issues" is never "mambo jumbo" or "pure nonsense". Anything that faces the Internet and the hordes of hackers and thieves infesting its sites has to be ironclad in terms of security across a wide range of protocols, scripting languages, data compartmentalization techniques, and mastery of complex interactive segments of coding between browser modules.
Creating and maintaining that ironclad quality is not to be taken lightly - it's a major, compelling, critical task. Many different makers of browsers have repeatedly failed in key security areas during the years after their concepts first saw the light of day. The ability of a new designer with limited resources to keep on top of all the minutiae of good security design practice is something that has to be demonstrated, not merely asserted nor simply taken as an article of faith. That demonstration will only occur over time and with thorough testing in the "heat of battle" and by users and penetration experts⦠and such time (and testing) has not yet happened with Otter, though it is gradually happening with Qupzilla.
In the meantime, be careful in a security sense with any "new" browser concept that has yet to have its mettle truly tested. By all means, try them out and participate where possible in feeding back information and ideas to developers... but do so only with proper system security and compartmentalization in place, and don't entrust the browser with sensitive/personal/financial usage. Do not live under the illusion that the browser is "secure" until it has been proven to be so over time and testing.
None of this is to say that Otter (or any other up-and-coming browser) is insecure... it is to simply say their security has yet to be rigorously tested and established. The wise user will act accordingly.
-
QupZilla really looks good. If it had a mail client with the rss reader it would be excellent.
-
β¦ This mambo jumbo coming from the Opium 15+ fanboys about security issues is just pure nonsense. ...
I have real hopes for browser initiatives like Otter, Qupzilla, and a few others, but with all due respect, concern over "security issues" is never "mambo jumbo" or "pure nonsense". Anything that faces the Internet and the hordes of hackers and thieves infesting its sites has to be ironclad in terms of security across a wide range of protocols, scripting languages, data compartmentalization techniques, and mastery of complex interactive segments of coding between browser modules.
Speaking of the devilβ¦
What you are saying is exactly "mambo jumbo" or "pure nonsense". A bunch of truisms with no relation to the issue at hand. Otter browser will be a shell for the Chromium rendering engine (I hope it will use V8 JavaScript engine). It's basically the user interface that Otter has to invent. The security overall will be the same as in Chromium.If you want security, try a good firewall (OS firewall) and try browsing without JavaScript when it's not necessary. And never use Windows 8.
So this is just scaring people from Otter and other competition. It's being done by fanatical members of the cult that irrationally worships Opium 15+. They know Opera is dead, but they try to ressurect and defend the zombie anyway.
-
What does this QupZilla offer? Otter browser is intended to provide the features of old Opera. Does QupZilla offer this, too?
Does it offer those features?
**
β full mouse gestures and keyboard shortcuts with JavaScript execution
β User JS (native, not through extensions)
β User CSS (it may be in one file like in Firefox, this actually could be better)
β customizable graphical user interface (toolbars, buttons) - like buttons on a toolbar to quickly switch on and off JavaScript, plug ins, cookies
β sidebar
β Notes
β tab stacking
β debugger like Dragonfly
β Status bar like in old Opera (shows up and hides)
β Plug-ins on demand only** -
β¦ Speaking of the devil...
What you are saying is exactly "mambo jumbo" or "pure nonsense". A bunch of truisms with no relation to the issue at hand. Otter browser will be a shell for the Chromium rendering engine (I hope it will use V8 JavaScript engine). It's basically the user interface that Otter has to invent. The security overall will be the same as in Chromium.So is it your contention then that a user interface and its methods of integration with a rendering engine can never create an opportunity or vulnerability for security exploits to occur?
If you want security, try a good firewall (OS firewall) and try browsing without JavaScript when it's not necessary. And never use Windows 8.
It will be interesting to see how your "good" firewall protects you from a JavaScript-based exploit the next time a rotating ad containing a drive-by appears on a website you believe is safe for use with JS. With regard to Windows 8, I don't use it - but a large and growing number of folks around the world do, if only because it comes with their new computers.
