Opera For iPhone To Test Apple's Resolve 292
Barence writes "Opera is launching a version of its Mini browser for the iPhone in what could prove a landmark decision for Apple's app gatekeepers. Apple has been traditionally hostile to rival browsers, with Mozilla claiming that Apple made it 'too hard' for its rivals to develop a browser for the iPhone. However, Opera remains bullishly confident that its app will be approved. 'We have not submitted Opera Mini to the Apple App store,' an Opera spokesperson told PC Pro. 'However, we hope that Apple will not deny their users a choice in web browsing experience.'" I can't imagine what would motivate them to do that.
Forced to include in EU? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Forced to include in EU? (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft was forced to do so after being convicted of anti-competitive behaviour. The differences between Apple and Microsoft aside, Apple would be no more forced to apply by the same rules as Microsoft, than you are forced to spent the rest of your days in prison, just because someone else was sentenced that for their crime.
Re:Forced to include in EU? (Score:5, Informative)
It's not the same thing in practice, though. The actions of a corporation with a near monopoly on the market have different repurcussions than the same actions performed by a minority player. I mean, if Apple's locked down the iPhone browser, they've removed browser developers' ability to compete, and customers' browser choice, but only on the iPhone. They're a minority player in a competitive market, so the remaining 85% of smartphone owners are unaffected, and the 15% with iPhones can switch easily. If Microsoft locks down the Windows browser, they've removed browser developers' ability to reach the overwhelming majority of computer users, and thanks to Windows' near-monopoly, there's precious little to switch to.
Re:Forced to include in EU? (Score:4, Insightful)
But they didn't do that. In any way. They simply didn't include everyone else's browser by default.
Re: (Score:3)
Hence "if". I'm pointing out that identical actions do not lead to identical repurcussions and should not necessarily be treated equally, and probably won't be by the courts.
Re:Forced to include in EU? (Score:5, Interesting)
But they didn't do that. In any way. They simply didn't include everyone else's browser by default.
A little more egregious than that. They intentionally deviated from HTML standards to cause incompatibilities with other browsers, and they used "security" updates to reset IE as the default browser.
It's nowhere in the same ballpark as what Apple has with the iPhone. But it's a very different beast -- a primary appeal of a Windows machine is the huge list of compatible software. The iPhone wasn't conceived that way -- but it's steadily heading into that territory; wouldn't be surprised if Warren G pays them a visit before too long.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
A little more egregious than that. They intentionally deviated from HTML standards to cause incompatibilities with other browsers, and they used "security" updates to reset IE as the default browser.
Well also they put various hooks into the OS so that, regardless of what you set as your default browser, when you clicked on a link within the OS, IE might come up. There were even allegations that they designed some Windows updates specifically to break competing browsers and cause them to crash.
Anyway, it's not *exactly* the same thing, but it's still pretty crummy that Apple won't allow alternative browsers and mail clients. There was a rumor at one point that AT&T was requiring Apple to control
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you trying to assert that no update has ever reset the default browser, or just that you haven't installed one that did? If the latter is true, who cares?
Re:Forced to include in EU? (Score:5, Informative)
* One thing we have got to change in our strategy - allowing Office documents to be rendered very well by other peoples browsers is one of the most destructive things we could do to the company. We have to stop putting any effort into this and make sure that Office documents very well depends on PROPRIETARY IE capabilities. o 1998 a memo to the Office product group[2]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
>It's not the same thing in practice, though. The actions of a corporation with a near monopoly on the market have different repurcussions than the same actions performed by a minority player
That's kind of a horseshit argument. That's like saying that if a poor minority smokes crack, its worse because he makes less money and it has a larger impact on his family; but if a rich white guy does it, it's less of a big deal since he's rich and he's not influencing his neighbors and setting a bad example.
Should
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If a company is found guilty of monopolistic behavior, the law allows them to be broken up, sold, or disposed of in any way the judge deems correct. In fact, Judge Jackson's suggested restructuring would have resulted in three companies that would have each had a clear mandate. The software division would have concentrated on applications like the Office suite. The OS division would have developed more interoperable systems based on standards, because they wouldn't have been large enough to bully the rest o
Oh, really? (Score:2)
Apple would be no more forced to apply by the same rules as Microsoft, than you are forced to spent the rest of your days in prison, just because someone else was sentenced that for their crime.
