Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > iOS Blog Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Apr 24, 2014, 07:01 AM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
'Opera Coast' WebKit-Based Browser Now Available for iPhone




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.

Quote:
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
MacRumors is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 07:02 AM   #2
vmachiel
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Holland
Until Apple let's user set default apps, this doesn't really matter. Chrome looks better than this too IMO.
__________________
2010 MBP, 2.4 GHz i5, 8 GB RAM, 240 GB SSD; 32GB Silver iPhone 5S; 32 GB Wifi iPad (3rd gen)
vmachiel is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 07:04 AM   #3
ArtOfWarfare
macrumors 603
 
ArtOfWarfare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Send a message via Skype™ to ArtOfWarfare
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?
ArtOfWarfare is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 07:16 AM   #4
KSean
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtOfWarfare View Post
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.
KSean is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 07:19 AM   #5
kfury77
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Osaka, Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtOfWarfare View Post
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
__________________
iMac 27" (i5, 12GB RAM), Mac mini (i7 Quadcore, 8GB RAM, 1TB HD); iPod touch 5th gen (32GB) - iPad Air (32GB)
kfury77 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 07:30 AM   #6
Jessica Lares
macrumors 603
 
Jessica Lares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Near Dallas, Texas, USA
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.
__________________
Have You Hugged Your Mac Today?
Daily Expressions | iMac G4 | Late 2011 13" MacBook Pro | iPod Nano (7G) | iPad Mini | iPod Touch (5G) | iPhone 5S
Jessica Lares is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 08:15 AM   #7
Megakazbek
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtOfWarfare View Post
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"
Megakazbek is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 08:25 AM   #8
spyguy10709
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: One Infinite Loop, Cupertino CA
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.
__________________
Last edited by spyguy10709; Tomorrow at 07:10 AM.
spyguy10709 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 08:36 AM   #9
wikiverse
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy10709 View Post
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.
wikiverse is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 09:26 AM   #10
redscull
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Texas
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.

Last edited by redscull; Apr 24, 2014 at 02:07 PM.
redscull is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 09:34 AM   #11
dalbng
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
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-...hone-and-ipad/
dalbng is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 09:40 AM   #12
APlotdevice
macrumors 68020
 
APlotdevice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by KSean View Post
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.
__________________
Pebble SmartWatch - iPhone 5c - 11" Macbook Air '13 - TV - HTPC - Numerous Consoles
There is something deeply wrong with a society more offended by breasts than by entrails.
APlotdevice is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 12:34 PM   #13
C DM
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalbng View Post
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-...hone-and-ipad/
Yup, sandboxing and all that.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by APlotdevice View Post
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?
C DM is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 01:05 PM   #14
torturegarden
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtOfWarfare View Post
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.
torturegarden is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 04:02 PM   #15
C DM
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by torturegarden View Post
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"?
C DM is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 04:24 PM   #16
sebastian...
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtOfWarfare View Post
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.
sebastian... is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2014, 09:38 PM   #17
Parasprite
macrumors 65816
 
Parasprite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalbng View Post
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-...hone-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-...apps-are-slow/
__________________
Has anyone, anywhere, ever actually used ~/Pictures/iPod Photo Cache/ for anything besides deleting or hiding it?
Parasprite is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2014, 06:39 AM   #18
hilzom
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtOfWarfare View Post
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?
hilzom is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2014, 10:03 PM   #19
spyguy10709
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: One Infinite Loop, Cupertino CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by wikiverse View Post
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.
__________________
Last edited by spyguy10709; Tomorrow at 07:10 AM.
spyguy10709 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2014, 01:30 AM   #20
wikiverse
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyguy10709 View Post
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.
wikiverse is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2014, 11:13 AM   #21
spyguy10709
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: One Infinite Loop, Cupertino CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by wikiverse View Post
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.
__________________
Last edited by spyguy10709; Tomorrow at 07:10 AM.
spyguy10709 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2014, 01:31 PM   #22
deluxeshredder
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by wikiverse View Post
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".
deluxeshredder is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2014, 04:01 PM   #23
hilzom
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 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?
hilzom is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2014, 04:52 PM   #24
iolinux333
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
I think mercury is the best browser by far on iOS. This new Opera is a very close second.
iolinux333 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2014, 05:40 PM   #25
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by deluxeshredder View Post
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.
Renzatic is online now   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > iOS Blog Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Opera browser - anyone using it? OceanFrog Mac Applications and Mac App Store 11 May 11, 2014 03:01 PM
Opera Browser on OSX 10.5.8 Sterlingholobyt Mac Basics and Help 0 Nov 9, 2013 08:42 PM
Opera Releases New WebKit-Based Browser 'Coast' MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 46 Sep 10, 2013 11:25 AM
WebKit is awesome, Fastest PPC Web Browser SawyerTHEBEST PowerPC Macs 34 Mar 15, 2013 09:39 PM
Opera Browser For Mini A Game Changer Awakener iPad Apps 18 Nov 15, 2012 10:47 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:50 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC