Ya know, I've got to admit that I'm stunned by the negative press and attitude about this new Opera browser. I see there are some fleeting positive reviews, yet so far they seem in the minority.
Well, I downloaded it from the Application Store and gave it a whirl on a first-gen iPod Touch (32GB) just to see what I thought.
Yes, it could stand some refinement. However, the speed of it alone is phenomenal. Owners of new iTouch devices might not care so much about this with their faster processors and more RAM, but I thought the improvement on the hardware I have was striking to say the least. I'm going to keep the Opera browser and just watch how it goes.
I have nothing against Mobile Safari. Although I don't really care for its desktop counterpart, the mobile version is very good at what it does. By comparison, Opera's offering is a strong start and it will get better--if negative commentary and journalism don't do it in first.
One of the points is right there--Opera's feature set and speed are unlikely to be ignored by Apple. I'm sure Apple will implement some of the features that show up in the Opera browser.
On a brighter note, I got to see an iPad for the first time at an independent Apple retailer. I really wasn't planning to buy one--nor have I--but after holding it and using it, it's really very slick. I doubt that I will buy one just yet...rather, I will just watch and see what a previous model can be had for when a new one comes out. (I would have to say that I'd prefer not having a camera in place.)
I did notice that Apple had tagged the display models with a "not for resale" engraving on the back. I wonder if that means the demonstrator iPads have secrets?
I did notice that Apple had tagged the display models with a "not for resale" engraving on the back. I wonder if that means the demonstrator iPads have secrets?
They do contain a bunch of App Store apps, usually full paid versions. I think the engraving is simply to discourage stealing.
I haven't tried opera since trying it on a Mac and I didn't care for how it rendered the font... But I have had some gripes with mobile Safari especially when Steve Jobs mentioned about not just making a bigger app on the iPad but rethink the whole app....why didn't Apple do that with Safari on the iPad? Yeah, it's works for the iPhone but I want tabs on the iPad.
Anyway, after someone mentioned about using Atomic Browser on here, I am in love.... It is fast, it blocks ads, I have tabs not background tabs as in Safari and that annoying refresh page is gone. You all should try it....
By passing the Acid3 test completely it means Safari - at least desktop Safari - 100% supports HTML5 and so is the best browser for pushing support of the new standard. Desktop Opera is very close behind. FireFox is some way behind and Internet Explorer... well the less said about that the better.
IE is the elephant in the room. IE8 is a vast improvement over previous versions but has still got a long way to go. IE6 which far to many people still use is not only bad but has enough holes it is flat out dangerous. IE9 is starting to embrace html5 but still only manages 55/100. Until IE can be fully brought into the html5 party many websites are going to be reluctant to full embrace the new standard.
There is also the fun of video codecs. The actual choice of codec is not part of the standard. Safari and Chrome use h264. FireFox - despite supporting the html5 video tag - does not.
There is also the fun of video codecs. The actual choice of codec is not part of the standard. Safari and Chrome use h264. FireFox - despite supporting the html5 video tag - does not.
Chrome also supports Ogg A/V while Google is clearly throwing its weight behind H.264 for their video, for obvious reasons. IE9 looks to be supporting H.264 at this point. Opera has also not chosen to support H.264, but with Apple, Intel, ARM, MS, Adobe and Google all in the H.264 camp from HW acceleration to apps and it clearly being better than Ogg Theora, Firefox's holdout looks silly, their only savign grace may be Google's VP8, but who knows if or when they will ever be a contender to H.264.
I don't get why there is so much hate for Opera. Complaints about the app is one thing, but a lot of people just seem to outright hate the app (like the app insulted their mother and punched their father). It isn't the best experience and there are issues, but that's what updates are for. For the initial release on the iPhone, it is decent. It isn't like any of us paid for it. So I'm not getting the hate (other than, you know, this is the internet and people like to hate things, lol).
I don't get why there is so much hate for Opera. Complaints about the app is one thing, but a lot of people just seem to outright hate the app (like the app insulted their mother and punched their father). It isn't the best experience and there are issues, but that's what updates are for. For the initial release on the iPhone, it is decent. It isn't like any of us paid for it. So I'm not getting the hate (other than, you know, this is the internet and people like to hate things, lol).
because its not an apple product therefore people hate it. speed is everything with a mobile browser, and this is the one thing opera does well.
because its not an apple product therefore people hate it. speed is everything with a mobile browser, and this is the one thing opera does well.
Speed is important only after rendering has been taken care.
