Opera strikes a false note

I was an active Opera browser user for about 10 years.
But the time has come for me to stop that practice, and here's why.

To start with, I really like Opera. Or, liked - I should say.
It has pioneered way too many useful features to ignore -

built-in e-mail client with tagging and quick reply (M2)
built-in bookmark sync (Opera Link)
built-in BitTorrent client (although quite limited and slow)
Opera DialPad - replacement for your TV channels
page mini-thumb previews
tabs (yes, way way back before Firefox)
side panes for everything
notes
widgets
Magic Wand - you unobtrusive password helper, even for those site which do not allow to save it
and, lastly, Opera Unite and Opera Turbo (which I don't use)

Opera is a real all-in-one convenience, especially for multiple installations and platforms. It seriously helps achieve unified user experience across separate devices.
I had used it on two PCs, one Mac and two cell phones (S40 and UIQ2.1)
Bookmark sync was a bliss!

But, recent 10.x branch of desktop browser has been less than encouraging.
First off, there's been UI rehash in 10.0 to which one would have to accustom for quite a while. Then, there were some issues with my proxy detection PAC script - while easily processed by IE, it was not always taken well by Opera.
These issues were finally resolved, only to reappear in the latest 10.51.

But Oh, this 10.51 release is something.

The hideous thing is that it installed itself on top of my two 10.10 PC installations! No questions asked, no indication of a process given.
Sneakily and silently it installed itself, so when I reopened a closed Opera browser, the Windows Installer proceeded to set up my user environment and - voila - I had a new shiny un-asked-for release installed.
And guess what - I don't like it.

On one of my PCs, with User Switching enabled, it takes so much time to load. It also makes a simple wake-up operation take up almost 10 minutes with blank screen.
It clearly behaves in a CPU hog manner.
On another PC, it loses connectivity way too often, and I suspect "new and improved" PAC script logic. For instance, taking notebook off the docking station, I am losing Ethernet connection, then I dock it back - and have to restart Opera, because it obviously loses proxy connection, and goes direct.

I hate the new Microsoft-like "O" menu button in the top left.
This is the new Start button for you the netbook generation! :)
Takes one or two clicks more to do same stuff.

Mac version takes too long to start. Although I like the way it scrolls pages.
Smoooth!

So I have taken a look at three more browsers for PC - Apple Safari, Google Chrome, and Mozilla Firefox. And here's what I say.

Apple's Safari was my next turn, obviously, for having it on my Mac.
Once again, I was looking for a unified user experience, a browser I can rely on for both Mac and PC. (I am not using those cell phones anymore)

Safari pros:
- works great on a Mac
- works fast on a PC, too
Safari contras:
- has ugly unnatural looks on PC, trying to achieve mac's look with pc's means
- takes too much space in vertical dimension (three lines for my setup, IE8 takes two)
- bookmark sync is a paid option (mobileme.com costs $100/y)
FAIL (as compared to Opera I'm replacing, and the winner)

Google Chrome is very fashionable now, I see it more and more often, especially at web expos, where most of devs are Google-junkies/wannabes. So I took a spin on it and was not impressed...yet? "Yet" is too, the word which comes to mind when I think of Android. But I digress.

Chrome pros:
- fast
- Google-integrated, HTML5 support
Chrome contras:
- system colors are not respected nor used! I am on XP (Silver theme), do not show me bloody blue Vista-like buttons! WTF? Respect my environment, look and color prefs - do not supplant them!
- WTF with fullscreen (F11) mode? I raise the mouse to top bar - and see no menu, no address line only some useless nag?
FAIL ("yet"?)
By the way, "Chrome" is "lame" in Russian.
Not that I hate it, it's just "not there yet".

And the winner is: Mozilla Firefox

Why?

Firefox pros:
- nice look, respects colors and style
- fast
- has free bookmark sync plug-ins
- does not cause "hanging" when waking up
- does not hog CPU on user-switched setups
- most sites are tested on it (although Opera was also OK in that regard for me)
Firefox contras:
- not the same look on mac - but I guess I don't want it to look like Safari on a PC
- there were problems updating it on a mac, "locked" dynlib files in Trash, even after restart
- popular - could be exploited successfully - will need often updates
Well, I guess it still much better on PC than the rest.

It's not the fist time Opera screwes up. But it's time to change.
Thanks for 9.x-10.10 though, it's been a great ride.

Insecure certification? Say no.

If you, like me, have worked for some corporation, or even smaller company with an Intranet, then you'd recognize this kind of screenshots:

It's a long standing security issue and the one I just read an article about here

For people without due understanding of certificates and why they are used, this is a non-issue - they just click "Continue" or something to that effect - and go on.
But the devil is in the details, as we know.

I think it's about time we stopped allowing that.

Besides presenting a usability issue, namely a "nag" dialog, it also de-voids one of two purposes of certificates - it does not verify the server's authenticity, allowing for so called "man-in-the-middle" attack.

The second, remaining, purpose is encryption against eavesdropping, but this one will also be crippled if you're talking to "the wrong" server after clicking "Continue" on invalid certificate.
Simply because the eavesdropper will be the non-authenticated (fake, malicious) server with similarly incorrect certificate, to which you'd blindly accept connection.

Such practice had been "convenient to user", who needed a way to access things, and "merciful to developer" who did not want to spend money on SSL certificates from established Certificate Authorities.
Well, there's been epoch with no condoms, and people suffered greatly while not realizing there's an exit.
As more and more electronic fraud and hacking dilutes quality of online life, there's more and more need to establish better standard practices.
Now web looks like only richer folks can buy needed protection. The rest of us have to "blindly click extra".

Time to revisit what stops us from helping every website?

I would suggest to "close the cap" by disabling access from all browsers to invalid certificates.

The only exception left would be VALID self-signed certificates, but they should be separately indicated in browsers by a special icon (not the padlock as with CA-signed certificates). Such exception leaves out one vector of attack - DNS.

And for future development, there is a need to secure DNS, too.
I think there can be one solution to both problems.

An option to get certificate when registering your domain name!
(Directly from the registrar.)

Think of this - we trust DNS, should not this trust be augmented by certification?

Unfortunately, this would mean serious increase in business for registrars and decrease for CAs.
Well, good does not come without changing.
Besides, I think they are in the right position to lobby this as a new web standard.

For registrars, that would be an additional competition vector.