Resinence wrote:One thing most people have forgotten is that Opera has a built-in bittorrent client, newsreader, POP/SMTP mail client and IRC chat client. And you can edit pages in your local cache and view them with just a reload. Opera has lower memory usage.
I can't believe I forgot the Bittorrent client.
Firefox also has Live Title's and Live Bookmarks which I'm not sure Opera has.
Opera has (as far as I can tell) full RSS reader support, which I find superior to Firefox's Live Bookmarks. Opera's RSS reader tells me when there are new items, while I still have to go to each Live Bookmark and look myself to see if there are updates.
When it comes to security, bugs and security flaws in firefox are fixed VERY quickly, but Opera has the advantage of being completely closed source.
With Firefox getting more popular, there is always the concern that spyware makers will eventually start targeting Firefox as well. Time will tell how that works out.
I've found Opera's browsing interface to be quite irritating at times as compared to firefox's simple interface, but being so simple is also a disadvantage. You have to dig through convoluted menu's to get to you're plugins.
I prefer Firefox's interface, as well. Opera takes some getting used to, but it made sense to me once I understood it.
General Zod wrote:I'm not sure I'd count the nicer looking interface as a pro, considering how subjective that is. Personally I find Opera's default interface rather fugly, which is one of my main reasons I dislike it. (It has too much "stuff" in its toolbars and buttons, wheras Firefox is very minimalist).
True, I guess the word I meant is "polished." Opera's interface is shinier than Firefox's default interface. It makes Firefox's interface look boring by comparison, even though FF's interface is perfectly functional. Skins are available for Firefox, of course, if the shininess of the interface is a concern. (Personally, I don't bother. The default interface does exactly what I need.)
Later...