Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Approves Opera Mini For iPhone

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the game-is-afoot dept.

Iphone 284

andylim writes "Opera today announced its popular mobile browser, Opera Mini, has been approved for iPhone and iPod touch on the App Store. Opera Mini will be available in less than 24 hours, market by market, as a free download. Here's the download URL for when it goes live."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

wtf (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31829948)

how did opera get this through the app store approval process!?

Re:wtf (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31829968)

Facebook has a built-in browser in its app. Why not Opera?

Re:wtf (2, Informative)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830330)

But that [Facebook app] uses webkit that is built in to iPhone OS.

Re:wtf (0)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31829984)

How wouldn't they? There are already loads of browsers available from the App Store. Now Opera has joined them. There's really nothing strange at all about this. Apple doesn't force people to use WebKit.

Re:wtf (2, Insightful)

Don_dumb (927108) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830182)

How wouldn't they? There are already loads of browsers available from the App Store.

Really?
Do any if them do (Or make use of) ad blocking?
Opera and Safari are okay but give me ablockplus for faster, more pleasant browsing.

Re:wtf (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830412)

Opera Mini can't really offer adblocker; many webapges would simply block Opera proxy servers, I guess (heck, even though full Opera browser does have one, it's not very, well, advertised (;p) or obvious)

But what Opera Mini does helps greatly anyway as far as "faster, more pleasant browsing" goes; that's one of its selling points.

Re:wtf (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830240)

how many posts from misinformed people, all considering themselves the Holders of the Truth. (and modded interesting, no less)

all other apps using browsers are using the webkit rendered to display pages, which is an iphone component, and while apple doesn't force you to use webkit it does forbid you to use any kind of generic interpreters, including the javascript interpreter required for browser to actually work

opera is the _first_ alternative browser to get published, and it does so not interpreting javascript on the iphone but serving already interpreted web pages (javascript stuff is run on the opera own backend and pages served after collecting the result)

so before posting your smartass "loads of other browser" opinion, please do some research. there are ton of other gullible people that find you "interesting", and now are as misinformed as you, thanks of the slashdot moderation.

Re:wtf (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830390)

That's good information about the javascript being handled on the opera servers. I still don't see how this can be installed though as it replaces or is redundant with built in functionality (as does say Google Voice). According to their own fluid, ever changing "rules" Opera (or any alternate browser) should not be allowed as it is redundant with built in stuff.

Re:wtf (4, Insightful)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830418)

Thanks, that's a good point. My favourite mobile browser is Opera Mobile, which I love on my 5800; I guess the Apple phones will never have that.

Even for Opera Mini, it's interesting to note the idea of having to wait for approval, as well as not supporting open standards like Java (again, because of the locked down nature), so they had to presumably rewrite the application for Apple. I was using Opera Mini years ago on my Motorola V980, before the first Iphone was even released.

Re:wtf (2, Informative)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830374)

The other browsers on the App Store are simply webkit (Safari browser on iPhone) with a skinned UI.

Re:wtf (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31829992)

jobs had another illness attack and somebody mentally healthy had to take control for a while .... ;)

Re:wtf (5, Informative)

Knutsi (959723) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830032)

how did opera get this through the app store approval process!?

Because, as far as I understand, it is not really a browser, but rather a viewer for a remotely processed webpage: http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/17/opera-mini-on-iphone-is-fast-but-why/ [engadget.com]

It allowed my old Sony Ericsson phone (can't remember which model, but it was not a smartphone) to have a Safari like zoomable web-browser of quite hight quality (:

indeed (4, Informative)

Herve5 (879674) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830146)

Opera Mini is indeed a simple viewer for images remotely calculated on Opera servers.

