Slashdot Mirror


Opera 10.0 Released, With Integrated Web Server Functionality

sherl0k writes "Opera 10.0, dubbed Opera Unite, has been released. Built into the Web browser is a full-fledged Web server, complete with nifty little gadgets such as a 'fridge' that people can post notes onto, a chat room, a widget to stream your music library anywhere, and a built-in file-sharing mechanism. It also scores 100/100 on the Acid3 test." Readers fudreporter and TLS point to The Register's report on the new release and a 5-minute video demo, respectively. Update: 06/16 15:18 GMT by T: Roar Lauritzsen of Opera Software writes to point out that "release" isn't quite the right word here; though you can download it, version 10.0 is still in beta, and the version with Unite is a labs (experimental) release.

35 of 437 comments (clear)

  1. What? by Yvan256 · · Score: 5, Funny

    No kitchen sink?

    1. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      The sink will be available as an Opera Widget.

    2. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Anyone else seeing graphics appearing midcomment on about 1/4 of the comments?

    3. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm seeing them on almost all of the comments. It's incredibly annoying. (running kubuntu9.04 firefocks3.0.11)

    4. Re:What? by ipb · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've been seeing them for about a week or so.
      Firefox 3.0.11
      Konqueror 3.5.9

      Very annoying

    5. Re:What? by sopssa · · Score: 5, Informative

      On every aspect the title and summary is just so wrong.

      To begin with, Opera 10 has not been released. Its in Beta.
      Opera Unite is not Opera 10, its a feature in Opera 10.
      Opera Unite is not a webserver, its a system where functionality is provided by widgets and other users can access those aswell (kinda like Google Wave)
      Opera provided some widgets to begin with, like File Sharing, Web Server, Media Player, Photo Sharing, The Lounge (chat), Fridge (post-a-note wall)
      All of these can be separately enabled or disabled.
      Atleast in the Opera 10 Beta, Unite and all the widgets were disabled by default.
      It makes direct connections when possible, and if user is behind NAT Opera proxy servers will route it (afaik)

      Its a great thing for an user who doesn't care or know how to install webservers, dont want to upload their private photos to imageshack or the like or chat via servers. The thing here is that instead of using websites, you can connect to your friends directly. Widgets provide the functionality then (theres API developers can use to make them)

      Hopefully that clarifies some about that incredibly bad summary.

    6. Re:What? by sopssa · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'd say it is a BAD THING when someone who doesn't care or know how to install a web server winds up installing a web server just because it is part of his web browser. I'd say it is a massive hole through which bad guys can poke at someone's system without the victim knowing that he's installed it.

      Why is it a massive hole? You know, its not apache or anything complicated. It doesn't run php scripts. It serves files and only does that. Seeing how secure Opera has been compared to IE/FF I'd say they know how to secure it aswell.

      Personally, I don't want my VNC server also running an http demon to distribute widgets to anyone who comes by. I don't want my web browser doing the same thing.

      Nor it does, it has a good access police thats easily noticed by the user. Opera's site has some pics in the press section if you dont want to install it to see.

      As long as your friends are explicit in wanting you to be able to this, ok.

      As said, user access controls and the services/widgets DONT run on by default.

      If that were true, it's trivial to set up a real webserver to provide exactly what you want them to get, instead of it being a side-effect of browsing the morning's ration of pr0n.

      Internet is not just us nerds anymore. Actually, we're quite minority like in teh real world. Not anyone has interest to learn how to install and configure apache and hell, I would be more worried about someone using apache instead of opera's very basic webserver, if they get it working they most likely dont know what they're doing.

  2. Excellent! by shadow349 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm sure all seven Opera users will be thrilled.

    1. Re:Excellent! by sopssa · · Score: 3, Informative

      eh, how wrong is the summary. Opera 10 != Opera Unite. Its just a feature in it. Surprisingly, TechCrunch has a good summary http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/16/that-reinvention-of-the-web-thing-opera-was-talking-about-its-called-opera-unite/

    2. Re:Excellent! by sopssa · · Score: 4, Informative

      âoeCurrently, most of us contribute content to the Web (for example by putting our personal information on social networking sites, uploading photos to Flickr, or maybe publishing blog posts), but we donâ(TM)t contribute to its fabric â" the underlying infrastructure that defines the online landscape that we inhabit.

