I don't understand. Where did anyone say that quarterly profits are the only focus? Opera has numerous long-term projects going that will in fact cost money in the short term (and they were started after JvT stepped down as CEO), so it seems quite ignorant to claim that they have started only thinking about quarterly profits.
In fact, the company believes that the real big money will not be made until a few years from now. They may be profitable right now, but their aim is long-term profitability, and they have laid out their strategy for that.
What makes you think anyone is going to focus on the short term alone? Opera has numerous long-term projects, such as a new joint venture in China which is supposed to grow their presence there. That will take time, and will cost money in the short term, but is expected to be profitable in the long run.
Opera 3 had rudimentary support, at best. Considerable effort was spent in creating M2 (the mail client in later versions) after the fact when they should have been focusing on the browser.
There was a full e-mail client in Opera 4. M2 came with Opera 7, and has barely been touched for extended periods. For example, until the recent mail panel facelift, it had been dormant for a long time. So yes, Opera has indeed been doing more than just a browser since day 1, and the non-browser parts have often suffered.
Opera lost most of its performance advantage several versions ago.
Yes, because others became faster. They did so by using JIT and such. Then Opera did the same thing, and now all browsers are basically the same performance wise.
But the point here is that Opera is faster than ever. So the claim I was responding to is false. Opera has been focusing a lot on performance, especially since 10.50.
Couple of the many that annoyed me:
Um, Firefox reloads tabs when you start it. Opera uses its cache, as it always has. MDI is useless these days.
The BitTorrent client was built before it was ignored, which was attention spent on something that was never needed.
Whether it was needed or not is none of your business, and not what we are discussing here. We are discussing the fact that you made false claims about how "everything used to be so great", when the fact is that the things you are complaining about all happened when JvT was in charge.
And really, ignoring stuff that needs work is the Opera way in some things.
So basically, you are contradicting your "Opera was so wonderful when Jon was in charge" claim.
Really? You're the one telling me the same mail client has been there all along when it really wasn't. They called it "M2" for a reason, and it wasn't because it was the first version.
Are you blind or something? I never claimed that it was the same mail client. I pointed out that Opera has been doing mail all along. Please pay attention.
Unite is a web server stuck inside a web browser.
...and something Jon pushed for...
Jon was the CEO until last year. Have you EVER heard a CEO go on an interview and say "yeah we're doing this shit all wrong"?
So what you are saying is that your claims about how wonderful Opera used to be under Jon are false?
Those hundreds of other programmers and the millions of users are getting the worst of it as the direction of development for Opera turns away from "let's make a really good browser that clobbers all the rest in standards compliance and performance" to "how can investors and management squeeze the most blood out of the work of other people who actually worked hard contributing code or supported Opera through the years as users?".
What makes you think the direction is going to change?
And as for those working hard to contribute code, these people are getting paid to write that code. Do you really feel sorry for them?
I'm really wondering where you are getting all this nonsense from. You talk about a "changed direction" even though you have no clue what Opera's direction has been, or what it will be.
It has 200 million actual users. More than 50 million on desktop, more than 100 million on mobile, and then some on various devices.
It might not be big in the US, but it's huge in many parts of the world. The mobile version in particular is completely dominant in many countries, especially emerging markets.
No, but seriously. Are you really denying the fact that Opera has much better and more complete support for a lot more standards and technologies than it used to? That's the point here.
What gradients? I'm not going to bother with some random data URI.
And are you saying that "render gradients" is the only standard there is? That everything else doesn't count? So even if Opera does support SVG, HTML5, etc., that's irrelevant because of perhaps one CSS property or one single bug?
So you think Jon single-handedly wrote every single line of code? That he's still working on actually coding? That the hundreds of other programmers don't matter?
The guy took the company public. He made bucketloads of money that way. And we should somehow feel sorry for him for being filthy rich?
Are you saying that Jon has been writing Opera all by himself until now, or that they've fired all the developers now and are just going to squeeze money out of the product without maintaining development? I'm confused.
The company at the time was focused on making a good browser for power users
Actually, it was never just a browser. Even the first public version did mail, newsgroups, and more. Furthermore, site compatibility was a huge problem in the early days, and until recently. Opera now works with more sites than ever.