This has the advantage of lowering the data transmitted to your phone (actually cost-effective if you are volume-limited), and the disadvantage of providing some unexpected behaviors whenever local things like active buttons etc. are expected to be loaded on your device (I say *some*)

In fact Opera also offers a full browser, named Opera Mobile, on all sorts of phones (on my Nokia for instance, aside Nok's one), but that one, Mobile, isn't ported on the iPhone. Wonder why ;-)

Re:indeed (1)

Knutsi (959723) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830236)

Yes, it's quite fascinating actually. If you go to http://www.kevs3d.co.uk/dev/asteroids/ [kevs3d.co.uk] (a Canvas based game) in Opera Mini on the iPhone, it gives you a frozen image from the game. Reload, and you get a frozen image as well, but form a different time in the game :D

Re:indeed (1)

God'sDuck (837829) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830528)

It also has the advantage of dramatically decreasing latency and processor needs, which present serious challenges for embedded devices even when there is scads of bandwidth available. On my Android phone (Verizon 3G and local WiFi), Opera Mini consistently smokes the built-in browser.

Re:wtf (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830042)

Opera Mini doesn't really do one of big no-no things on Appstore, "having interpreter to run external code", etc.; it's a custom protocol client to connect with the full browser engine running on Opera servers (yes, O Mini can act on few js events, but apparently it was insignificant enough)

Plus maybe Apple came to agree it's quite distinct in what it does from Safari - not as full featured (though it does give iPhone a tabbed browser now), but with its own strong points (largely conserving bandwith; BTW, makes iPhone somehow more attractive in places where you can get it without contract and use with cheap prepaid SIM; or when network is congested)

If you prefer to put it another way, Apple simply tries to appear "not evil" after recent announcement...

Re:wtf (2, Interesting)

rarel (697734) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830414)

(though it does give iPhone a tabbed browser now)

Gotta say, I love tabbed browsing as much as any bloke but in all honesty, The Touch (and iPhone) Safari's way to switch between pages is more than ok for a mobile device.

Now don't get me wrong, I was waiting for this and I'll get Opera Mini as soon as I get home tonight to see how it goes :) it's just that tabs weren't really a priority for that class imho

Re:wtf (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830618)

I take it you'll be checking it out not only when at home, but also on Touch (and hence certainly WiFi)? In that case, I have to point out that it really shines primarilly when network connection is so-so.

Re:wtf (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830462)

though it does give iPhone a tabbed browser now

Wait - surely the Iphone has a tabbed browser, right? This is an honest question - what with all the praise of the browser being the best ever, surely it at least has tabbed browsing? (The reason why I love Opera Mobile so much.)

Re:wtf (1)

MosX (773406) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830550)

It doesn't really have tabs on the screen. It has different windows that you can switch to.

Re:wtf (3, Interesting)

Anonymusing (1450747) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830748)

No, the iPhone's Safari does not have tabs, not in the way desktop Safari does. It's closer to a "virtual desktop" metaphor: you click a button to view a scrollable thumbnail list of open pages.

Personally I think this works better than tabs, given the limited screen size and the sensitivity of the touch.

Re:wtf (2, Informative)

adamstew (909658) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830760)

It does have "tabbed" browsing, in that you can have multiple browsing sessions going at the same time. However, they don't waste valuable screen real estate with a tab bar. In the regular tool bar there is a button that lets you switch between open browsing sessions. You can switch back and forth. Quite quickly.

Thank you... (4, Funny)

the_one_wesp (1785252) | more than 4 years ago | (#31829958)

...all powerful application overlord, for your unending generosity. How shall we ever repay you?

Re:Thank you... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31829990)

Start by buying another shiny iProduct.

Re:Thank you... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31829996)

$1.99 on your credit card?

Re:Thank you... (1)

chentiangemalc (1710624) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830000)

buy more iPhones and iPADs

Re:Thank you... (1)

chentiangemalc (1710624) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830022)

oh and i made a song on similar topic in 'it lullaby' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umZuGLIv7xM [youtube.com] Hush little baby don't say a word Daddy's going to buy you an Apple iPhone...etc

Re:Thank you... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830420)

Your soul has already been forfeited, as per the EULA.