Or rather, because someone else was sentenced for the same crime you've committed.
Explain how Apple has engaged in anti-competitive behavior with its tiny OS market share and still-small smartphone market share. (Especially in the EU. Its market share in Europe is even smaller than in the US)
Re:Oh, really? (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple would be no more forced to apply by the same rules as Microsoft, than you are forced to spent the rest of your days in prison, just because someone else was sentenced that for their crime.
Or rather, because someone else was sentenced for the same crime you've committed.
Explain how Apple has engaged in anti-competitive behavior with its tiny OS market share and still-small smartphone market share. (Especially in the EU. Its market share in Europe is even smaller than in the US)
Maybe it's not engaged in anti-competitive behaviour with its tiny smartphone market share, but aren't these apps also available on the iPod? There they have a much higher [wikipedia.org] market share (90% of the hard drive MP3 player market, and 70% of the entire market). Surely locking down competitor apps on the iPod would fall within the anti-competitive behaviour laws? I wonder, if they were forced to open this up on the iPod, would they still keep it locked down on the iPhone - that would be interesting to see (of course, it's all moot until we see if they actually don't allow Opera on iPhones).
Re:Forced to include in EU? (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple would be no more forced to apply by the same rules as Microsoft, than you are forced to spent the rest of your days in prison, just because someone else was sentenced that for their crime.
Or rather, because someone else was sentenced for the same crime you've committed.
It's sad to see comments like yours modded up because they simply indicate how prevalent and popular ignorance is. Your problem and the problem with everyone who modded you up is that you don't know what crime MS was convicted of, or at least what that crime is. MS was convicted of the crime of antitrust abuse, where they undermined the operation of the free market. Apple, not having sufficient influence on any related market, doesn't even have ability to commit this crime with regard to browsers.
Its like someone arguing everyone who goes to the range and fires a pistol should be arrested for murder because they believe murder means "shooting a gun" because someone who shot someone with a gun was convicted of murder. Additionally, they're too willfully ignorant to go educate themselves before spouting off.
Re:Forced to include in EU? (Score:4, Informative)
"Apple, not having sufficient influence on any related market" I believe they're the top pick in the smartphone market right now.
Yeah, Apple has 25% or so market share. Regulators usually start investigating at about 70%.
Locking out a browser would probably be the same thing as Microsoft not allowing browsers on their machines, or saying that IE was "integrated" into Windows.
If Apple had 70% or more of the relevant market, and that market was already established in previous court cases, then it might be the same. There's a long way before we're there though.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You've been drinkin' the Apple kool-aid. They don't give a flyin' frack about "security problems" or slowdowns due to Java on the iPhone. Which, in fact, don't exist -- every other major smart phone supports Java, some (including Blackberry and Android) are based on Java, and suffer no performance problems.
Any time Apple is called to task on any mis-feature of the iPhone, they cry "stability", "security", and "performance". But the reality is, they want to control competition. They want all competition rout
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Your analogy didn't work. A crime is a crime. Circumstances come into play sometimes. You feel that anti-competitive behavior is only illegal for big companies. That's fine.
It doesn't have anything to do with big companies. That's like beating someone to death is only illegal for big strong people and not for infirm grandmothers. The size speaks to capability to commit the crime. An infirm grandmother can come up and punch me and that is not murder. If Mike Tyson does it, it may well be murder. It's not because the law treats boxers and grannies differently, it's just those people have different capabilities to commit the crime.
It doesn't mean we are uneducated. It merely means we differ in our ideas on monopolies, market, and government intervention.
No, it means you misunderstand what the crime is,
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"The rest of us"... well, aren't WE the monopoly today.
You're incorrect, and also, incorrect about "a crime is a crime". Anyone can be anti-competitive. It's only illegal for a monopoly to do so. Period. The monopoly itself is not illegal, only certain behaviors, and only once you've been recognized as a monopoly.
