Slashdot Mirror
Opera For iPhone To Test Apple's Resolve
Barence writes "Opera is launching a version of its Mini browser for the iPhone in what could prove a landmark decision for Apple's app gatekeepers. Apple has been traditionally hostile to rival browsers, with Mozilla claiming that Apple made it 'too hard' for its rivals to develop a browser for the iPhone. However, Opera remains bullishly confident that its app will be approved. 'We have not submitted Opera Mini to the Apple App store,' an Opera spokesperson told PC Pro. 'However, we hope that Apple will not deny their users a choice in web browsing experience.'" I can't imagine what would motivate them to do that.
First! (Presumably) I wonder how this will play out in EU where MS was forced to include multiple browsers...
Certainly, Apple will reject the app and Opera knows it. Maybe Opera tries to strengthen Apple's "Evil Empire" image and deal with it with the help of EU (just like they did with Microsoft recently).
We have not submitted Opera Mini to the Apple App store
Really? Then what the hell is this story about? I read the article through a number of times, but that sentence really doesn''t make any sense. Are they targetiing this at jailbroken phones? Was that quote from some time ago and was unwisely used here?
Perhaps I just need some caffeine, or is my confusion shared by others?
You can advertise in this sig from as little as £99.99 a month!
I really dont think that they are about choice. If they were, we would have gotten the iPad we all wanted. Additionally they have a history of not being open in situations like this. I really hope they do, Opera makes a killer mobile browser. would be nice but I think it's doubtful it gets approved.
If Apple rejects it please post it on Cydia
At least not in the strictest technical sense. It doesn't understand html, etc. ..."just" it's own, highly compressed format; sent to it from Opera servers.
Not that it'll make a difference to Apple.
One that hath name thou can not otter
Yeah Right....when hell phreezes over
Even if (or, when) Apple rejects it, they can put it on a Cydia repository. When Google Voice came to the iPhone many people jailbroke for it. I'm sure Apple is weighing in these consequences, but I'd almost like to see them reject it just so more people jailbreak.
The EU ruled against Microsoft not because it was a monopoly (that is not illegal in the EU) but because it used its monopoly position against other companies, in other words the EU ruled against Microsoft because Microsoft was an abusive monopoly.
Apple is twice as abusive as Microsoft ever was but they are far from being a monopoly. Apple are permitted to lock down their platform as there are many other platforms to chose from, Apple is not in a position to control the market so the EU wont do a thing (unless Apple have broken another EU law, but if they did the EU would have already made a statement to that effect).
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
It could be accepted.
Apple forbids code interpreters other than Apple's own, BUT this is Opera Mini, not full Opera Mobile. Mini executes JavaScript server-side and only sends rendered result to the phone. There's likely no (turing-complete) interpreter on iPhone side, so it should be fine within terms of SDK.
Apple has already accepted number of WebKit-based browsers, so browsers in general aren't forbidden.
And for iPhone users, especially on EDGE, there is very good reason to use Opera Mini: it's going to be faster. iPhones before 3GS are also very low on RAM, and Safari only uses RAM for caching. Presumably Opera Mini would be able to keep many more tabs open and fully cached.
Really? Why not Opera Mobile? That doesn't make sense to me. Opera Mini is java based and is for smartphones. Web pages are processed by Opera's proxy servers and stripped down for mobile viewing on underpowered devices. Opera Mobile 10 is an actual web browser, on par with Safari on the iPhone.
Better known as 318230.
Apple will reject the app
Apple can't reject what hasn't been submitted.
"We have not submitted Opera Mini to the Apple App store".
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
Instead of porting opera mini on every existing platform, why not assign more resources to do the same for opera mobile, or at least make opera mini as good as opera mobile?
I paid to use opera mobile on my windows mobile phone (htc tytn II), and would gladly pay again to be able to use it on my android phone. I have opera mini on it, it is not usable at all.
If I had mod points I'd mod this insightful. I think you've hit the nail on the head, this is a cheap "toe in the water".
I really wish Opera would just go away already. I'm quite happy with IE8/Safari4/Firefox3 lineage no more players needed thank you.
Have you tried Chrome yet?
That's odd, Opera runs better than Firefox and Safari for me.
