'Opera Coast' WebKit-Based Browser Now Available for iPhone

MacRumors · Apr 24, 2014

Back in September, Opera Software released its Coast WebKit-based browser for the iPad and now the company is debuting a new version of the browser designed for Apple's iPhones.

Like the iPad version of the app, Opera Coast for iPhone has been optimized for the touchscreen. Initiating a search is as simple as pulling down on the home screen, which brings up an input interface with an icon-based autofill that allows users to tap the site they want to visit.

Made for thumbs: The iPhone was made for having all screen real estate within a thumb's reach, and Opera Coast takes this idea one step further. Gestures take care of practically all of the navigation needs, with the rest handled by a bare minimum of conveniently placed buttons. Two, to be exact.

Websites are displayed full screen, and swipe gestures let users navigate between pages. There's a small toolbar on the bottom that brings up a visual grid of saved websites, which can be altered with a simple tap and drag gesture. Users can have multiple screens of saved websites, providing easy access to all favorite sites, and search is enhanced with related words and suggestions.

The app also recommends popular websites to visit in a "Stuff we like" section, and provides a sharing tool to send links via iMessage, email, or social networks like Facebook and Twitter. An info tool also provides safety information, letting a user know whether a website is secure. While there is a lot of competition in the browser space, with Safari and Google Chrome readily available, Opera Coast is well worth checking out for its unique touch-focused interface.

Opera Coast for the iPhone will be available today as a free download.

The iPad version of the app is also available as a free download. [Direct Link]

Article Link: 'Opera Coast' WebKit-Based Browser Now Available for iPhone

vmachiel · Apr 24, 2014

Until Apple let's user set default apps, this doesn't really matter. Chrome looks better than this too IMO.

ArtOfWarfare · Apr 24, 2014

I'm curious: why does Opera exist? What do they get out of producing a web browser that virtually no one uses? They don't charge for it, and they can't use it to exert control on web standards using it... So why bother?

KSean · Apr 24, 2014

ArtOfWarfare said:
I'm curious: why does Opera exist? What do they get out of producing a web browser that virtually no one uses? They don't charge for it, and they can't use it to exert control on web standards using it... So why bother?

They license their browser tech to third party companies, and I assume that's where the bulk of their money comes from. Opera is used in Nintendo consoles, some smart televisions, Adobe's Creative Suite etc.

kfury77 · Apr 24, 2014

ArtOfWarfare said:
I'm curious: why does Opera exist? What do they get out of producing a web browser that virtually no one uses? They don't charge for it, and they can't use it to exert control on web standards using it... So why bother?

Approx 1.3% of traffic is from Opera browsers, when you think of the massive scale of all of the traffic globally - then even just 1% is a large portion. They generate revenue from the built-in search panel.

----------

The article should state that this is now a Universal app - there aren't separate versions for iPad and iPhone

Jessica Lares · Apr 24, 2014

Oh, yes, I really liked this on my iPad. Using it on my iPod right now, it's very fluid! The recommendations are nice too.

Megakazbek · Apr 24, 2014

ArtOfWarfare said:
I'm curious: why does Opera exist? What do they get out of producing a web browser that virtually no one uses? They don't charge for it, and they can't use it to exert control on web standards using it... So why bother?

Several million users is not "no one"

spyguy10709 · Apr 24, 2014

Without data compression (that makes browsing on EDGE tolerable... And saves $), this is the most pointless Opera product - quite literally, ever.

Protip, Opera team. Stick to your roots. Do what you do well, and enhance that.

wikiverse · Apr 24, 2014

spyguy10709 said:
Without data compression (that makes browsing on EDGE tolerable... And saves $), this is the most pointless Opera product - quite literally, ever.

Protip, Opera team. Stick to your roots. Do what you do well, and enhance that.

No company should ever 'stick to their roots'. It didn't work for blackberry, or Nokia, or Atari, or Kodak.

Apple ignored this advice and made the iPod. Clearly 'adapt or die', or 'innovate' would be much better corporate advice.

redscull · Apr 24, 2014

I really liked the user interface of this on the iPad back when its competitor was iOS 6's Safari. But the newer Safari made some minor improvements in touch-based navigation to close the gap. Plus, at least back then, this Opera browser was pretty buggy. That's what ultimately made me quit using it.

