Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Opera Browser Not Allowed in iPhone App Store

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 - this includes encrypted traffic - where it is decrypted if required and then the proxy talks to the actual server to get you the data. 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.

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.

I am not sure the browser they did for iPhone actually does this, but if it does, I would support Apple not allowing it just for the privacy concerns alone.

If there is no proxy involved (i.e. Opera for iPhone is like Safari), and Apple rejected it due to it being competition - shame on Apple. Anyone who cares about free markets and fair use should just stop buying anything Apple sells.
 
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.
 
NT1440 said:
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. Apple is doing this to ensure that everything works so people wont bitch.


Unfortuneatly, they bitch anyway.
Click to expand...

Funny thing is that people are having all kinds of trouble already with the iphones crashing running Apple-approved (and in some cases, Apple-created) apps.

Apple isn't doing this so that people won't bitch. They're doing it so people will be forced to use safari. If Safari is better, then nobody will use Opera. It's a free download. Lame argument.
 
Honestly I agree with Apple in not letting them use another browser on the phone because then it is competing with Safari and also you can have features like Flash built in that will use allot of bandwidth that AT&T doesn't want us to use.:rolleyes:
 
bradl said:
You're also equating 'crashing' with open source, which isn't always the case. Firefox is open source, yet it has significantly less issues than Safari or IE.

Also, may want to read up on Opera. It isn't open source. It's built entirely by Opera ASA, out of Norway, and is closed source.

BL.
Click to expand...
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.

where did I equate crashing with open source?

I equate badly written apps with crashing. (and thats not saying opera was made crappily)
 
NT1440 said:
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.
Click to expand...
That's a ridiculous argument. Flash uses no more battery than Youtube, music videos, movies or games. It also uses less battery than simply making a call.
 
On any other smartphone......are you allowed to use an alternate browser than what is provided on the phone (legally, without hacks)?

-Kevin
 
hopefully opera accidently leaks this on installer.app. ;)

It would great to have browser with flash and another without to save battery.
 
Unfortunate.

This should send another strong message to 3rd party developers.

My Nokia phone has more functionality - particularly when it comes to internet - than the iPhone, i.e., view Flash content, embedded in the browser.

kbmb said:
On any other smartphone......are you allowed to use an alternate browser than what is provided on the phone (legally, without hacks)?

-Kevin
Click to expand...

Yes. Other smartphone platforms don't have nearly as many restrictions ( read: barely any restrictions ) as the iPhone. You can freely install web browsers, or any other software. The user isn't nanny'd like Apple does with its users.

Cell phone carriers may restrict applications that can or cannot be installed on a locked phone, but that isn't due to the phone manufacturer.
 
paj said:
That's a ridiculous argument. Flash uses no more battery than Youtube, music videos, movies or games. It also uses less battery than simply making a call.
Click to expand...

Flash also heavily taxes the cpu. (go ahead and take a look)
 
DanielJvdBerg said:
People should note that Microsoft has a monopoly on the OS market, and therefore MUST allow competition, while Apple does NOT on the smartphone market, so I think they should be allowed to play their own game.
Click to expand...

Last I checked there is an Apple offering and quite a Linux following in the OS market, 3 seems > 1 which means Microsoft is not a monopoly and never has, Microsoft gets in trouble for monopolistic behaviour, not being a monopoly.

Apple doesn't have to allow competition, but they look right stupid when they don't.
 
I hope Opera puts it up as an .ipa file so all the folks with Jailbroken iPhones/iPod touches can at least decide for themselves which browser they'd like to use on their hardware. And I hope Firefox has an .ipa leak at some point also.

I for one would at least love to see what they pulled off. Stifling creativity the way Apple does... it's downright idiotic.
 
parapup said:
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 - this includes encrypted traffic - where it is decrypted if required and then the proxy talks to the actual server to get you the data. 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.

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.

I am not sure the browser they did for iPhone actually does this, but if it does, I would support Apple not allowing it just for the privacy concerns alone.