So this is just scaring people from Otter and other competition. It's being done by fanatical members of the cult that irrationally worships Opium 15+. They know Opera is dead, but they try to ressurect and defend the zombie anyway.
You obviously failed to read my posts. I am quite interested in and hopeful about Otter and other browsers; I'm anything but an Opera 15+ fanatic - I don't really like New Opera versions. I mainly now use Firefox plus a little of Opera 12; I'm open to trying all manner of new browsers for casual browsing. What I said before, and will reiterate again, is that before one commits their financial Internet and critical browsing usage to any new browser design, they would be wise to establish that the designers are experienced in the security aspects of browser design and have proven themselves capable of successfully responding to security vulnerabilities in timely ways when they arise.
-
So is it your contention then that a user interface and its methods of integration with a rendering engine can never create an opportunity or vulnerability for security exploits to occur?
Don't ask question, make a point, if you have one.
But I can answer: Oh, yeah. Theoretically, it could. That's where OS firewall comes to work. I hope you know how that works. If you don't, don't bother with anything above Chrome or Opium. You will never be safe anyway.It will be interesting to see how your "good" firewall protects you from a JavaScript-based exploit the next time a rotating ad containing a drive-by appears on a website you believe is safe for use with JS.
I can tell you that it's not that interesting. It protects me quite well. But I can tell you I know what I'm doing. I don't spend all the time on Opera forums.
I hope you know how OS firewall works. That's not anti-virus. Firewall with OS firewall lets me deal with programs interactions. Even with components interactions.
I went to so many strange websites , even downloaded viruses and I never let them stay thanks to OS firewall.
Of course I can do nothing about the rootkits included in Microsoft programs for Pentagon (NSA). But that's another issue. Nobody can.
If you are downloading, for instance a "missing plug-in" from a website streaming a football match, you are a sucker, and nobody can help you.You obviously failed to read my posts. I am quite interested in and hopeful about Otter and other browsers;
That's the point with you. You are just writing essays full of nothing but truisms or mambo jumbo. Intelligent people present their thesis. People who have too much time, try to write pointless "essays".
I told you how irrelevant your point was. I showed you that raising issues of security with browsers based on Chromium is just a scare tactic or a bloviating of a guy who has nothing else to do.Otter will be used by sophisticated users, as far as I read the intentions of the creator. If you are not one, move along to Opium 15+ or Chrome. That's it.
-
Otter browser will be a shell for the Chromium rendering engine (I hope it will use V8 JavaScript engine). ]It's basically the user interface that Otter has to invent. The security overall will be the same as in Chromium.
You do know that the shell interacts with the system too?
The shell is relevant for security too because it is no monolithic block with neither interaction to the underlying interpreter and renderer codes nor the system.
If the author for example uses a framework like QT, he has to look into the security issues of that too because that framework had its own issues in the past and will have new ones. No such complex software is bug free.If an author uses the chromium blink or webkit code, he will have the same security flaws in his browser as those have - plus those of his shell framework. It is fine if the programmers of an alternative browser can handle that, but if not, it will be prone to security issues.
Additional questions, that have to be answered:
[ul]- What new potential issues do his own modifications cause?
- How fast is the author with updating his modification, if the chromium/blink/webkit code or the framework code changes? Much more than 24 hours can be too slow.
- Can he handle regression testing fast enough?
[/ul]
In that regard I trust bigger programming teams with a dedicated security team a bit more than one person teams.
If you want security, try a good firewall (OS firewall) and try browsing without JavaScript when it's not necessary. And never use Windows 8.
About Firewalls and other security software:
[ul]- Desktop firewalls can be a stopgap at best. 90% of them are poor in that regard and external firewalls offer exactly no protection against those flaws.
- A good antivirus software with a good HIPS might help a bit more, but even those do not solve problems that arise from a sloppy system configuration or badly coded software.
- A good filtering proxy with the ability to inspect and rewrite page code, running on an external computer could help to protect the system from malicious code - but that could cause issues with secured connections because it would need to act like a "man in the middle" which breaks the chain. Nobody who does not know exactly what he is doing should use that.
