▲ 67 points
back
42 comments
I don't know how they achieve it, but this Quartz website works perfectly in Lynx, yet all I get in Chrome is a blank screen and a loading spinner.
Sorry for being off topic, but it infuriates me when people screw up the web this much.
resize the window slightly if it's blank ... there's a silly renderer bug in the latest chrome. I had to do it here.
And no, I don't know the bug number or if it's tracked or if it's been fixed. I just deal with it and hope it will be fixed eventually.
Works in Opera. ;)
I got the same thing in Firefox 10.0esr, so it seems safe to assume it's the site and not a Chrome bug... I had to select "View->Page Style->No Style" to read the page. It was ugly because there was no CSS but at least I could read the text!
The website is completely broken in Firefox for Android. It loads a different article (at this time, it's loading the first one in the sidebar, rather than this article on Opera, which is the second---but at least if you tap that item it loads it), and has a sidebar which covers about a third of the text (always bad), and disables all zooming (almost always bad---please, web developers, refrain from doing that... I know best when I want to scroll).
I had annoyances as well. With JS disabled, I had three scroll bars on the right and a banner at the top saying "qz.com works best with Javascript enabled" (no joke). With it enabled, dragging the scrollbar is broken because it removes about a page of content when you scroll down, which causes the page to jump around as you drag the scrollbar. I guess my days of making badly-written sites work slightly better by disabling JS are gone.
Works fine in Chrome on Windows for me. The site's design is pretty weird, though.
I experienced the same thing in Chrome (Ubuntu). It didn't load.
I had the same experience with Safari but it worked fine with Chrome.
If it works in Lynx, are you sure it's the website that's wrong?
Works on the POS known as chrome mobile. Nexus 7.
Works fine. Chromium on Arch.
Same config, does not work for me.
website always works fine for me in chrome (os x) but i hate that they don't allow the font size to increase when i zoom. i have to put my face 3 inches from the monitor to read their (usually really high quality) articles
The resizing problem happens because they are using (abusing!) this CSS style:
-webkit-text-size-adjust: none;
I made a userstyle that fixes this problem on all the sites that have it:
Thanks for pointing this out. The change will be live by Wednesday morning.
niiiiice thanks!!
I really wish Opera was more popular. It's a really good browser and helps to drive the open web, which is ironic since it's closed source.
I use it nearly every day, and it's really annoying how some major websites (cough Google Apps) don't support it. It is very competitive on html5test.com (beats out Firefox) and works really well for everyday browsing.
You don't have to be socialist to use Opera...
summary: People in Belarus saved money when they used Opera's features to "strip out images and other bandwidth-gobbling web extras" due to the way the state telco billed them.
Every browser has an option to disable loading of images, javascript, flash or java. At least Firefox and Opera have them for sure, I suspect others do too, because why not?
Actually, Opera can use a (Opera operated) proxy to scale the images down, compress html, css and js. This feature is called "Opera Turbo", I think, and is unique to Opera (browser and company) - at least as a built in from the start.
The second reason is Opera Mini, which can run on "dumbphones" and is a fast, modern browser, which can use "Opera Turbo" too. People there didn't have access to newer hardware, stuck with "dumbphones" were essentially abandoned by everyone else - only Opera was there for them.
Third reason was Opera's good support for cryptography, which is nice to have when you know every byte you send is archived and can (and will be) used against you if you happen to become inconvenient.
So, to summarize: your summary is inaccurate, misleading and not necessary.
> Every browser has an option to disable loading of images, javascript, flash or java. At least Firefox and Opera have them for sure, I suspect others do too, because why not?
For me the crucial difference is that Opera could toggle between loading images/cached images with a single keypress: 'i'. These days you have to press Shift-i. Toggling CSS on/off is Shift-g. Having this so easily accessible makes a big difference. I don't know how to do this in Chrome. Looking quickly through the menu, I can't even find the options for this.
>Every browser has an option to disable loading of images, javascript, flash or java. At least Firefox and Opera have them for sure, I suspect others do too, because why not?
1. Opera has also option to show only cached images and option to load selected image.
2. Chrome has not option to disable images.
Opera has been light years beyond the other browsers in caching for so long it seems they'll never catch up.
It did have a hard time recovering from the early backlash against it for not being open-source, belying the involvement and contributions of Opera engineers to the open standards web.
And the ads. Don't forget how long it showed you ads.
Well, I seriously doubt anyone really bothered about these ads in Belarus. Most people back then bought software collections on pirate CDs that already included a keygen or a serial number. (In fact, some people still use these, but now it’s easier to download most software.)
How long? I never saw (edit: don't remember seeing - as it was showing ads then) ads in Opera and I was using it from about 2002(3?) to 2011 when I switched to Chrome. I seem to remember that back then Opera's main selling point was that it was insanely fast and had small memory footprint while having many new and useful features.
So I think it showed the ads for about 6 years? Just curious.
According to Wikipedia:
> Up to this point, Opera was trialware and had to be purchased after the trial period ended. Version 5.0 (released in 2000) saw the end of this requirement. Instead, Opera became ad-sponsored, displaying advertisements to users who had not paid for it.[25] Later versions of Opera gave the user the choice of seeing banner ads or targeted text advertisements from Google. With version 8.5 (released in 2005) the advertisements were removed entirely and primary financial support for the browser came through revenue from Google (which is by contract Opera's default search engine).