How are they a monopoly? They don't have the majority market share in smartphones or laptops or desktops. There is no such thing as a monopoly over your own products, so you can't say "well they get to control everything that happens on their apple devices." That is not a monopoly, because you can accomplish very nearly the same tasks with devices from other players. A monopoly exists when a company is the only player. This is not the case with apple. You can buy a Nexus. You can buy a windows PC. So what exactly do you think a monopoly is?
they're all just modded safari clones which all give an even poorer user experience than safari itself
I just hope Opera Mini has Flash and Java!
I really wish Opera would just go away already. I'm quite happy with IE8/Safari4/Firefox3 lineage no more players needed thank you.
Opera has the source of most big innovations in browsers for quite some years now. If it disappeared, where would firefox addons developpers find ideas of new features to implement?
Gomez Addams said it best.
GREED!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
The question here seems to be "have you tried Opera yet?"...
Apple would be no more forced to apply by the same rules as Microsoft, than you are forced to spent the rest of your days in prison, just because someone else was sentenced that for their crime.
Or rather, because someone else was sentenced for the same crime you've committed.
Explain how Apple has engaged in anti-competitive behavior with its tiny OS market share and still-small smartphone market share. (Especially in the EU. Its market share in Europe is even smaller than in the US)
It always amazes me how many MS-bashers still bring up the case of MS supposedly unfairly using its monopoly to push IE back in the 90's, yet ignore the fact that Apple and others engage in MUCH more egregious anti-competitive behavior today than MS ever dreamed of doing. MS's big sin was to include IE in their default Windows installation (the same as notepad, media player, and dozens of other standard apps). Never once did they block competing software from being installed on Windows. The whole case is a relic from a time when browsers were still a new toy (today pretty much every operating system comes standard with a browser, and no one considers that unfair).
But here we have Apple, actively BANNING any competing software from even being installed on their devices, and the EU and all the others who raised holy hell about MS just turn the other way and say nothing. MS gets huge fines for just including their browser in their software, yet Apple gets nothing for not only including their browser, but banning any competing browsers too. And it's not just browsers, Apple does the same thing with iTunes and other apps too. "We don't allow competition" should become Apple's new motto, especially as they move more and more away from their traditionally more open products (PC's) and focus more and more on their locked down products (iPad, iPhone, iTouch, etc.). They should name their next product the iMonopoly.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Apple has been traditionally hostile to rival browsers, with Mozilla claiming that Apple made it "too hard" for its rivals to develop a browser for the iPhone.
While I like and use Firefox on PCs, Mozilla hasn't been able to develop a decent mobile browser for Windows Mobile or any of the mobile other platforms that don't suffer from Apple's barriers to entry. I don't think their complaint really means much. If it were Opera - a company with good existing mobile products - saying this, it might actually mean something.
It will be interesting to see if Opera's able to get around the asinine restrictions Apple imposes on iPhone applications, though.
Apple automatically rejects all applications that are NOT submitted. However, they don't notify the non-submitter when this happens.
microsoft isn't monopoly by your definition either, and yet it was forced to ship other browsers than theirs.
Yes, Microsoft is a monopoly because it has a monopoly in the market, not just over its own products. Also, Microsoft wasn't forced. They made the ballot suggestion themselves.
Clever signature text goes here.
Microsoft had and still has 90%+ marketshare in operating systems
Apple has about 21% in the cell phone market right now.
In choice of operating systems, you have Windows, OS X, or Linux. OS X and Linux have Windows emulators available for those windows programs you can't just live without. You tell me if they are relevant enough to not consider Windows a monopoly?
If you need a computer that runs windows software, and you can't spend hours upon hours of configuration or you can't spend $1000 on the cheapest iMac or Macbook along with a license to windows, you have to buy a windows machine.
If you don't like the iPhone, buy a Symbian or an Andriod.
The difference is how the market works. In the Windows world, you have no choice, so they should be regulated. In the phone market, Apple does not have a monopoly so you can go somewhere else.
I'm not saying Apple is holy, or out of the wrong, the difference is that if you don't like Apple's product you can leave! That's how the market is supposed to work.
Come back and replay that tired ignorant argument when you take monopolies 101.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
In many localities it is forbiden to sell you one item only if you buy another item as well.
Lets say a grocer can't say they will sell you eggs only if you buy milk.
Apple is periliously close to that, also in some countries there are laws against restraining trade, which is pretty much what Apple does by arbiting which applications can and can't be run on the iPhone, it will not surprise me an iota if somebody takes this to a tribunal soon.
