Hi...

Just posting to share the experience...

I installed the Opera browser and it works really fine.

What I liked :
- It works with flash better then the Firefox I have.
- It is small and fast
- It has a lot of plugins
- The cool option of 'paste and go' at url bar
- Install was completely painless
- It has a lot of coll themes

What I disliked :
- The imported bookmarks from Firefox are in alphabetical order, but they were not like that... so in Firefox I find what I need in a second... the stuff I use more are where I want it... in Opera this is more confuse. My bookmarks go like since I use browsers...I am importing and importing by generations of installs... of course most of it doesn't exist anymore, but it is ok to have it in an 'olds' dir just to remember.
- Of course everything is different, and I use Firefox since I don't remember when...


So... I am not stopping using Firefox, but it is fine to know that there are option, and sometime I like to run the Opera, just to have a different 'view'

Yes. Opera is an excellent browser!
At the moment I'm really liking Seamonkey 1.1.14 (the latest security release for Slackware). The integrated mail and chat clients are excellent in Seamonkey 1.1.14. I've got IMAP set-up for gmail with the e-mail client and I am chatting on ##slackware with ChatZilla. Interesting to note that Seamonkey uses less system resources on this aging 850 IBM Celeron than Fire Fox 3.0.5.

I like opera, too. I think its the best browser 'out of the box' but there are a better set of extensions available for Firefox. Historically, it also has tended to be where innovation has occured, although other browsers do tend to catch up after a while.

I find Opera's way of working with bookmarks created in Opera is the best in any browser. Takes a bit of getting used to, but it does work well. You are probably right that imported bokmarks are a bit of a mess, though.

I'm completely spoiled using Opera -I haven't used much else for several years. I don't have any other QT apps so I use the statically-compiled version. I still have hopes that opera will become open-source some day. Since Nokia bought troll-tech, some have guessed that opera might be their next target.
What I like most about opera are the download manager (just found out the other day that it works seamlessly with torrents!) and the drop-down history list which is made up of any URL's you type in the location-bar -I use this feature for my most-visited sites.

Really have to agree with gnashley, and I was spoiled by opera as well, since the day it released to the public as free browser. It is very stable, light, and very fast when compared to others, and so far I am quite happy with it.

Though occasionally, when I open more than 50 tabs (for research purpose), right click the mouse might cause CPU running at 100% and freezes the system, and I have to close Opera, and start it again. I dont know this is due to Opera or Windows xp,

Opera is a real driver of innovation, and a they use Qt, I agree with the folks gnashley quotes: It would make complete sense, if Nokia would acquire this little Norwegian company. But it seems that they are turning towards WebKit on the browser-side, and they even ported Mozilla Firefox to Qt for the N810 internet tablet running Linux/Maemo.

I haven't had a look at the recent versions, but the versions I saw and used (7.x) came with an oft-overlookded mail client, M2 if I recall it correctly. This tool is really worth a look as it is lightning fast and supports virtual folders. This solves a big problem that probably just about everyone has in MUAs like Thunderbird: If an email is related with more than one topic, in which of the topic folders do you store it? How do you know, where you will look for it weeks, months or years later? Do you store two copies?

Virtual folders are similar to softlinks. You store the mail in one folder, and have references to it in the others. But the best thing here is: M2 can create virtual folders automatically based on rules. It's much harder to explain than to use it, just try it out yourself!

I also like Seamonkey, as someone said, and Thunderbird is a good mail client, too. I don't use any of these, including M2, for only one reason: They do not support export from their default mail format to maildir or mh. And the way Thunderbird (and Seamonkey) is using mbox with index files is certainly not as fast and flexible as what you can do with Mutt or KMail.

But yes, an open-sourced version of Opera and M2 would be really, really great.

gargamel

I've even thought of creating one of those web-based petitions to urge the opera folks to open-source their work. I dare say that their current business model is probably not more successful than that of the mozilla foundation.
Firefox ported to QT?? -why that sounds absolutely horrendous!