Sure, you may be a market leader at 17% of a market, but you don't have any special ability to influence that market, limit others' competing within that market, or to use your powers in that marke
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
no law require interoperability and openness of platforms. some states don't punish reverse engineering in the wake of interoperability, but that is another story.
Re:Forced to include in EU? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
In the case of the Prius, it won't matter if the cops try to pull it over, as the brakes don't work, and the accelerator sticks.
I can't decide whether your metaphor is out to lunch or unintentionally insightful.
Re:Forced to include in EU? (Score:5, Informative)
On the main computer platform, all browsers are available and easy as pie to install -- with the exception of Internet Explorer, which Microsoft stopped developing for the Mac years ago.
On the phone, Apple's Webkit runs on the iPhone, Android, and some other platforms. It's open source, after all. There are already other browsers on the iPhone. Check out the app store. What Opera had done was a weird construction based on Java that they didn't submit to the app store, because it demanded Java, which they know damn well the iPhone doesn't support. Gruber has the story here.
http://daringfireball.net/2008/11/opera_app_store [daringfireball.net]
On the other hand, this PR genius seems to be starting off on the wrong foot. He's basically blackmailing Jobs to prove he's not a bully. That doesn't seem like a negotiation, but like blackmail. But it certainly helps them on Slashdot/Apple, where any wild surmise about the dictatorial Apple is taken as gospel.
Re:Forced to include in EU? (Score:4, Informative)
Difference is, apple does not have the same market-share on smartphone OSes as microsoft has on desktop OSes.
Re: (Score:2)
Difference is, apple does not have the same market-share on smartphone OSes as microsoft has on desktop OSes.
How's their market share on MP3 players?
Re: (Score:2)
you got a point, even more if we only count web-capable mp3 players.
EU/FCC wont do a thing (Score:5, Informative)
The EU ruled against Microsoft not because it was a monopoly (that is not illegal in the EU) but because it used its monopoly position against other companies, in other words the EU ruled against Microsoft because Microsoft was an abusive monopoly.
Apple is twice as abusive as Microsoft ever was but they are far from being a monopoly. Apple are permitted to lock down their platform as there are many other platforms to chose from, Apple is not in a position to control the market so the EU wont do a thing (unless Apple have broken another EU law, but if they did the EU would have already made a statement to that effect).
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
While I agree that the FCC/EU would do frak all to apple over a denial of another browser. I fairly sure the app store is a market, and that apple is an abusive monopoly there.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have to use apple products. However if you use windows you have no choice but to use IE at least once todownload an alternative. And because ofmsft poor coding practices and designs you have to use for the rest of life as explorer.exe, windows update , windows messanger(or this years name), outlook, and word all use parts of the same buggy trident backend.
Apple also has a tendacy to start lockdown, and open slowly(sometimes never). While msft pretends to be open and tries to lock things down later
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What laws exist that prohibit you from designing, building and selling your own cellphone complete with an appstore service?
/Mikael
Re: (Score:2)
You would license [GSM and UMTS patents] like everyone else.
Since my last post, I realized that GSM and UMTS patents aren't the only patents affecting mobile phones. Multitouch gesture patents are another, and the licensing structures for these don't seem to be as reasonable and nondiscriminatory as the licensing structures for, say, GSM and UMTS patent pools.
Huh? What does this have to do with making a phone?
Slashdot and Apple are based in the United States. In the United States, the three national carriers with decent coverage are Verizon, Sprint, and AT&T.[1] These carriers do not give a discount if you use
Re: (Score:2)
How does any of this refute his orignal statement: "What laws exist that prohibit you from designing, building and selling your own cellphone complete with an appstore service?"
None is the answer. You may be muscled out by the Carriers if you don't play by their rules, but that's not the same as being illegal, which is what his statement quoted. Apple doesn't control the smartphone market. Ask RIM if they have to bow before Apple before releasing a new product.
Re: (Score:2)
How does any of this refute his orignal statement: "What laws exist that prohibit you from designing, building and selling your own cellphone complete with an appstore service?"
So I guess the answer is "whatever law prohibits you from starting your own carrier".
