Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account



Photo

Opera 9.xx in Windows 98

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
65 replies to this topic

#51
Sfor

Sfor

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 579 posts
  • Joined 01-July 07
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
I've upgraded Opera from 9.2x to 9.60.

The problems with oppening .URL links remained unchanged.

When comared to the 9.2 the 9.60 does have worse readablity, because almost all icons are just in shades of gray. I do not know how to make them coloured, at the moment.


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#52
Dave-H

Dave-H

    Friend of MSFN

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 890 posts
  • Joined 04-January 06
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

I've upgraded Opera from 9.2x to 9.60.

The problems with oppening .URL links remained unchanged.

When comared to the 9.2 the 9.60 does have worse readablity, because almost all icons are just in shades of gray. I do not know how to make them coloured, at the moment.

Have you tried just using different skins?
:)

Dual boot Windows 98SE SP2.1a and Windows XP Professional SP3.
Dual 3.16GHz X5460 Quad Core Xeons with 8GB RAM. ATI Radeon X850 Graphics 1920x1080 32 Bit Colour with Large Fonts.


#53
Multibooter

Multibooter

    Friend of MSFN

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Joined 21-March 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

I've upgraded Opera from 9.2x to 9.60.

The problems with oppening .URL links remained unchanged.

When comared to the 9.2 the 9.60 does have worse readablity, because almost all icons are just in shades of gray. I do not know how to make them coloured, at the moment.

The internet-shortcut-bug is still there in Opera v9.60 (under Win98SE US version). The work-around is to have Opera already loaded before double-clicking on the internet shortcut on the desktop. Opera has removed the URL-selection under Preferences-Advanced-Details, maybe the people at Opera were working to fix this bug? I have set Opera back as my default browser, since the work-around solves the problem, even though in an inconvenient way.

Re colored icons: The grey icons actually help you focus on the content of the web page you're reading, instead of on the browser controls. When I weigh improved readability of the page content vs more visible browser controls, I would go for improved readability.

#54
Sfor

Sfor

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 579 posts
  • Joined 01-July 07
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
I do prefer the way it was done in the 9.2. The icons were in dimmed colours. So, the menus were more readable, and still not disturbing. Grey is good for the tool bar. But, in the menu coloured icons are much better.

Yet another problem. The Opera 9.60 appears to loose entries from the download list, between sessions. The sort order is distorted, as well.

Right after installation, it appears, there are no skins with coloured icons in the installation package.

I do prefer the Opera 9.2. So, I've unistalled the 9.60, as it appears to bring less good than bad.

#55
CharlotteTheHarlot

CharlotteTheHarlot

    MSFN Master

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,054 posts
  • Joined 24-September 07
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
Some impressions of Opera 9.60 ...

POSITIVE :: I am now thoroughly convinced there is a speedup over 9.5x in all parts of the Opera GUI. This includes the Preferences and Skin dialogs (which were slower in 9.5x) and I think everything else. I am using the same JRE 1.6 throughout all the 9.xx revisions so that is not to be factored in, and I can also confirm that no files outside of the Opera directory structure have been altered by any of the 9.xx upgrades. Clearly something that was badly changed in 9.5x has been changed back.

POSITIVE :: File > Save ... Saving MHT and HTM files is back to normal now as well. This was really ticking me off when saving individual webpages took longer than the entire initial Opera/Java loading (which is to be expected to take some time).

POSITIVE :: Wand, Cache, Cookies ... I had seen a real PITA problem in 9.5x concerning forums sign-ins (like this) where every single day when loading several threads from a session, in each of those threads I found myself NOT logged-in and of course had to. In short, Opera was not remembering things that it was supposed to remember. This has not yet happened again to me in Opera 9.60.

NEGATIVE :: Shell\Open and DDE ...

The internet-shortcut-bug is still there in Opera v9.60 (under Win98SE US version). The work-around is to have Opera already loaded before double-clicking on the internet shortcut on the desktop.

Confirmed here, and the same thing happens to me opening any file assigned to Opera (in this case HTM and MHT). Double-clicking them without first having Opera running causes the error. It hasn't bugged me to the point of research yet. I've been dodging this error the exact same way as you and it works. Just open Opera first. But I will be watching this thread hoping you guys come up with more ideas about this.

