I am, as I predicted, shocked that they approved this, for the security concerns alone, but also because the approval is in direct contradiction of the direction they've gone in the SDK licensing (i.e., Opera Mini undermines the iPhone web app platform). I think Apple should force them to include a Black Box warning in their app description that this browser should not be used for secure transactions, because it doesn't provide them.
Either Opera satisfied Apple's security requirements or Apple felt that their users were savvy enough to decide for themselves. I would agree that Apple should either require a warning in the app description and/or in the first run screen that comes up when you launch it initially.
I would interested in seeing some text that details what part of the SDK they are violating. Opera doesn't undermine the iPhone web app platform, it simply doesn't use it. It is still there waiting for us all in Safari and all the other webkit browsers. Not using it is not the same as undermining it. I guess it would be correct to say it undermines the requirement of using webkit for all iPhone browsers, if that was an actual requirement. If this is the case, Apple has made exceptions to their SDK rules in the past, and we might expect them to continue in the future.
I would interested in seeing some text that details what part of the SDK they are violating. Opera doesn't undermine the iPhone web app platform, it simply doesn't use it. It is still there waiting for us all in Safari and all the other webkit browsers. Not using it is not the same as undermining it. I guess it would be correct to say it undermines the requirement of using webkit for all iPhone browsers, if that was an actual requirement. If this is the case, Apple has made exceptions to their SDK rules in the past, and we might expect them to continue in the future.
It's not a technical violation of the license agreement, but it does go against Apple's goal of not having 3rd-party apps that make software available for the iPhone not work correctly, and I doubt very much if web apps will work correctly in Opera Mini.
Then again, looking at the screenshots, maybe they figure this will mostly just be a curiosity and no one will actually use it for much.
Umm...what's the big fuss? There are plenty of third party web browsers in the App Store. Go take a look. You can get iCab, for example, which is quite a nifty browser for MacOS. And there are a few lesser known ones that claim "Private" browsing, etc.
Really, approving Opera is a non-story. Maybe if they approved IE, I could see it being a big deal, but there's nothing new here.
Of course, it does raise the question of why the browsers that have been rejected were so.
Umm...what's the big fuss? There are plenty of third party web browsers in the App Store. Go take a look. You can get iCab, for example, which is quite a nifty browser for MacOS. And there are a few lesser known ones that claim "Private" browsing, etc.
Really, approving Opera is a non-story. Maybe if they approved IE, I could see it being a big deal, but there's nothing new here.
Of course, it does raise the question of why the browsers that have been rejected were so.
Not true, Opera is the first with its own rendering engine, they should have included that in the article. All existing ones use Safari in the underbelly of the app.
Not true, Opera is the first with its own rendering engine, they should have included that in the article. All existing ones use Safari in the underbelly of the app.
Actually, while the other browsers in the App Store use WebKit, Opera doesn't actually include a rendering engine at all. The rendering is done server-side. This is how they achieve their speed over Edge. You aren't actually downloading all the individual elements on a page over edge. You are downloading a compressed, rendered "image" of the site.
It goes something like this.
User types in URL and submits it. Opera's servers access the web page, parse it, and render what equates to an image with links associated with it. Then that image is sent to the device. Granted, this all takes place rather quickly.
That server-side interpreter is why Opera was approved. The SDK terms prohibit an application from having an interpreter as part of the application and since they aren't including an interpreter in the actual application, there was no reason for Apple to not approve it. I knew barring other complications and SDK violations that could have come up. that it would get approved.
Everyone is complaining about the lack of pinch-to-zoom. That's fine and all, since you're used to that on Safari. But I have to wonder if leaving this out was a term of agreement for Opera to be approved in the App Store...
Everyone is complaining about the lack of pinch-to-zoom. That's fine and all, since you're used to that on Safari. But I have to wonder if leaving this out was a term of agreement for Opera to be approved in the App Store...
probably, after all, that ipad app that used photobucket er whatever just recently got denied for using pinch to zoom.
I am, as I predicted, shocked that they approved this, for the security concerns alone
There are no security concerns. Opera doesn't spy on its users. I mean, it has been around for more than a decade and has a great privacy track record.
Quote:
the approval is in direct contradiction of the direction they've gone in the SDK licensing (i.e., Opera Mini undermines the iPhone web app platform)
Obviously not. But then again, I guess you know better than Apple?
Quote:
I think Apple should force them to include a Black Box warning in their app description that this browser should not be used for secure transactions, because it doesn't provide them.
