(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

The opinion that I gave above (and what will be appearing below) is, of course, limited by my own experience.
I probably will give Opera a try since everyone seems to like it. However, Firefox is most likely still the best for puppy at the moment. Here's why: Puppy has always touted itself as being friendly to Windows users, and Firefox is the only browser other than IE that is regularly used on Windows computers. It is also very stable (I won't say that FF2 is since I haven't had enough time with it yet, but previous versions have been) and has great compatibility with HTML standards.
That being said, I will be testing other browsers for my own use. I like Firefox, but it is larger than I would like. Swiftfox is too fickle at the moment or I might go with it. I'll post again once I've messed around with Opera. If it is as stable and standards compliant and can overcome unfamiliarity issues for new users, it may be worthy to be the default puppy browser.

Opera certainly runs on the widest range of platforms, Linux, BSD, Windows, cellphones, Nintendo DS etc.

As to standards, the CTO of Opera ASA is the guy who invented CSS when he worked for W3C, they are certainly standards focused.

Oh, and there's an Opera widget for a Sokoban game, so that's a big win right there

I have tried Hv3 and I have to say that it is very impressive and definitely has a future. I voted for Konqueror, but having thought about it, I think Hv3 is probably the best for Puppy. My reasoning is as follows:

1 - Hv3 is open source (BSD type license)
2 - Hv3 is under continued development
3 - Having Hv3 as the default allows the user to install their browser of choice while at the same time giving them something to start with.

Todd

My only problem with Hv3 is that it currently displays many of the pages that I have visited incorrectly. I like its layout and feel better than Dillo. Unfortunately, it just doesn't seem far enough along yet. It's one I will be keeping an eye on.

I don't know which is the best (Puppy or not), but I tried the 2.0whatever that had Opera in it. Opera may have advanced to useable since then, or may not be so incompatible with Puppy now, but that release gave Opera a big black eye in my view.

Dillo is awful in my experience. I have the strange feeling I'd prefer Lynx over Dillo any day, but I haven't tried Lynx (unless is was the gopher client that my old freenet.uchsc.edu account had, but that wouldn't be a fair comparison either).

I've recently obtained a Mac laptop with Core Duos, so I also know Safari isn't what I'm looking for in a webbrowser either. Of course FireFox for Mac didn't score me many points either, so maybe its the 'act like a Mac' that I don't like in that version.

With Puppy I use whatever real browser comes installed with that version, avoiding those with the crippled identifier 'Opera' since that one time. So normally in Puppy I use Firefox or SeaMonkey.

Most of my browsing still occurs with Mozilla 1.0 on my Win98 machine (after all it has internet access [dial-up]). The Macbook I have to go to the library and use their wireless (so I plan for big download days at the library, and surf while I wait).

opera 9.0 was a bad release in terms of bugs just like firefox 2.0, or most n.0 releases of software - the jump from verson (n-1).x to n.0 often involves significant code changes. i believe it was opera 9.0 (or even a beta?) in an earlier puppy iso so that would explain the bad experience.

9.02 (2nd minor release since 9.0) is solid for me so haven't felt the need to upgrade to 9.10.

like others have said, firefox is too big and older hardware struggles to run it. opera is very lite in comparison (>10mb smaller than the cut-down seamonkey used in puppy) yet has more features out-the-box. i believe sony phones come with opera mobile pre-installed - proof that it's designed to run on both low-spec and hi-spec platforms.

realistically, i can't see opera being the std browser in puppy. there's just not enough 'brand awareness' and too much anti-closed source sentiment in linux. i'd be happy with a basic browser like dillo or hv3 pre-configured with bookmarks to download the users favourite browser. and/or easy set-up scripts to select a separate .sfs file for each major browser - opera9.10.sfs, firefox2.0.sfs etc

Well, Opera seems okay so far. It displays most of the pages I have visited at least as well as Firefox. The first problem that I've noticed is that ctrl+clicking does not open the link in a new tab. I find this annoying. It is shift+enter+click. That's too many keys in my opinion. I feel that I should be able to change this, but cannot find where.

Other than that, I'm liking Opera. I can't say that it is actually any faster than Firefox, but it certainly isn't slower. I may find more to say about it after using it a awhile.

I still think Firefox is better as a default browser because of it's familiarity. Open source is a nice bonus, but in no way a deciding factor. It's simply the ubiquitous, non-Microsoft browser.

I must thank all of you for pointing me to Opera, though. It is a nice, good-looking browser, and although I may not think it is better than Firefox, it is most certainly better than Seamonkey and probably on par with Firefox.

You can middle-click to open things in new tabs in Opera and Firefox.

Swiftfox is great, but I have a question - is there an easy way to install it in Puppy? The script doesn't work for me (have Puppy 2.15 installed to hard drive)

Ok, noticed this is old thread resurrected by Pashabear to ask about Swiftfox. I have no idea about swiftfox. I will mention I tend to use Opera most. Occasionally Seamonkey when some website wont work properly with Opera. I have no real problem with Dillo (unoffial modified version). It is fast, but anymore so many sites that wont cooperate with it.

I used to like Konqueror, but dont want 70mb just for a browser. I may though add it one day as I really would like to have K3B. One of best browsers is actually Kmeleon or its even more simplified derivative K-Ninja run under WINE. Its as fast as anything even with the extra WINE layer.

i don't understand which script pashabear is talking about? when i downloaded swiftfox i just extracted it to / and ran it straight away.

pashabear wrote:Swiftfox is great, but I have a question - is there an easy way to install it in Puppy? The script doesn't work for me (have Puppy 2.15 installed to hard drive)

If my memory serves me, you have to edit the Swiftfox install script because it assumes you are running it as root with privileges to modify / directory. I don't think that's true in Puppy because the core is read only.