NEGATIVE :: Transfers ...

Yet another problem. The Opera 9.60 appears to loose entries from the download list, between sessions. The sort order is distorted, as well.

I noticed this as well, but I thought it was since the later 8.xx versions. I could have sworn it was present in all the 9.xx versions. It is too sporadic to be reproducible. What would be a nice fix here is to auto append to a log file all the download transactions like GetRight does. I also notice that every so often (perhaps 1% of the time) a file is corrupt even though it successfully downloaded. Having said that, I doubt I have downloaded enough files in 9.60 to be able to state with certainty that the problem is still existing.

NEGATIVE :: MSI Installer ... why they chose to remove the easy option of Classic Installer from the main download page is beyond me. Now you have to click: Show Other Versions, then Windows, then All Languages next to the current version, then you FINALLY get the radio button for the good installer.

Just so that the configuration here is clear: Windows is 4.10.2222, Opera is v9.60.10447, Java is JRE 1.6. The MSIMG32.DLL is in Windows\System and is from the WinME CDROM. Opera is NOT installed using MSI packages.

... Let him who hath understanding reckon the Number Of The Beast ...


#56
Sfor

Sfor

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 579 posts
  • Joined 01-July 07
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
The conclusion is the Opera 9.5 introduced some serious speed related core changes. The current 9.6 version is the result of trying to make the new design stable again.

The old 9.2 design is slower but more reliable. It seems to be logical to wait for higher than 9.6 version, before upgrading from 9.2.

#57
CharlotteTheHarlot

CharlotteTheHarlot

    MSFN Master

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,054 posts
  • Joined 24-September 07
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag


to Sfor and Multibooter and all others ...

FYI: I did some testing of Opera 9.60 and its recent Shell\Open and/or DDE bug. Wondering if you get the same errors as any of these that I noted? Methodology: Opera was verified to be closed, one file manager was opened, a .MHT test file selected, and [ENTER] was pressed.

Result = whether the MHT file successfully opened into an Opera tab, and,
MsgBox = any message returned complaining about the Shell/Open action ...

;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
application: Tracker v3.60.0030 ...
result: SUCCESS
msgbox: NONE!
;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
application: XYplorer v7.00.0000
result: SUCCESS
msgbox: NONE!
;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
application: nViPER.@bOX v0.0.0.401
result: SUCCESS
msgbox: NONE!
;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
application: WinNC Next Commander v3.00
result: SUCCESS (NOTE: it opened it in two tabs! verified again)
msgbox: NONE!
;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
application: Windows Explorer v4.72.3612.1700
result: SUCCESS
msgbox: Cannot find the file "TEST.MHT" (or one of its components). Make sure the path and filename are correct and that all
required libraries are available.

;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
application: BenniSoft LCARS FileManager v0.11.049
result: SUCCESS
msgbox: Cannot find the file "TEST.MHT" (or one of its components). Make sure the path and filename are correct and that all
required libraries are available.

;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
application: PowerDesk v6.0.4.2
result: SUCCESS
msgbox: Access to the specified device, path, or file is denied
;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
application: WinAbility AB Commander v6.6
result: SUCCESS
msgbox: Access to the specified device, path, or file is denied
;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
application: WinFile Win98se v4.10.1998 and WinME v4.90.3000
result: SUCCESS
msgbox: File Manager cannot find the specified file (or one of its components).
Make sure the path and filename are correct and that all required libraries are available.