An extreme example are WAP browsers for mobiles, text-based browser for desktops, or even turning off images or JS in your browser of choice. Any one of those will render faster, but that speed is pointless if the result makes it a pointless choice.
Safari's popularity on the iPhone is because it rendered well, used intelligent zooming and still resolved text well when zoomed. It set the bar.
Personally, I had intended to use it when on EDGE, GPRS, or a very slow WiFI connection (when there is no carrier signal). I doubt I'd even use it then unless they don't improve the app considerably.
For those that believe having a "choice" should trump functionality. I had a strong feeling that the Opera browser would be utter garbage, I'm sure there will be those vocal supporters that will spin this into something else.
The supporters want to apply the PC-paradigm to the iPhone platform and turn it into the ADHD mess that the PC platform is. So much choice that nothing works well.
If you want to design a great iPhone web-platform, stick with Safari. Eventually the other players will figure that out and either get their apps properly standardized or get out of the field.
I'm not sure what you are talking about here - I've been using Firefox, IE and Chrome on my PC and all work well. I've even tried Safari for a while on my PC and it was doing just fine.
Idea that choice is, by default, creating problem, is a bit off the target, I believe.
That being said, I also haven't seen much of a point of having Opera on my iPhone. It is same-old with some ugly rendering issues... but I'll keep it on my iPhone until I have a chance to test it in some 2G-bad signal situation. I did noticed a few times simple pages taking forever to open on Safari (sometimes going that slow that I gave up), so I'm guessing sooner or later I'll have same situation and Opera might prove to be useful.
In the mean time, it is one more app in my iPhone. I'm not short of free space and this program really doesn't create any inconveniences by being there. Once iPhone OS 4 is available, it will end up in some MISC APPS folder and that's about it.
because its not an apple product therefore people hate it. speed is everything with a mobile browser, and this is the one thing opera does well.
That is not the reason at all and anyone who thinks that is a troll.
Speed is only one aspect of Internet Browsing and according to one app it's almost a 50/50 split in favour of both Opera and Safari in terms of speed.
I prefer Safari because I don't like a lot of apps that do the same thing taking up space on my phone or Mac and because I extensively use Safari on my Mac (well WebKit nightlies to be honest) I just like using Safari on my iPhone because all my bookmarks are ported over.
Opera is nice just like it's desktop version but there are things that really bug me about it so I won't be using it either desktop or iPhone.
Ya know, I've got to admit that I'm stunned by the negative press and attitude about this new Opera browser. I see there are some fleeting positive reviews, yet so far they seem in the minority.
Well, I downloaded it from the Application Store and gave it a whirl on a first-gen iPod Touch (32GB) just to see what I thought.
Yes, it could stand some refinement. However, the speed of it alone is phenomenal. Owners of new iTouch devices might not care so much about this with their faster processors and more RAM, but I thought the improvement on the hardware I have was striking to say the least. I'm going to keep the Opera browser and just watch how it goes.
I have nothing against Mobile Safari. Although I don't really care for its desktop counterpart, the mobile version is very good at what it does. By comparison, Opera's offering is a strong start and it will get better--if negative commentary and journalism don't do it in first.
One of the points is right there--Opera's feature set and speed are unlikely to be ignored by Apple. I'm sure Apple will implement some of the features that show up in the Opera browser.
On a brighter note, I got to see an iPad for the first time at an independent Apple retailer. I really wasn't planning to buy one--nor have I--but after holding it and using it, it's really very slick. I doubt that I will buy one just yet...rather, I will just watch and see what a previous model can be had for when a new one comes out. (I would have to say that I'd prefer not having a camera in place.)
I did notice that Apple had tagged the display models with a "not for resale" engraving on the back. I wonder if that means the demonstrator iPads have secrets?
I think some people here have paranoid fear something else will prove to be better (and/or be more popular) than Apple product. I know it sounds weird, but that's how it looks to me
This is one bad App that deserves the heat. It's worth pointing out how arrogant the concept is of building a better web browser than Safari, on the iPhone platform, using the tools Apple gives you to build with. Its not going to happen, because its simply not possible without A) copying Safari implicitly, extensive testing on the hardware, which will never outpace Apple's own development on their web browser.
The concept of building a "companion" browser and not a "replacement", is even more of a joke, because this is a mobile platform. We don't need more than one browser. Mobile browsers, even the best, do one thing....Browse. There are no download windows or extensions to install/manage. There is no handling of these features, better in one browser than the other.
