Opera Set to Preview 'Opera Mini' Browser for iPhone

[NakedPaulToast]

I don't like Apple's position of denying apps with competing functionality to their own apps, but I accept it my iPhone.

I certainly would not accept it on an iPad. My decision to buy one will be dependant on a major change of their approval policy.

 

[wlh99]

This sounds like a repeat of the Netscape vs. Microsoft case in the 90s getting ready to happen.

 

[pmz]

I think you're missing his point. Why doesn't the SDK support the creation of different browsers? Many think it's because Apple doesn't want the competition.

Doesn't need, is more like it. Safari works perfectly on the iPhone, but it's missing a ton of features from its desktop equivalent, even the iPad is similarly crippled. This is what needs to change, not old irrelevant "browsers" finally coming to the iPhone. It's pointless. It's a window to the web, it either works or it doesn't. Safari works. That's all you need, and no sense of entitlement is going to change that, nor should it.


The purpose of Apple including the Safari Webkit as an API is so that useful, functional applications with a purpose, can also take advantage of Safari right from within the app. People that are creating other stand alone web browsers that do nothing, are wasting their time and that of customers.

 

[cumanzor]

Clearly, not everyone thinks there is a problem. In fact, the majority of consumers are perfectly happy - and in fact prefer - their current relationship with Apple.
.

Most people are not aware of this problem, this is why people don't seem to care. Which also makes it impossible to say for sure if people actually prefers this model.

From every way you see this, what harm could an alternative browser bring to a user? If the experience is subpar from that of Sarafi, the customer will go back to Safari. Let the customer make the choice.

It's ok if you defend this model. I simply don't, and so far, none of the points I've read have convinced me. Take the iPad for instance, I seriously would love to get one (only $500? hell yes!), but I just cannot give up on the freedom I'm used to. Yes, only 1 out of 100 users cares about this, but what will happen when other manufactures and companies adapt the same closed model? Interoperability hell, abusive control, you name it. You have to accept the fact that, if Apple truly is the innovator and everyone else follows it, they need to do something about this now. Those who don't care about this, they don't understand the consequences.

edit: Something should be clarified here. The only plus Opera Mini has over current Mobile Safari is the compressing they use which makes browsing faster in slower networks (and faster is quite an understatement here). Opera Mini is targeted toward feature phones (read: not smartphones) for this reason.

It would make way more sense if they developed a version of Opera Mobile instead, and just add the Opera Turbo feature (like in the lastest OM 10 beta).

edit2: something else, for all you guys dissing opera. some of the features most people take for granted in today's browsers (tabs, to name just one) came from Opera. While it has the smallest marketshare, Opera is probably the best, most stable, most robust browser out there. They are now working on a new JS and rendering engine which apparently is faster than WebKit (chrome, safari). And this is coming from a Chrome user

 

[KaneBaker]

I don't see that. If you buy a Ford you don't complain it can't have a BMW engine do you? There are many things in life where the choice is get something else not that what you have should have choices of other manufacturers parts within it. His comments were pretty accurate and common sense it seemed to me. It isn't at all 'accepting everything' to have this opinion. To bitch all day that what you bought has limitations is silly, you should have done the research better and known the Ford came with a Ford engine to reuse that analogy.

Actually horrible analogy.
I I buy a Ford I have the right to rip that **** apart and put in any engine I want. Ford does not forbid this, in your metaphor Apple does forbid me opening the hood and doing what I want. I can't even get 3rd part cup holders unless they approve it and sell it to me through their store.

 

[mrgreen4242]

Doesn't need, is more like it. Safari works perfectly on the iPhone, but it's missing a ton of features from its desktop equivalent, even the iPad is similarly crippled. This is what needs to change, not old irrelevant "browsers" finally coming to the iPhone. It's pointless. It's a window to the web, it either works or it doesn't. Safari works. That's all you need, and no sense of entitlement is going to change that, nor should it.


The purpose of Apple including the Safari Webkit as an API is so that useful, functional applications with a purpose, can also take advantage of Safari right from within the app. People that are creating other stand alone web browsers that do nothing, are wasting their time and that of customers.

I've had Safari lock up to the point where I had to reboot my iPod several times, and couple times where I wasn't sure how I was going to un-screw it as it kept trying to reopen the page that was crashing it at launch. Eventually got it to close the offending tab, but the point is that it does NOT work perfectly all the time. It is an adequate browser, certainly was THE best mobile web browser THREE years ago, but the complete lack of competition on the iPhone means that it's stagnated.

 

[iZac]

Great PR exercise since they get a bucket load of publicity whether Apple approve the App or not. Further to that, if (when) Apple do deny the App, they're clearly seen as "the bad guys"

 

[CaryMacGuy]

If Apple is to deny me the option to try another web browser on a device that I own, I will really begin to reevaluate the way I think about them. Perhaps Android is a better option for me.