;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
application: Total Commander v6.52
result: SUCCESS
msgbox: File not found!
;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All of the file managers actually do work, that is, they do pass the filename to the shell which opens the file as instructed by these registry keys:

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Classes\.mht]@="Opera.MHTML"[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Classes\Opera.MHTML\Shell\Open\Command]@="\"C:\\WinApps\\Opera\\096010447\\Opera.exe\" \"%1\"";;; here are the DDE entries shown for completeness sake although;;; I do not believe this branch is called during this test ... [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Classes\Opera.MHTML\Shell\Open\DDEexec]@="\"%1\""[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Classes\Opera.MHTML\Shell\Open\DDEexec\Application]@="Opera"[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Classes\Opera.MHTML\Shell\Open\DDEexec\Topic]@="WWW_OpenURL"
Since the requested file does get displayed in Opera (note that it opens in two tabs under WinNC), the only real problem is that nuisance MsgBox produced by the caller application in all but four of the tests. Another point, this MsgBox is not spawned from Opera, it is from the calling app. Even though during the Explorer test the MsgBox does not mention Explorer in its title, during the PowerDesk test it clearly mentions PowerDesk Pro.

Several have identical errors indicating they use the same function to pass the filename over to the shell: Windows Explorer and BenniSoft LCARS FileManager. Also PowerDesk and WinAbility AB Commander. And of course both the Win98se and WinME versions of WinFile.

I had hoped a simple patch to the parsing of the Shell\Open\Command string would solve this but I think the variation in results under this test implies that fixing that registry string so that it works for one program (e.g., Explorer) will likely break it for others. But that is still a hunch at this point.

This does not mirror exactly the previous testing in this thread with URL shortcuts, but I figured this would help narrow the list of suspects down by eliminating the HTTP registry keys as variables. But please anyone chime in with ideas about this. I'm just offering up some data at this point and I hope someone else will notice something I missed.

... Let him who hath understanding reckon the Number Of The Beast ...


#58
Dave-H

Dave-H

    Friend of MSFN

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 890 posts
  • Joined 04-January 06
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
If you want the look of Opera 9.2x back in 9.5/6 the shin here should do the trick -

http://my.opera.com/...s/info/?id=8248

It's not the real 9.2 native skin, but one made by someone to replicate it.
Gets rid of those black icons by all accounts though!

I love Opera because it's the most user customisable browser out there, you can get it to look exactly the way you want it to if you know how.

The thing with items disappearing from the transfers window is very long standing.
They do disappear by design incidentally if the item concerned is deleted or moved from the folder it was downloaded to.
:)

Dual boot Windows 98SE SP2.1a and Windows XP Professional SP3.
Dual 3.16GHz X5460 Quad Core Xeons with 8GB RAM. ATI Radeon X850 Graphics 1920x1080 32 Bit Colour with Large Fonts.


#59
Sfor

Sfor

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 579 posts
  • Joined 01-July 07
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
I've been observing items disappearing from the transfers window in the Opera 9.6, when the concerned file remained in the download folder.

I'm aware of the function removing deleted or moved files from the list. In my case the files were removed without apparent reason.

#60
Dave-H

Dave-H

    Friend of MSFN

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 890 posts
  • Joined 04-January 06
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
There is an option to set the number of days for transfers to be kept in the list, copy and paste this into the address bar:

opera:config#TransferWindow|KeepEntriesDays

The default is 7 days, but I've never been convinced that it makes any difference!

Did you try that skin?

:)

Edited by Dave-H, 20 October 2008 - 04:40 PM.

Dual boot Windows 98SE SP2.1a and Windows XP Professional SP3.
Dual 3.16GHz X5460 Quad Core Xeons with 8GB RAM. ATI Radeon X850 Graphics 1920x1080 32 Bit Colour with Large Fonts.


#61
Multibooter

Multibooter

    Friend of MSFN

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Joined 21-March 08
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

the only real problem is that nuisance MsgBox produced by the caller application in all but four of the tests. Another point, this MsgBox is not spawned from Opera, it is from the calling app.

Hi CharlotteTheHarlot,
I don't use any file managers. I use under Win98 only BeyondCompare for most most of my file operations, like deletes, it doesn't have the sluggish-file-delete-problem of Windows Explorer. BeyondCompare is very mature and only once did I encounter a bug, which has been fixed.

To replicate your file-opening with the various file managers, I added a selection "Open with - Opera" to the right-click menu inside BeyondCompare (Tools - Options - "Open with"). When, inside BeyondCompare, I right-clicked then on an internet shortcut .url in \Windows\Desktop\ or on a .mht file, selecting "Open with - Opera" Opera opened the desired page (SUCCESS) and msgbox: NONE.