So 2000 through 2005.
This seems to be borne out by the more specialized History of the Opera web browser page:
> Opera 5, released on December 6, 2000, was the first version which was ad-sponsored instead of having a trial period.
[snip]
> Version 8.5 was released on September 20, 2005, Opera announced that their browser would be available free of charge and without advertisements from then onwards, although the company still sells support contracts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Opera_web_browse...
> Opera has also option to show only cached images and option to load selected image.
Right, I forgot. One question: isn't loading of selected things used for any element, not just images? So I could disable loading of header div and such?
It is not disabling, it' enabling by right click and selecting "Show image" on element. If image is supposed to be loaded via background style for div then probably enabling will not work, it will not be loaded in "only cached images" mode.
At least Chrome 24 has the option to disable images. See Settings / Show advanced settings... / Content settings... / Do not show any images.
The idea is that you have a small button in your status bar, that switches between 'all images off' / 'show cached images' / 'all images on'. This setting is remembered on site-by-site basis.
Disclaimer: Long time Opera user and probably an Opera browser fan.
I have been using Opera since its "ad-supported" days. It was bundled with one of those PC magazines that gave out free software/shareware for the bandwidth challenged in those days and fell in love instantly. Opera is probably the most configurable, hackable and feature-full browser out there up to this day, and I still find things to configure and customise to this day (now on Opera 12.10). Opera also provides the user with an option to install itself as a portable version which I found very cool. It is also very light on PC resources (YMMV -- anecdata)
I also find it very annoying that a looot of websites do not support this browser.... at all despite its being on par (if not better) in most if not all browser tests (I heard they lagged behind on the most recent ones).
Opera Mini is blazingly fast on not-so-smartphones (used it on the Nokia ASHA series) and Android smartphones as well (anecdata -- my experience). It beats out Nokia's own browser which incidentally has adopted the "Turbo" architecture for its own browsers.
IMO the article does great disservice to Opera's technical/technological advanced capabilities by ingnoring all of those and solely focussing the article around socialism and dictatorship and internet speeds ( [almost] creating a straw-man in the process). Booo!
Also Opera's Turbo can be used to bypass internet censorship.
Probably, but it itself is blocked when something important occurs, e.g. it was blocked (as well as Opera Mini servers) during the unrest after the elections.
I remember using opera mini on my blackberry and 2G tmobile connection in NYC a few years ago. It was definitely the best thing on BB, and I remember it worked amazingly well.
And for those wondering about Opera's business model, see here [1].
[1] - http://my.opera.com/chooseopera/blog/2011/01/03/how-does-ope...
I wrote comments on this topic several times and I think the reason why Opera is popular in Centra/Eastern Europe is quite simple. I'll rewrite it once again:
It was the best browser out there for a long time without a doubt. While in west people used IE since it was free, people in east didn't care whether software is paid or not, they just used cracked versions[sidenote 1]. If copy of Office was about as expensive as your monthly income, it's understandable. So it was normal there, and not really frowned upon. Even when FF came out, the Opera was much better[sidenote 2]. But Firefox erupted in the west and as it evolved it found its way to the east. Opera stayed popular in many countries because a) it was still great b) people were used to it c) it still spread by a word of mouth. But as the "Internet" hit new generations, Firefox slowly took over. Fast forward to Chrome and its never ending multi-billion campaign. Ads in TV, radio. Billboards and posters all over the place. Banners (or even feature blocking) on most visited sites out there (.google.com/, youtube.com, ...). All that with comeback of ie5+ only sites (now for chrome of course) meant that Opera's user base slowly evaporates.
It's quite sad really, especially when I see it here on HN since Chrome is dumb-dumb browser meant for people who use the Internet for the first time while Opera is probably the most configurable, hackable and feature-full browser out there. Not better (when you consider the extensibility of FF/Chrome) but one would think it would appeal to "hackers".
PS: Of course the "turbo" aspect played its role but I think it was just a side thin on desktop.
PPS: Firefox had unreasonable amount of money in advertising as well, but I think it mostly hurt IE, not Opera.
sidenote 1: Cracked software meant an easy way to spread viruses. One of the biggest/best antivirus vendors that still exists are from that place and era (Avast, AVG, ESET, Kaspersky).
sidenote 2: If Opera had become free before Firefox was released, I think it would have dominated the west market as well (at that time at least).
Tried shifting to Opera from FF recently (last time I was trying few years ago, there was no suitable Adblocker available). Backed out this time as well because it has no official support for moving your history (which I would not want to loose). Makes no sense why would Opera not make it simple for people to move.
All very good points. Nice comment! I wish more people upvoted this to bring it up.
Especially right about "Opera is probably the most configurable, hackable and feature-full browser out there" I still find things to configure and customise to this day... and I have been using it since its "ad-supported" days.
My problem with Opera was (when I tried it once more, 2-3 years ago) is that it get really slow with many open tabs ( > 20) I frequently have 50 or more open tabs and the only browser that handles is well is Firefox.
Strange. I too am a member of the 50+ tab club, but this is why I've been using Opera for years (Firefox as well, but for dev tools). The difference between the two is stark, so I'm surprised we've reached the opposite conclusion.
Was this article written by bloody McCarthy?