I don't really buy the default browser argument. I think I am literally only ever in Safari as a result of clicking its icon to launch it from the home screen, something I can equally do with any 3rd party browser. The apps I use which have links to external web content never launch Safari, not the app itself anyway; they either launch Chrome or use an integrated Safari component instead of actually leaving the app.

dalbng · Apr 24, 2014

Putting the 'default browser' argument aside, doesn't it bother anyone that 3rd party browsers cannot use Safari's superior Nitro JavaScript engine, and instead have to resort to using WebKit's (slower) engine? This has been one of the top things that bugged me about Apple's policy regarding 3rd party browsers.

More on it here: http://www.howtogeek.com/184283/why...ays-be-inferior-to-safari-on-iphone-and-ipad/

APlotdevice · Apr 24, 2014

KSean said:
They license their browser tech to third party companies, and I assume that's where the bulk of their money comes from. Opera is used in Nintendo consoles, some smart televisions, Adobe's Creative Suite etc.

Opera was used in Nintendo consoles. It isn't in their current systems. And, from what I can tell, Adobe ceased to use it after CS4.

C DM · Apr 24, 2014

dalbng said:
Putting the 'default browser' argument aside, doesn't it bother anyone that 3rd party browsers cannot use Safari's superior Nitro JavaScript engine, and instead have to resort to using WebKit's (slower) engine? This has been one of the top things that bugged me about Apple's policy regarding 3rd party browsers.

More on it here: http://www.howtogeek.com/184283/why...ays-be-inferior-to-safari-on-iphone-and-ipad/

Yup, sandboxing and all that.

----------

APlotdevice said:
Opera was used in Nintendo consoles. It isn't in their current systems. And, from what I can tell, Adobe ceased to use it after CS4.

Perhaps as far as an actual Opera browser itself, but maybe not necessarily the technology behind whatever browser or browser components those products/companies (as well as others) use?

torturegarden · Apr 24, 2014

ArtOfWarfare said:
I'm curious: why does Opera exist? What do they get out of producing a web browser that virtually no one uses? They don't charge for it, and they can't use it to exert control on web standards using it... So why bother?

Opera exists for people like me. I've been using Opera's desktop browser for over 15 years and have no desire to change any time soon. All other browsers feel like a step back in terms of usability to me. That said, I'm sticking with Opera 12.16 as long as I can. They removed many features starting with version 15 and newer. These versions, like Safari, Chrome, Fire Fox, etc. are basiically unusable and very frustrating.

C DM · Apr 24, 2014

torturegarden said:
Opera exists for people like me. I've been using Opera's desktop browser for over 15 years and have no desire to change any time soon. All other browsers feel like a step back in terms of usability to me. That said, I'm sticking with Opera 12.16 as long as I can. They removed many features starting with version 15 and newer. These versions, like Safari, Chrome, Fire Fox, etc. are basiically unusable and very frustrating.

Out of curiosity, why/how are they "unusable and very frustrating"?

sebastian... · Apr 24, 2014

ArtOfWarfare said:
I'm curious: why does Opera exist?

As I said before on forums I think Opera was the only browser on iphone and ipad, capable to have 10x more simultaneous tabs, no reloading and instant back and forward. I once loaded 17 tabs on ipad 1. While Safari probably could load max 2 or 3 without reloading.

My question for you and others, how come not more people used Opera ?

I used it rarely and mostly used Safari because on wifi it was fast and most of the time I didn't need multiple tabs and fast browsing, but when I needed to research something and access multiple tabs and fast browsing on ipad - Opera was the browser.

Parasprite · Apr 24, 2014

dalbng said:
Putting the 'default browser' argument aside, doesn't it bother anyone that 3rd party browsers cannot use Safari's superior Nitro JavaScript engine, and instead have to resort to using WebKit's (slower) engine? This has been one of the top things that bugged me about Apple's policy regarding 3rd party browsers.

More on it here: http://www.howtogeek.com/184283/why...ays-be-inferior-to-safari-on-iphone-and-ipad/

Nope, I don't see any difference in speed regardless of whether I use Chrome/Safari/Opera on iOS. The only reason I tend to stick to Safari is because of other browser's weird design choices, such as Chrome's swiping from the sides of the screen changing tabs instead of how it functions on iOS Safari and OS X Safari/Chrome/Firefox/etc.

Besides, JavaScript has always been the "slow" option, regardless of how much faster it looks now on paper. Nitro or no.

This isn't 100% relevant to the topic, but you may find this worth a read: http://sealedabstract.com/rants/why-mobile-web-apps-are-slow/

hilzom · Apr 25, 2014

ArtOfWarfare said:
I'm curious: why does Opera exist? What do they get out of producing a web browser that virtually no one uses? They don't charge for it, and they can't use it to exert control on web standards using it... So why bother?

Why does any company exist?