It is easy to modify, though. I just can't remember what I had to change. It was a case of deleting calls to locations outside of /root and forcing Swiftfox to install there. Then you can move the folder to /usr/local and you're away.

BTW, I don't remember that still being the case the last time I downloaded Swiftfox, so maybe they've addressed that issue in the latest stable tarball.

Hope that helps.

swiftfox site wrote:There is now an installer available that is distro independent. It is a script that downloads and installs Swiftfox in the /opt directory and attempts to use existing Firefox plugins

Maybe this is the script. Since it installs into /opt which is not in a standard Puppy it is probably not a good idea.

Billwho? wrote:Since it installs into /opt which is not in a standard Puppy it is probably not a good idea.

Ah, yes. Now I remember. I had to go through the install script and change all references to /opt to read /usr/local instead. Then the script runs fine.

Hope that helps our befuddled would-be Swiftfox user.

Cheers

after opera was yanked from 2.15 RC i cried. Its not that i cant remaster blah blah blah. But its like pizzasgood point about loading to ram, and remastering the disk is not the 1st task a user performs with a new distro of any OS. Nowadays, its something like, Browse the web, chat, download something, email, run document functions, install personal tastes if any, customize the interface appearance.

Opera is extremely well featured; size aside.

Its small(size no longer aside)

Its well supported and developed(which i never saw brought up as a issue)

It has its own widgets(apps, whatever the hell they are called now) that are simple to apply

and just about every thing brought up is configurable in opera, you just have to hunt through the menus. A matter of fact, before my run with opera in puppy RC, i had never heard of it. Im darn glad i did.

As for future puppies, i doubt Barry will choose a non open browser(it only makes sense ), BUT the CE edition deserves that range of options, performance, and customizability.

I cant speak of hv3, but ive run all of the rest. On the same box, Swiftfox and Seamonkey were better than the rest. of those 2, swiftfox was faster and will developmentally follow firefox, but opera sure canned them both.

Hello pashabear and anyone else,
If you find changing the script to hard, just create a folder called opt in /, Swiftfox will install itself there and when you want to delete Swiftfox, just delete the whole folder instead.

You can try this experiment while running live, then there's nothing to lose.

mysticmarks wrote:As for future puppies, i doubt Barry will choose a non open browser(it only makes sense ), BUT the CE edition deserves that range of options, performance, and customizability.

I cant speak of hv3, but ive run all of the rest. On the same box, Swiftfox and Seamonkey were better than the rest. of those 2, swiftfox was faster and will developmentally follow firefox, but opera sure canned them both.

Swiftfox can never be distributed, even with a CE version, because it is processor specific. Opera has problems with Flash support. That's why we always come back to Seamonkey. I don't think Barry is put off by Opera's non-open source nature.

These days, the extras for Seamonkey are starting to rival Firefox. I'm running the excellent Seahawke 3D theme, recommended to the forum by mbutts I believe, and I have ForecastFox loaded for my weather needs. As a Swiftfox devotee, I'm finding Seamonkey more and more acceptable and much less of a compromise choice. It is way lighter than both Opera and Firefox/Swiftfox, too.

Cheers

I decidede to do some research before actualy voting. So I downloaded and installed Flock Swifrfox and Opera to try. Konqueror was already in my system thanks to mini KDE as well as Elinks (not sure if it is another KDE app or part of the puppy core (215CE Alpha)) Using Puppy's aim of small and just works straight from the box as a guide my winner was anything Mozilla with Seamonkey my favouritre.
Opera was good especialy with the tight intergration with Email but I found its habit of automatically moving to any newly opened tabs annoying especialy when I am at the index of the Puppy forum.
Konqueror also was good but requires too many specialised libraries.
Swiftfox is not suitable because it is processor specific. But as an added extra is quite good.
Elinks was unusable for me. It opened in a terminal but I could not do anything with it.
Dillo and H3v are just not to my taste as a browser and seem to have problems with more sites than the other browsers
Firefox is good but I prefer a tighter intergration with my Email client
Flock may be a better option than Firefox for some but still does not have a tight enough intergeation with Email for me.
Seamonkey has everything I want and then some I may never use but others on the forum do.

The Mozilla browsers are also the source of libraries that many of the other apps in Puppy use which justifies any larger size.

I'm finding Seamonkey more and more acceptable and much less of a compromise choice. It is way lighter than both Opera and Firefox/Swiftfox, too.

my calculations put opera as 'way lighter' than seamonkey even after removing the shared moz libraries (which opera also makes use of).
prepared to eat my hat if anyone can come up with a definitive answer - thought i had, maybe i got the calc wrong.

Opera was good especialy with the tight intergration with Email but I found its habit of automatically moving to any newly opened tabs annoying especialy when I am at the index of the Puppy forum.

you can control how opera behaves in this and practically every other respect. normally, middle click on a link with open a 'new tab in background'. opera's by far the most customisable (and stable in w32) browser i've used.

you can control how opera behaves in this and practically every other respect. normally, middle click on a link with open a 'new tab in background'. opera's by far the most customisable (and stable in w32) browser i've used.

Thanks for the middle click tip seems it works in Firefox too. While Opera is more customisable than most it was not as good "straight from the box" which was one of my guidlines, at least not for me.