AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Opera teases speedy iPhone browser but denies pact with Apple
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Opera teases speedy iPhone browser but denies pact with Apple - Page 2

post #41 of 64
2/16/10 at 7:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I don't know who wrote this, but this has to be the most slanted article written for AppleInsider in a long while.

First it's a whole article about Opera's new "browser" which isn't actually a browser in the normal sense of the word, that not only doesn't discuss that fact, it doesn't even mention it? What gives? Are you guys purposely trying to deceive here?

Sure it's 6 times faster, but isn't a discussion of the fact that it uses Operas servers to achieve this relevant? How about the security issues of going through some unknown "browsing service"? How about the simple fact that this "browser" is merely showing you jpegs of pages, as opposed to the pages themselves? How can you write an article about this and not include all this stuff?

Secondly, this article repeats things that just aren't true, like "Apple has rejected any third-party browsers submitted to the App Store that might replace its own, native Safari application ..."

The only true fact I get from this article is that the author probably uses Opera.

Nicely said, and I definitely learnt a few things from your comments. I really dont understand why Opera does a JPEG render of the websites, but it sounds horrific, as is the rerouting through Opera servers. If I wanted a re-routed internet on my phone, I'd use Blackberry \
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 64
2/16/10 at 7:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post

I don't surf enough on 3G for me to care if it's faster. I occasionally surf via 3G and it's generally to try to find something that I don't care if it takes 3 seconds vs 1. Unless you bring something that Safari doesn't have (compression isn't something new - it's just a different avenue to bringing the exact same internet) I don't care. You put flash in your browser and I'll download - no flash and I just couldn't care less...

yes.. there are just too many choices out there to make one single thing important enough to care about..
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 64
2/16/10 at 8:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post

Does anyone know why Microsoft effectively forcing Explorer on the world by bundling it with Windows was considered illegal, yet Apple can force people to use Safari and that is OK?

I'm sure there is a good reason for it, but I don't really know the details of the legal situation that lead to the IE problems.

Webkit and Safari use current web standards, while IE bastardized them.

You don't hear people bitch about how web sites only work properly in Safari.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 64
2/16/10 at 11:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Browsers are only allowed if they use WebKit, but that doesn't mean that it's "just a different UI on top of Safari."

In this case, it does. All current iPhone browsers are only using the existing Safari engine. None of them come with their own fork of WebKit.

Quote:
If that was true then all browsers except Mozilla and MSIE are also "Safari" including the desktop version of Opera.

No, because Chrome is using a different fork of WebKit than Safari, and also has a different JavaScript engine.

Opera is not a WebKit browser either. It has its own engine, Presto.
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 64
2/16/10 at 11:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

If a browser doesn't use WebKit, users likely won't get the same experience accessing these, if they get any usable user experience at all, which is bad for Web App and web site developers, iPhone users and Apple.

No, what's bad for everyone is to design exclusively for a specific browser. If the sites design with cross-browser compatibility in mind there will be no problems. Sites optimized for the iPhone browsers generally work perfectly fine in Opera and other browsers.

Quote:
It's pretty obvious that the Opera iPhone browser will, rightfully, never be approved for the App Store. It's also pretty obvious that Opera know this and are only using this "announcement" to generate publicity for themselves.

On the contrary, Opera has argued for why it doesn't violate any guidelines, and Apple actually called Opera after their announcement to work with them on the iPhone port of Opera Mini.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post

"Duplicates current iPhone functions"

Rejected.

So do a lot of applications in the App Store, including Spotify and of course one of the dozens of browser shells.

Fail.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 64
2/16/10 at 11:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

1) Apple rejects Opera's browser

2) Apple implements similar compression technology in next version of iPhone/iPhone OS

3) Opera no longer a factor


So what you are saying is that Apple will admit that the browsing experience on the iPhone is and has been far too slow, since this is necessary? Boy, will all those people who bragged about web browsing from the iPhone eat crow if Apple does this!