It might be that Opera is superior to Safari but I would have no way of knowing. Why is it a big deal if other apps compete with Apple's built in apps. I can understand them not wanting a mobile Amazon music store but other things, who cares. It isn't like they are losing anything by me using other apps. They have already installed their apps on the phone and they cannot be removed.

Come on Apple...give your loyal users choice! This smells like IE circa 1998

 

[mj1108]

Microsoft's anti-competitive behaviour was going to PC manufacturers and saying "if you put this alternative software onto your PC's then we will charge you more for all the Windows licenses you buy".

That's abusing your monopoly. You're the only reasonable choice out there, everybody uses your software, and you force manufacturers who know they have to buy it into taking it along with all your other conditions.

Apple's choice for what applications it allows on it's own hardware is totally different and in no way a monopoly. There are hundreds of other mobile phones out there, and a reasonable number of OS alternatives. The consumer has plenty choice. Nor is Apple strong-arming manufacturers to accept their terms to keep competitors out, they're simply choosing which apps to allow and which apps not to allow. It's their hardware, their store, their game.

People need to start realising that if you buy an iPhone, this is the way it is. Just because you can install anything you want on your Windows PC, or Mac, or Android phone or whatever else you have, doesn't mean that the iPhone HAS to be the same way. I can't download and install any game I want on my 360, PS3 or Wii, nor do they multi-task, and all of those manufacturers decide exactly what games they allow on their platform. And you know what, that's just fine by me. And I have a PC to play games on if it's not.

And if that's not what you want, exercise your consumer choice and buy an Android, or Nokia, or Samsung, or one of the many other phones out there. That's your freedom, stop tramping on the freedom of everyone else who is quite happy living within the Apple kingdom.

This is the problem: Apple isn't letting you have choice. Choice is a good thing, no matter what line Apple feeds you. With Apple not letting any apps onto the market that duplicate what their own do, they have no reason to try and improve their own apps. It's an example of what happens when there's no competition: complacency sets in. I don't know how you can sit there and call MS's practices anti-competitive yet Apple's way of doing this isn't anti-competitive?

These practices make me glad I went the Android route.....

 

[ghostface147]

Motion denied Opera. Please get LOST and don't resubmit your app. However if you want to go to Rock or Cydia...

 

[Hattig]

Hopefully this gets rejected, unless it offers at least one feature that Safari does not.

-There is no chance that it peforms better than Safari, aka no reason to use it.

The 6x data compression is clearly a major feature that Safari doesn't have, and quite useful for slow data connections.

Choice is good. It's high time that Apple got off their high horse.

 

[JMax1]

I don't understand why this would/should interfere with apple making $$. If Opera should choose to charge a buck for this, then it would benefit apple financially to approve this app. They get no $$ for us using their native apps, so unless I'm missing something (which happens), the "duplication" reason for denial is such a bogus reason. But it's not up to me, so whatev.

 

[*LTD*]

The 6x data compression is clearly a major feature that Safari doesn't have, and quite useful for slow data connections.

How would Opera manage this with their servers? Would increased load be a factor? I don't know how this works.

 

[GQB]

If Apple reject this application, then isn't this a clear cut case of pot, kettle and black?

M$ were slated in the press for their monopoly of their IE browser on the Windoze platforms. Personally, I think the whole monopoly, bundled software is a croc of **** but there you are.

Apple are doing the same restrictive practice as M$ so they should expect some kickback.

Opera is not my choice at all and I quite like Safari as it happens but with Apple having such a huge % marketshare of the smartphone sector, this is very restrictive for consumers.

Stand up people, and be heard!

OK, for the 10,000th time, MS got into monopoly problems because it was the dominant (i.e. nearly exclusive) operating system for all desktop hardware. There were no alternatives, e.g. monopoly. If they made their own hardware and Windows only ran on that hardware, there would have been no issue at all.
There are tons of alternatives to the iPhone. They have absolute right to control what goes on their hardware. If you don't like it, buy a Nexus, Droid, Pre, Pixie, etc etc.

 

[HLdan]

I'm not going to lie, the App Store is a love/hate thing for me.

I love having one spot to search, buy, and get new apps. I know they are tested and safe (no mac STDs on em).

I hate the fact that only apple can turn down apps for no good reason besides greed.

I hate the fact that they get mad $$$$$ for their "effort."

It's something I'm "Okay" with for the iPhone...but for the iPad? No..Not so much.

Oh come on, it's not like it's really affecting you. There's over 100k apps on the App Store, regardless if many of them aren't great, the fact remains there's more than enough decent apps to satisfy most people's needs. Get off your principals wagon.

