Opera 11's out

[Funkin']

I can't believe it has extensions now. Never thought they would go that route.

[elbuitre]

Real extensions? no widget garbage? osunds good. how's the stability with extensions? and... what's your OS.

[anon]

how's the stability with extensions?

As good as always, apparently - tested on Windows XP SP3 and 7.

[fox92]

has the facebook issue been resolved? Every Opera version was not compatible with fb, atleast for me it wasn't.

[anon]

Every Opera version was not compatible with fb, atleast for me it wasn't.

Opera has always been compatible with Facebook here, or at least back when I had an account there. Some of my friends have been using Opera on Facebook all this year with no issues.

[Slickerey]

As good as always, apparently - tested on Windows XP SP3 and 7.

I've tried 7 many times in the past but never got used to it. I customized the living hell out of it to try and make it faster and once got about twenty processes on idle.

[anon]

I customized the living hell out of it to try and make it faster and once got about twenty processes on idle.

That's awesome - my Windows 7 install is in my netbook and even after heavy tweaking I can't get it to run less than 35 processes when idle...

That's why I plan to format and install MicroXP on it as soon as I can. That's what I use in my desktop PC (where I'm typing this from), and it's running just 22 processes with all my stuff open.

[Slickerey]

...And that's why I love Windows XP.

My desktop PC uses only 16 processes on idle (without uTorrent or IDM open).

[Cabalo]

Again this talk about running processes. You should check a standard Ubuntu instalation for running processes and then you'd see.
As since Vista the services aren't invoked via svchost, which would cause kernel crashes on Windows XP, this does not happen on windows 7.
FYI, on my Asus EEEPC 901, single core, a Windows 7 default install is much faster than a Windows XP one. All those who still defend such a flawed and outdated OS like XP should really pay more attention to what's going on around them. Not even the excuse "Windows Vista is too much of a resource hog on my old computer" is valid any more. Windows 7 blows away XP on performance, paging, kernel, memory management, and so much more it would need an entire board just to get through all of that.

[anon]

For me, less processes equals more memory available to the rest of the system, which I think we'll agree is good. I can't comment on kernel crashes and the like, but I've never had any major issues with XP. Maybe I'm a bit of a stubborn "what the hell, it works for me" user. Your points are valid, however.

After reading your post, I do kind of feel like giving Tiny7 a second chance, though. Maybe I'll like it this time. Jokes aside, I've seen a lot of things on Windows 7 (in the netbook), that I do like.