All you get is browsing, so it had better be fast, and it had better be accurate, and it had BETTER not suck...
Apple has the fastest, and most popular mobile web browser in the world. Get used to this fact.
This is one bad App that deserves the heat. It's worth pointing out how arrogant the concept is of building a better web browser than Safari, on the iPhone platform, using the tools Apple gives you to build with. Its not going to happen, because its simply not possible without A) copying Safari implicitly, extensive testing on the hardware, which will never outpace Apple's own development on their web browser.
I think it should be pointed out that it's very possible to build a better browser than mobileSafari on the iPhone/Touch or iPad. You have to use WebKit as the engine, but the browser itself can be anything you wish. I'd think that with Opera's long history of innovating great browser concepts that eventually become standard that they would have done better to build their idea of a quality iPhone OS browser using WebKit for the engine. If they made it that much better than the other option available, I'd pay money for it. I won't pay money for the browser they just released.
I think some people here have paranoid fear something else will prove to be better (and/or be more popular) than Apple product. I know it sounds weird, but that's how it looks to me
huh. have you tried opera on the iphone? i just tried it and i don't think it's a keeper... \
That's really the lamest defense of crappy software I've ever read, and it's been given twice. Well, most users won't even bother to take a look at v2, so I guess they were too clever for their own good.
Maybe it would be a lame defense if we were talking about a random company releasing crappy software. However, Opera have a track record of producing innovative and quality software - both for desktop and mobile devices.
If people won't bother looking at v2 then that will be their own loss.
Have you used Opera on the iPhone? its freaking terrible.
Well that all depends. If I want to look at some timetables or how a shop is open or their telephone number and im on some GPRS slowassconnection. Which will i use? Safari will take 5 minutes to load the two pages I need. Opera does it in 15 secs... And the formating, well, couldnt care less if i just want to click a link on a page to get to the information i need...
So I will use both.... Opera has some neat ideas that safari also should have... thats my 2 cents anyway.
I think Safari definately shouldnt
-reload a page everytime i go back to an open tab. THAT IS THE WORST feature of the mobile version. On GPRS networks this is very frustrating.
It sould have:
-quicklinkpage for important pages like opera/safari os x 4.0 has
I think it should be pointed out that it's very possible to build a better browser than mobileSafari on the iPhone/Touch or iPad. You have to use WebKit as the engine, but the browser itself can be anything you wish. I'd think that with Opera's long history of innovating great browser concepts that eventually become standard that they would have done better to build their idea of a quality iPhone OS browser using WebKit for the engine. If they made it that much better than the other option available, I'd pay money for it. I won't pay money for the browser they just released.
That's just it. WebKit. Why wouldn't someone want to use WebKit??
Comments
What's the point of this browser? Really.
Ya know, I've got to admit that I'm stunned by the negative press and attitude about this new Opera browser. I see there are some fleeting positive reviews, yet so far they seem in the minority.
Well, I downloaded it from the Application Store and gave it a whirl on a first-gen iPod Touch (32GB) just to see what I thought.
Yes, it could stand some refinement. However, the speed of it alone is phenomenal. Owners of new iTouch devices might not care so much about this with their faster processors and more RAM, but I thought the improvement on the hardware I have was striking to say the least. I'm going to keep the Opera browser and just watch how it goes.
I have nothing against Mobile Safari. Although I don't really care for its desktop counterpart, the mobile version is very good at what it does. By comparison, Opera's offering is a strong start and it will get better--if negative commentary and journalism don't do it in first.
One of the points is right there--Opera's feature set and speed are unlikely to be ignored by Apple. I'm sure Apple will implement some of the features that show up in the Opera browser.
On a brighter note, I got to see an iPad for the first time at an independent Apple retailer. I really wasn't planning to buy one--nor have I--but after holding it and using it, it's really very slick. I doubt that I will buy one just yet...rather, I will just watch and see what a previous model can be had for when a new one comes out. (I would have to say that I'd prefer not having a camera in place.)
I did notice that Apple had tagged the display models with a "not for resale" engraving on the back. I wonder if that means the demonstrator iPads have secrets?
I did notice that Apple had tagged the display models with a "not for resale" engraving on the back. I wonder if that means the demonstrator iPads have secrets?
They do contain a bunch of App Store apps, usually full paid versions. I think the engraving is simply to discourage stealing.
Anyway, after someone mentioned about using Atomic Browser on here, I am in love.... It is fast, it blocks ads, I have tabs not background tabs as in Safari and that annoying refresh page is gone. You all should try it....