I guess they did it, because (1) they "own" QT and want to exploit the portability of QT4, so that applications developed with can be used on various platforms, such as Symbian and Linux devices.

And I don't think, it's horrendous. I think, it's great. Because it means that, in principle, future Firefox version can be integrated a lot better with KDE. It's a long-yeared idea, with some support from Mozilla's side, too. Only two reasons seem to have prevented the Mozilla developers from doing this themselves: (1) License issues in earlier versions of QT. (2) Lack of manpower.

By the way: Eclipse is said to have a QT port, too, but IBM did never publish it, again becaus of the QT licensing model.

A nice option is QT Jambi, i. e. QT bindings for Java programs. It's a question of personal preferences, but I don't like the look of SWT applications. I prefer Swing or QT widgets. Gtk+ is ok, but tends to look a bit strange in KDE, although there are mimicry tools. But they only make the applications look like KDE applications, while they still use the "wrong" file dialogs and so on.

So porting Firefox to QT is a good think, I think. BTW, to my knowledge, Nokia did it the other way round, too, and has ported Opera (!) to GTK+. Probably nice for XFCE or Gnome users. Although it's currently only for Maemo, AFAIK, and because Opera isn't open source, not as helpful as the Firefox to QT for potential integration into KDE.

gargamel

I've used Opera since the whole program fit on 1, that is, one, 1.44 meg. floppy disk, and used the e-mail client for several years.
The "virtual folders" is about the only really good thing about M2, IMHO. It lacks good html support, as does KMail, but the Opera developers are working on that in version 10, which is available now in alpha form.
It doesn't have mime support. I doesn't have support for "return receipts," and there are a few other items it lacks, which, without, it will never gain a large following, especially in the business world.

I didn't notice that M2 hasn't MIME support. Apparently I didn't do anything for which it is needed to start a helper application or something like that, when I used M2. So I didn't miss this feature, just like "return receipts". Like HTML mails I consider return receipts a disease. In my business environment everyone turns them off, immediately after receiving a new laptop. Everyone hates this "feature". Only some non-technical people don't turn it off, because they don't even know, that it's possible.

Regarding HTML support: I think, KMail is using a very sensible approach, both secure and user-friendly. Generally I don't expect a MUA to do the job of a web browser.

In the past I used Mutt. For HTML mails or attachments I configured Mutt to start a browser. A MUA doesn't have to duplicate the functionality of a browser. Well, in Opera, on the other hand, without MIME support, the configuration of helper applications seems trickier.

gargamel

Personally I prefer plain text, but in the corporate world I work in HTML e-mail is required, as it is at many companies. If the KMail developers don't give "the market" what they want, good HTML support and the ability to forward HTML e-mail in its original form, they, like M2, will be left behind.

Using "return receipts" saves time and money. I wouldn't do business without that option. I need to know that documents I've sent to the home office have been received and are being acted upon. Without a timely acknowledgement I have to stop what I'm doing and go to the expense of making a phone call. All counter productive, when a simple return receipt request can accomplish the same thing.

You guys have got my curiosity up. I was using Opera yesterday on FreeBSD--linux-firefox was version 2 and very slow, so I tried linux-opera to get flash--It was like getting an upgrade on my internet connection. Now, let's see what it does for Slackware .

Yes, unfortunately. But that many others do it, doesn't mean, it's the right or recommended thing to do. Otherwise you wouldn't be here, in a Slackware Linux forum, but in MS Windows forum, right?

Really, I don't see the benefit of HTML mails. If they contain a web page, send me an URL rather, so I can decide myself if I want to click it or not. But if your information is really important, than don't hide it between tags.

By convention, in my job environment we usually use plain text and RTF for email. The latter is not what I like, but harmless compared to the nonsense that can be included with HTML. Anyway, our business doesn't suffer from this.

Still not sure what you miss in KMail. Because all my communication partners, personal and business, would blacklist me, if I started to forward them HTML emails, I haven't verified it, but I am pretty sure that KMail can forward HTML email without manipulating it.