It also helped that back then they were focused on performance and working on older systems.
Good thing Opera is currently one of the fastest browsers, and still runs on slow hardware, them.
Opera got bigger, and slower.
On the contrary. Opera is now faster than ever. It got bigger because it now handles a lot more open web standards and technologies than it used to. You'll notice that most of the growth comes from adding support for new web standards, and adding workarounds for broken sites.
UI stuff that worked forever was broken in favor of a less flexible Firefox clone model.
Such as?
Attention was diverted to writing an email client. Then a BitTorrent client. Then a web server built into the browser. I only wish I was making that last one up.
What are you talking about? The BitTorrent hasn't received a single update in several years. Mail was there from the very first public version, but was also left nearly untouched until quite recently, when they made a new mail panel for 11.0 or something like that.
It is clear that you have no idea what you are talking about.
Unite might be a web server, but what it enables is direct communication between devices. Opera is not just a desktop browser, but actually a cross-platform browser.
The company lost focus on what made Opera good in the first place as they went from trying to be a good, fast browser to trying to do everything for everybody.
Once again you are getting it completely wrong. Opera has always been doing more than just browser.
This drift coincided with the company growing in size and it being less about how it started: Jon and a few other guys trying to make a good browser.
You must be drunk or something. Jon himself wanted Opera to be everything for everyone. He was constantly going on about how great that was in various interviews.
Clearly, you are completely clueless about Opera's history.
How so? Businesses need to make money to stay in business. After JvT stepped down as CEO, the profits started accelerating. Even Mozilla needs to make money. Is making money a bad thing?
Yeah, because that will make the thing amazingly portable... Never mind the fact that it doesn't come standard with the device, so the game developer can't assume that it's there, so he has to stick to touch controls.
Why haven't tablets and phones replaced dedicated gaming devices already, then? Games have been around for ages. The DS was still selling like crazy, well after the arrival of smartphones capable of running games?
It's like PC vs. console: You would assume that the PC would kill game consoles. They didn't. PCs are general-purpose computers. Smartphones and tablets are portable general-purpose computers. They don't have what it takes.
Tablets will not come with game pads as a standard accessory, so games will never be able to rely on such things.
Furthermore, how will heavy accessories help tablets and phones against portable gaming devices? They won't.
They are not all just computers. Game consoles are specifically designed to play games, including buttons and all. That is not the case for general purpose computers.
Windows has a market monopoly, which would make that illegal. Apple only has a monopoly over its own products, which does not make exclusive software handling illegal (unless the product also has a market monopoly).
So your comparisons do not work. Windows is not just a product monopoly. It completely owns an entire market. That is not the case with any Apple product.
It's too bad that Carmack seems to think that tablets and phones are goig to replace dedicated gaming consoles. Dedicated consoles will always be around, because for a lot of games you actually need those dedicated gaming controls. Touchscreen gaming, frankly, sucks most of the time.
Slashdot Mirror
Opera's audited financial statements to its investors and the market.
In fact, the company believes that the real big money will not be made until a few years from now. They may be profitable right now, but their aim is long-term profitability, and they have laid out their strategy for that.
What makes you think anyone is going to focus on the short term alone? Opera has numerous long-term projects, such as a new joint venture in China which is supposed to grow their presence there. That will take time, and will cost money in the short term, but is expected to be profitable in the long run.
Your point being? They did move away from that, and now have more than 200 million users on desktop+mobile+devices.
Why would Opera be done? Just because someone buys it doesn't mean that the browser will disappear.
There was a full e-mail client in Opera 4. M2 came with Opera 7, and has barely been touched for extended periods. For example, until the recent mail panel facelift, it had been dormant for a long time. So yes, Opera has indeed been doing more than just a browser since day 1, and the non-browser parts have often suffered.
Yes, because others became faster. They did so by using JIT and such. Then Opera did the same thing, and now all browsers are basically the same performance wise.
But the point here is that Opera is faster than ever. So the claim I was responding to is false. Opera has been focusing a lot on performance, especially since 10.50.
Um, Firefox reloads tabs when you start it. Opera uses its cache, as it always has. MDI is useless these days.