 

[lamadude]

Apple should allow this (and firefox mobile as well) not allowing it to me seems like apple thinks they have an inferior product since they fear that people would abbandon safari in favor of these other browsers.
The way to keep your marketshare is by making sure your product is best, not by simply banning all competing products

 

[pmjoe]

Apple will reject this for various reasons, depending on how they've implemented it. But, I'm all for the Opera folks putting some heat on Apple to relax their draconian App Store policies. And we need Mozilla, Sun, Adobe, etc. to do the same.

 

[mj1108]

OK, for the 10,000th time, MS got into monopoly problems because it was the dominant (i.e. nearly exclusive) operating system for all desktop hardware. There were no alternatives, e.g. monopoly. If they made their own hardware and Windows only ran on that hardware, there would have been no issue at all.
There are tons of alternatives to the iPhone. They have absolute right to control what goes on their hardware. If you don't like it, buy a Nexus, Droid, Pre, Pixie, etc etc.

No, it wasn't due to desktop hardware. It was due to their browser like the person you replied to said.

 

[blackhand1001]

I say Apple should approve them just to shut them up. It's not like many people will even bother downloading their app. Opera is the least popular browser in market share, yet they're the most vocal.

In fact, they're constantly complaining to regulatory agencies about Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla and any and all major PC manufacturers that won't install their browser by default.

It's a ridiculous company that for some reason doesn't want to stand on its on merits even when their products are good (like the Wii's Opera-based browser).



And it's a security nightmare as everything you access via their browser has been compressed (and theoretically logged and stored) by their servers. As if we don't already have enough problems with ISPs keeping data.

You know that opera has a very large share in the mobile browser market. More than 25% actually.

 

[mrgreen4242]

OK, for the 10,000th time, MS got into monopoly problems because it was the dominant (i.e. nearly exclusive) operating system for all desktop hardware. There were no alternatives, e.g. monopoly. If they made their own hardware and Windows only ran on that hardware, there would have been no issue at all.
There are tons of alternatives to the iPhone. They have absolute right to control what goes on their hardware. If you don't like it, buy a Nexus, Droid, Pre, Pixie, etc etc.

You have to consider all App Store compatible devices, which include iPod touch and now iPad, first off. We're talking about the market of internet enabled PMPs which Apple does substantially control.

There's also the issue of the degree of anti-competitiveness which is happening. MS didn't prevent users from getting another browser, they just built one into their system and sometimes kept vendors from pre-installing competitors. Apple is going as far as specifically not allowing other browsers to run at all on the device, and making it difficult/as impossible as they can for users to unlock and install other apps on their hardware.

(I know jailbreaking is relatively trivial to do, but the effort that goes into creating those processes is not, and Apple continues to close off the methods used every update, actively preventing people from choosing to get software outside the App Store).

 

[Stella]

Opera makes damn good mobile browsers.

Its a shame that Apple will probably bar this from the AppStore.

Opera have made some quite good innovations - such as tab browsing (IRC - an Opera first ), the Top Sites that Safari has - first was seen in Opera,to name a few. Opera ideas soon get incorporated into other browsers.

 

[lilo777]

Hopefully this gets rejected ...

Right, because we buy Apple products to bring profits to Apple and not for our own good. We are that stupid (brainwashed).

 

[cumanzor]

How would Opera manage this with their servers? Would increased load be a factor? I don't know how this works.

Data just goes through a proxy server that compresses and adjusts the page for small screen devices.

Pros:
Extremely noticeable on slow connections.
Text is adjusted to the screen size, pages look almost like on a desktop (zooming out).

Cons:
Scripting is done on their proxy servers, which means no advanced features. No flash either.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Mini#Functionality

Certainly, the more phones there are, the more workload they'll have. In that wiki article there is a graph showing the amount of data consumed by users.

 

[iZac]

I don't see that. If you buy a Ford you don't complain it can't have a BMW engine do you? There are many things in life where the choice is get something else not that what you have should have choices of other manufacturers parts within it. His comments were pretty accurate and common sense it seemed to me. It isn't at all 'accepting everything' to have this opinion. To bitch all day that what you bought has limitations is silly, you should have done the research better and known the Ford came with a Ford engine to reuse that analogy.

I'd say the iPhone is more akin to the Audi A2. About the only hardware access the end user has to the engine is to check the oil level. To fix it you need to send it to an Audi approved Genius Bar ... I mean garage. But like anything, with enough spanners and detimination, you can hack a porche engine in it.

 

[ghostface147]

Opera makes damn good mobile browsers.

Its a shame that Apple will probably bar this from the AppStore.

Opera have made some quite good innovations - such as tab browsing (IRC - an Opera first ), the Top Sites that Safari has - first was seen in Opera,to name a few. Opera ideas soon get incorporated into other browsers.

And yet still they lag and lag and lag in market share overall.