Everyone is complaining about the lack of pinch-to-zoom. That's fine and all, since you're used to that on Safari. But I have to wonder if leaving this out was a term of agreement for Opera to be approved in the App Store...
No, it's just that pinch zoom is pointless with only two zoom levels. Stop pinching, and tap the screen where you want to zoom instead. Faster and less frustrating.
Looks like the iPhone is now the number one platform for Opera Mini installs in the US and Canada and number three globally (alternative link for those taking part in the embargo).
I wonder how many people are using it with any frequency. I've tended to fire it up only when I am away from wifi, and not even every time in those cases. Just too comfortable with Safari. But, it's popularity does perhaps reflect that maybe, just maybe, the haters are not as representative of the Apple community as they think they are.
Apparently a lot of people are using it frequently... The iPhone is a mainstream device, and most people don't care much about things that Apple fans might think are important.
If I wanted someone to spy on my browsing habits, I already have Google. Why do I need Opera "lite" to track every web interaction through their servers? I can't see why anyone would bother with this app except the most network constrained (like Tulkas's example above) and maybe all 8 Opera browser users.
This was just a publicity stunt on the part of the Opera team, and Apple did the right thing allowing this into the App Store as that made this non-event lose all it's steam.
Although I still think this app ought to pop up a message everytime you start it reminding users that this is a big brother app of the worst kind.
Anyone who pays for their data or is on a slow connection will benefit from the compression. That's why "anyone would bother". Nearly 3 million active users apparently "bothered".
It's quite amusing to see Apple fans denigrate Opera because of its allegedly low user base. Are you also denigrating Apple for their failure in the desktop market?
That said, Opera has more than 130 million active users worldwide. That's slightly more than 8. But whatever.
Anyone who pays for their data or is on a slow connection will benefit from the compression. That's why "anyone would bother". Nearly 3 million active users apparently "bothered".
It's quite amusing to see Apple fans denigrate Opera because of its allegedly low user base. Are you also denigrating Apple for their failure in the desktop market?
That said, Opera has more than 130 million active users worldwide. That's slightly more than 8. But whatever.
Paranoia rocks, dude!
Maybe you should buy a vowel.
All traffic through the Opera Mini iPhone app (and any other version of Opera Mini) goes through Opera's servers. Unencrypted, no less. 100% of the traffic, including IDs and passwords. That's just how the application works. Next time do some research before you go all Opera fanboy on us...
Actually, the communication between the Mini client and sever is encrypted, so it's actually safer than other browsers on open wifi networks.
Furthermore, just because the data goes through their servers doesn't mean that they are tracking browsing habits. In fact, their business model relies on trust, and they have been around for a long time with an excellent privacy track record.
Comments
I am, as I predicted, shocked that they approved this, for the security concerns alone, but also because the approval is in direct contradiction of the direction they've gone in the SDK licensing (i.e., Opera Mini undermines the iPhone web app platform). I think Apple should force them to include a Black Box warning in their app description that this browser should not be used for secure transactions, because it doesn't provide them.
Either Opera satisfied Apple's security requirements or Apple felt that their users were savvy enough to decide for themselves. I would agree that Apple should either require a warning in the app description and/or in the first run screen that comes up when you launch it initially.
I would interested in seeing some text that details what part of the SDK they are violating. Opera doesn't undermine the iPhone web app platform, it simply doesn't use it. It is still there waiting for us all in Safari and all the other webkit browsers. Not using it is not the same as undermining it. I guess it would be correct to say it undermines the requirement of using webkit for all iPhone browsers, if that was an actual requirement. If this is the case, Apple has made exceptions to their SDK rules in the past, and we might expect them to continue in the future.
I would interested in seeing some text that details what part of the SDK they are violating. Opera doesn't undermine the iPhone web app platform, it simply doesn't use it. It is still there waiting for us all in Safari and all the other webkit browsers. Not using it is not the same as undermining it. I guess it would be correct to say it undermines the requirement of using webkit for all iPhone browsers, if that was an actual requirement. If this is the case, Apple has made exceptions to their SDK rules in the past, and we might expect them to continue in the future.
It's not a technical violation of the license agreement, but it does go against Apple's goal of not having 3rd-party apps that make software available for the iPhone not work correctly, and I doubt very much if web apps will work correctly in Opera Mini.
Then again, looking at the screenshots, maybe they figure this will mostly just be a curiosity and no one will actually use it for much.
Really, approving Opera is a non-story. Maybe if they approved IE, I could see it being a big deal, but there's nothing new here.
