Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 25th May 2012 19:09 UTC
Opera Software Pocket-lint has a rumour up that Facebook is interested in acquiring Opera to kickstart their own move into the browser market, to compete with Mozilla, Google, and Microsoft. While it would mean much-deserved recognition for Opera, I actually hope such a deal does not go through - for entirely selfish reasons.
Order by: Score:
I dunno
by WorknMan on Fri 25th May 2012 19:25 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

I think they would have to dumb Opera down significantly to appease the Facebook crowd. Seems like they would go for something simpler than that.

Reply Score: 6

RE: I dunno
by zima on Sat 26th May 2012 09:10 UTC in reply to "I dunno"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

There is more than one Opera, really. Among them Mini - a fairly simple thing, one which gives very decent access to, say, Facebook (it is a top site visited from Opera Mini http://www.opera.com/smw/2011/11/ ) - particularly for people who otherwise would hardly have it, on devices hardly able of running any other browser.

And Facebook knows such mobile phones are most popular, wants to cater to them (if only, I guess, because it opens FB to many growing markets, hence increases the number of users that FB can gloat about): http://blog.facebook.com/blog.php?post=483824142130

...but the thing about that app mentioned in the above FB blog post: last I checked, it was quite horrible. Opera Mini certainly offered a better experience.

So perhaps this "leak" (which no doubt went through a form of Chinese whispers game) is not about buying Opera ASA and all its customer relations - which wouldn't seem to make much sense - but about becoming one of Opera customers.

Carriers or mobile phone makers do have deals with Opera to offer Mini - typically little more than rebranded (if even that), at least sometimes used as the browser for cheap web prepaid packages (one carrier at my place does that).
I can easily imagine Facebook also licensing it, building on its tech some good client to their website (more integrated with it, more streamlined than "general usage" Mini or one of its rebranded version, maybe offering free access on some carriers).
At least, that would have some sense...

Reply Score: 2

RE: I dunno
by No it isnt on Sat 26th May 2012 09:20 UTC in reply to "I dunno"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

The Facebook crowd? That's 901 million people you're talking about.

Reply Score: 2

RE: I dunno
by Liquidator on Mon 28th May 2012 09:44 UTC in reply to "I dunno"
Liquidator Member since:
2007-03-04

the browser has just too many features for my own liking


Similar interface as Firefox or Chrome. These features are burried, non-obstrusive and hidden. Ignore them if you don't need them ;)

Facebook's buying the company would save it having to build a browser from scratch.


They could take source code of WebKit, Mozilla, etc. And they could even start from scratch, they have so much money, they can hire the best devs on Earth.

it makes sense Facebook would look in Opera's general direction if it wanted to move into the browser market


But so many people have strong opinion against Opera because it was a paid/ad browser in the 90's and because it isn't opensource. This is partly why it is only 1% of the market even after 20 years. But they are well established on the mobile market.

I'd hate to see Opera get stuffed with Facebook crap


Me too! Duh...I hate Facebook and Twitter time wasting junk.

assuming Facebook wants to get into the browser business, Opera is the only logical choice


Nope. A few other options, as other web browsers have their source code available. Or Facebook can start from stratch and promote their new browser on their pages. Usage growth would skyrocket in a few months.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: I dunno
by PresentIt on Mon 28th May 2012 13:01 UTC in reply to "RE: I dunno"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

This is partly why it is only 1% of the market even after 20 years.


Not just 1%. More like 5% or so globally, but up to 50% in some countries.

Reply Score: 1

RE: I dunno
by zima on Fri 1st Jun 2012 23:50 UTC in reply to "RE: I dunno"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

But so many people have strong opinion against Opera because it was a paid/ad browser in the 90's and because it isn't opensource. This is partly why it is only 1% of the market even after 20 years. But they are well established on the mobile market.

"So many people" are mostly hardly aware of Opera - and even less would care about the OSS aspect, or remember that it was paid / adware.

(well established in mobile - where most of growth is yet to happen; oh and in most of CIS as a desktop browser)

Edited 2012-06-02 00:05 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: I dunno
by zima on Fri 1st Jun 2012 23:48 UTC in reply to "I dunno"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06



Edited 2012-06-01 23:48 UTC

Reply Score: 2

What would happen to Opera Mini?
by Morgan on Fri 25th May 2012 19:27 UTC
Morgan
Member since:
2005-06-29

Opera Mobile/Mini is the only alternative to Pocket IE I have on the ancient WinCE based barcode scanners I'm responsible for maintaining at my part time job. If Facebook buys Opera, and does away with the gateway that allows the mobile apps to function, our company will have to spend several thousand dollars for new hardware to maintain compatibility with the database we use. That's money that is not in the budget, and while it ensures job security for me, it's not an ideal situation by far.