Of course I understand your point, but it only works if the receiver doesn't turn off the function. There are much better solutions for "presence control", like conferencing tools working similarly to ICQ.
It's all "Big Brother" to me, and I have never felt the need to use any of these, but your use case is apparently different.

gargamel

As someone who uses KMail I can tell you without a doubt that KMail canNOT forward HTML mail, unless it is sent as an attachment. Thunderbird, e.g., will let you edit out the header showing who it was from, etc., before you send it on. Opera M2 will, supposedly, have that ability in version 10.

I've been a big fan of KMail and other than its lack of "proper" HTML support, think it is the best e-mail client available, but, as I've said before, if they don't improve its ability to handle HTML, its popularity will dwindle. Even when KMail is setup to show HTML mail it still, more often than not, makes a mess of the presentation. Sometimes it will show the HTML mail as it was intended to be shown, but then show the graphic images, again, separated from the text, at the bottom of the message. If you try and forward HTML e-mail it separates the graphics from the text and places them at the bottom of the e-mail and jumbles the text in the process.

As someone here on the forum correctly pointed out, I think it was Woodsman, telling people they can't use HTML mail is like telling them they can't write or draw in color. Same, same. People are visual by nature. They like colored text, .gifs, .jpgs, etc., all nicely composed and presented to them.

I'm old enough to remember the transition from Blank & White to Color photo processing and we are in a similar period now going from plain text e-mail to HTML e-mail. Same thing as going from the command line to the GUI and from the old BBS days of black screens and a few ansi graphics to the world wide web and full color HTML pages, and all for the same basic reason, people are visual. It is really as simple as that. Getting there wasn't and isn't as simple as it now appears in printing, photography, or the web, but the principle motivation behind those transitions is simply, once again, people are visual. If you, regardless of what kind of business you are in, don't give people, i.e., the market, what they want, you will be out of business. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

As much as I dislike KDE 4.xx, it is an excellent example. If you go to their web site you will see a banner that reads, "Discover beauty with 4.2." The banner is in color. It uses the word "beauty." The world is in color and that is what people want. As I said, it doesn't get any simpler than that.

Which is the only method, I accept as a receiver...

That means, the HTML mail can be manipulated before it is forwarded?

I am not so sceptic about the popularity of KMail. I think the way it handles HTML mails is the exactly right way to do it. I am more afraid that they do what has been done with Evolution: Make it an Outlook clone, only worse. My fear is that the functionality you desire can't be implemented without compromising the excellent security of KMail. I'd stop using it, then. Whatever that would mean for its popularity.

The good thing about KMail is that is user-friendly, standards compliant, and a real alternative.

Well, yes, but a MUA is not a HTML browser. And, BTW, all you describe reminds me of MS Outlook, where I have had such problems many, many times. Problem is: Once you allow HTML mail, people will start to use CSS, Javascript, Active X and other technologies, just to make it all look colourful and eye-catching.


Good point. Unfortunately you are probably right.

So you want to save time by using the return receipt functionality. But
how would you ensure that your colleagues and employees don't start playing around with the cosmetics instead of focusing on the "real" content?

Because that is what will inevitably happen.
I recall, what Richard P. Feynman wrote in his memories. Word processors could have helped to accelerate the writing and publishing of magazine articles. But the increased productivity wasn't and isn't used that way. Spell and grammar checking, embedding figures and see (just about) what the result will look like, the possibility to delete text without wasting paper: All this could accelerate the production process compared to the past situation when documents were written on a type writer and corrections and the inclusion of figures had to be done by hand on paper.
But as a matter of fact, word processors aren't used that way. Instead, we now produce 14 versions of each silly document (instead of one or two), only to make it "look better".

This is *not* what I would call an increase of productivity, but it is what HTML mail will bring us, if you are right (and I am afraid, you are).

Hopefully not.

I guess, the next step after HTML mail *must* be Flash mail...

KDE 4 looks great on my 64-bit OpenSuSE 11.1 box. Really promising, and up to now quite stable.

gargamel