Reply
Reply
post #47 of 64
2/16/10 at 11:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dusk View Post

Some people here don't seem to understand how Opera Turbo works.

It's not Opera Turbo. It's Opera Mini.

Quote:
Opera Mini is a normal Browser in the normal meaning of this word. All it does is it gets a compressed Website from the Server. The Servers compress the page pretty much like as if you zip it with the difference that zipping jpg or gif doesn't help much thus all pictures on the website are downsized or rendered at a very low quality setting to get maximum compression. This helps a lot especially on pages with lots of small pictures. The full size picture (that Safari Mobile has to load all the time) is only loaded if you switch Turbo off or select the picture.

But this isn't Opera Mobile with Opera Turbo. It's Opera Mini where they don't just do compression, but actually do the handling of the page on the server and sends the result to the Opera Mini client on the phone.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 64
2/16/10 at 11:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

I always thought that Opera Mini was a java based application which would rule it out, Opera Mobile on the other hand is a more fully fledged application based on the SDK's of various platforms (Symbian, WinMo etc.).

Opera Mini exists as a Java client and a native C client or something.

Quote:
I found Opera Mini was useful in 2G situations but there was no advantage with 3G due to everything being parsed through Opera's servers in Norway.

Opera has servers all over the world. Including in the US.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 64
2/16/10 at 11:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

]I don't know who wrote this, but this has to be the most slanted article written for AppleInsider in a long while.

On the contrary, the article is quite accurate. It is you who are resorting to fake quotes and misinformation.

Quote:
First it's a whole article about Opera's new "browser" which isn't actually a browser in the normal sense of the word, that not only doesn't discuss that fact, it doesn't even mention it? What gives? Are you guys purposely trying to deceive here?

Sure it's a browser. It's just that the browser engine resides on a server which does all the heavy lifing, and compresses pages up to 90%.

Quote:
Sure it's 6 times faster, but isn't a discussion of the fact that it uses Operas servers to achieve this relevant? How about the security issues of going through some unknown "browsing service"?

Opera Mini isn't "some unknown browsing service". Opera has been around for more than 15 years, and has the most widely used mobile browser in the world. It's a respectable company with hundreds of millions of users around the world, and major customers and partners like Sony, Nintendo, AT&T, and so on.

Opera also happens to have the best security track record of all browsers.

Quote:
How about the simple fact that this "browser" is merely showing you jpegs of pages, as opposed to the pages themselves? How can you write an article about this and not include all this stuff?

First of all, it is not just showing images (or "jpegs"). It's drawing the page based on the Opera Binary Markup Language (OBML), which is a highly efficiently compressed format sent from the Opera Mini servers.

Secondly, the article clearly states that the speed is due to compression.

Quote:
Secondly, this article repeats things that just aren't true, like "Apple has rejected any third-party browsers submitted to the App Store that might replace its own, native Safari application ..."

This is absolutely true. There are no third-party browsers in the App Store. All of the browsers there are merely skins or shells on top of Safari.

Also, the article clearly states: "any non-WebKit third-party browsers"

Why are you resorting to making up fake quotes to fake outrage?

Quote:
The only true fact I get from this article is that the author probably uses Opera.

Based on what? The article is entirely factual, and is not bashing Apple nor is it praising Opera.

The only true fact we get from this is that you are highly sensitive to anything that might touch your religion...
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 64
2/17/10 at 1:33am
Opera Mini is Java:-

Quote:
Download Opera Mini

OverviewOpera Mini 4Opera Mini 5 betaDownloadDemoHelp Developer
Quick download

STEP
1
Download
Visit the address m.opera.com, using your phone’s default Web browser. To download Opera Mini 5 beta, visit the address m.opera.com/next.
STEP
2
Install
Follow the on-screen download instructions.
STEP
3
Browse
After downloading, locate Opera Mini on your phone among other Java applications, and start enjoying lightning-fast mobile Web.