(sent from my iPad)
By passing the Acid3 test completely it means Safari - at least desktop Safari - 100% supports HTML5 and so is the best browser for pushing support of the new standard. Desktop Opera is very close behind. FireFox is some way behind and Internet Explorer... well the less said about that the better.
IE is the elephant in the room. IE8 is a vast improvement over previous versions but has still got a long way to go. IE6 which far to many people still use is not only bad but has enough holes it is flat out dangerous. IE9 is starting to embrace html5 but still only manages 55/100. Until IE can be fully brought into the html5 party many websites are going to be reluctant to full embrace the new standard.
There is also the fun of video codecs. The actual choice of codec is not part of the standard. Safari and Chrome use h264. FireFox - despite supporting the html5 video tag - does not.
There is also the fun of video codecs. The actual choice of codec is not part of the standard. Safari and Chrome use h264. FireFox - despite supporting the html5 video tag - does not.
Chrome also supports Ogg A/V while Google is clearly throwing its weight behind H.264 for their video, for obvious reasons. IE9 looks to be supporting H.264 at this point. Opera has also not chosen to support H.264, but with Apple, Intel, ARM, MS, Adobe and Google all in the H.264 camp from HW acceleration to apps and it clearly being better than Ogg Theora, Firefox's holdout looks silly, their only savign grace may be Google's VP8, but who knows if or when they will ever be a contender to H.264.
Single worst most successful app to date.
I don't get why there is so much hate for Opera. Complaints about the app is one thing, but a lot of people just seem to outright hate the app (like the app insulted their mother and punched their father). It isn't the best experience and there are issues, but that's what updates are for. For the initial release on the iPhone, it is decent. It isn't like any of us paid for it. So I'm not getting the hate (other than, you know, this is the internet and people like to hate things, lol).
because its not an apple product therefore people hate it. speed is everything with a mobile browser, and this is the one thing opera does well.
because its not an apple product therefore people hate it. speed is everything with a mobile browser, and this is the one thing opera does well.
Speed is important only after rendering has been taken care.
An extreme example are WAP browsers for mobiles, text-based browser for desktops, or even turning off images or JS in your browser of choice. Any one of those will render faster, but that speed is pointless if the result makes it a pointless choice.
Safari's popularity on the iPhone is because it rendered well, used intelligent zooming and still resolved text well when zoomed. It set the bar.
Personally, I had intended to use it when on EDGE, GPRS, or a very slow WiFI connection (when there is no carrier signal). I doubt I'd even use it then unless they don't improve the app considerably.
For those that believe having a "choice" should trump functionality. I had a strong feeling that the Opera browser would be utter garbage, I'm sure there will be those vocal supporters that will spin this into something else.
The supporters want to apply the PC-paradigm to the iPhone platform and turn it into the ADHD mess that the PC platform is. So much choice that nothing works well.
If you want to design a great iPhone web-platform, stick with Safari. Eventually the other players will figure that out and either get their apps properly standardized or get out of the field.
I'm not sure what you are talking about here - I've been using Firefox, IE and Chrome on my PC and all work well. I've even tried Safari for a while on my PC and it was doing just fine.
Idea that choice is, by default, creating problem, is a bit off the target, I believe.
That being said, I also haven't seen much of a point of having Opera on my iPhone. It is same-old with some ugly rendering issues... but I'll keep it on my iPhone until I have a chance to test it in some 2G-bad signal situation. I did noticed a few times simple pages taking forever to open on Safari (sometimes going that slow that I gave up), so I'm guessing sooner or later I'll have same situation and Opera might prove to be useful.
In the mean time, it is one more app in my iPhone. I'm not short of free space and this program really doesn't create any inconveniences by being there. Once iPhone OS 4 is available, it will end up in some MISC APPS folder and that's about it.
because its not an apple product therefore people hate it. speed is everything with a mobile browser, and this is the one thing opera does well.
That is not the reason at all and anyone who thinks that is a troll.
Speed is only one aspect of Internet Browsing and according to one app it's almost a 50/50 split in favour of both Opera and Safari in terms of speed.
I prefer Safari because I don't like a lot of apps that do the same thing taking up space on my phone or Mac and because I extensively use Safari on my Mac (well WebKit nightlies to be honest) I just like using Safari on my iPhone because all my bookmarks are ported over.
Opera is nice just like it's desktop version but there are things that really bug me about it so I won't be using it either desktop or iPhone.