Re:Thank you... (5, Insightful)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830484)

Indeed - I just love that "Apple approves an application, when we thought they might not" is front page news. People are that thankful.

Re:Thank you... (1)

DaitanGio (72247) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830496)

"Buy an iPad"
Ipse dixit :)

Kudos to Opera (0, Troll)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31829964)

For creating such a buzz around their browser. They've accused Apple for not allowing their browser on Apple's platform, but in reality they've never submitted an app for review until now. And it seems it hass passed without any hassle and is now available for everyone, so there's really nothing going on at all. But nonetheless everybody is writing about it like it's a freaking miracle, which is of course great for Opera.

Re:Kudos to Opera (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830056)

Opera had already submitted its Opera Mini browser for iPhone and it was rejected.
Get your facts straight before you start kissing Steve Jobs ...

Re:Kudos to Opera (0, Troll)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830114)

If would be nice if you actually provided some kind of source for this statement. As far as I know, Opera has never actually submitted something to Apple before this.

Re:Kudos to Opera (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830358)

It would be nice if you actually provided some kind of source for this statement.

Re:Kudos to Opera (0, Troll)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830498)

So now I have to prove they didn't do something? Right...

You don't have to prove anything. (1)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830680)

But you come off as lazy and a whiny apologist.

A quick search yields several articles from 2008 that mention Opera Mini being rejected from the Apps store.

Soon you will know more (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830540)

2008:

http://www.unwiredview.com/2008/10/30/opera-mini-for-iphone-rejected-by-apple-from-app-store/

Now you know more.

Re:Soon you will know more (0, Troll)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830582)

This is what I'm talking about. Opera's CEO says Apple won't approve it, based on his assumptions or who knows what. But have they actually submitted it to Apple to see what would happen? I don't think so.

Re:Kudos to Opera (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830726)

It would be nice if you actually knew what you were talking about [zdnet.com] , that was the first result for "Opera browser rejected."
Also I'm tired of the fucking fan boys kissing Apple's ass, The App Store is a horrible implementation of an otherwise good idea. Why do they reject applications for using the official API just because it does the same thing as Safari. They want to lock-in their own apps, it's the only explanation.

Re:Kudos to Opera (-1, Troll)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830736)

That's the same story as posted above. Basically the story is "Opera CEO says something". But have they submitted an actual app to Apple? I don't read any of the sort.

Re:Kudos to Opera (4, Insightful)

chrb (1083577) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830072)

it hass passed without any hassle and is now available for everyone, so there's really nothing going on at all.

Whilst the positive press around Opera's browser does certainly generate interest in it, it would be a mistake to conclude from this that Apple is a benevolent dictator which treats apps equally when they compete with its own. Did you consider that one of the reasons the Opera browser may have being accepted is because of the attention that Opera brought to the subject? It is certainly possible that Apple's decision to allow the app would have been affected by the fact that Opera is a European company involved in a high-profile ongoing EU antitrust case regarding web browsers. Rejecting the app would probably have triggered an antitrust complaint from Opera, and that is the kind of attention that Apple could do without.

Re:Kudos to Opera (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830520)

I take the point - but for antitrust issues to apply, Apple would have to have a monopoly on phones, which they most certainly do not.

Re:Kudos to Opera (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830126)

You do understand that this is Opera Mini, and not the real Opera browser? There's a massive difference between the two.

Re:Kudos to Opera (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830488)

You do understand that this is Opera Mini, and not the real Opera browser? There's a massive difference between the two.

There sure is. Regular Opera goes up to 11 but Opera Mini only goes up to 10.

It's almost a freaking miracle... (2, Insightful)

Herve5 (879674) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830222)

It would be a freaking miracle if Opera Mobile (the complete Opera browser, that exists for ALL smartphones but Apple's) would be accepted on the iPhone.
But indeed, Opera didn't even try to propose it. They dared propose a simple remote viewer, Opera Mini.

