Hurting financially? Whatever gave you that idea? They've reached new profit and revenue highs every single quarter now for a long time.
They didn't lay off 90 developers. They laid off 90 people in total, including sales and marketing personnel. About half were engineers, which includes testers. So the real number of programmers is probably around 20 or so, which is a very small number compared to the several hundred developers that are still working there.
Being bought sounds like what is happening to Opera? Um, but it isn't. In fact, it's Opera doing the acquisitions.
They aren't just skinning an existing browser on iOS (does the Opera ICE demo look like just a skin to you?), nor are they doing it on other platform. Using a browser framework doesn't mean you are merely reskinning another browser using the same framework.
The other day, Opera announced that it has grown to 300 million active users, up from 200 million 1.5 years ago. And several quarters in a row now, they have reported record revenues and profits.
How is Opera falling exactly, when all the numbers are pointing up?
It started with the insistance on the MS WIndows ecosystem instead of bringing the incredible functionality of other OS.
What are you talking about? Opera was the first browser company to focus on mobile (back when everyone laughed at them for thinking that anyone would want to browse on their phones), and they started working on Mac and *nix versions in the late 90s.
I had thought that the move to Webkit was a gutsy move... Instead they are hitching their wagon to a convenient big horse instead of just being an innovative company.
Does not compute. The whole point of moving away from Presto was to be able to spend more time on innovation.
How is Opera hitching their wagon to anything? They can fork at any time, or move to some different engine.
The point of using Opera is that it has the features you need. Presto was a necessary evil (since lots of sites didn't support it). You can probably count on one hand the number of people who used Opera because of presto.
Weird, another anonymous commenter spreading pro-corporation propaganda.
Restricting the free speech of a corporation does not infringe on the free speech of the people that make it up. Those people can still exercise their free speech privately.
Seeing Opera first dump its amazing killer feature (Opera Unite), and then dumb their core engine, is a really sad sight. I declare Opera (the company) as dead as Nokia.
If Unite had been such a killer feature, it wouldn't have been dumped. Evidently, hardly anyone actually ended up using Unite once the hype died down.
Declaring Opera as dead as Nokia is weird to say the least. Nokia ditched their dying platform for a dead platform (Windows Phone still doesn't sell!). Opera is ditching their platform which is still growing (Presto browsers reached 300 million active users this month) for one of the most successful and recognized browser engines on the planet.
How you can even begin to compare Opera to Nokia is beyond me.
How you can even claim that Unite was an "amazing killer feature" is also beyond me.
I guess you know how silly it is, and that's why you are posting as an AC.
What Opera guy was that? I know because Opera never reported to the market that they got a deal (they would definitely do that), and news sites reported that it was using some other browser.
Sadly they've let it go to shit the past several releases, probably because they knew they were walking away from it.
Really? I've been having fewer problems than ever, and looking at the general feedback on their site it's basically the same as always: A vocal minority complaining about things. This is the way it's been for nearly 20 years now. Someone always insists that "they've let it go to shit" and things like that. Even 15 years ago.
even he is trying various browsers because he says Opera gets slower and buggier with each release
Doesn't make sense. It's got fewer bugs than ever.
Do you think Opera would be ditching presto if it could run on the iPhone?
Definitely. They don't have to switch to Webkit across the board just to run on the iPhone.
No, Nintendo probably switched because it was cheaper to license some third-rate Webkit wannabe rather than the real thing. The 3DS and Wii U browsers are truly horrible. The Wii browser actually did a good job within the limits it existed in.
Please, rendering technology was the heart of the browser and now it's been flushed down the toilet.
So? If said technology was frustrating to work with (which we now know it is because they have to spend far too much time doing boring things like patching sites that keep breaking), then replacing it will boost morale.
How will it innovate? How will it differentiate? By creating a different set of icons on the toolbar?
So basically, the way Opera "innovates" and "differentiates" today is to be far less compatible with websites than Chrome?
Of course not. It differentiates with its features and user experience. The user interface, not the engine. The engine is a negative differentiator because it doesn't work on many sites.
Look at Dell (basically sticking their logo on sb's else hardware) vs Apple which actually innovated and designed stuff.
What makes you think Opera won't come up with new and unique features? Does switching to Webkit suddenly mean they lose that ability?
And that's actually the problem with Opera moving to webkit.
Sure, but how is that a problem with Opera moving to Webkit? Clearly Presto is not relevant at all to all those web developers, so what actual difference does it make?
Also, why should any of this be Opera's problem? Why should they pay the bill?
Slashdot Mirror
Hurting financially? Whatever gave you that idea? They've reached new profit and revenue highs every single quarter now for a long time.
They didn't lay off 90 developers. They laid off 90 people in total, including sales and marketing personnel. About half were engineers, which includes testers. So the real number of programmers is probably around 20 or so, which is a very small number compared to the several hundred developers that are still working there.