Of course, it does raise the question of why the browsers that have been rejected were so.
Umm...what's the big fuss? There are plenty of third party web browsers in the App Store. Go take a look. You can get iCab, for example, which is quite a nifty browser for MacOS. And there are a few lesser known ones that claim "Private" browsing, etc.
Really, approving Opera is a non-story. Maybe if they approved IE, I could see it being a big deal, but there's nothing new here.
Of course, it does raise the question of why the browsers that have been rejected were so.
Not true, Opera is the first with its own rendering engine, they should have included that in the article. All existing ones use Safari in the underbelly of the app.
Not true, Opera is the first with its own rendering engine, they should have included that in the article. All existing ones use Safari in the underbelly of the app.
Actually, while the other browsers in the App Store use WebKit, Opera doesn't actually include a rendering engine at all. The rendering is done server-side. This is how they achieve their speed over Edge. You aren't actually downloading all the individual elements on a page over edge. You are downloading a compressed, rendered "image" of the site.
It goes something like this.
User types in URL and submits it. Opera's servers access the web page, parse it, and render what equates to an image with links associated with it. Then that image is sent to the device. Granted, this all takes place rather quickly.
That server-side interpreter is why Opera was approved. The SDK terms prohibit an application from having an interpreter as part of the application and since they aren't including an interpreter in the actual application, there was no reason for Apple to not approve it. I knew barring other complications and SDK violations that could have come up. that it would get approved.
Everyone is complaining about the lack of pinch-to-zoom. That's fine and all, since you're used to that on Safari. But I have to wonder if leaving this out was a term of agreement for Opera to be approved in the App Store...
probably, after all, that ipad app that used photobucket er whatever just recently got denied for using pinch to zoom.
This mini is bad.
No, it just serves a different purpose than browsers like Safari and Opera Mobile.
I am, as I predicted, shocked that they approved this, for the security concerns alone
There are no security concerns. Opera doesn't spy on its users. I mean, it has been around for more than a decade and has a great privacy track record.
the approval is in direct contradiction of the direction they've gone in the SDK licensing (i.e., Opera Mini undermines the iPhone web app platform)
Obviously not. But then again, I guess you know better than Apple?
I think Apple should force them to include a Black Box warning in their app description that this browser should not be used for secure transactions, because it doesn't provide them.
Yes it does.
Everyone is complaining about the lack of pinch-to-zoom. That's fine and all, since you're used to that on Safari. But I have to wonder if leaving this out was a term of agreement for Opera to be approved in the App Store...
No, it's just that pinch zoom is pointless with only two zoom levels. Stop pinching, and tap the screen where you want to zoom instead. Faster and less frustrating.
I wonder how many people are using it with any frequency. I've tended to fire it up only when I am away from wifi, and not even every time in those cases. Just too comfortable with Safari. But, it's popularity does perhaps reflect that maybe, just maybe, the haters are not as representative of the Apple community as they think they are.
This was just a publicity stunt on the part of the Opera team, and Apple did the right thing allowing this into the App Store as that made this non-event lose all it's steam.
Although I still think this app ought to pop up a message everytime you start it reminding users that this is a big brother app of the worst kind.
Anyone who pays for their data or is on a slow connection will benefit from the compression. That's why "anyone would bother". Nearly 3 million active users apparently "bothered".
It's quite amusing to see Apple fans denigrate Opera because of its allegedly low user base. Are you also denigrating Apple for their failure in the desktop market?
That said, Opera has more than 130 million active users worldwide. That's slightly more than 8. But whatever.
Paranoia rocks, dude!
Opera isn't tracking our browsing habits.
Anyone who pays for their data or is on a slow connection will benefit from the compression. That's why "anyone would bother". Nearly 3 million active users apparently "bothered".
It's quite amusing to see Apple fans denigrate Opera because of its allegedly low user base. Are you also denigrating Apple for their failure in the desktop market?
That said, Opera has more than 130 million active users worldwide. That's slightly more than 8. But whatever.
Paranoia rocks, dude!
Maybe you should buy a vowel.
All traffic through the Opera Mini iPhone app (and any other version of Opera Mini) goes through Opera's servers. Unencrypted, no less. 100% of the traffic, including IDs and passwords. That's just how the application works. Next time do some research before you go all Opera fanboy on us...
Furthermore, just because the data goes through their servers doesn't mean that they are tracking browsing habits. In fact, their business model relies on trust, and they have been around for a long time with an excellent privacy track record.