Opera Browser Not Allowed in iPhone App Store

[Kelmon]

Needless to say this is another occurrence of suckage from the App Store. When it was first announced there was the hope that Apple's administration of it would yield quality applications, but equally there was the fear that they could abuse their position. Not only is the latter increasingly true, but given the number of junk applications on the store it appears that not even the first is true.

In some respects I can understand why they have a number of the App Store rules in place in order to maintain a good user experience on the iPhone (i.e. use our proven JavaScript engine rather than making your own). However, this policy of "don't compete with Apple" sucks. This is anti-competitive behavior that should not be allowed, particularly since Apple still won't tell you whether your application would be allowed until after you have written it and invested your time.

In short: BOOOOO!!!

 

[Kelmon]

but that depends on whether or not you see the iPhone as a market in its own right.

The fundamental problem for developers with the iPhone is that Apple will let you invest your time and other resources into writing an application that complies with the published App Store guidelines and still tell you that it won't be permitted. This sort of practice really has to be stopped and a legal case would certainly help. But since, as a developer, you are expected to compete against other applications in the App Store for a customer's money I don't think you can see the App Store as anything but a market in its own right.

 

[.Chris]

you have proof its a "better" browser?

And flash = battery destroyer. So you can either cry about not having flash (which PERSONALLY ive never needed on my touch) or you can cry about having ******(er) battery life.

pick your battles people.

well same with the apps, running music and video all those "distory battery life"

 

[ikir]

Apple, the iPhone/iPod Touch & the App Store.

Damned if they do, Damned if they don't.

Not in the least bit surprised that they won't allow another browser, even if it is from a reputable software maker. Maybe if they (Opera Software) charged for it so Apple could get more than 30% of $0 they might find it more appealing in at least one way.

Given Opera (and Skype) seems to be available for other mobile devices without much concern I will just leave it at this...

Apple can do what they like, but they aren't doing much to help their own image.

Skype is available as Fring for iPhone. About Opera i don't care, since Safari is perfect for mobile browsing.

 

[ikir]

Anything is better than Safari, and the fact that Apple doesn't want to allow alternatives just makes me want to switch back to my old Archos even more, which runs-- you guessed it-- Opera Mobile. (And yes, Opera Mobile does quit, but rarely, and at least it does so predictably.)

In my opinion is the best browser i've tried, it doens't crash on my Mac and it is open 24/24h every day. It faster than opera and firefox on my system. maybe you are referring to some years old safari.

 

[adjones]

I really don't understand this!

Surely it can't be about sales? Safari comes free with the iPhone. Therefore when you buy the iPhone you get Safari. You have to have the iPhone to be able to put Opera on it.

I didn't buy my Mac to then only be allowed to use Safari... I use Firefox. Why should it be any different on the iPhone? So if it passes their 'will-it-break-the-phone' or 'is-it-a-virus' tests then it should be allowed on. It doesn't introduce any conflicts with AT&T or O2 et al with regards to the data provision contracts so I don't get it.

Please Apple, explain yourselves!

 

[djellison]

pick your battles people.

That's the point. WE can't. Apple have chosen for us. They don't want to be embarassed by another browser doing a better job than their own.

 

[plings]

and Opera's PR stunts continues....

PR stunt? Opera's CEO mentioned this in passing, and a journalist wrote about it. It made up a tiny part of a large article. How is casually mentioning something a "PR stunt"?

It's MacRumors that's making a big deal out of it. If anything, MacRumors is the one doing the PR stunt on Opera's behalf.

How's that desktop version coming along?

According to Opera's financial reports, revenues for the desktop verison are up between 50-100% from quarter to quarter. From the launch of 9.5 to 9.6, Opera's desktop user base grew by 25%.

Looks to me like it's coming along very nicely.

Opera might not have more than 1% in the US, but in Europe and Asia, Opera has a market share of 5-20% (20% in Eastern European countries like Ukraine, Russia, etc.).

Oh that's right, no one uses it

Opera Software's reports indicate tens of millions of users each month. No one?

Opera's other Mobile browsers are a great security risk - Opera won't tell you upfront when you install it, but all the traffic originating from the browser goes to a Opera hosted Proxy Server

You are mistaken.

Opera Mobile is a standalone browser, and does not use a proxy server at all.

