<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Opera.com &#8211; Refreshed Home Page</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.favbrowser.com/operacom-refreshed-home-page/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.favbrowser.com/operacom-refreshed-home-page/</link>
	<description>Web Browser News and Reviews.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 16:52:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Foo</title>
		<link>http://www.favbrowser.com/operacom-refreshed-home-page/#comment-62597</link>
		<dc:creator>Foo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:07:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.favbrowser.com/?p=1997#comment-62597</guid>
		<description>It is completely relevant, this is the new design we are talking about.
How can you &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; notice the eyesore that is the &quot;gradient&quot; in the background, or the greenish blotches in the shadow?
It stands out like frikkin&#039; Mt. Everest!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is completely relevant, this is the new design we are talking about.<br />
How can you <em>not</em> notice the eyesore that is the &#8220;gradient&#8221; in the background, or the greenish blotches in the shadow?<br />
It stands out like frikkin&#8217; Mt. Everest!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Foo</title>
		<link>http://www.favbrowser.com/operacom-refreshed-home-page/#comment-62595</link>
		<dc:creator>Foo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:00:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.favbrowser.com/?p=1997#comment-62595</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s true, I had completely forgotten about that. 1px width just appears &quot;simpler&quot; I guess.
If they would use sprites they could even get away with ~408px in width, meaning the browser would only have to stitch together 2 or 3 gradients :D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s true, I had completely forgotten about that. 1px width just appears &#8220;simpler&#8221; I guess.<br />
If they would use sprites they could even get away with ~408px in width, meaning the browser would only have to stitch together 2 or 3 gradients :D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Slack</title>
		<link>http://www.favbrowser.com/operacom-refreshed-home-page/#comment-62545</link>
		<dc:creator>Slack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:54:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.favbrowser.com/?p=1997#comment-62545</guid>
		<description>Wow, all this whining over something completely irrelevant? I didn&#039;t even notice (still don&#039;t), and yes someone has to find some minor issue to whine about.

Geez.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, all this whining over something completely irrelevant? I didn&#8217;t even notice (still don&#8217;t), and yes someone has to find some minor issue to whine about.</p>
<p>Geez.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nobody</title>
		<link>http://www.favbrowser.com/operacom-refreshed-home-page/#comment-62542</link>
		<dc:creator>nobody</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:55:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.favbrowser.com/?p=1997#comment-62542</guid>
		<description>youre welcome :)

it is a bit ancient knowledge, because most modern webdevs dont even remember what 486 is, and for them p4 is &#039;old&#039; :)

there is a lot of similar tricks, that are not relevant to someone with opera/safari/firefox and core2duo cpu, but they can be usefull when designing mobile-only sites.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>youre welcome :)</p>
<p>it is a bit ancient knowledge, because most modern webdevs dont even remember what 486 is, and for them p4 is &#8216;old&#8217; :)</p>
<p>there is a lot of similar tricks, that are not relevant to someone with opera/safari/firefox and core2duo cpu, but they can be usefull when designing mobile-only sites.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vygantas Lipskas</title>
		<link>http://www.favbrowser.com/operacom-refreshed-home-page/#comment-62539</link>
		<dc:creator>Vygantas Lipskas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:45:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.favbrowser.com/?p=1997#comment-62539</guid>
		<description>Really? Didn&#039;t knew that, thanks for the tip!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really? Didn&#8217;t knew that, thanks for the tip!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nobody</title>
		<link>http://www.favbrowser.com/operacom-refreshed-home-page/#comment-62538</link>
		<dc:creator>nobody</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.favbrowser.com/?p=1997#comment-62538</guid>
		<description>1px wide images ISN&#039;T the best way to do backgrounds. in fact it is better to use about 8-16px wide, and in case of &#039;non-gradient&#039; background even greater

reason? slow computers render 1000*1px images much more slowly than 20*50px images. on slow computers and with certain browsers it is a HUGE difference.

but yes, it could heve been done better than that what opera did</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1px wide images ISN&#8217;T the best way to do backgrounds. in fact it is better to use about 8-16px wide, and in case of &#8216;non-gradient&#8217; background even greater</p>
<p>reason? slow computers render 1000*1px images much more slowly than 20*50px images. on slow computers and with certain browsers it is a HUGE difference.</p>
<p>but yes, it could heve been done better than that what opera did</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Foo</title>
		<link>http://www.favbrowser.com/operacom-refreshed-home-page/#comment-62533</link>
		<dc:creator>Foo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:06:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.favbrowser.com/?p=1997#comment-62533</guid>
		<description>Yea, that&#039;s what I meant by two images :)
Oh well, there&#039;s still time for them to fix it, hopefully they will.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yea, that&#8217;s what I meant by two images :)<br />
Oh well, there&#8217;s still time for them to fix it, hopefully they will.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vygantas Lipskas</title>
		<link>http://www.favbrowser.com/operacom-refreshed-home-page/#comment-62530</link>
		<dc:creator>Vygantas Lipskas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:44:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.favbrowser.com/?p=1997#comment-62530</guid>
		<description>You are right on that, they also seem to use graphics with background already painted (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.opera.com/bitmaps/home/campaign/0906unite/unite.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.opera.com/bitmaps/home/campaign/0906unite/unite.jpg&lt;/a&gt;) instead of 1px width bg repeat + placing red logo on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are right on that, they also seem to use graphics with background already painted (<a href="http://www.opera.com/bitmaps/home/campaign/0906unite/unite.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://www.opera.com/bitmaps/home/campaign/0906unite/unite.jpg</a>) instead of 1px width bg repeat + placing red logo on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Foo</title>
		<link>http://www.favbrowser.com/operacom-refreshed-home-page/#comment-62528</link>
		<dc:creator>Foo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:06:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.favbrowser.com/?p=1997#comment-62528</guid>
		<description>Horrible jpeg compression deluxe. They would have been better of with two png images or a single sprited png if they want to speed things up a tiny bit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Horrible jpeg compression deluxe. They would have been better of with two png images or a single sprited png if they want to speed things up a tiny bit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