Source

Opera Mobile is the C based version:-

Quote:
Opera Mobile 10 beta 3
for Nokia smartphones

English language phones 4.4 MB
International version 5.8 MB

Opera Mobile 10 beta 3
for Windows Mobile phones

Touch phones 4.5 MB
Keypad phones 4.5 MB

Source

Before getting an iPhone I used Opera Mini or Mobile for years, maybe it went through Norway as I'm in Australia.

I can access My Opera from my iPhone and all my old bookmarks are still stored there, I've had it since 2004.

Quote:
Originally Posted by insike View Post

Opera Mini exists as a Java client and a native C client or something.


Opera has servers all over the world. Including in the US.

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #51 of 64
2/17/10 at 3:18am
In this day and age does anyone (apart from those with crappy feature phones and no other choice) use Opera on a mobile handset? Apple, Nokia, Google, Samsung and others are now building their browsers around webkit.

Looks like this is one last gasp for Opera in the mobile browser market.
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 64
2/17/10 at 6:03am
Can it log into Google Mail? Desktop Opera still can't, and that type of basic incompatibility (blamed on Google by Opera zealots) is the only reason I don't use it.
My Android phone is the worst phone I've ever owned.
Reply
My Android phone is the worst phone I've ever owned.
Reply
post #53 of 64
2/17/10 at 7:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by insike View Post

No, what's bad for everyone is to design exclusively for a specific browser. If the sites design with cross-browser compatibility in mind there will be no problems. Sites optimized for the iPhone browsers generally work perfectly fine in Opera and other browsers.

An iPhone Web App is not the same as a web site, and it's just extra work and a possibly compromised experience for users to have alternative rendering engines on the iPhone. It's also, from a practical standpoint, unnecessary, since WebKit is a fully standards compliant rendering engine.

Quote:
On the contrary, Opera has argued for why it doesn't violate any guidelines, and Apple actually called Opera after their announcement to work with them on the iPhone port of Opera Mini.

I don't think we can take it as fact that a phone call reported on a rumor site -- a report based entirely on speculation and wishful interpretation -- actually occurred. I doubt very much that there was such a phone call, or that there will be. And according to the article we are all responding to, Opera have denied any such contact.

The Opera browser clearly violates the iPhone developer guidelines and there's really no need for it on the iPhone.
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 64
2/17/10 at 8:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

there's really no need for it on the iPhone.

Need? That's way too high a bar. Using that standard, there is no need for an iPhone!

What's wrong with desire? From what I've seen, a certain amount of desire for alternative browsers exists.

There's also a desire for multitasking and Flash. Those who have no such desire need not use these things.

But to withhold stuff because of a negative determination of need, made by a third party, is just nuts.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 64
2/17/10 at 8:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Opera Mini is Java:-

And native:

http://www.opera.com/press/releases/2007/12/06/

Also, Opera Mini for Blackberry is a native client and not Java.

Quote:
Opera Mobile is the C based version:-

No, Opera Mobile is the full browser written in C++. Opera Mini started out as a Java client, but was ported as a native application (C or C++) to Brew, and then to BlackBerry.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 64
2/17/10 at 8:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by knightlie View Post

Can it log into Google Mail? Desktop Opera still can't, and that type of basic incompatibility (blamed on Google by Opera zealots) is the only reason I don't use it.

False
American centrism dominates 50% of the population here. That half don't think outside the box ... or perhaps just don't think. © digitalclips
Reply
American centrism dominates 50% of the population here. That half don't think outside the box ... or perhaps just don't think. © digitalclips
Reply
post #57 of 64
2/17/10 at 8:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by irnchriz View Post

In this day and age does anyone (apart from those with crappy feature phones and no other choice) use Opera on a mobile handset? Apple, Nokia, Google, Samsung and others are now building their browsers around webkit.

Looks like this is one last gasp for Opera in the mobile browser market.