Re:EU/FCC wont do a thing (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple introduced DRM-free tracks in iTunes not long after few European countries expressed the possibility of blocking iTunes outright (not saying that was the only possible reason)
One doesn't have to be a monopoly to be reminded of obligations. Abusive is enough; braking law is enough (as you...sort of pointed out). I wonder which iPhone will finally have removable battery...
Re:Forced to include in EU? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That would be "anti-competitive" behavior does not require a monopoly.
Opera's Motivation (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Opera's Motivation (Score:4, Interesting)
Certainly, Apple will reject the app and Opera knows it. Maybe Opera tries to strengthen Apple's "Evil Empire" image and deal with it with the help of EU (just like they did with Microsoft recently).
My first thought on reading the summary was "where's the leverage?" Either Opera is talking right through their own asses, or they have some serious leverage -- certainly more than just bad PR (which Apple seems immune to anyway). They've invested time and manpower in this project, one can only hope that someone's cojones over at Apple are in a vice grip, and that we will all soon enjoy the big red O on our iPhones.
Opera not submitted (Score:2)
Apple will reject the app
Apple can't reject what hasn't been submitted.
"We have not submitted Opera Mini to the Apple App store".
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The thing is, this is a high-profile app that Apple can approve and point to, saying "Look, we're letting our competitors in!" even though it doesn't open the platform in any meaningful way. So I actually think there's a very good chance they will approve it.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No real profit in browsers, wha?
For someone like Google, maybe. Opera is making a piddling amount of profit even in comparison to someone like Red Hat.
So how is Opera operating as a company and how did the Mozilla Foundation raise $78 million in revenue in 2008?
By getting paid by Google to make them the default search engine in the browsers. That's how they make the majority of their money.
Re: (Score:2)
If they are smart Apple will see more popularity for Opera as another blow to IE and MS dominance, both of which are good for to Apple.
How exactly would letting Opera on the iPhone be a blow to IE and Microsoft dominance? I didn't realize there was an IE for the iPhone nor that Microsoft had any dominance in the iPhone space.
Confused? I certainly am... (Score:4, Insightful)
We have not submitted Opera Mini to the Apple App store
Really? Then what the hell is this story about? I read the article through a number of times, but that sentence really doesn''t make any sense. Are they targetiing this at jailbroken phones? Was that quote from some time ago and was unwisely used here?
Perhaps I just need some caffeine, or is my confusion shared by others?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've had caffeine today, and I also found this confusing.
It sounds like one schoolkid bully saying to another, "When I see you after school, I'm going to kick your ass." He hasn't yet done the ass-kicking; in fact, the showdown won't happen until some time in the future. But he's showing off his swagger to prove his bravado, intimidate the opposition, and/or try to impress his buddies.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think the implied missing word is 'yet'.
They intend to submit it, and are making it very clear that they will stand up to Apple if, when they *do* submit it, it gets rejected. It's a shot across the bows.
Re:Confused? I certainly am... (Score:4, Insightful)
Opera is publicly announcing their intention to submit their browser to Apple before actually committing to the process, because they know they stand a good chance of summary rejection for trying to break into the Safari monopoly. Opera hopes to preempt Apple's choice in the matter by raising public support in advance of the submission and raising in conjunction with that support awareness of Apple's monopolistic methodologies, preparing the public to view Apple's coming rejection as the act of an Evil Fascist Corporate Overlord (whether it is or not is irrelevant; we're talking about Opera's intentions here, not Apple's). Their hopes are that, should Apple realize the public has been thus prepared, Opera might be more likely to pass the submission process to avoid the storm of negative publicity that would fall out of a realization and fulfillment of that media preparation. In other words, this is manufactured opinion, and Slashdot is the medium of manufacturing outrage on behalf of one corporation against another (regardless of your feelings towards either company) because Slashdot is a public forum where corporate media services can advertise against one another.
Opera suffers from a kind of hubris, though: they don't realize that the audience who will listen to them is smaller than they need to generate sufficient public outrage to press Apple on any decision and far smaller than needed to drown out the Apple supporters who will regurgitate or themselves even generate, given sufficient creativity, reasons why Apple Is Right And You Are Wrong. The Opera FanBois are fewer than the Apple FanBois and by a sufficient margin that Opera is not going to win this PR turf war. But Slashdot is a cheap place to advertise, so it doesn't hurt to try.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is true that there are orders of magnitude more Apple FanBois then Opera FanBois.