Contrary for instance to my Nokia N97mini which features the original Nokia browser and let me replace it with Opera Mobile, the iPhone is probably the only platform where no other browser will be allowed (nor even proposed).

So, yes, some call it freaking...

Re:Kudos to Opera (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830406)

This isn't true, not at all. The concept of another web browser on the iPhone or iPad is prohibited due to how they use the API. It's the same reason Firefox for iPhone won't be approved. But Opera has gotten around this limitation by using their proxy servers to render the webpage on their servers and send it back to the iPhone.

Re:Kudos to Opera (0, Troll)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830518)

But both Opera and Mozilla have (until now) never ever submitted an app for review to Apple.

how is this news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31829994)

nothing to see here, it's opera MINI - moving on

Negative reviews? (3, Insightful)

solevita (967690) | more than 4 years ago | (#31829998)

The summary suggests that this has yet to be released, although the reviews on the linked site are all negative and all complain that Opera isn't as good as Safari. How do they know?.. Am I missing something?

Re:Negative reviews? (3, Informative)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830010)

It's available right now from Apple's App Store on every iPhone.

Re:Negative reviews? (4, Informative)

imamac (1083405) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830016)

The summary was sumbitted yesterday...the browser is available now.

Re:Negative reviews? (1)

solevita (967690) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830074)

The summary was sumbitted yesterday...the browser is available now.

OK, thanks, that explains it. I should have remembered where I was reading this "news" ;-)

Posting from it now.... (4, Insightful)

imamac (1083405) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830002)

And it seems to be incredibly fast. However, incredibly insecure from what I've heard. Also, the iPhone auto-correct for typing does not seem to work.

Re:Posting from it now.... (2, Informative)

Knutsi (959723) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830066)

And it seems to be incredibly fast. However, incredibly insecure from what I've heard. Also, the iPhone auto-correct for typing does not seem to work.

I've used it for a few hours now, and It's quite scary in fact. Where does the line go between my phone and Opera's servers that do all the processing? /:

Re:Posting from it now.... (3, Informative)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830128)

Where does the line go between my phone and Opera's servers that do all the processing? /:

It goes through encrypted connection. Encrypted for all pages, at all times.

Re:Posting from it now.... (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830138)

> Where does the line go between my phone and Opera's servers that do all the processing? /:

It's all done on their servers - the browser doesn't touch HTML at all. It's unencrypted too, as far as I recall, so you get to trust opera, apple, your isp and anyone else between your phone and the website (forget https). Why do people use Opera again?

Re:Posting from it now.... (5, Informative)

Macthorpe (960048) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830248)

Because:

1) The main Opera browser doesn't operate the same way
2) You're already trusting everyone except Opera on your list when you browse HTTP anyway, and
3) Opera warns you that HTTPS transmissions may be insecure the first time you attempt it.

Re:Posting from it now.... (3, Informative)

Rockoon (1252108) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830352)

It's unencrypted too, as far as I recall

You recall incorrectly. Opera Mini since the "Advanced" 3.0 version use 100% encrypted traffic from proxy to the browser (they are up to version 5.)

Thats not to say that you get true point-to-point encryption with HTTPS, since that traffic gets unencrypted on the proxy and then re-encrypted with your Mini key.

Re:Posting from it now.... (4, Informative)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830102)

"Incredibly insecure" is a gross overstatement. Whole traffic between it and Opera servers is encrypted. Only at the point of the proxy there's hypothetical weak point - but really, I'd trust Opera Software. Braking that trust would cost them dearly, they've shown over the years they can be trusted, they come from a place with a somehow better corporate culture...

Or you can simply not use Opera Mini on the few webpages where the above might matter.

Re:Posting from it now.... (2, Insightful)

ProppaT (557551) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830156)

I'd trust Opera more than any of the other browser publishers. Opera is in the browser business and that's just about it. They can't afford to put out a shoddy product like any of the other contenders....and they never do.

