Opera, Microsoft, and the Mobile Browser Market

DrEspenA writes "Salon has an interesting article on the competition for the mobile phone browser market. Ostensibly the article is about Microsoft's efforts to dominate the market, but the key protagonist is really Opera Software, which may be gaining the (initial) upper hand simply because they are not Microsoft. Good discussion of whether standards and familiarity really is necessary in the mobile browser market."

Comments

Re:Open Source?

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Got Lynx?

What about Links?

Small screen rendering

[Mr_Silver]

In Opera, engineers have solved the scrolling problem with something they call "small-screen rendering," in which HTML code is "massaged," von Tetzchner says, "so that it can fit on the screen." The results are intriguing; by examining the structure of the page, the browser produces a small-screen version that includes all the important content but requires only vertical scrolling.

Am I the only one that thought that this wasn't particulary unque? Hell, Lynx has been doing it with text for ages and AvantGo (with "display tables" turned off) does exactly the same thing.

Whilst the Opera guy may think that the browser war is hotting up (he's wrong, MS have won, everything else is relegated to the niche position and always will be - there are far too many Joe Blow users out there), they are definately onto a winner in the mobile arena.

Oh finally, for those that don't know, Sendo are not a well known manufacturer of mobile phones here in the UK. The reason being is that they don't sell under their own brand. Their business model is to create cheap network operator branded phones and for that, they do pretty well.

Re:Small screen rendering

[trezor]

• Am I the only one that thought that this wasn't particulary unque? Hell, Lynx has been doing it with text for ages and AvantGo (with "display tables" turned off) does exactly the same thing.

This is different. While Lynx just plainly ignores html-table-tags and replaces them with linebreaks, this Opera thingy is actually doing reformatting of the page, after a full analysis of the layout.

Even though I don't know how well this works, it seems like a extremely clever algoritm, and shouldn't be underestimated as simple table-dropping, which is actually a lack of standard features.

From the opera-quote:

• "massaged," von Tetzchner says, "so that it can fit on the screen."

This implies more than mere table-dropping to me at least, and especially if you read the press release (no I will nothunt it down for you).

Now! In selected European countries

[CaptainZapp]

Don't be suprised if you find a Microsoft branded mobile phone released sometime in the next couple of years.

Too late. It's on the market since about a week in selected European countries.

The phone is manufactured for Microsoft and sold exclusively through a deal with Orange.

If it is a success, now that's a whole different question. I guess people prefer not having to reboot their phones.

Re:nice

[rseuhs]

Microsoft failed in the embedded market (except on PDAs where they are doing OK) because:

• WinCE is too expensive. In lower numbers (like several hundred per year), you pay about 100$ per unit (at least that's what I have been told). I have no idea how much you pay for mass-produced devices, probably a lot less. Still you want to standardize on an OS, so you will choose one that can be profitable on both mass-produced devices and niche devices. You won't choose WinCE. Also you usually have only a very vague idea how many units you will sell of a particular device. When your device becomes a smash-hit, you may be easily be paying the WinCE license fees, but if the numbers stay slow, WinCE can turn the numbers into the red, espcecially if you have to lower the price of the device.
• WinCE is only suitable for PDAs and not really that useful anywhere else. WinCE comes with an good graphics library, but most embedded devices don't need it. With non-graphic applications, WinCE just slows you down.
• Nobody trusts Microsoft that prices and contracts will stay stable.
• You don't get the source code. (Yes, the end-user doesn't care, but the embedded developer does.)
• WinCE doesn't offer anything valuable. Yes, I'll get flamed for saying that, but face it: The only thing Windows does better than other operating systems is running Win32 or WinCE-PDA applications. If you don't need that, why use Windows?
• Embedded developers are not used to be dependent on the OS. General purpose operating systems became popular only recently on embedded systems. Most embedded systems were developed with no or a specially designed OS inhouse. Moving from the inhouse-OS (with source-code available and no license fees) to WinCE could very well be considered a step backward. The same person might be happily paing for Windows on his PC but would not dream of switching to a non-free (as in having the source and as in beer) OS.

Yes, I do work in embedded systems. Microsoft has already lost that market. On PDAs, they are still holding out pretty well, but in the long term I see them losing that, too.