Please understand that I'm not saying Facebook should drop interest because of its potential impact on one little online sales company, I'm simply offering an anecdote about the impact such decisions have at this level. In fact, I'd love for my company to be able to upgrade us to the latest hardware; it would certainly make my job easier in the long run. I just find it sad that a corporate buyout by a company that has nothing to do with our business could affect us so greatly. But, that's the way the business world works every day.

Reply Score: 2

foldingstock Member since:
2008-10-30

I just find it sad that a corporate buyout by a company that has nothing to do with our business could affect us so greatly. But, that's the way the business world works every day.


I don't mean for this to sound rude, but the "sad" outcome you speak of is always a possibility when you depend on any external entity to conduct business. Free services such as Opera's mobile browser are great, but should be used with caution and some kind of contingency plan in place. Personally, I expect to see a lot more of this in a few years.

Companies are increasingly pushing internal services to "the cloud" to free up their staff and save operational costs. This is great short term, but most companies aren't prepared for the possibility that their cloud service will shut down one day. Services don't even have to shut down to drastically effect business operations. Simply changing a public API or web interface layout could result in broken functionality. Ah, the cloud.

Reply Score: 6

Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Not rude at all, I agree with you completely. I knew what I had thrown together was a kludge, and would eventually be replaced with a more robust answer. In fact, I do have a long term solution mapped out via OpenBravo's ERP offering. But it will still involve a significant hardware upgrade, something my superiors will just have to deal with when the time comes.

My point was more that, increasingly, big decisions by the major players no longer trickle downhill to the little guys. Rather, they become an avalanche of change that is difficult to deal with unless, as you said, there is a contingency plan. I have a feeling that even if we had licensed a specific level of support and customization from Opera for our warehouse database project, a move like the one rumored would still impact it significantly.

Reply Score: 3

foldingstock Member since:
2008-10-30

My point was more that, increasingly, big decisions by the major players no longer trickle downhill to the little guys. Rather, they become an avalanche of change that is difficult to deal with unless, as you said, there is a contingency plan.


I agree completely and feel that "the cloud" is to blame for this shift. In "the old days," if a software vendor was bought out, you could keep using the last version you purchased from them as long as you had hardware that would run it. This can't happen with a lot of modern software that depend on a cloud connection to operate (whether for licensing or computational purposes). If the company gets bought out or goes belly up, changes are good their servers that your software depend on to function will not remain online for long.

I have a feeling that even if we had licensed a specific level of support and customization from Opera for our warehouse database project, a move like the one rumored would still impact it significantly.


Very likely, yes. Most SLA's don't/can't cover a buyout since the terms of any potential buyout are unknown. If Opera was open source and provided a server package that would allow the end user to build their own server to perform computation for their mobile browser you might have a chance, but this would also require purchasing hardware and probably some rather extensive software configurations. Certainly no 'one size fits all' fix.

Reply Score: 5

Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Very likely, yes. Most SLA's don't/can't cover a buyout since the terms of any potential buyout are unknown. If Opera was open source and provided a server package that would allow the end user to build their own server to perform computation for their mobile browser you might have a chance, but this would also require purchasing hardware and probably some rather extensive software configurations. Certainly no 'one size fits all' fix.


Exactly. It looks as though I'll be moving forward with OpenBravo ERP anyway, since it is much more robust that my cobbled-together database setup. It will also integrate nicely with the POS I put together for the physical storefront, which is based on OpenBravo's free POS offering.

Reply Score: 2

pgquiles Member since:
2006-07-16

There are alternatives: NetFront, ZetaKey, UC Browser, Konqueror Embedded, and probably more.

Reply Score: 3

Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Actually I have tried a few alternatives, including NetFront, and none will work on the very specific hardware we have. I'm exploring other hardware solutions at this point, but so far it looks like a complete upgrade to WinMo6 based scanners, unless I can find an Android based alternative that is as rugged as what we use now (DataLogic Kyman scanners).