Re:Posting from it now.... (4, Insightful)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830242)

SCO is in the UNIX business and that is about it. They can't afford to effectively cease all of their traditional commerce and become a failed litigation house instead, dragging their name through the mud and trying to burn the industry to the ground.

I never trust companies to do the right thing, no matter how insane they'd have to be to do otherwise.

Re:Posting from it now.... (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830320)

I take you also don't trust iPhone version of Safari or...pretty much most operating systems and browsers out there? (if not all - can you trust the binary you got? The compiler? ISP? Clerks at the bank or in public office?)

Victory for the Free Market (0, Troll)

gauharjk (1175207) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830006)

Finally, the tyranny of the Apple App Store has been beaten. More power to the Free Markets... :)

Re:Victory for the Free Market (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830086)

The market hasn't been freed, you drooling moron, it's just one more app that has been approved.

Re:Victory for the Free Market (-1, Troll)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830238)

Yes, it joins the other 50 or so browsers already on the iPhone, already available from the app store as well as Safari.

Maybe they had to add a new row in the iTunes Online Store view.

Re:Victory for the Free Market (1)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830328)

Do any of the other browsers use their own rendering engines (and javascript interpreters), or are they just different frontends for the built-in WebKit?

Re:Victory for the Free Market (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830558)

They all use Webkit, which is in the rules for the store.

I seem to remember the last time discussions of web browsers on the iPhone though, that the overriding "common knowledge" was that there were *no* browsers other than Safari on the iPhone, when a quick search would show that there were plenty.

You can't bring alternative render engines, you have to use the version of WebKit that is already there, but it's not like this is the first alternative web browser for the iPhone, as the summary is inferring. It's more accurate to say that its the first alternative browser that uses a different engine, by tunnelling all the traffic to a remote server.

Re:Victory for the Free Market (3, Insightful)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830764)

OK, so instead of Opera being the first alternative browser on the platform, you choose to define "alternative browser" in such a way that the platform already has a plethora of "alternative browsers", turning freedom of choice into a game of semantics. What's your point, apart from clouding the issue?

Re:Victory for the Free Market (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830596)

Hush, you fool! Do you want to invoke the wrath of Father Steve?

This will actually help... (1)

HopkinsProgramming (1633737) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830012)

With the [internet browsing] improvements that the Opera browser brings, maybe iPhone users will have less chances to notice how flaky AT&T's service is, thus raising the overall satisfaction level with Apple and AT&T.

In other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830064)

Opera has unveiled a new line of browsers for Apple's line of iPods: Opera Mini for the iPhone, Opera Medium for the iPad and Opera Max for the yet unannounced iSurface.

Biggest mistake (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830070)

Soon Apple will regret this, and make up some sorry excuse to yank Opera Mini out of App Store.

So,Opera Mini is now on all major smartphone OS-es (1)

buruonbrails (1247370) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830098)

I've used it on Windows Mobile, Symbian, BlackBerry OS, Android and will definitely try it on iPhone OS later this day. So, with Opera Mini you may get consistent browsing experience no matter what smartphone (or featurephone) you choose.

As long as it doesn't provide for Flash... (2, Insightful)

jbarr (2233) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830150)

...it will probably be approved.

And to those not understanding the Flash issue, it really is about revenue. By allowing Flash, it removes authorization control from Apple. Like it or not, Apple maintains control, and will continue to maintain control. Anything that removes control will be rejected. Don't like it, move to another platform.

Re:As long as it doesn't provide for Flash... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830284)

I don't need to move to another platform. I was not foolish enough to drink the Apple kool-aid in the first place.

Have a nice day.

Re:As long as it doesn't provide for Flash... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830316)

Then it is a moot point for you and is nothing more than purely an informational exercise.

Nothing to see here, move along.