Sorry. If you really want to argue semantics: a monopoly is when a company has near-exclusive control over a market. MS has in the past had near-exclusive control over some of its markets, even though it wasn't the only player, it was the only one who could set the rules of the game. Apple does not have this. It has serious competition for all of its products. A monopoly can exist iff. there does not exist credible and serious competition. My argument is still relevant. You can't just shout monopoly because a company is doing things with their own products that you don't like. You can only shout monopoly if their products have no credible alternatives. And even then there is nothing illegal or unethical about being a monopoly. It becomes unethical/illegal when you use your position to ground out any competition. Case in point: if you invent a new personal levitation device that works great and somehow runs on solar energy and you get a patent and start building them, you would have a monopoly because no one else would be in that market at least until your patent runs out (or some other method for doing the same thing is invented). You would not be doing anything illegal or unethical, however.
...in the App Store. iCab Mobile for example: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/icab-mobile-web-browser/id308111628?mt=8
There are alternative web browser(s) available in the Apple iTunes App Store such as iCab, for one.
duplicate functionality
mov ax,4c00h
int 21h
Yeah, Opera, you hear that? It's time to shut the doors, close the shop down. Some anonymous guy on Slashdot doesn't like your product, so it looks like it's time to give it a rest.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
This is a complete non-story and is just Opera trying to drum up some publicity for the release.
What do you mean, is that like when Apple leaks product details to the media before a product launch? I agree, it's a non-story, but people sure like to talk about it.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
But what's a smartphone - can you give me an technical definition (i.e., not simply "high end phones") that includes the original Iphone, but not many feature phones? And given that the issue here is web browsers, it's not clear how the "smart" distinction matters, since all feature phones run web browsers too.
Apple's market share in the phone market is a few per cent. Yes, you can get higher figures if you restrict the market to just the Iphone and a few other phones, obviously - you might as well say that Apple have 100% share of Iphones - but it's not clear to me those tricks make them a monopoly.
If you want to use another browser - including Opera Mini which runs on billions of feature phones out there - you have plenty of alternative choices.
Given Apple's attitude toward certain apps that don't fit their "vision", and toward modding of their products, does anyone else think it's awfully ironic that this is the same company that produced that famous 1984 commercial about breaking free from a software monoculture? I know, it was just marketing, not what they actually believe. But still.
HTML5 is not just an author's spec, it's a browser maker's spec. HTML rendering is now at the level of the TCP/IP stack. The WebKit and Mozilla projects bust their balls to handle HTML in the same standardized way. That leaves the browser UI. There are multiple alternate browsers for iPhone, but you have to use WebKit as the renderer, same as you have to use the iPhone OS network stack. Opera is totally free to make an Opera for iPhone, they just don't get to replace core OS components.
There are 2 billion phones and the ones that LEAST need Opera are the iPhones. It's like they want to run their renderer inside Firefox.
As long as they use WebKit! The announcement didn't say if they are or not, but who knows I guess.
Okay, I suppose I'm going to tagged flametroll although I'm just being honest...
I see no real threat to Safari from any version of Opera, Mini or not. I've tried repeatedly over the years to give Opera incarnations "the old college try." I've been left relatively unimpressed. This after having all of the incredible features and benefits pointed out to me time and again. One of the worst of the bunch was the OM I ran on my Samsung D307.
Anyway, to make a long story short (too late), it would seem that approving Opera on the iPhone could only improve Safari's image. And if OM turns out to have some advantages, Apple can always improve Safari to match (in theory).
As an aside, I found the summary mildly confusing. However, like Opera, I haven't submitted an app to the App Store and I'm hoping that Apple won't deny their users a choice. Something like that...
"trying to break into the Safari monopoly"
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Regardless of legality, I have to wonder. Someone goes out and buys a device that they know is built by a notoriously paranoid company that refuses to work with others. They know that various apps have been rejected for no real reason. They know there's no way for them to legally add software without going through that companies store. And yet they're surprised, and offended, when it turns out they can't add whatever software they want and make major changes to the system.
So I have to wonder.... where can I get some of the magical unreasonable optimism drug they've been taking?
Screw opera. You know what I want on my iPhone? A text browser like links.
Most of what we read on the go (news, blog entries, tweets, facebook, etc) is text. It'd be nice to be able to use a text browser for these types of sites - I'll bet browsing would be a lot faster.