Opera Mini does use a proxy server, but it's not like they are trying to hide it. In fact, they are actively and openly bragging about using proxy servers.

It's dishonest of you to pretend that Opera hides the fact that Opera Mini relies on proxy servers. This is clearly documented all over their website, marketing material, etc.

They say they do it in order to improve performance - the proxy does all the parsing of HTML/JS and converts into some efficient, renderable form and sends it to the browser which does little work and so ends up being faster - at least that is Opera's theory.

It's not a theory. It's fact. Everything is compressed usually up to 80-90% which allows even older phones to run a browser. And because of the compression, transfers are very fast, and you save a lot of money if you pay per MB. It's extremely useful if you have a poor network connection, which can happen a lot with phones.

You are acting as if Opera is some dodgy company in a third world country. Opera Software is in fact a reputable software vendor which numerous well known customers, including Sony, Nintendo, Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, HTC, Sony Ericsson, T-Mobile, KDDI, etc.

Opera Software is also located in Norway, which has among the strictest privacy laws in the world.

As anyone can imagine - if you are doing a bank transaction for example, Opera's proxy server sees it all - if some malicious employee was to look at the Proxy, he/she can easily hack in to your account.

Just like a malicious employee at the bank can do the same things. Or a malicious employee at your ISP can read your mail and monitor your browsing habits.

And I would bet that your ISP and bank are in a country with far worse privacy laws than Norway.

I agree that the more open source the iphone gets, the more were going to hear people bitching about crashes and other things of that nature.

Considering that Safari on the iPhone crashes all the time, this is a funny comment. Further to that, Opera is not open source, and Opera Software happens to be a fairly well known browser vendor, not some hobbyist application developer.

you have proof its a "better" browser?

Choice is good. What's better about Opera Mini to many is that it's faster because stuff is compressed.

And flash = battery destroyer.

This is just fanboyism. Flash isn't more of a battery destroyer than many other things on the iPhone, and people should be given the choice.

Not that Opera Mini supports Flash anyway.

By open source i meant allowing any app anyone wants on the iphone. That clearly opens the door for crappily made apps that crash constantly.

How would allowing Opera Mini be more allowing "any app" than they are allowing "any app" today?

 

[parapup]

It's dishonest of you to pretend that Opera hides the fact that Opera Mini relies on proxy servers. This is clearly documented all over their website, marketing material, etc.

Just like a malicious employee at the bank can do the same things. Or a malicious employee at your ISP can read your mail and monitor your browsing habits.

So you are saying I can make a product available for use that does not tell me when I open it and use it that it watches what I do and I have to go find that one out by searching marketing materials and websites that provide this information? Why can't they disclose it up front - when I install the browser? Would you accept if Firefox came bundled with a configuration that accesses the Internet over a proxy some where without telling you about it upfront? I would not.

Malicious employee at the bank - have you ever worked at an IT department of a bank recently in the US? I have - and believe me, there is a lot of accountability there (Read up on SOX.) - few, known employees have access to the database where my bank account details are stored and the bank typically ensures that if there was fraud at there end they will refund any money stolen from your account as a result of identity theft, provided I have not been negligent.

Whoa - and I trust my bank with my money already - so I can trust them with few other things. Opera Employee - I have no reason to trust that person - it would be absurd if you were required to trust random people by no relation.

Do you even understand the privacy implications of this? Your post made Zero sense.

 

[Jowl]

Apple is being anticompetitive.

It's probably been written hundred times in this thread - but isn't this exactly what M$ got 'done' for with IE?

 

[TheMacPotato]

This is clearly anti-competitive. the EU will have every right to fine Apple over this, exactly as Microsoft were.

Opera mini is an excellent browser. I use it on my old mobile phone all the time. Though whether it is better than safari or not is irrelevant. At the moment the user has no choice, Apple are stifling the competition.

 

[plings]

If they really want to be so competitive and open they should go to Android imo.

They already have a preview version out for Android.

If Verizon says that the only browser they allow on a phone they offer is Opera Mini, then why aren't browser companies complaining in the same way they are here?

They are. Opera has been loudly arguing for smashing down walled gardens. It was actually a central theme of one of the first Opera Mini ad campaigns, if I remember correctly.

He's talking about Opera Mobile which is very different from Opera. It requires the use of a proxy to do its job.

Nope.

Opera Mobile is a standalone browser. Like Safari.

