Tweak

Screengrab! = here

Afair, thumbalizr.com uses IE engine for creating screenshots. It may be useful, but it not analogue «Screengrab!».

Afair, thumbalizr.com uses IE engine for creating screenshots. It may be useful, but it not analogue «Screengrab!».

I think so to, but for most people its a toy to play with, for developers it wont be much use, but there are 3rd party programs for that, but for 95% of the people who actually use the plugin it should be good enough.

143 Restart Firefox - Firefox specific, restart is often not needed in Opera to apply customizations

For Opera can be done via button: Restart Opera



Or change the item in [Browser File Menu]

Item, MI_IDM_Exit = Exit & Execute Program, "Opera.exe"

For Opera 9.5 it's more safely because of launch speed.

147 Linkification / Text Link - Go to URL in context menu, Linkify UserScript for text files

There is also Linkifier UserJS that works not only in text files: linkifier.js

You said you were waiting for 9.5 to release to update this. I can't wait to see which way the updates go.

Opera has JavaScript, CSS, and DOM debugging via Dragonfly (Tools-> Advanced-> Developer Tools)

https://dragonfly.opera.com/

No. 7: Open with IE/Firefox/Seamonkey/any-other-installed-browser is out of the box in Opera 9.5. So it would be solid green.

I would suggest to add one more colour to the scale, GOLD maybe, when functionality is not just similar, but significantly better/more useful in Opera, than extension in Firefox - like iin this point, where you have not only "Open in IE" option, but you can choose from more browsers.

Also GOLD would be Synchronize function which is superior in Opera compared to Firefox amatour sometimes-works-often-buggy-or-incompatible solutions.

You might also want to highlight (either also by the gold colour or in separate way) the functions which are introduced by Opera and copied by Firefox (like Speed dial) and which are natural solution in Opera (like 18 and 25 - behaviour of tabs).

This way it would be even more powerful list.

The noscript functionality is not equivilent. This is a pretty big deal to me... noscript allows me to easily whitelist individual sources of script, regardless of what site I am visiting. That way I can allow the bare minimum script needed for a page to function (usually hosted on the site I am visiting) without allowing the half a dozen other scripts (usually hosted by ad sites). Not possible in Opera.

Also, once I whitelist a script host with noscript, it will be whitelisted on every site I visit, even if I have never visited that particular site before. This is pretty useful for video hosting services, for example, where you run into the same few hosts again and again. Not possible in Opera.

The JS blocking functionality is of pretty limited usefulness... I can't really see any use for it at all given that it is all or nothing for a given site. Most sites will not function very well or at all without some JS. Most commercial sites also contain annoying scripts. With Opera you get nothing or all of that. With FireFox I can get just what I want.

If it wasn't for this deficiency I think I would prefer Opera.

@Nasty: In my opinion, very few built-in Opera functionalities outperform their extension counterparts. Speed dial, NoScript, and HTML Validation are all good examples. Opera's implementation (whether first or second) is often outshined by the extension. I believe Rijk and other Opera staff would argue that Opera's implementation is easier to use which is often the case. However, easiest to use and best implementation are not always synonymous. In general when comparing extensions to Opera, the response is

Originally posted by Rijk:

Opera's functionality is more limited

It is just the nature of the beast. It seems like in most cases (speed dial extension) the extension developers are not focusing on ease of use but on functionality and configurability. In the case of the speed dial extension, you can use it without configuring much and get Opera's functionality out of the box. However, you can configure a bajillion options (3 tabs worth) and get all kinds of fancy, cool, useful functionality out of it. In my opinion, Opera devs religiously (read: far too often) trade ease of use for configurability and functionality. Disclaimer: Keep in mind I don't use speed dial in either browser (ff or opera). I merely researched the extension to compare and contrast it to Opera's implementation.

The main reason that I believe extensions outperform Opera's implementations is because Opera's finite number of developers are trying to compete with 10s of thousands (if not more) of extension developers. It is not a fair fight. Even if you found a case where Opera's implementation was superior, it would be 100 times more likely for the extension developer to go back and improve the extension than it would for Opera devvs to improve their side where extensions outperform Opera. The devs can't afford to be in an arms race with extensions. It would be too time consuming and a losing battle as they are greatly outnumbered.