Whether it was needed or not is none of your business, and not what we are discussing here. We are discussing the fact that you made false claims about how "everything used to be so great", when the fact is that the things you are complaining about all happened when JvT was in charge.
So basically, you are contradicting your "Opera was so wonderful when Jon was in charge" claim.
Are you blind or something? I never claimed that it was the same mail client. I pointed out that Opera has been doing mail all along. Please pay attention.
So what you are saying is that your claims about how wonderful Opera used to be under Jon are false?
Hint: Opera is making money in several different ways without charging users directly.
What makes you think the direction is going to change?
And as for those working hard to contribute code, these people are getting paid to write that code. Do you really feel sorry for them?
I'm really wondering where you are getting all this nonsense from. You talk about a "changed direction" even though you have no clue what Opera's direction has been, or what it will be.
What does that mean? Turning a profit is evil?
It might not be big in the US, but it's huge in many parts of the world. The mobile version in particular is completely dominant in many countries, especially emerging markets.
The world is bigger than the US, you know.
How so?
I guess you are just trolling.
And are you saying that "render gradients" is the only standard there is? That everything else doesn't count? So even if Opera does support SVG, HTML5, etc., that's irrelevant because of perhaps one CSS property or one single bug?
Wow.
Is Google driving excellence? Is Apple driving excellence? Can you think of no for-profit business that drive excellence in software?
How about you mention someone who does drive excellence in software, then?
The guy took the company public. He made bucketloads of money that way. And we should somehow feel sorry for him for being filthy rich?
Are you saying that Jon has been writing Opera all by himself until now, or that they've fired all the developers now and are just going to squeeze money out of the product without maintaining development? I'm confused.
Actually, it was never just a browser. Even the first public version did mail, newsgroups, and more. Furthermore, site compatibility was a huge problem in the early days, and until recently. Opera now works with more sites than ever.
Good thing Opera is currently one of the fastest browsers, and still runs on slow hardware, them.
On the contrary. Opera is now faster than ever. It got bigger because it now handles a lot more open web standards and technologies than it used to. You'll notice that most of the growth comes from adding support for new web standards, and adding workarounds for broken sites.
Such as?
What are you talking about? The BitTorrent hasn't received a single update in several years. Mail was there from the very first public version, but was also left nearly untouched until quite recently, when they made a new mail panel for 11.0 or something like that.
It is clear that you have no idea what you are talking about.
Unite might be a web server, but what it enables is direct communication between devices. Opera is not just a desktop browser, but actually a cross-platform browser.
Once again you are getting it completely wrong. Opera has always been doing more than just browser.
You must be drunk or something. Jon himself wanted Opera to be everything for everyone. He was constantly going on about how great that was in various interviews.
Clearly, you are completely clueless about Opera's history.
How can Opera be in that boat when the company is turning record profits and has loads of cash to spare? It's even acquiring other companies!
How so? Businesses need to make money to stay in business. After JvT stepped down as CEO, the profits started accelerating. Even Mozilla needs to make money. Is making money a bad thing?
Opera has more than 200 million users (on desktop and mobile combined), so I think they're doing pretty well as it is.
Yeah, because that will make the thing amazingly portable... Never mind the fact that it doesn't come standard with the device, so the game developer can't assume that it's there, so he has to stick to touch controls.
It's like PC vs. console: You would assume that the PC would kill game consoles. They didn't. PCs are general-purpose computers. Smartphones and tablets are portable general-purpose computers. They don't have what it takes.
Tablets will not come with game pads as a standard accessory, so games will never be able to rely on such things.
Furthermore, how will heavy accessories help tablets and phones against portable gaming devices? They won't.
They are not all just computers. Game consoles are specifically designed to play games, including buttons and all. That is not the case for general purpose computers.
So your comparisons do not work. Windows is not just a product monopoly. It completely owns an entire market. That is not the case with any Apple product.
If Apple is anti-competitive, then so is Walmmart and any other entity which chooses itself what to sell from its store(s).
It's too bad that Carmack seems to think that tablets and phones are goig to replace dedicated gaming consoles. Dedicated consoles will always be around, because for a lot of games you actually need those dedicated gaming controls. Touchscreen gaming, frankly, sucks most of the time.