This confirms your finding that the internet-shortcut-bug is probably a Windows Explorer bug. Opera does NOT have this bug unter WinXP. Maybe somebody with WinME can verify whether the internet-shortcut-bug exists under WinME also? If the error does not occur under WinME, then maybe a WinME-dll could help, rather than a registry patch???

Edited by Multibooter, 20 October 2008 - 05:16 PM.


#62
CharlotteTheHarlot

CharlotteTheHarlot

    MSFN Master

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,054 posts
  • Joined 24-September 07
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
This is a follow-up to my post #55 above. Now using Opera 9.62 with the same Java JRE 1.6. I need to quote myself for it to make sense ...

Some impressions of Opera 9.60 ...

POSITIVE :: I am now thoroughly convinced there is a speedup over 9.5x in all parts of the Opera GUI. This includes the Preferences and Skin dialogs (which were slower in 9.5x) and I think everything else. I am using the same JRE 1.6 throughout all the 9.xx revisions so that is not to be factored in, and I can also confirm that no files outside of the Opera directory structure have been altered by any of the 9.xx upgrades. Clearly something that was badly changed in 9.5x has been changed back.

:thumbup Absolutely convinced of this speed improvement now. If you are still on 9.5x, you should upgrade immediately. Speed-wise, 9.5x feels like a buggy beta version. 9.6x feels like 9.2x.

POSITIVE :: File > Save ... Saving MHT and HTM files is back to normal now as well. This was really ticking me off when saving individual webpages took longer than the entire initial Opera/Java loading (which is to be expected to take some time).

:realmad: Whoops, I spoke too soon. The loooong delays appear every now and then after you save a webpage to MHT. It effectively freezes up all instances of Opera while the MHT is being created. It appears to be almost random but if I was pressed to give an estimate, I would say say this occurs about 5% of the time.

POSITIVE :: Wand, Cache, Cookies ... I had seen a real PITA problem in 9.5x concerning forums sign-ins (like this) where every single day when loading several threads from a session, in each of those threads I found myself NOT logged-in and of course had to. In short, Opera was not remembering things that it was supposed to remember. This has not yet happened again to me in Opera 9.60.

:angry: Well this problem is still here but I believe this is not Opera related after all. The subject is under active discussion at this thread here at MSFN: periodically being logged out.

NEGATIVE :: Shell\Open and DDE ...

The internet-shortcut-bug is still there in Opera v9.60 (under Win98SE US version). The work-around is to have Opera already loaded before double-clicking on the internet shortcut on the desktop.

Confirmed here, and the same thing happens to me opening any file assigned to Opera (in this case HTM and MHT). Double-clicking them without first having Opera running causes the error. It hasn't bugged me to the point of research yet. I've been dodging this error the exact same way as you and it works. Just open Opera first. But I will be watching this thread hoping you guys come up with more ideas about this.

:angry: Opera 9.62 is acting the same as 9.61 and 9.60 and probably every previous version since Java JRE was required. It's a minor pain (just close the Error MessageBox) but I think we'll eventually crack this one.

NEGATIVE :: Transfers ...

Yet another problem. The Opera 9.60 appears to loose entries from the download list, between sessions. The sort order is distorted, as well.

I noticed this as well, but I thought it was since the later 8.xx versions. I could have sworn it was present in all the 9.xx versions. It is too sporadic to be reproducible. What would be a nice fix here is to auto append to a log file all the download transactions like GetRight does. I also notice that every so often (perhaps 1% of the time) a file is corrupt even though it successfully downloaded. Having said that, I doubt I have downloaded enough files in 9.60 to be able to state with certainty that the problem is still existing.

:realmad: The Transfers window is definitely buggy and is acting the same as that comment above. I started a thread over at Opera about the corrupt downloads: Transfers ... 'DONE' sometimes means incomplete and would like to invite anyone with similar experiences to add to the discussion. This will wind up in a bug report.

NEGATIVE :: MSI Installer ... why they chose to remove the easy option of Classic Installer from the main download page is beyond me. Now you have to click: Show Other Versions, then Windows, then All Languages next to the current version, then you FINALLY get the radio button for the good installer.