However, almost everyone likes choice and virtually no one likes being denied choice. I can't imagine that the EU could be very happy about this lack of choice, product tie in, extreme control and customer lock in. I seem to remember the EU having some tough laws applying to this sort of thing but maybe they only come into effect if MS is involved. I suspect once the numbers reach a certain point, millions or billions,
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Fanboys aren't the real issue here... Opera's being pretty clever here. They're announcing this, knowing full well that "Apple rejects App" will garner far more publicity than "Opera releases browser". There is a large segment of the electronic computer press, and perhaps even some print media still, that's just crazy obsessed with every little move Apple makes. Google too, for sure, and maybe all this only because Microsoft has been relatively boring lately.. they haven't eaten a baby or kicked a puppy in
Re:Confused? I certainly am... (Score:4, Informative)
from a different source I read earlier (norwegian, interviewing a norwegian person from opera), it's not submitted yet, because it's still in beta.
Post to Cydia (Score:2)
If Apple rejects it please post it on Cydia
Well, Opera Mini isn't strictly a browser... (Score:4, Interesting)
At least not in the strictest technical sense. It doesn't understand html, etc. ..."just" it's own, highly compressed format; sent to it from Opera servers.
Not that it'll make a difference to Apple.
Re:Well, Opera Mini isn't strictly a browser... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Well, Opera Mini isn't strictly a browser... (Score:5, Informative)
It doesn't terminate in the sense that you suggest - connection between Opera servers and mobile phone is always encrypted, on every webpage.
Yes, when accessing encrypted websites, the pages and data are in an unencrypted form on Opera servers (only there!)...which isn't that big of a problem. You need to only ask yourself whether you trust Opera Software ASA.
If not...you can still use the advantages of Opera Mini on most of webpages; unless you really limit yourself to visiting your bank website on a mobile device, for some reason.
Re: (Score:2)
You need to only ask yourself whether you trust Opera Software ASA.
Or any individual one of their employees, who have access to said servers. And when it comes to financial information, my position is no on both counts. I sure hope most people share my position.
Re: (Score:2)
So why do you trust employees of your bank?
(not saying that not trusting Opera is not a valid choice; just be carefull how you justify it; also, when running mobile phone with at least some software you haven't written yourself; and taking into account that Opera is a Nordic company...)
Re: (Score:2)
Because the bank is (presumably) chartered in the country you live in and heavily regulated, and you have recourse if they screw something up. Good luck going after Opera if they mess up.
Re: (Score:2)
> Because the bank is (presumably) chartered in the country you live in and heavily regulated, and you have recourse if they screw something up.
Indeed, Opera won't get trillion dollar bonus if they screw something up ;)
Opera is publicly traded company regulated in civilised country. They're technologically very competent, which I can't say about my bank which has JavaScript-laden IE-optimized website in 640x480 popup window.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Naturally. And yet...look at quite recent state of banking mess. Wasn't there also a story not that long ago how most bank security breaches are inside jobs?
Being not that far from Scandinavia I can also assure you that there's something to be said about their ethics all around (well, at least in comparison to the one I'm used to, in post-Soviet colony...); plus I would be really surprised if access to Opera proxy servers wasn't appropriately limited.
That said, I agree it still doesn't render not trusting t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. I use a local credit union for all my accounts and loans. They seem to be technically competent. They were unaffected by the financial mess because they were not making stupid loans.
Re:Well, Opera Mini isn't strictly a browser... (Score:5, Funny)
But...I just said all of that.
Re:Well, Opera Mini isn't strictly a browser... (Score:4, Insightful)
By using any of their binaries on the same system you do whatever it is you do on encrypted web pages, you trust whomever compiled that binary implicitly. The end-to-"end" encryption of Opera Mini terminates at an Opera, ASA server. The end-to-end encryption of Opera (Desktop) terminates at the control of just that closed-source browser. If they were in it to fuck you over, well, they can.