If there is no proxy involved (i.e. Opera for iPhone is like Safari), and Apple rejected it due to it being competition - shame on Apple. Anyone who cares about free markets and fair use should just stop buying anything Apple sells.
Click to expand...

Just like with all browsers, this is togglable, and is not set to default by an initial install of Opera. A user has to set that, otherwise it isn't done at all (I just went through a clean install of Opera 9.62, and this option was not set).

NT1440 said:
where did I equate crashing with open source?
Click to expand...

going off of what you had posted and the title of the thread. Opera isn't open source, so going by your logic, it shouldn't crash as bad as you'd think it would..

But since you know better, all is good. :)

BL.
 
I'd have no problem with this if they could make a browser that doesn't crash. So far they haven't. And judging by OS X Safari, Safari will always be useless on any platform.
 
Give Feedback to Apple

I just gave feedback to Apple. I wouldn't care about Opera or not, except that Safari just sucks. Crashes every time I open a large web page, caching sucks. Write Apple to complain. Maybe they'll at least improve Safari. Here's the link to their iPhone feedback page.

http://www.apple.com/feedback/iphone.html
 
DanielJvdBerg said:
People should note that Microsoft has a monopoly on the OS market, and therefore MUST allow competition, while Apple does NOT on the smartphone market, so I think they should be allowed to play their own game.
Click to expand...

Actually, that is incorrect as having a monopoly is perfectly legal in every way. It's when the company holding the monopoly uses tactics that prevent competition from entering the market they're in that crosses the line and becomes an illegal act.

Sorta like Apple designing software for its iPhones and iPod touches and then dropping hammers on coders that might have created a piece of software that might perform a similar function to something that Apple already has done.

That's where the trouble comes from. Creating a browser for the iPhone/iPod touch and then never letting anyone else write the same type of application would technically be crossing that line - and they really think a silly subsection in the SDK requirements is going to make that stick.

Fat chance of that, Steve.
 
Opera iPhone?

Now, I do believe choice is good, but come on people. Anti-competitive? This is the Apple iPhone not the Opera Software iPhone. Apple can pick and choose to their hearts' content. If the iPhone held 95% of the cell phone market share then this may be grounds for your arguments.... but, no. If you want choice there are hundreds of other cell phones available to you.

I use Firefox but don't expect my phone to run it just because I like it.

Let the free market decide the fate of Apple's decision! Good grief.
 
JakeDTS said:
Where did it say Opera has Flash?
Click to expand...
I wondered the same thing. Isn't Opera Mini the cut down version that pre-processes the HTML for better display on mobile devices. I didn't think that had flash.
 
NT1440 said:
Flash also heavily taxes the cpu. (go ahead and take a look)
Click to expand...

If the user is aware that running applications will drain their batteries faster, then where's the problem?

Apple should put a notice somewhere, that running applications on your iPHone / Touch may drain the battery faster than not.
 
Stella said:
Cell phone carriers may restrict applications that can or cannot be installed on a locked phone, but that isn't due to the phone manufacturer.
Click to expand...

How is that different than Apple?

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?

Just curious?

-Kevin
 
NT1440 said:
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.
Click to expand...

NT - you know I have respect for you, but I think you are wrong here. Yes, flash is a drain. Maybe it should be allowed on some websites. Hulu would be a good example. (They use flash, right?)

As for other browsers, which is "better" doesn't matter. What does is competition. Through having competitors, Apple can be forced to improve it's own applications.

I have a feeling they like saying mobile safari instead of iPhone web browsing.

Besides the competition, it prevents what surely is coming anti-trust lawsuit.
 
opera mini on the blackberry using edge was really fast because the opera servers converted the pages into smaller images. it didnt allow the webpages to be full featured like safari but is much faster. having opera would be an excellent alternative. apple is a browser nazi. if they were confident enough in their browser they shouldnt be worried about any competition but the truth is that their browser crashes all the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back