Re:As long as it doesn't provide for Flash... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830318)

And to those not understanding the Flash issue, it really is about revenue. By allowing Flash, it removes authorization control from Apple.

Which is really quite ironic considering their initial stance for the iPhone was that everything would need to be a web app and there would be no authorization control from them.

Re:As long as it doesn't provide for Flash... (4, Informative)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830416)

For thos of us who have used a Mac, the Flash issue is about performance. Have you ever used Flash on OS X? The result would be much the same on the iPhone (given that the core of iPhone OS is the same as OS X), except now there's no 2GHz+ CPU to make it look acceptable and all you have is a little ARM chip and a battery.

If it was about control then they wouldn't be promoting Flash's replacement for the iPad and iPhone. It really is about performance.

Don't just take my word for it - google "flash performance OSX" for a vast number of complaints about it. It really is hideous. Not just sluggish, but banging a 2Ghz core at 100% usage for website animations and video streams - ie, it drains the battery on your MacBook Pro rather quickly, and is one of the few things that can get the fans on my iMac to become audible.

In fact, I just opened the Diablo 3 page and had it sit idle for about a minute or so and then had a quick look at the CPU use. This is a 2GHz Core2Duo, and whether it is that full-site-flash or a youtube video, or BBC iPlayer stream, the CPU usage looks exactly like this:

http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/4771/flashosxperformance.jpg [imageshack.us]

Re:As long as it doesn't provide for Flash... (1)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830744)

Ya, it sucks that mean ol' Apple has banned all those web apps...

Not a Surprise (3, Insightful)

foo fighter (151863) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830186)

If you understand how Opera Mini works and why Apple bans other browsers (hint: it is not because they retrieve and display web pages) you would not find this surprising at all.

Re:Not a Surprise (1)

Goffee71 (628501) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830376)

Indeed, when the anti-trust investigators come knocking, Apple can go "hey - look we let others play too! There's Google (or Bing or whoever) there's Opera - what closed system?"

followed by "What? Flash? Neverheardofit!"

Re:Not a Surprise (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830506)

There are a *ton* of alternative web browsers on the app store, although they all use WebKit. You can't drop your own render engine of choice on there, which I suppose Opera gets around with the new vpn-style system.

You could even have a version of Firefox on the iPhone, as long as it used the WebKit engine already there instead of Gecko.

Re:Not a Surprise (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830636)

In Soviet Russia you are free to vote for any party you wish, as long as it's a front for the official party.

Not all that surprising (2, Insightful)

Fasolt (1789082) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830220)

I have Opera Mini installed on my Android phone, and I believe it is no threat to the Safari browser, as it does not support multi-touch and is generally not as sophisticated. It is very useful when only a slow network connection is available; however, I feel that if that is not the case, Safari will stay superior.

Re:Not all that surprising (2, Insightful)

gauharjk (1175207) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830262)

Opera for iPhone supports pinch to zoom multitouch. Check the video in Engadget - http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/12/opera-mini-for-iphone-approved-will-be-available-for-free/ [engadget.com]

Re:Not all that surprising (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830372)

But it doesn't control the zoom level.

Is this a troll? I think it's true. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830254)

The only thing worse than a Linux fan boy is an Opera fan boy!

Opera Mini blows, try Atomic Browser instead (1)

teshuvah (831969) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830290)

I'm sure it will get better over time, but Opera mini on the iPhone is pretty terrible right now. Multitouch sucks, the tab implementation sucks, and the zooming sucks.