      Our computers are only dumb terminals connected to other computers (meaning servers) owned by other people â" such as large corporations â" who we depend upon to host our words, thoughts, and images. We depend on them to do it well and with our best interests at heart. We place our trust in these third parties, and we hope for the best, but as long as our own computers are not first class citizens on the Web, we are merely tenants, and hosting companies are the landlords of the Internet.â

      This is more of a way for people to communicate, share and do stuff together rather than using websites. You know, P2P. It has developer API so new stuff can be added, opera's own stuff currently include webserver, chat room, note board, streaming and file sharing.

      Its quite nice system actually, and you dont need to share your stuff to all of the internet or upload your photos to facebook or similar.

    3. Re:Excellent! by Kamokazi · · Score: 5, Informative

      I would be, if it was actually Opera 10 being released today. However that is not the case. They released the Alpha of their new Unite collaboration thingamajig which requires the current BETA of Opera 10. The current version is still 9.64, with 9.7 in beta testing, so it will be some time before 10 comes out.

      --
      As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to disable Slashdot 2.0.
    4. Re:Excellent! by sopssa · · Score: 3, Informative

      You do actually make a direct connection if its possible. If not, then opera will proxy it so that it works for users behind nat aswell.

    5. Re:Excellent! by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't want my pictures, banking, email (thanks Gmail!), etc to rely on a P2P network of home computers. I want servers doing what they do best, serving data from a facility with backup power, redundant connectivity, and some sort of physical security. And I want my laptop/desktop doing what they do best, fetching info from the rest of the world.

  3. Alpha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Somewhere in the summary you REALLY should mention this is an ALPHA release, not a final release.

    Thanks.

  4. Re:Acid 3 test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pretend for a second that I don't know anything about Acid 3. Pretend I'm just a regular Joe-sixpack web user.

    Why should I care that my browser scored 100/100 on the Acid 3 test?

    I would pitch Acid 3 compliance in this manner: This web browser is 100% compliant with the proper web rendering standards. The more compliant your web browser is, the less likely your web browser will break. You can take that to the bank. You spend less time with a broken browser, and more time enjoying a cold one.

  5. using it now. Very, very impressed. by Hanzie · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm posting this from Opera 10. It seems quite different from the last version. Slashdot looks very, very good. To enable the file sharing, you have to click the "+" tab at the bottom and explicitly enable the web serving goodness. It includes a media player, to share your music collection around. I think we might have a game changer here. hanzie.

    --
    ********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
    1. Re:using it now. Very, very impressed. by nkh · · Score: 4, Informative

      I tried it and love it! It has a few "widgets" installed by default (which may be removed in the final version): file, note, and photo sharing, a media player, a simple chat, and a web server that you point to a specific folder on your disk. Of course more functionality will come with the SDK (and there's also a template library to write code faster)

    2. Re:using it now. Very, very impressed. by Bluesman · · Score: 4, Funny

      Me too. Although I couldn't say /. looks very, very good :-(

      But at least you can say it's rendered properly.

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    3. Re:using it now. Very, very impressed. by Amouth · · Score: 3, Funny

      wait.. there is a "proper" way?

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
  6. Sweet Zombie Exploit Jesus by Rogerborg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's a botnet writer's wet dream; a victim that will host your exploit once you've pwned it.

    We can only hope that it's secure, or else the two dozen people who actually use Opera will be very unpopular indeed, at least until the RIAA has then rounded up for sharing their tunes with (world + dog).

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:Sweet Zombie Exploit Jesus by mikael_j · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You do realize that once upon a time the web was filled with "weird" URLs like darthvader.cs.uni.edu/userpages/~mijon96/, web5.hoster.com/m/mi/~mikaelj and the like, right? And that it wasn't unusual to find early web-based companies operating out of websites that could only be reached by typing in a URL like one of those?

      I'm sorry but your post sounds a bit too "we need to clean up the web, only allow hosting by well-known corporate entities and require $500 website licenses for anyone who wants to publish a website!!11" for my tastes (yes, I've heard both these two suggestions being made in a very serious manner by people who I know to be knowledgeable enough about the internet to not make suggestions like that without a lobotomy or, more likely, their corporate masters telling them to in exchange for money).

      /Mikael

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
  7. 10.0 still beta and Unite is alpha by ablaze · · Score: 4, Informative

    Looks great, except that 10.0 isn't released yet, and Opera Unite is a "labs build", aka alpha release.

  8. Re:OMG! That bug is coming back! by Amouth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    something sitting in the back of my head telling me that i would trust Opera to do it FAR more better than Netscape - if not for the reason that when Netscape did it.. no one thought people would be evil with it.. second Opera is by far one of the most secure browsers out there, let alone the fastest (although chrome is giving it a run for it's money on that front).

