Originally Posted by anonymouse
It's really quite simple, despite the twisted mess of "reasoning" above. Apps that use WebKit for web access are fine, those that don't aren't. Apps that have been approved do, Opera doesn't.
Of course, there are, as has been pointed out, a number of other perfectly good reasons for Apple to reject Opera, some of which are along the same lines of why Google Voice was rightly rejected.
Yes, it is a twisted mess of reasoning. Irrational arguments tend to be.
So, now you have changed your argument to their choice of browser engine (when one argument fails, change arguments, I suppose...) Might be a good argument, but it doesn't relate to the SDK quote in question. If you could quote the SDK clause that specifically forbids the use of alternative engines, you might have a leg to stand on. Of course, I expect you won't be able to find such a clause.
The only argument relating to a violation of the SDK, might be, as you say, the same used for GV. Apple might claim it duplicates existing functionality. Of course, that would be strange, as it was in the GV case, since if it can be considered duplication then there are certainly other examples in the same categories which are also duplications and allowed. So, again you are right, banning Opera might make as little sense as banning the GV app.
In the end, it is silly and a waste of time to try to assume reasons for some apps being banned. Usually, those that need to argue that Apple is right, regardless of circumstance, end up being proven wrong or inconsistent when they try to use 'facts' to justify their arguments. They always
end up going to one and only one argument, that being "It is Apple's iPhone, SDK and AppStore and so they can do as they please". Not a very compelling argument as to the why, but they seem to confuse this with the how.