:wacko: Yeah, you still have to follow those instructions to get the non-MSI Installer version of the file. No big deal, just a bunch of extra clicking.

... Let him who hath understanding reckon the Number Of The Beast ...


#63
Sfor

Sfor

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 579 posts
  • Joined 01-July 07
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
Have anyone tried the Opera 10 for the problems with oppening links related to Explorer and DDE?

I'm getting tired of waiting for this problem to be handled. So, far it appeared, the Opera creators were not willing to take care of it. If the Opera 10 will not solve it, there will be a good time to do something by ourselves.

The simplest action possible, would be to locate the place the DDE related registry entries are stored in the Opera files. By changing them to some neutral text it should be possible to disable DDE registry keys for good.

-----------------------------

I've just installed the Opera 10 alpha. Nothing changed.

-----------------------------

If you want the look of Opera 9.2x back in 9.5/6 the shin here should do the trick -

http://my.opera.com/...s/info/?id=8248

It's not the real 9.2 native skin, but one made by someone to replicate it.
Gets rid of those black icons by all accounts though!

I love Opera because it's the most user customisable browser out there, you can get it to look exactly the way you want it to if you know how.


I've just tried the skin on Opera 10. And, I must say I like it. It is much better than the other skins provided with the Opera 10, for my taste.

Edited by Sfor, 23 December 2008 - 05:36 AM.


#64
PROBLEMCHYLD

PROBLEMCHYLD

    The Resurrector for old Windows OS

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,534 posts
  • Joined 07-October 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
Is Microsoft Java Virtual Machine (JVM) Update 3810 ok
or do we have to use JRE 1.6?

Believe God is the Alpha and Omega.
Believe Jesus Christ died for our sins.
Repent for your sins now or there will be
BLOOD

The Path to God


U98SESP3 03-11-2013


#65
CharlotteTheHarlot

CharlotteTheHarlot

    MSFN Master

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,054 posts
  • Joined 24-September 07
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

Is Microsoft Java Virtual Machine (JVM) Update 3810 ok
or do we have to use JRE 1.6?

Good question. There are a few Win9x Java threads lately to scan through here at MSFN although they are discussing Sun JRE specifically. See Java JRE 6 and win-98? (Problem with windows installer) and Java versions, Changes since 1.5.0_07 for some reference points.

I am not aware of any machines still using JVM under Win9x (here in my world or on any forums). Will the Sun JRE install (and operate correctly) when a JVM is/was present? That is the dilemma. I hope others know the answer for you. I do know that on Win9x Sun JRE_1_6_0 works with Opera 9.62. See those threads above for members using versions as high as 1_6_7.

FYI: you are probably aware that Microsoft screwed the pooch with their Java Runtime, lost a big lawsuit from Sun, and subsequently removed JVM from WinXP with SP1a. I can tell you from experience that remnants of JVM can still exist after removal (ActiveX killbits and such) which can affect Java programs and websites from operating correctly. On WinXP this means not to re-install with less than SP1a, and, to decline any offer to auto-install JVM from any 3rd party apps that still try to (certain AOL and Yahoo Messenger versions).

P.S. to all: on Win9x or WinXP, I would like to get my hands on any JVM uninstaller or removal utility that may exist. Any link to such a file would be appreciated. I would like to dissect the utility to audit all the registry and file references it contains. This would be very useful for solving some of these Java hiccups caused by JVM.

... Let him who hath understanding reckon the Number Of The Beast ...


#66
Sfor

Sfor

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 579 posts
  • Joined 01-July 07
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
I've been playing with Opera 10 alpha a bit, yesterday. The first impression is, the file download part has to be improved significantly.

- there is something wrong with the file type selection, while saving files. All the files were saved with the same extension (the first one I've used).
- not the default skin can cause the popup text to be invisible
- there is something wrong with the dowloaded files sorting

Also, I've noticed when running links from desktop with Opera selected as the default browser. While the error condition dialog gets displayed, the desktop gets locked, to the moment the dialog is closed. So, the error condition message comes from Explorer.exe shell (not from the Opera).




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users