So because Opera's compression uses different hardware than Amazon's compression, Amazon's compression is a huge innovation and never seen before in the entire world?
Right.
This isn't new tech, and it sure as hell isn't revolutionary, considering that Opera and others have been doing it for ages.
So, it works as a full-fledged local browser, just like Opera Turbo.
Opera Mini is bad at Flash? No, it just doesn't handle Flash. Flash is a plugin, and no proxy browsers are able to process Flash. All they can do is to use the local plugin, or transcode some specific Flash videos.
And how is Opera's compression not transparent? The user doesn't have to care about whether it takes place on the phone or the server.
Opera Turbo does do that. It adapts the page to the screen size and such. Images are resized, etc. In order to do that, it needs to render on the server first. That dynamic stuff is still handled on the browser part on the phone doesn't change that. Claiming that Silk is different from what Opera has been doing for ages is just silly. Opera can both render on the server, and render on the phone.
How is pre-fetching relevant? It's just another thing they are doing which they ripped off from another browser, just like they ripped off Opera Mini/Turbo. Just because they are combining them into one product doesn't make either of them a revolution, contrary to Amazon's silly claims.
Probably because the three people who use Opera Mobile and the two that use Opera Mini are an insufficient crowd to create a fuss.
I'm not sure what you are looking at, but Opera is the #1 mobile browser globally.
Obviously, I exaggerate; but go ask a bunch of random net users how many have heard of Opera and how many have heard of Amazo. Opera is not a significant player.
Without a representative sample, your questions to people are useless. Opera is a significant player indeed in the mobile market. Not only is it #1 in terms of users, but it powers mobile services for most major mobile operators on the planet.
The first ones were funded by Microsoft. I'm sure they have found some way for Microsoft to provide indirect funding in this case, because that's what Microsoft always does. Lies, lies, lies.
The simple fact is that NSS Labs is a bunch of cheating liars who are actively lying and shilling for Microsoft. That is why all these problems appear with their tests. The tests aren't real. They are fake, and are made as marketing material for IE.
Your comment isn't even making any sense. Tell them what? You're saying that NSS Labs is unable to read "About Firefox"? Geez, these NSS Labs people sure are incompetent.
Apparently on Slahsdot, the scientific method has no merit when the result favors Microsoft somehow.
What scientific method? There's no science in this "report." It's pure pseudoscience. The results are not repeatable, the data is not available for independent analysys, there are huge methodology flaws, etc.
Forget that these tests are repeatable, and can be independently conducted and verified
Except they can't. Do you work for NSS Labs? They have a history of astroturfing and lies in public.
Opera "just" lost a loyal user? I don't get it. What does JvT's departure have to do with the product's quality (except the fact that it was under JvT's time that 10.5 was released prematurely).
You seem to be very confused indeed. Compare 11.5 (the new CEO) to 10.5 (JvT). It's a world of difference. 10.5 was buggy. 11.5 is nearly bug-free.
You may want to stop making assumptions, and instead ask honest questions. Hint: Opera is the #1 mobile browser globally, with a market share of 20-25%. Furthermore, stats like Hitslink focus almost exclusively on North America and Western Europe, while Opera is stronger in other parts of the world (that are not weighted equally because the stats data is much more comprehensive for North America).
No, the board does not want free. If you weren't completely clueless about Opera, you would have known that they laid out exactly how they can grow their profits and still keep Opera free. They laid out their strategy to reach 500 million users with a higher average revenue per user within the next few years. All based on freely available browsers and other products and services.
Please, educate yourself. It doesn't take long to look up Opera's strategy for the future on opera.com.
The board does want free. In fact, the board counts on remaining free to reach their long-term goals. There are other ways to generate revenue without charging end-users directly. You should ask Google, Facebook or any other company that does it about it some time.
You are obviously clueless about who the Opera management are, and what they value. The new CEO has been running the company for a year and a half now, and they've never had more long-term projects and plans for the future. Until the new CEO took over, there was no clear direction for Opera, and no one really knew how they would survive long-term. Now they know.
You need to stop making assumptions about things you obviously know nothing about.
