Search Members Help

» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Mini-ITX Boards Sale, Fanless BareBones Mini-ITX, Bootable 1G DSL USBs, 533MHz Fanless PC <-- SALE $200 each!
Get The Official Damn Small Linux Book. DSL Market , Great VPS hosting provided by Tektonic
Pages: (5) </ 1 2 [3] 4 5 >/

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

 reply to topic new topic new poll
Topic: Opera, browser substitution< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
delaguer Offline





Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: Feb. 2006
Posted: Feb. 02 2006,10:22 QUOTE
xxx  sorry double post  xxx
Back to top
Profile PM 
mikshaw Offline





Group: Members
Posts: 4856
Joined: July 2004
Posted: Feb. 02 2006,16:00 QUOTE
Quote (Guest @ Jan. 04 2006,01:25)
Dunno about the specific terms of Opera's licence, but in Windows at least, the program is now free, (for the latest versions 8.50 and 8.51).
Are the terms of the license still the same?

There's a huge difference between freeware and open source. Last time I checked, Internet Explorer was free.  It is not open source, however, which means it cannot legally be modified to suit the needs or desires of the user.

--------------
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/intro-linux/html/index.html
Back to top
Profile PM WEB 
Delboy Offline





Group: Members
Posts: 144
Joined: Nov. 2003
Posted: Feb. 08 2006,13:34 QUOTE
Yes Opera is quite a bit quicker on second opening.  Over the last couple of years with DSL on an old laptop, I have allways found myself using Opera for 'proper' browsing (Dillo for quick hits on bookmarks) and e-mail.  The contacts database feature means that is really quick to retrieve old stuff.  The file size is small at 3.66MB. I have never really used Sylpheed and Firefox.  Firefox is so slow and doesn't score as high as Opera on security from what I've read - a real concern nowadays.
Mikshaw: why would Opera need to be modified to fit in DSL?
Grafpup and other earlier Puppy versions and MCNlive manage it without any fuss about licences.
Flock at 8.5MB is huge by comparison and seems to be version of mozilla.  No thanks.
Back to top
Profile PM 
mikshaw Offline





Group: Members
Posts: 4856
Joined: July 2004
Posted: Feb. 08 2006,15:15 QUOTE
Quote (Delboy @ Feb. 08 2006,08:34)
Mikshaw: why would Opera need to be modified to fit in DSL?
Grafpup and other earlier Puppy versions and MCNlive manage it without any fuss about licences.

I don't believe i said it needs to be modified in order to fit into DSL...that was just something i used to explain a major difference between freeware and open source software.  In any case, John already stated that they wanted (not "needed") to make changes to it for DSL, but the license forbids.
Additionally, I seem to remember someone once saying that DSL probably would not include non-GPL-compatible applications in its base....but i might be mistaken.

--------------
http://www.tldp.org/LDP/intro-linux/html/index.html
Back to top
Profile PM WEB 
cbagger01 Offline





Group: Members
Posts: 4264
Joined: Oct. 2003
Posted: Feb. 08 2006,17:31 QUOTE
My guess is DSL will not include applications that are not open source and freely distributable.

Although the GPL license is the most common was to achieve this, it is not the only way.

For example, I believe that most Mozilla products (Mozilla, Firefox, Thunderbird, etc) are covered under a Mozilla Public License or somerthing to that effect.

But Opera license is definately not unrestricted so it is a great example of "freely distributable" does not equal "freely modifyable"
Back to top
Profile PM 
20 replies since Jan. 03 2006,01:21 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Pages: (5) </ 1 2 [3] 4 5 >/ 		reply to topic new topic new poll
Quick Reply: Opera

Do you wish to enable your signature for this post?
Do you wish to enable emoticons for this post?
Track this topic
View All Emoticons
View iB Code