Yep, and their market share is still square root of diddly squit. The only real competition to Safari (on Mac) is FF. How much choice do we need?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Opera Mini Browser for iPhone Being Demoed at Mobile World Congress
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's not exactly "no dynamic functionality at all". Some event triggers still reach the device, so a page that fetches stuff with javascript upon a click (or something similar) would send another request to the Opera servers, the event would be processed there, and the resulting page would be sent again to the device. i'm pretty sure that 95+% of the content out there would be perfectly usable this way and this is definitely worth the 6x speed-up. Of course I would love to see Opera mobile for iPhone (which is a normal browser), but Apple would never allow it, since it would have to execute javascript.
I've been using Opera since 9.27 under OS X, Windows and Linux and I never had this problem (without even changing the user agent). I've seen this mentioned a lot though so it may be something that people are doing wrong.
No. Opera filed the original complaint once back in 2007 (IIRC). After Microsoft proposed the ballot screen, Opera said in a letter to the EU that they were happy with the proposal but they had some suggestions, as did Google and Mozilla. I am still against the Ballot screen, but saying that Opera complained more than once is incorrect.
Are we going to be looking at a repeat of AT&T's support of the iPhone? Perhaps some complaining about how customers should cut back on using the services they've paid for. I hope not.
Apple wants to keep things simple and secure for the average user. Get used to it.
For the average user, Apple's control is perfect but for me, notsomuch.
iPhones sold: 43 million
Opera mini unique MONTHLY users: 50 million
In less than a year they almost trippled their monthly user base from 20million to more than 50 million. And it's still 6 times faster than Safari.
http://www.opera.com/press/releases/2010/02/12/
I think the way the browser uses Opera's servers is the users choice. It is called Opera Turbo, and can be turned on or off at will, at least it can be changed on the S60 version.
F
fishcove
Guest
To me, dynamic functionality means NOT having to go back to the server.
Regardless, repeated requests to the server are very quickly going to eat into that 6x speed-up.
We all know what will happen, including Opera. They will submit the app, Apple will reject and they (and the media) will make a big fuss about that. I've seen it before... seriously.
Apple should be more open, but they are not. So what to do? Sue them or just go to he competitor.. easy. Isn't it?
Apple should be more open, but they are not. So what to do? Sue them or just go to he competitor.. easy. Isn't it?
Opera Turbo is a different (although similar concept) thing altogether. All websites on Opera Mini are server-side processed.
Best guess is Apple will continue to be insular and it'll be rejected.
The more interesting news to me about browsers from the World Congress was the first demos of RIM's new Webkit based one for their Blackberrys:
http://www.intomobile.com/2010/02/17/rim-shows-off-new-webkit-browser.html
Not available yet, but it's looking good. Of all apps, the one that keeps the iPhone most attractive over other phones is its browser.
The more interesting news to me about browsers from the World Congress was the first demos of RIM's new Webkit based one for their Blackberrys:
http://www.intomobile.com/2010/02/17/rim-shows-off-new-webkit-browser.html
Not available yet, but it's looking good. Of all apps, the one that keeps the iPhone most attractive over other phones is its browser.
If Opera's server is able to access your internal corporate application then your corporate application is not so "internal". So, toss that usecase right on out.
So far as tracking goes, you're essentially putting Opera in the role as your second ISP, with all the privacy concerns that that entails. I suspect their servers will have a hard enough time keeping up with the entire Internet's worth of traffic without writing out your usage habits, but since there's monetary value there it's also likely they'll "make it work" even at the expense of slowing down the customer-facing side of the system.
Note, of course, that all Blackberry users form the same kind of bargain with RIM, and no one seems to be making too much of a fuss about it.
Opera has been doing this on other phones, way before we even knew what an iPhone was.
What are you fanboys babbling about?
Why is everyone talking about this will be rejected? On what grounds? Have you ever heard of PERFECT BROWSER 3? That's in the APP Store. It's a browser as well and it duplicates Safari... tell me one reason why Opera should or will be rejected.
Why is everyone talking about this will be rejected? On what grounds? Have you ever heard of PERFECT BROWSER 3? That's in the APP Store. It's a browser as well and it duplicates Safari... tell me one reason why Opera should or will be rejected.
It's difficult to imagine how to do something wrong when simply logging into a web page.
I think it depends on your definition of "complain." They made one official complaint, but they sure sounded like they were complaining subsequently, even if they did not go through official channels to do so.
There have been numerous examples given in the thread, if you read it. Not least of which is Apple only allowing browsers based on the built-in WebKit library and the potential for executing code on the client, both of which are valid reasons. And Apple only need one.
Based on my own experiences with web browsing on phones "before we even knew what an iPhone was", I'd say Opera would suddenly find itself handling 3-4 times the load on its servers. Minimum. (If Opera mini on iPhone becomes popular, which I honestly doubt.)
So, you think what you simply read is sacred and personal, but company data should be public?
Because Opera really is a different browser.
All the so-called alternative browsers in the App Store simply wrap the provided Apple Safari library with a different UI shell.
The whole point of the period following Microsoft's proposal of the ballot screen was to solicit input from the rest of the industry which had been injured by Microsofts monopoly abuse. It is hardly 'complaining' to provide feedback when explicitly asked for it. But this is getting progressively more off topic, so I'll end now.
I've come to really respect Opera's developers and hope their app makes it through approval.
I'd like to try browsing via EDGE (to save battery life) with Opera's server side compression and see how it is.
Google's method leaves a lot to be desired.
I'd like to try browsing via EDGE (to save battery life) with Opera's server side compression and see how it is.
Google's method leaves a lot to be desired.
There's no more arbitrary code execution on the phone in Opera Mini than there is in any of these VNC apps:
http://www.google.com/search?q=+site:itunes.apple.com+vnc
Umm. You can't disable Google Analytics tracking of the web sites you are viewing on the iPhone unless you jailbreak.
Being Europeans and being fairly touchy-feely techno idealists, Opera isnt paying enough attention to the fact it's dealing with a depraved value set: corporate Americans, and very low on that curve to boot, Californians.
Approve the app?
Heh. Please refer to the Google situation.
Approve the app?
Heh. Please refer to the Google situation.