Opera has almost 30% market share in the mobile browser market, and is the most widely used mobile phone browser. Opera Mini just passed 50 million active users. And that is just counting people who downloaded it dierctly from Opera, and not preinstalled versions. It's preinstalled on lots of Nokia phones, for example.

Quote:
Originally Posted by knightlie View Post

Can it log into Google Mail? Desktop Opera still can't, and that type of basic incompatibility (blamed on Google by Opera zealots) is the only reason I don't use it.

I just tried, and Opera on the desktop can log in just fine. Google was blocking Opera at some point a few years ago, and the "Opera zealots" were right: It's Google fault when Google is doing the blocking. It would work just fine if you spoofed as another browser.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I don't think we can take it as fact that a phone call reported on a rumor site -- a report based entirely on speculation and wishful interpretation -- actually occurred. I doubt very much that there was such a phone call, or that there will be. And according to the article we are all responding to, Opera have denied any such contact.

Actually, this was reported by a Norwegian site which quoted Opera's CTO. And no, Opera has not denied contact. They are denying that they have worked with Apple so far:

Quote:
"We haven't worked with Apple on it yet," Bhuta said. "We haven't submitted it to the App Store."

This doesn't mean that Apple didn't call them.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 64
2/17/10 at 9:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by insike View Post

Actually, this was reported by a Norwegian site which quoted Opera's CTO.

Yes, I read the site this was reported on and, unless google translate is completely useless, at no time did the Opera CTO say that Apple had actually called them, He made vague comments about, "we're in," which could mean anything, or nothing at all.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 64
2/17/10 at 9:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Yes, I read the site this was reported on and, unless google translate is completely useless, at no time did the Opera CTO say that Apple had actually called them, He made vague comments about, "we're in," which could mean anything, or nothing at all.

No, he was quoted as saying that Apple actually contacted them. Ask any Norwegian to translate it for you. One of the Opera guys actually translated it in his blog and confirmed that that was what the article said.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 64
2/17/10 at 10:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by insike View Post

No, he was quoted as saying that Apple actually contacted them. Ask any Norwegian to translate it for you. One of the Opera guys actually translated it in his blog and confirmed that that was what the article said.

Well, maybe google translate is useless. (Or maybe I read a different Norwegian blog.) I remain skeptical, however, that we'll see Opera in the App Store.
Reply
Reply
post #61 of 64
2/17/10 at 10:44am
http://www.digi.no/835579/apple-ringte-oss

Quote:
- Apple phoned us

Quote:
Digi.no can now reveal that Apple even contacted the site after last week's news.

- Our understanding is that they noticed a tremendous attention to this. They understand that this is a potentially difficult case for them. Apple said that if the site is approved, so they look forward to a partnership, "says communications director Tor Odland.

Such a telephone bode well for those who want an alternative to the built-in browser in the iPhone. Why look forward to a partnership if they were not prepared to approve the site?
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 64
2/17/10 at 2:01pm
So what's this then?

Quote:
Note to BlackBerry users: If your handheld is running BlackBerry System Software previous to 4.0, you should use the Basic version of Opera Mini as these devices do not support the MIDP 2 standard for Java apps.

http://www.opera.com/mini/download/blackberry/7100v/


Quote:
Originally Posted by insike View Post

And native:


http://www.opera.com/press/releases/2007/12/06/

Also, Opera Mini for Blackberry is a native client and not Java.


No, Opera Mobile is the full browser written in C++. Opera Mini started out as a Java client, but was ported as a native application (C or C++) to Brew, and then to BlackBerry.

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #63 of 64
2/17/10 at 2:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post

Thing is though, don't Apple have something like 20% of the smartphone market? Now, I know that's nothing like the dominance of Microsoft and Windows, but is there a point whereby their share of the market would make this a problem?

RIM has the monopoly in the smartphone market, not Apple.

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply
post #64 of 64
2/17/10 at 11:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

So what's this then?

That's Opera Mini 4. Opera Mini 5 is the native one for Blackberry.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Opera teases speedy iPhone browser but denies pact with Apple