Opera Mini, which is being discussed here, is the one that requires a proxy.

I honestly think Apple has good reason for not having alternatives to the launch bar 4 (phone, mail, web, ipod). They're the defining parts of the iphone so if a third party app replaces it and does a horrible job it probably will make them look bad

Why would Opera Mini have to replace anything? It could just be installed in addition to Safari.

Because people are making Opera to be some browser that doesn't crash, I mean all browsers crash even on desktops, so if they are looking for Opera to come and save them, it won't be it.

Maybe it crashes less than Safari. And Opera has a lot more experience with mobile browsers than Apple.

In all sense, the only difference Opera would be from Safari would be the Javascript interpreter and the looks.

The difference would be a completely different rendering engine (Presto), the fact that the engine runs on a server rather than the phone, and a different UI. Basically, everything would be different.

If it did, then it makes more sense it gets rejected...not only does the Javascript violate the SDK, but so would Flash.

I'm not sure if Opera Mini even supports JS locally. Everything is handled on the server.

 

[mogzieee]

Even so, what does Opera have to offer that Safari doesn't?

 

[lamadude]

If Norway was a part of the EU, apple would probably allready look at a huge fine

 

[plings]

So you are saying I can make a product available for use that does not tell me when I open it and use it that it watches what I do and I have to go find that one out by searching marketing materials and websites that provide this information? Why can't they disclose it up front - when I install the browser?

I just explained to you that they don't just "disclose" it. They openly and loudly brag about how Opera Mini works because it's what lets it run on old and crappy phones.

At least read my post before responding.

As I said, you are dishonestly pretending that they are trying to hide it or something, but the fact is that any time Opera is interviewed about Opera Mini they talk about how it works. As an example.

Malicious employee at the bank - have you ever worked at an IT department of a bank recently in the US? I have - and believe me, there is a lot of accountability there (Read up on SOX.) - few, known employees have access to the database where my bank account details are stored and the bank typically ensures that if there was fraud at there end they will refund any money stolen from your account as a result of identity theft, provided I have not been negligent.

I just pointed out the fact to you that Norway, where Opera is located, has some of the strictest privacy laws in the world. Better than the US, if I remember correctly.

Do you really think that any Opera employee (it's a company of more than 500 people) can just stroll by the Opera Mini servers and have their way with it?

If that were the case, then why do they have customers like Nokia and Sony Ericcson, that preinstall Opera Mini on many phones?

Opera Employee - I have no reason to trust that person - it would be absurd if you were required to trust random people by no relation.

You have no reason to trust bank employees either. You have to trust the company and its procedures. And it just so happens that Opera Software is a reputable company, and the likes of Nokia and Sony Ericsson are preinstalling Opera Mini on their phones. And they also have numerous other huge customers, like Nintendo, Sony, etc.

Do you even understand the privacy implications of this? Your post made Zero sense.

My post made perfect sense. You just didn't bother to read it properly.

The privacy implications are no different from the privacy implications of having a connection through your ISP. You trust your ISP not to abuse your data, right?

 

[lifeinhd]

In my opinion is the best browser i've tried, it doens't crash on my Mac and it is open 24/24h every day. It faster than opera and firefox on my system. maybe you are referring to some years old safari.

I have the latest version of Safari, and an earlier version of Webkit (admittedly, I do need to update that). Even if a newer version of Webkit doesn't crash, it still lacks some features, say... I dunno... session restore? Without the ability to restore sessions, I can't shut off my Mac unless I want to lose my copious number of tabs (and I mean 70+ tabs at any given moment). Safari simply lacks too many important features such as this to make it useful.

 

[plings]

Opera? People still use that bloated piece of adware?

Bloated? Opera is much smaller than other browsers. And it's faster (yeah, except for a few JavaScript things, but overall).

It is not adware. The ads disappeared several years ago. It's completely free of charge now.

Even so, what does Opera have to offer that Safari doesn't?

Compression. Makes it faster, especially when the connection is not optimal.

Don't you see what is going on? This is called marketing. Pick one of the hottest products/items in world and hitch your trailer to it, whether it be good or bad publicity.

Huh? Opera's mantra is that they want to be on as many devices and platforms as possible. This is not just a marketing stunt, it's what their goal is. Why wouldn't they want to be on the iPhone when they obviously want to be on everything else? No browser is on more platforms than Opera. They specialize in porting their browsers to as many platforms as possible.