Opera has 300+ million active browser users and is one of the major mobile browsers, so you shouldn't worry about that. But even if Opera did have few users, so what? Why can't someone make a browser if they want to?

spyguy10709 · Apr 25, 2014

wikiverse said:
No company should ever 'stick to their roots'. It didn't work for blackberry, or Nokia, or Atari, or Kodak.

Apple ignored this advice and made the iPod. Clearly 'adapt or die', or 'innovate' would be much better corporate advice.

Lolno.

The iPod did what Apple did best. It stuck to easy to use principles with good design. It stuck to its roots.

What Blackberry, nokia, atari, and kodak all did was release new products that strayed from the company DNA. Blackberry released ****** phones, Nokia released confusing phones, atari released computers you couldn't game on - and consoles you couldn't compute on, and kodak released terrible cameras. They didn't stick to their roots.

Thats for arguing for me, though.

wikiverse · Apr 25, 2014

spyguy10709 said:
Lolno.

The iPod did what Apple did best. It stuck to easy to use principles with good design. It stuck to its roots.

What Blackberry, nokia, atari, and kodak all did was release new products that strayed from the company DNA. Blackberry released ****** phones, Nokia released confusing phones, atari released computers you couldn't game on - and consoles you couldn't compute on, and kodak released terrible cameras. They didn't stick to their roots.

Thats for arguing for me, though.

Apple had no business getting into the music industry. The didn't license or sell content prior to iTunes. They didn't have any successful portable devices prior to the iPod.

Apple's roots weren't 'easy-to-use' and 'good design', they almost went bankrupt in the late 90s because their products were crap. Apple's roots were high-end, expensive computers used by graphics and film professionals.

Hell, they didn't even change their name from "Apple Computer Inc" to "Apple Inc" until 2007 - when the 2G iPhone launched.

The idea that Apple went 'back to it's roots' by creating a product and business model that they had never, ever had any previous experience in is just nonsense.

spyguy10709 · Apr 27, 2014

wikiverse said:
Apple had no business getting into the music industry. The didn't license or sell content prior to iTunes. They didn't have any successful portable devices prior to the iPod.

Apple's roots weren't 'easy-to-use' and 'good design', they almost went bankrupt in the late 90s because their products were crap. Apple's roots were high-end, expensive computers used by graphics and film professionals.

Hell, they didn't even change their name from "Apple Computer Inc" to "Apple Inc" until 2007 - when the 2G iPhone launched.

The idea that Apple went 'back to it's roots' by creating a product and business model that they had never, ever had any previous experience in is just nonsense.

They went bankrupt in the 90s because Apple strayed from its roots of easy to use, consumer oriented products. I don't think you understand what "roots" means. Honestly. I don't think you do. Roots are PRINCIPLES. Not products.

deluxeshredder · Apr 27, 2014

wikiverse said:
Apple's roots weren't 'easy-to-use' and 'good design', they almost went bankrupt in the late 90s because their products were crap.

They almost went bankrupt in the late 90s because:
- many of their devices were ahead of time;
- they had very poor marketing/advertising;
- they were too afraid to go "mainstream".

hilzom · Apr 27, 2014

So what are Opera's roots, and why is the company more successful than ever now (with hundreds of millions of active users, and record profit and revenue each quarter) if it left those roots?

iolinux333 · Apr 27, 2014

I think mercury is the best browser by far on iOS. This new Opera is a very close second.

Renzatic · Apr 27, 2014

deluxeshredder said:
They almost went bankrupt in the late 90s because:
- many of their devices were ahead of time;
- they had very poor marketing/advertising;
- they were too afraid to go "mainstream".

Nope. Apple in the 90's just kinda blew. It wasn't because they were ahead of their time. The Macs back then weren't any better than PCs as far as build quality and components go. Nor were they afraid to go mainstream. Hell, they tried going as mainstream as Windows by licensing out their OS.

...but when you make most of your profit on hardware, you don't give away your trump card that draws people to the hardware in the first place. They learned their lesson on that the hard way.

'Opera Coast' WebKit-Based Browser Now Available for iPhone

macrumors bot

macrumors 68000

macrumors G3

macrumors member

macrumors regular

macrumors G3

macrumors regular

macrumors 65816

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 6502a

macrumors newbie

macrumors 68040

macrumors Sandy Bridge

macrumors newbie

macrumors Sandy Bridge

macrumors regular

macrumors 68000

macrumors newbie

macrumors 65816

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 65816

macrumors 6502a

macrumors newbie

macrumors 68000

Suspended

Our Staff