Case in point, Mozilla recently launched a Firebug team to research and dev new Firebug strategies. Maybe the number of in-house Mozilla devs working on Firebug is congruent or similar to the number of devs working on Dragonfly but on top of that Firebug has a whole community of developers around it because it is the gold standard for web developer tools.

BTW did anyone find a solution for DownThemAll? There's nothing like this in Opera and I don't even see it coming unless Opera rethinks their plugin/widget platform...

Originally posted by Rijk:

Rereading about the Console2 extension , it seems like this is basically something Opera 9 offers built-in. I'll wait with upgrading the Opera rating here until 9.5, which will improve the console further.

Did this happen yet? Was it pushed back to a later release?

Are you planning on updating the list at any point?

Some corrections (in one place):

«VideoDownloader Widget» - Don't work, at least for youtube.

«Adblock Plus: Element Hiding Helper» - Approximate analogue: Remove_it_permanently-for_Opera.js

«NoScript» - Approximate analogue: BlockIt.js.

«"Open in IE" button» don't work in Opera 9.5. Variant with separated html-page - works.

«User Agent Switcher _ Site preferences > Network» - «Site preferences > Network» does not allow to set necessary User Agent (for instance, it needed for sites which oriented on mobile browsers), therefore it must have light green color (limited functionality).

«Megaupload SX.3» - megaupload_com.js

«Flashblock» - FlashBlocker now includes a variant (show flash size) which looks like Flashblock for FF.

«ScrapBook _ Notes (text only), or Dmitry's OBook Plugin (Windows only)» - As a result of bug with superfluous quotes in Opera 9.5, OBook now works only partly. Also, Qsaver have some functions, as saving selected part of page, similar to ScrapBook.

«gTranslate _ Selected text context menu» - Google translate supported many more languages. There exists two userjs for it: google-translation with tooltip and google-translate.

«Save Image in Folder» - Qsaver or this method.

And some Firefox Out-of-the-Box functions, which Opera does not have:

Google auto-suggest - Not available.
Text autocomplete - ops.js.

Sorting search engines - http://my.opera.com/SearchEdit

Source code of selection - UserJS or button.

Full screen mode with autohide panels - Not available, but you can try this buttons.

Copy formatted text (aka rtf) - htm2clip.
Copy vertical text blocks (with ctrl, Word-like) - Not available?

Information about page - Sidebar Info + extra-download-links.js. (Sidebar contains absolute useless «Navigation links», but does not contain info about images or embedded objects)

Disable loading images for the site - Not available? (maybe content blocker).

Source code of selection - UserJS or button.

Or bookmarklet (second link from above).

are there plans to update this list any soon?, maybe you should make it a wiki

Any news on the update?

yes. this does deserve an update in the era of O.10b.

This is real cool! I had a list of stuff that Opera created, then FF/Safari/Chrome copied, and Ive gotta add this stuff. I read somewhere that it took 45 FF extensions now to do what Opera does outta the box.

Id like to see this as advertisement.

Why have to defend yourself, when you can advertise yourself?


Cheers!

Originally posted by digitalinksmudge:

I read somewhere that it took 45 FF extensions now to do what Opera does outta the box.

This is not a positive to some people. Many technologically-adept people complain that they would use Opera if it were merely a browser and not a suite. The swiss-army-knife approach actually turns some users away. Advertising how much stuff it has that it doesn't need is not a good thing in my book. FF may take 45 extensions to be able to do what Opera can do, but you can never make Opera be just a browser like Firefox. There is power in the ability to customize.

Originally posted by fearphage:

There is power in the ability to customize.

Indeed!

Cheers!

> 24 User Agent Switcher -> Site preferences > Network

This line is factually wrong.

Please fix that line to [red]Not available[/red]

What user agent switcher does can not be replicated in Opera. It is one of the weakest Opera points IMHO.

Opera limits user agents to three pre-determined strings. Two additional strings can be selected, which does not include the term "Opera", but neither of those choices can be made persistent.

There is NO option in opera to configure the user agent string at will. You can't make a custom user agent string.

(Using Opera 10)

This list needs a big update, for example point 14

FF:4 Foxmarks Bookmark Synchronizer / OnlineBookmarkManager Synchronizer / Google Browser Sync
Opera:
Third party tool oSync (now opera link)