Being bought sounds like what is happening to Opera? Um, but it isn't. In fact, it's Opera doing the acquisitions.
They aren't just skinning an existing browser on iOS (does the Opera ICE demo look like just a skin to you?), nor are they doing it on other platform. Using a browser framework doesn't mean you are merely reskinning another browser using the same framework.
Opera just reached 300 million active users, up from 200 million a little more than a year ago. Falling behind?
They don't have to back the strongest player. They have to choose the technology platform that best fits their needs to keep growing.
Your comment doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
The other day, Opera announced that it has grown to 300 million active users, up from 200 million 1.5 years ago. And several quarters in a row now, they have reported record revenues and profits.
How is Opera falling exactly, when all the numbers are pointing up?
It started with the insistance on the MS WIndows ecosystem instead of bringing the incredible functionality of other OS.
What are you talking about? Opera was the first browser company to focus on mobile (back when everyone laughed at them for thinking that anyone would want to browse on their phones), and they started working on Mac and *nix versions in the late 90s.
Does not compute. The whole point of moving away from Presto was to be able to spend more time on innovation.
How is Opera hitching their wagon to anything? They can fork at any time, or move to some different engine.
The point of using Opera is that it has the features you need. Presto was a necessary evil (since lots of sites didn't support it). You can probably count on one hand the number of people who used Opera because of presto.
Weird, another anonymous commenter spreading pro-corporation propaganda.
Restricting the free speech of a corporation does not infringe on the free speech of the people that make it up. Those people can still exercise their free speech privately.
If Unite had been such a killer feature, it wouldn't have been dumped. Evidently, hardly anyone actually ended up using Unite once the hype died down.
Declaring Opera as dead as Nokia is weird to say the least. Nokia ditched their dying platform for a dead platform (Windows Phone still doesn't sell!). Opera is ditching their platform which is still growing (Presto browsers reached 300 million active users this month) for one of the most successful and recognized browser engines on the planet.
How you can even begin to compare Opera to Nokia is beyond me.
How you can even claim that Unite was an "amazing killer feature" is also beyond me.
I guess you know how silly it is, and that's why you are posting as an AC.
At least you have first-hand experience with the actual code.
Russian, eh? Wikipedia:
Guess that's settled then.
Yes, you are basically using Opera's proxy servers. Like any other proxy server. And their documentation clearly explain what Turbo does.
What Opera guy was that? I know because Opera never reported to the market that they got a deal (they would definitely do that), and news sites reported that it was using some other browser.
Because Apple insisted that H.264 be part of the HTML5 video spec.
How is it hijacking when they tell you what's going on, and you explicitly have to enable it manually?
I guess you've never heard about proxy servers before.
Why? People don't give a damn about the engine. It's the GUI that matters.
It already exists. It's what Opera is by default when you install it. Mail and all that other stuff is disabled until you decide to start using it.
The engine was the reason people switched? Why? Why would people switch because of something they didn't even notice?
Really? I've been having fewer problems than ever, and looking at the general feedback on their site it's basically the same as always: A vocal minority complaining about things. This is the way it's been for nearly 20 years now. Someone always insists that "they've let it go to shit" and things like that. Even 15 years ago.
Doesn't make sense. It's got fewer bugs than ever.
Definitely. They don't have to switch to Webkit across the board just to run on the iPhone.
No, Nintendo probably switched because it was cheaper to license some third-rate Webkit wannabe rather than the real thing. The 3DS and Wii U browsers are truly horrible. The Wii browser actually did a good job within the limits it existed in.
What are you talking about? The Wii U browser isn't Opera.
They are counting active monthly users, not just downloads.
So? If said technology was frustrating to work with (which we now know it is because they have to spend far too much time doing boring things like patching sites that keep breaking), then replacing it will boost morale.
So basically, the way Opera "innovates" and "differentiates" today is to be far less compatible with websites than Chrome?
Of course not. It differentiates with its features and user experience. The user interface, not the engine. The engine is a negative differentiator because it doesn't work on many sites.
What makes you think Opera won't come up with new and unique features? Does switching to Webkit suddenly mean they lose that ability?
Google "Peter Bortas Opera"...
I don't see it. Presto is irrelevant. No one tests in it. How does replacing something that is irrelevant change anything?
Sure, but how is that a problem with Opera moving to Webkit? Clearly Presto is not relevant at all to all those web developers, so what actual difference does it make?
Also, why should any of this be Opera's problem? Why should they pay the bill?
If this was because Apple doesn't allow non-Webkit browsers, they would have switched to Webkit only on iOS.
Just because something is innovative doesn't mean it ends up being picked up. Unite might have been innovative, but hardly anyone was using it.
Who claimed that removing features was innovative?