The same applies to MSIE and Safari (even more, since they're distributed by the OS manufacturers), Chrome (a lot; seeing how much data is exchanged between a typical computer and Google's servers, a lot could be hidden somewhere in there), Firefox (slightly less because development is more visible and done by Mozilla, Google only bankrolls it), for binary-distributions.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
However, Opera's servers are sitting out in the open with thousands of devices connecting to it to get all sorts of information. That's a sweet target for hackers. How can I tr
Re:Well, Opera Mini isn't strictly a browser... (Score:4, Insightful)
You are running a software built by said commercial 3rd-party company. They don't need that server in the middle to see all of those things.
So there's no increase in capability if they are malicious. There is an increase in risk if they are incompetent - and do something like cache requests/responses containing that data.
Re:Well, Opera Mini isn't strictly a browser... (Score:5, Informative)
It's not like it's some big secret. From Opera Mini FAQ (http://www.opera.com/mini/help/faq/#security):
Is there any end-to-end security between my handset and — for example — paypal.com or my bank?
No. If you need full end-to-end encryption, you should use a full Web browser such as Opera Mobile.
Opera Mini uses a transcoder server to translate HTML/CSS/JavaScript into a more compact format. It will also shrink any images to fit the screen of your handset. This translation step makes Opera Mini fast, small, and also very cheap to use. To be able to do this translation, the Opera Mini server needs to have access to the unencrypted version of the Web page. Therefore no end-to-end encryption between the client and the remote Web server is possible.
And
Can Opera Software see my passwords and credit card numbers in clear text? What is the encryption good for then?
The encryption is introduced to protect the communication from any third party between the client (the browser on your handset) and the Opera Mini transcoder server. If you do not trust Opera Software, make sure you do not use our application to enter any kind of sensitive information.
Re: (Score:2)
At least not in the strictest technical sense. It doesn't understand html, etc. ..."just" it's own, highly compressed format; sent to it from Opera servers.
Not that it'll make a difference to Apple.
At least it should support File Uploading [faqs.org], unlike the cut-down browser from Apple.
I honestly can't see any logic behind disabling this really simple feature - other than it forces developers to write stupid applications which could be better written in a web-browser.
It does not violate SDK terms (Score:5, Insightful)
It could be accepted.
Apple forbids code interpreters other than Apple's own, BUT this is Opera Mini, not full Opera Mobile. Mini executes JavaScript server-side and only sends rendered result to the phone. There's likely no (turing-complete) interpreter on iPhone side, so it should be fine within terms of SDK.
Apple has already accepted number of WebKit-based browsers, so browsers in general aren't forbidden.
And for iPhone users, especially on EDGE, there is very good reason to use Opera Mini: it's going to be faster. iPhones before 3GS are also very low on RAM, and Safari only uses RAM for caching. Presumably Opera Mini would be able to keep many more tabs open and fully cached.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Big question for me is whether or not you can turn off image loading. If so it would become my favorite app ever. Nothing more frustrating than wanting to load a page full of mainly text and having it take 5 minutes because Apple doesn't want you to ruin your browsing experience...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, you can turn off image loading in the settings. As well as selecting quality level.
Re:It does not violate SDK terms (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Big question for me is whether or not you can turn off image loading.
My feeling is that the network speed is not the problem, but rather the iPhone rendering speed is. Safari on the iPhone, plus a heavy JavaScript page, means waiting for me. Graphics, not so much.
Re: (Score:2)
It's rather amazing to think that this situation might even be considered by a court of law. The founding fathers would have to have been the equivalent of Mentor of Arisia to have known something like this was coming when they put the Interstate Commerce Clause and copyright clause into the Constitution.
Opera Mini? (Score:2)
Really? Why not Opera Mobile? That doesn't make sense to me. Opera Mini is java based and is for smartphones. Web pages are processed by Opera's proxy servers and stripped down for mobile viewing on underpowered devices. Opera Mobile 10 is an actual web browser, on par with Safari on the iPhone.
