M Thompson wrote: > > This story was copied from: http://www.opera.com/interviews/linux.html > > [SNIP] > > DS I'm thinking before Christmas because I get a bonus! The test group is > quite pleased with what we've sent out and I've gotten a lot of positive > feedback. Great, we get fed crap because the guy gets a bonus for shipping before Xmas... I thought Linux was supposed to free us from the "rush it out the door" syndrome. That's the joy of open source boys and girls, it ain't done til it's done... > Are you adding anyone to the test group? Can I e-mail somewhere to get on > the list? > > DS No, I'm afraid not as the test group has already been settled. The bigger the pool of eyes, the shallower the pool of bugs. > > [SNIP] > > How will the Linux version compare to the Windows version when it comes to > features? > > DS We don't have mail and news but we should have everything else. In a lot > of cases we will have more features to make Linux users happy. 2 years and no mail or news? Double-bah. > > [SNIP] > > Which GUI toolkit will Opera for Linux be based on? > > DS It's based on QT right now and the window manager that we use will work > under Gnome and KDE which is my first priority. We'll add support for other > window managers in version 4.1. It should run under all the window managers > but will lack integration. Someone mind explaining to me why a BROWSER requires it's own window manager? It's a fscking application for pete's sake! Create the top-level window and forget it. Sheesh... this thing's gonna be a pile of crap. > What kind of dependency problems, if any, might a user run into installing > it? > > DS Right now it's running on a computer with nothing but a kernel, the > standard C++ libraries and X Windows. There are no other requirements as we > include the libraries. What about the concept of shared libraries. Thanks, but I've already GOT Qt installed on this machine. Use it. This "ship the system libraries with the applications" is Windowsish to the core. > Will Opera for Linux offer an automated install script for generic Linux or > come packaged for the different flavors (rpm, deb etc...), or both? > > DS There will be a lot of different installation options including simple > tar files for advanced users as well as advanced shell scripts for end > users. How about creating a tarball, a .deb and an .rpm package and calling it a day. What system did I miss? > Will Opera for Linux offer browsing from the console? > > DS The QT edition does not, however another version we are currently working > on will be console, right now we have two different versions: console and > X-Windows. Unless that's an FBDev graphical browser for the console, thanks but no thanks. Lynx and (umm, what's the name of the other one?) work just fine. > Which flavors of Linux will be supported initially? > > DS Linux in general - anything with a 2.x kernal and X free 86 version > 3.3.3.1 or better on an intel platform. Within a week after the first > release we expect a public beta on Linux for Sparc. > > Will Opera for Linux support integration into different desktop > environments, for instance "NeXTish docking", Gnome Panel integration and > KDE? > > DS To a certain degree yes, however, the first version will be focused on > browsing. This is something we'll be implementing, but in later versions; > perhaps after 4.1 or 4.2. > > Well thank you, Darren, for taking some time out of your busy schedule to > chat with us today. > > DS It's no problem, I don't mind at all. I think what the interviewer forgot to mention was that we might have had a browser over a year ago if these putzes weren't out trying to reinvent the wheel. We've got a variety of window managers and people are highly tied to their personal choice of manager. Forcing them to move to another one for a browser will seal the browser's fate. Step back and think hard about forking your money over to a company that clearly does not get the Linux platform. -- Steve Philp Network Administrator Advance Packaging Corporation [EMAIL PROTECTED]