[/ul]
The recommendation to switch off JS where possible is a good one, but it still does not protect against hacked sites that are on the whitelist.
The arbitrary recommendation not to use Win 8 is correct. You should update to Win 8.1.
-
If an author uses the chromium code, he will have the same security flaws in his browser as chromium has plus those of his shell framework.
That's my point that if you use Chromium in Opera or Chrome, anyway, you cannot complain about its problems in independent browsers. They are a given. The rendering engine, JavaScript engine are the main source of security problems.
And when you use the shell (user interface), you never give it too much authorization in firewall. I don't give it too much even to Opera 12.
Again. You have to know what you are doing. If you let the browser open other programs to access internet or the registry, you are not a smart person.
If you know what you are doing, the security of Otter would be not an issue (above Chromium problems, of course, which are, as I said, a given).You do know that the shell interacts with the system too?
And what about it? I just said you need to use firewall and it's not for greenhorns. If you are not sophisticated, don't use it. Don't scare people back to Opium 15+.
While desktop firewalls can be a stopgap at best, 90% of them are poor in that regard.
That's absurd. Just don't use the 90% of them that are bad. I just wrote that I can manage even viruses with an OS firewall (and of course other obvious things).
btw: The arbitrary recommendation not to use Win 8 is true. You should update to Win 8.1.
You see.. And that's your problem. The main security issues in Windows 8 are still existent in 8.1. Only the user interface is a little better. And for you it's just a new great thing.
The worst security problems are deep rooted (in operating system and in the rendering engine).Superficial look at security issues is just irritating. People don't care about obvious spyware in Opera 15+, but are warning others off from the new competition with made-up hysterical security "concerns".
All the exploits are usually made by state actors (USA's NSA, Russia, etc). They are very sophisticated and sold on black market by Pentagon contractors and other state mafias. That's where the real danger comes from. If you are using a niche browser (or OS), there is a much lower chance that NSA created an exploit for it. Even if it did, it's not the best or not popular on the black market. So you are still safer than with Chrome. Unless spy agencies are looking especially for you. But that's not a problem for regular users.
-
Just curious: Is it a name, or does it refer to anything or have a meaning, the context of Otter (the five letter word)?
-
Just curious: Is it a name, or does it refer to anything or have a meaning, the context of Otter (the five letter word)?
to quote from the Otter developer page:
Why this name, Otter?
[ul]- I don't like "invented" names (don't look deeper into history of repository, you will find such name there, thankfully I've changed it quickly ;-)).
- I've chosen Otter because it also start with "o", furthermore it has the same amount of letters as Opera.
- Why there is Browser in name? There was already such package, some mathematics related software (such ones probably should use invented names, or at least prefix or suffix them).
- Coincidentally full name is pronounced in similar way to Other Browser, and well, indeed Otter intends to be different from current mainstream trend of UI oversimplification (and in fact it started with IE years ago, I believe that Chrome was trageted to takeover users of that browser, which had biggest market share back then).
- Also it allows "fun" jokes about for example Firefox (the last "mainstream" browser that didn't lost its identity, at least not yet), fire and water.
[/ul]
-
β¦ @Blackbird:
It will be interesting to see how your "good" firewall protects you from a JavaScript-based exploit the next time a rotating ad containing a drive-by appears on a website you believe is safe for use with JS.
I can tell you that it's not that interesting. It protects me quite well. But I can tell you I know what I'm doing. β¦I hope you know how OS firewall works. ... Firewall with OS firewall lets me deal with programs interactions. Even with components interactions. ...
OK⦠case in point: how would your "OS firewall" alone block malware like Cryptolocker from locking your computer?
-
@Blackbird
You apparently have too much time on your hand.
What's "Cryptolocker"? Why would you come up with this particular name?
Just tell me how it infects computers, and I can tell you how I can protect myself (you probably have no idea whatsoever how it infects computers, you just read some article about another malware).
This kind of mambo jumbo discussions are good for gossiping people.