Re:Opera Mini? (Score:5, Interesting)
Hmm. Maybe I can answer my own question. It would be much easier to roll out Opera Mini for iPhone, since it is already implemented in Java (making it OS / hardware independent). If Apple approves Opera Mini, then Opera can begin investing the resources into porting Opera Mobile to the iPhone platform. So perhaps Opera is testing Apple with a low-risk, low-investment browser first. If Apple approves mini, then Opera could perhaps have some legal ground to challenge Apple should they later deny Opera Mobile.
If I had mod points .... (Score:2)
Re:Opera Mini? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Opera Mini? (Score:5, Insightful)
Web pages are processed by Opera's proxy servers and stripped down for mobile viewing on underpowered devices.
If Opera reduces the bandwidth to the iPhone, then AT&T [slashdot.org] should be on the front line encouraging Apple to accept the app!
Re: (Score:2)
Seams like it would decrease the bandwidth per page viewed. Although this could improve the browsing experience to the point where people browse more sites on the phone (using tabs and such) that it could increase overall bandwidth usage. (must resist car analogy) but much like better fuel economy cars just caused people to drive more, increasing overall fuel use. (sorry)
What about opera mobile? (Score:3, Interesting)
Instead of porting opera mini on every existing platform, why not assign more resources to do the same for opera mobile, or at least make opera mini as good as opera mobile?
I paid to use opera mobile on my windows mobile phone (htc tytn II), and would gladly pay again to be able to use it on my android phone. I have opera mini on it, it is not usable at all.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What about opera mobile? (Score:4, Insightful)
Uhm, Opera Mini is primarily an app for more then a billion or so "feature phones" out there, the ones with j2me; it gives them rather nice browsing experience (especially since many have slow data access and/or data costs are very high)
So of course it will be less featured, that's the point - having a sensible browser on devices which were thought uncapable of running one at all.
That said, latest Opera Mini 5 beta releases show great progress.
Re: (Score:2)
They're not wasting valuable Opera Mobile time on porting Mini, because Mini doesn't need to be ported. It's a Java app, it goes where the virtual machines are.
The current Mini beta is in many respects as good as Mobile (the interfaces are indistinguishable for starters), you should give it a shot.
Re: (Score:2)
Last time I checked the beta was not available for android phones (my wm phone was stolen a year ago).
Can't imagine what would motivate them to do that? (Score:2)
Gomez Addams said it best.
GREED!
But if Apple does it, then it's okay (Score:2)
It always amazes me how many MS-bashers still bring up the case of MS supposedly unfairly using its monopoly to push IE back in the 90's, yet ignore the fact that Apple and others engage in MUCH more egregious anti-competitive behavior today than MS ever dreamed of doing. MS's big sin was to include IE in their default Windows installation (the same as notepad, media player, and dozens of other standard apps). Never once did they block competing software from being installed on Windows. The whole case is a
Re:But if Apple does it, then it's okay (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft doesn't make and/or sell their own computers. Windows goes on other companies' machines. Microsoft used agreements with those other companies to their advantage against other OS vendors.
Apple makes their own computer. Apple only puts their OS on their computers. Apple's app store only sells to Apple's own hardware. Apple allows competition between products. You can easily chose not to buy an Apple product and live a happy Apple free life. Apple does not allow competition within its products. It's Apple's store for Apple's hardware. Why should any other company have say over what is and isn't on Apple's store for its own products?
If you can't see the difference between Microsoft's dealings with OEMs and Apple wanting control over Apple product lines you must have some pretty hefty blinders on.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The knowledge of what is a monopoly and what's not appears to be not clear for many people...
"not submitted" (Score:5, Funny)
Apple automatically rejects all applications that are NOT submitted. However, they don't notify the non-submitter when this happens.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I really wish Opera would just go away already. I'm quite happy with IE8/Safari4/Firefox3 lineage no more players needed thank you.
Have you tried Chrome yet?
Re:Opera is lousy from my experience, please go aw (Score:5, Insightful)
I really wish Opera would just go away already. I'm quite happy with IE8/Safari4/Firefox3 lineage no more players needed thank you.
Opera has the source of most big innovations in browsers for quite some years now. If it disappeared, where would firefox addons developpers find ideas of new features to implement?
Re: (Score:2)