No, there are 200 million users who actually use Opera every month (installations are not counted). How about educating yourself instead of making false assumptions all the time?
This is the same way other browsers are counting users, by the way.
No, the current browsers (even IE!) are basically about the same when it comes to JS performance. You can cherry-pick specific benchmarks, but if you look at the big picture, your cherry-picked benchmarks do not represent reality.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know... Opera has more than 200 million active users. How many does Amazon have?
Anyone who doesn't agree with blatant marketing lies from Amazon is automatically a fanboy for some other product.
Amazon is describing Opera exactly.
I don't think Skyfire is doing it these days. It only compresses video now.
Right.
This isn't new tech, and it sure as hell isn't revolutionary, considering that Opera and others have been doing it for ages.
Skyfire is not doing it anymore. It's just a video transcoder these days.
Opera Mini is bad at Flash? No, it just doesn't handle Flash. Flash is a plugin, and no proxy browsers are able to process Flash. All they can do is to use the local plugin, or transcode some specific Flash videos.
And how is Opera's compression not transparent? The user doesn't have to care about whether it takes place on the phone or the server.
Opera Turbo does do that. It adapts the page to the screen size and such. Images are resized, etc. In order to do that, it needs to render on the server first. That dynamic stuff is still handled on the browser part on the phone doesn't change that. Claiming that Silk is different from what Opera has been doing for ages is just silly. Opera can both render on the server, and render on the phone.
How is pre-fetching relevant? It's just another thing they are doing which they ripped off from another browser, just like they ripped off Opera Mini/Turbo. Just because they are combining them into one product doesn't make either of them a revolution, contrary to Amazon's silly claims.
Various services tied to the browser, such as the Google search which Google pays for. Simple, really.
I'm not sure what you are looking at, but Opera is the #1 mobile browser globally.
Without a representative sample, your questions to people are useless. Opera is a significant player indeed in the mobile market. Not only is it #1 in terms of users, but it powers mobile services for most major mobile operators on the planet.
The first ones were funded by Microsoft. I'm sure they have found some way for Microsoft to provide indirect funding in this case, because that's what Microsoft always does. Lies, lies, lies.
The problem is that their methodology still sucks. They could have as few as 10 unique sites for the whole damn test, for example.
The simple fact is that NSS Labs is a bunch of cheating liars who are actively lying and shilling for Microsoft. That is why all these problems appear with their tests. The tests aren't real. They are fake, and are made as marketing material for IE.
Your comment isn't even making any sense. Tell them what? You're saying that NSS Labs is unable to read "About Firefox"? Geez, these NSS Labs people sure are incompetent.
What scientific method? There's no science in this "report." It's pure pseudoscience. The results are not repeatable, the data is not available for independent analysys, there are huge methodology flaws, etc.
Except they can't. Do you work for NSS Labs? They have a history of astroturfing and lies in public.
I still don't understand what you are trying to say.
Right. Then it wouldn't work anywhere, basically. Opera is a business. The company can't afford to ignore the real world.
You seem to be very confused indeed. Compare 11.5 (the new CEO) to 10.5 (JvT). It's a world of difference. 10.5 was buggy. 11.5 is nearly bug-free.
You may want to stop making assumptions, and instead ask honest questions. Hint: Opera is the #1 mobile browser globally, with a market share of 20-25%. Furthermore, stats like Hitslink focus almost exclusively on North America and Western Europe, while Opera is stronger in other parts of the world (that are not weighted equally because the stats data is much more comprehensive for North America).
Please, educate yourself. It doesn't take long to look up Opera's strategy for the future on opera.com.
The board does want free. In fact, the board counts on remaining free to reach their long-term goals. There are other ways to generate revenue without charging end-users directly. You should ask Google, Facebook or any other company that does it about it some time.
You need to stop making assumptions about things you obviously know nothing about.
You mean "making stuff up on the spot"? Is that it? Ignore the facts and everything is fine?
This is the same way other browsers are counting users, by the way.
No, the current browsers (even IE!) are basically about the same when it comes to JS performance. You can cherry-pick specific benchmarks, but if you look at the big picture, your cherry-picked benchmarks do not represent reality.