Ya know, I've got to admit that I'm stunned by the negative press and attitude about this new Opera browser. I see there are some fleeting positive reviews, yet so far they seem in the minority.
Well, I downloaded it from the Application Store and gave it a whirl on a first-gen iPod Touch (32GB) just to see what I thought.
Yes, it could stand some refinement. However, the speed of it alone is phenomenal. Owners of new iTouch devices might not care so much about this with their faster processors and more RAM, but I thought the improvement on the hardware I have was striking to say the least. I'm going to keep the Opera browser and just watch how it goes.
I have nothing against Mobile Safari. Although I don't really care for its desktop counterpart, the mobile version is very good at what it does. By comparison, Opera's offering is a strong start and it will get better--if negative commentary and journalism don't do it in first.
One of the points is right there--Opera's feature set and speed are unlikely to be ignored by Apple. I'm sure Apple will implement some of the features that show up in the Opera browser.
On a brighter note, I got to see an iPad for the first time at an independent Apple retailer. I really wasn't planning to buy one--nor have I--but after holding it and using it, it's really very slick. I doubt that I will buy one just yet...rather, I will just watch and see what a previous model can be had for when a new one comes out. (I would have to say that I'd prefer not having a camera in place.)
I did notice that Apple had tagged the display models with a "not for resale" engraving on the back. I wonder if that means the demonstrator iPads have secrets?
I think some people here have paranoid fear something else will prove to be better (and/or be more popular) than Apple product. I know it sounds weird, but that's how it looks to me
The concept of building a "companion" browser and not a "replacement", is even more of a joke, because this is a mobile platform. We don't need more than one browser. Mobile browsers, even the best, do one thing....Browse. There are no download windows or extensions to install/manage. There is no handling of these features, better in one browser than the other.
All you get is browsing, so it had better be fast, and it had better be accurate, and it had BETTER not suck...
Apple has the fastest, and most popular mobile web browser in the world. Get used to this fact.
This is one bad App that deserves the heat. It's worth pointing out how arrogant the concept is of building a better web browser than Safari, on the iPhone platform, using the tools Apple gives you to build with. Its not going to happen, because its simply not possible without A) copying Safari implicitly,
I think it should be pointed out that it's very possible to build a better browser than mobileSafari on the iPhone/Touch or iPad. You have to use WebKit as the engine, but the browser itself can be anything you wish. I'd think that with Opera's long history of innovating great browser concepts that eventually become standard that they would have done better to build their idea of a quality iPhone OS browser using WebKit for the engine. If they made it that much better than the other option available, I'd pay money for it. I won't pay money for the browser they just released.
I think some people here have paranoid fear something else will prove to be better (and/or be more popular) than Apple product. I know it sounds weird, but that's how it looks to me
huh. have you tried opera on the iphone? i just tried it and i don't think it's a keeper...
That's really the lamest defense of crappy software I've ever read, and it's been given twice. Well, most users won't even bother to take a look at v2, so I guess they were too clever for their own good.
Maybe it would be a lame defense if we were talking about a random company releasing crappy software. However, Opera have a track record of producing innovative and quality software - both for desktop and mobile devices.
If people won't bother looking at v2 then that will be their own loss.
Have you used Opera on the iPhone? its freaking terrible.
Well that all depends. If I want to look at some timetables or how a shop is open or their telephone number and im on some GPRS slowassconnection. Which will i use? Safari will take 5 minutes to load the two pages I need. Opera does it in 15 secs... And the formating, well, couldnt care less if i just want to click a link on a page to get to the information i need...
So I will use both.... Opera has some neat ideas that safari also should have... thats my 2 cents anyway.
I think Safari definately shouldnt
-reload a page everytime i go back to an open tab. THAT IS THE WORST feature of the mobile version. On GPRS networks this is very frustrating.
It sould have:
-quicklinkpage for important pages like opera/safari os x 4.0 has
-better tab browsing.
I think it should be pointed out that it's very possible to build a better browser than mobileSafari on the iPhone/Touch or iPad. You have to use WebKit as the engine, but the browser itself can be anything you wish. I'd think that with Opera's long history of innovating great browser concepts that eventually become standard that they would have done better to build their idea of a quality iPhone OS browser using WebKit for the engine. If they made it that much better than the other option available, I'd pay money for it. I won't pay money for the browser they just released.
That's just it. WebKit. Why wouldn't someone want to use WebKit??
iCab Mobile is the best alternative I've used.