    --
    '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
  9. Re:Acid 3 test by Kandenshi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The more compliant your web browser is, the less likely your web browser will break.

    I love webstandards, and wish greatly that all browsers supported them well. But I just don't think that quote is factually true. If your browser adheres to webstandards that IE doesn't then it's quite possible/plausible that your browser will fail to deliver websites that look and function like you and the designer expected it to.

    People "should" code to standards, but I just don't think that it's (yet) true that they DO.

  10. Security by sleekware · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't think it's a good idea to run a web server on the average user's PC for security reasons. If there is a web server running on an un-patched (or not patched up to date, rather) and improperly firewalled it could be compromised in a small amount of time. Seeing as many have personal data on their PC as well this makes it worse. Plus, isn't it common practice to separate web servers from the rest of a network also for security reasons?

  11. Re:Acid 3 test by bigpresh · · Score: 5, Funny

    You spend less time with a broken browser, and more time enjoying a cold one.

    Dude, necrophilia is wrong.

  12. Why does a web browser have FS access by tepples · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Building a firewall-piercing file server into a browser, a program which typically has full network and file system access, is going to cause many incidents of accidental file sharing.

    Why does a web browser have full access to the file system, other than read-only access to its own "program" and "files to upload" folders and read-write access to "user profile", "cache", and "downloaded files" folders?

  13. Oblig by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yo dawg, I heard you like surfing, so we put a web server in your browser so you can surf while your surf!

  14. Re:Mac version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Unfortunately, it still looks completely out of place.

    It's highly functional. Of course it looks out of place on a Mac.

  15. Re:OMG! That bug is coming back! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Fractional horsepower web servers [scripting.com] are not a new idea, but baking them into the browser is

    Not even remotely true, I'm afraid. The early WWW papers describe the browser and server being integrated, with the browser UI containing a simple editing tool for editing pages on your local server. It wasn't until later, when dial-up users became common that the two components were separated. The every-client-is-a-server model was at the core of the early Web.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  16. So many features... by Tarlus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Did they just slap a GUI on Emacs?

    *Runs away*

    --
    /* No Comment */
  17. Re:Acid 3 test by CastrTroy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You could say that, but you would be wrong. Getting 100/100 on Acid3 does not in any way prove that you follow the specs 100%. ACID 3 tests a certain portion of the standards that most browsers have trouble with. Personally, I've found that Safari which also has a history of scoring very high on these tests, has many rendering bugs that show up when rendering normal everyday webpages. Scoring 100% ACID 3 only means that you have created a browser than can render ACID 3 correctly, and not that your browser would render any other web page properly when it was trying to read it.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  18. I wrote this 9 years ago! by ChronoFish · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The "Fishbowl" browser had an integrated web server.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20010502014727/chronofish.com/FishBowl/

    -CF

  19. Re:bloat by Ilgaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Opera PPC OS X is just 12 MB, the actual executable is way below it.

    In fact, if you dig deeper, you figure the amazing fact. Core renderer is below 1 MB. Yes, 1 MB of ultra portable pure C is the "Opera". Rest is done via the functionality it already has. E.g. lsof when you use the "bulky" IRC function of Opera, you will see the thing you see as "IRC" is actually a web page along with CSS!

    Same with the "Web server". It must be amazingly tiny, even less than the rendering engine since it is clear that they are heading to mobile with this.

    Opera and Firefox has different development models, concepts and even targets. Ask Firefox developers if they will remove 80% of code just because they want the exact same binary to run on my horribly outdated, OS dead UIQ3 Sony Ericsson P1i. That is what Opera does.

    With Google, Google Backed Mozilla, MS Backed IE, Apple backed Webkit, I really don't think Opera dreams about "World Domination!". Look at these silly people, they want to boycott Opera because MS backed blogs called for it. Why? EU judicial system investigates MS (did you see IE icon's size on Win 7?) and MS pulled one of "I am taking my toys and going home" tricks again by not including IE in EU Windows. So, it is all Opera's fault now (as they can't mess with Google/Firefox) and they want to boycott Opera (as if they ever used!).

    I mean, as ordinary user, I can see the stupidity but they can't? I bet they do and they never dreamed of being some 20-30% market share browser because of these facts which aren't really too technical.

  20. Re:That's all well and good... by aesiamun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How many ordinary non techie end users actually know what opera is?