Purpose of Tor is to hide your identity. Wonder how convenient it is to hide your identity from your banking site where you have to log in anyway.
The main reason I use TOR is not to hide my identity from the bank, but to hide the fact that I am connecting to my bank from the local network administrators (or whoever else on the LAN that could capture packets). In one of my previous jobs they installed some kind of spyware that tracks all web sites that you visit without telling us. If they are sneaky enough to do that, I do not trust them with knowing when I connect to my bank or any other confidential sites.
I realize that I can set up Otter to use TOR manually; I just thought it would be a nice touch to add it as default for private mode.
Quote
Basically you can use any browser that supports proxies and SOCKS with Tor. The two, are different software and independent to each other. The browser will communicate through a local port (it was set for) and Tor will listen on that port forwarding incoming and outgoing requests.
OK, I just thought that the TOR port was a standard port, so on the browser side you would only have to set the browser to use that port when in private mode. But if I would need to set the local TOR port manually in any case, it doesn't make sense to have it as an automatic option for Otter. Thanks for the explanation.
I am not sure if this is an Otter bug, or somewhere upstream, but it seems that the JS engine used have memory holes... i.e. the longer multiples pages using JS is open, e.g. gmail, facebook, linkedin (this does not occur for normal html pages), the memory usage of Otter just seems to grow and grow until it uses all RAM available (running Debian stable 64 bit, 4GB RAM, with Otter 0.0.08-dev100 installed from .deb package) and the whole X-window system become unusable (I need to kill otter from CLI).
Emdek, just a question. This is not a show stopper for me, but another nice to have... how easy/difficult is it implement the Opera "skins API" or something similar? Getting users to develop their own skins (and being able to download some nifty ones from some very artistic people) was a nice feature about Opera for me. However, I would not like it if it would make the browser slower or use too much extra RAM. I still remember the small and fast Opera from the 1990's. :-)
Not sure if this is the right place, but compared to a year ago, Otter is already my main browser. :-) The speed en relative small size, combined with the Opera-like interface and currently no obvious memory leaks, makes it a winner in my book (both Mozilla (Firefox/Iceweasel etc.) and later Opera versions had memory leaks when you closed tabs and especially web pages with lots of javascript (gmail and facebook, in my case), would sometimes over time use so much RAM that I had to kill it from the terminal to get my PC to respond again. I sometimes use Pale Moon for those website that require a more Mozilla-like browser or Tor Browser for my banking and other sensitive cases. I would like to be able to import my Opera sessions, though... no longer using Opera for anything much, but the ability to store and restore different sessions, is one of my favourite Opera features. It looks like Otter has the same feature working, but it would be nice if I could import my existing Opera sessions, like I can my Opera bookmarks.
Talking of Tor Browser (I know there used to be a portable app Tor Opera browser), it would be nice as an option if the private tabs had an option (in advanced preferences?) to use Tor instead of just locally deleting the history and clearing the cache.
Any downloads for Debian 64 bit? Sourceforge wants me to download the i386 version... ? (Possibly because I am still running old Opera i386 version on my 64 bit Debian).
I was an Opera user when still using Windows 3.1 and dial-up internet. A fast, small browser was and is my first priority... add to that standards compliance and the ability to restrict cookies or other privacy leaks, and Opera stayed my favourite browser until recently. And Otter seems to fit the bill much better currently than Vivaldi. Speed, small size and stability combined with configarability (which can come later) and security are the most important reasons why I preferred Opera in the first place and why I prefer Otter to Vivaldi currently. Yes, it would be nice to add all the rich features of later versions of Opera (including skins and integrated e-mail/newsreader/...), but try to keep the stability and speed above all. The one thing I still miss in Otter, is the ability to turn images off/on/only downloaded on the fly.