Besides, it was just mentioned in passing by the CEO. If this was a real marketing stunt, why didn't he make a big deal out of it? It's MacRumors that is making a big deal out of a tiny commeng in a huge article.

Either way, by releasing this news story, Opera has very effectively increased traffic to their site and has increased the amount of people now downloading and installing Opera.

Opera didn't release this news story. It was mentioned in passing by the Opera CEO, in a long article about Opera in general. It's MacRumors which is making a big deal out of it.

Opera's dev team can't play naive and pretend like the didn't know Apple wouldn't allow Opera on the iPhone.

Yeah, because it's SO clear what Apple will allow. It's not like they are inconsistent, and it's not like they have received a lot of criticism for it. No siree!

 

[iSamurai]

personally I'm not a fan of Opera, but rather Firefox, however I think this is unfair for competition and monopolising the iPhone. It's gonna be like Microsoft with their anti-trust thing and it'll probably be the EU suing Apple. I don't want to see this happen though... but people will only come to realisation after being fined.

I don't like this stupid rule of competing apps -- I've been wanting to have Skype on my iPhone but it'll probably never happen any time soon (that Fring thing doesn't work well). You know, allowing these apps and a more relaxed rule could probably boost the number of iPhone sales as there's more freedom to use more apps. People don't just buy the iPhone because it's cool -- you use the phone, n'est-ce pas? There's not even an official IM chat client yet. The rest are hideous -- you gotta leave them on or use push mail. Come on, Apple.

Ya whatever, at the end of the day, they don't really care about what I wrote here.

 

[Stridder44]

I really don't understand this!

Surely it can't be about sales? Safari comes free with the iPhone. Therefore when you buy the iPhone you get Safari. You have to have the iPhone to be able to put Opera on it.

I didn't buy my Mac to then only be allowed to use Safari... I use Firefox. Why should it be any different on the iPhone? So if it passes their 'will-it-break-the-phone' or 'is-it-a-virus' tests then it should be allowed on. It doesn't introduce any conflicts with AT&T or O2 et al with regards to the data provision contracts so I don't get it.

Please Apple, explain yourselves!

Exactly. It wouldn't be such a big deal if Safari on the iPhone didn't suck.

 

[Patriks7]

This is ridiculous..
It's not like Apple is getting money from people when they use Safari..
Why not ban Firefox and Opera for normal OS X then, eh Apple?

 

[xUKHCx]

As a desktop user of Opera on both my PC and my macs I would love to have it on the iPhone. The Opera link facility would be a dream, as it would mean all your notes and bookmarks etc. would be updated on your iPhone without having to sync it through iTunes.

Shame that this won't happen (at least for now).

edit:

This is ridiculous..
It's not like Apple is getting money from people when they use Safari..
Why not ban Firefox and Opera for normal OS X then, eh Apple?

They could well be as Google being the integrated search engine means that they might have a deal with google to give them money based on the number of searches. Much how Opera as a company makes it money.

 

[dudup]

Settings>Safari>Search Engine begs to differ.

Why can I choose Yahoo?

Sorry, I had the desktop Safari in my mind.

 

[plings]

Why can I choose Yahoo?

Because they have a revenue deal with Yahoo as well?

Podcaster, Opera, and MailWrangler are providing direct alternatives to Apple applications and services.

As is Google Earth.

One of the most appealing reasons to use Apple products is that the company handles the hardware and the software. As soon as 3rd parties start building core software, we start our voyage down the Windows Mobile path.

What is "core software"? Opera Mini wouldn't replace Safari. It would just be an addition.

And what's wrong with going down the path of having the choice?

If Apple is so great, it should be able to withstand competition. But give us the choice, please. You can choose to stick with Apple, and other people can choose other things.

It's great to see someone other than the WebKit team paying attention to emerging web standards and things like the Acid3 test.

Opera has always been at the forefront of open standards. Long before Apple even considered making a browser.

 

[sangosimo]

apple is afraid of competition; it is pretty simple.

 

[Kila]

I just want a browser that doesn't crash.
Is that too much to ask for?
Safari is TERRIBLE.
When will Apple finally realize this?
iPhone Safari is the most crash prone app I have ever had the displeasure of using.