If you guys want a better browser download the 99 cent Atomic Browser. It has tabbed browsing (and opens tabs in the background if you want it to), and you can load as many tabs as you want. With Mobile Safari you're limited to like 8 "windows" I think. With Atomic Browser not only can you open as many as you want, but when you switch back to the first tabs you opened it doesn't reload the page like Mobile Safari does (Safari kicks old windows out of RAM to make room for new ones, forcing you to reload when you return to the page, Atomic Browser keeps them all loaded. This is more noticeable with the iPad where you're lucky to get 4-5 pages before Mobile Safari starts reloading old ones). The only downside to Atomic Browser is that when you close the app and open it back up, it reloads every tab. I spoke with the developer about it, and he says it is a limitation of the iPhone SDK, but the new "saved state" feature in iPhone OS 4.0 may allow for him to keep the tabs between sessions without having to reload them.

If you don't want to pay the buck download the free version which has some limitations but it gives you a good sense of the browser.

Disclaimer: I am in no way affiliated with this developer I just recently found this app and am telling everyone about it because it is leaps and bounds ahead of Mobile Safari.

92 page license (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830306)

Trying to install now but have 92 page license to read through first.

Bad Reviews (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830326)

Is it just me, or are all the reviews on the app store purposely giving it less-than-great reviews?

don't be fooled, it's a trick! (0)

BroadbandBradley (237267) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830344)

somehow Apple will make using Opera a royal pain, some URL handlers or something in there so that those that try Opera will eventually ditch it and think "why did I ever think it could be better than what Apple force feeds me already?"

just watch, you'll see...

Got It (1)

JackSpratts (660957) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830346)

d/ld and installed last night. first impressions: renders pages better than safari (faint praise), very customizable, has pressure issues with touch screen (iTouch).

verdict: good start but needs improvements, which opera historically provides in a timely fashion. will be using this extensively.

- js.

Re:Got It (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830378)

renders pages better than safari

If by "better" you mean "faster" than I agree, but if you mean "better looking" then I wonder if you need a pair of glasses. To me websites look a lot better in Safari!

... for now (1)

Speare (84249) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830400)

With the release of any iPhone / iPad app, the announcement really needs to end with the phrase, "for now." That is, the app has somehow been accepted by the current byzantine App Store approval process, but a future byzantine App Store decision may pull the app and confuse developers and customers alike. It's happened often enough that this should be a clear footnote on all App Store stories.

No mystery here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830404)

If I'm understanding it correctly: Apple historically has rejected any app that duplicated functionality of their own included apps. I'm no expert, but I think Opera flows pretty close to Safari as far as functionality goes, back-end tech or not. So why did A allow this one to pass through the filter? I think it's simply because it received a lot of media coverage, and the outcome was going to be scrutinized by the tech community. Everyone was ready to make a martyr of Opera Mini and Apple sucked the wind out the potential bad press. -- If they had denied it, it would've caused an uproar - Opera would've gotten tons more coverage as David, and Apple would've been shown in the light of Goliath.

And VERY good it is too. (1)

Zoidbot (1194453) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830482)

Like it ALOT. Seems alot faster than Safari, renders very well, and on metered connections can save MASSIVE amounts of money in data charges.

I've already been converted to Opera Desktop 10.51, as it's also very quick, looks great and is fully loaded with features, without looking and feeling like it's loaded with features.. (I got sick of Firefox's bloat at turns up every time you want something trivial added), Opera seems to have it built in, for free and without the bloat.

I've hapilly moved from Firefox to Opera in the desktop, and I can see myself moving from Safari to Opera in my iPhone too...

Happy Days...

What is this? (0, Troll)

Slash.Poop (1088395) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830494)

I thought I had ads disabled.

Pardon my cynicism (0, Troll)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830538)

But for how long? I mean, it's not like they can't just pull it anytime they want later, once some of the PR that Opera stirred up has settled down.

It runs javascript? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31830560)

What's the difference between a browser running javascript and another application running actionscript? I thought Apple didn't approve this sort of apps.

Fast rendering not faster on download (0, Troll)

DaitanGio (72247) | more than 4 years ago | (#31830566)

I am trying it right now.
It is fast on rendering, but you must wait to see the entire page.
So the overall speed is comparable to Safari.
It is possible to save login/password pairs: so it is a plus

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?