Reply Score: 2

RE: What would happen to Opera Mini?
by zima on Sat 26th May 2012 10:09 UTC in reply to "What would happen to Opera Mini?"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Opera Mobile/Mini [...] the gateway that allows the mobile apps to function

But Opera Mobile doesn't depend on Opera servers. Sure, it can use them - say, for compression on a slow connection, just like desktop Opera Turbo function - but it doesn't require their presence, it's a full browser.

(anyway, I doubt any buyout; if there's something behind rumors, I suspect just more of how Opera ASA does business in... mobile)

Reply Score: 2

PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

(anyway, I doubt any buyout; if there's something behind rumors, I suspect just more of how Opera ASA does business in... mobile)

Um, what do you mean?

Reply Score: 1

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

FB becoming one of many clients of Opera (my 1st post in this thread, something in the vicinity of http://www.opera.com/business/ "Mobile operators & OEMs" and perhaps "Mobile advertising" too; anywhere from FB offering a slightly customized version of Mini - instead of the presently offered sucky official j2me FB app - when so called "feature phone" visits their page, to a new official j2me FB app built around Mini tech; generally something that Opera does)

Though one other option, I guess - a site the size (and traffic & bandwidth costs) of FB might be interested in Opera Turbo...

Reply Score: 2

daedalus Member since:
2011-01-14

True, Opera Mobile is a fully fledged browser. Opera *Mini* on the other hand depends entirely on the servers. The differences between Opera Mobile and Opera Mini are hard to see (similar interface, icon etc.) but they are totally different apps.

Reply Score: 1

I do not think they will buy it
by churlish_Helmut on Fri 25th May 2012 19:27 UTC
churlish_Helmut
Member since:
2010-04-12

Well, if they buy it, it would be some sort of smart move, after buying instragram for the money of 10 Third-world-countries.

I mean, i wouldn't use opera anymore, if the O becomes blue and i can instantly have access to my FB-account than to my email accounts. Pretty useless for me, unless they intend to do their mobile OS

Reply Score: 4

RichterKuato Member since:
2010-05-14

Yeah, I very much doubt it too. At least I don't see Facebook being interested in the Browser/Brand considering their small market share and poor website compatibility. If anything they'd be more interested in the talent and expertise of employees working at Opera. They be put to work on a brand new Webkit-based browser.

Reply Score: 3

PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Yeah, I very much doubt it too. At least I don't see Facebook being interested in the Browser/Brand considering their small market share and poor website compatibility. If anything they'd be more interested in the talent and expertise of employees working at Opera. They be put to work on a brand new Webkit-based browser.


Small market share? Opera is #1 on mobile with 20-25% market share, and it has more than 200 million active users.

Poor website compatibility? No, it's excellent, but a lot of sites are using browser sniffing so you'll have to spoof as Firefox to get them working (which means that it isn't Opera that's incompatible, but that the site is blocking Opera).

Please, educate yourself.

Reply Score: 4

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

The last time they gave concrete numbers, at the end of 2010, over 200 million people accessed FB from their mobile phones; a year ago it was "hundreds of millions of people" ( http://blog.facebook.com/blog.php?topic_id=185065394274 )

And it just so happens that Opera is the #1 mobile browser, Facebook a top webpage viewed by its users ( http://www.opera.com/smw/2011/11/ oh and FB works fine under Opera, that's probably all FB cares about), and the most explosive growth of new FB users (and web users in general) occurs in places where mobile phone is often the first and only way to access the web ( http://www.opera.com/smw/2012/03/ ).
I'd guess FB keeps an eye on a browser which brings a sizable portion of users to its webpage (and, most importantly, keeps many of them hooked / they're a demographic likely to be more affluent one day, and clicking on ads); though I also doubt in any buyout.

If anything they'd be more interested in the talent and expertise of employees working at Opera. They be put to work on a brand new Webkit-based browser.

Employees who aren't used to Webkit, and certainly only part of them would be interested and willing to familiarize themselves ...OTOH most would be probably put off by takeover and murder of their darling.
Easier, and most likely by far cheaper, to just "announce" perks to employees and "steal" some, than to buy whole company.

Reply Score: 4

RichterKuato Member since:
2010-05-14

I stand corrected, that's quite a bit of research there. I can certainly see the value Facebook would see in the mobile version of Opera. I still think they'd value their expertise and talent more but now I also think they'd value their business relationships with manufacturers.

Reply Score: 2

bhtooefr
Member since:
2009-02-19

...at least that's what was said as the reason why Opera was able to disable ads on the desktop version.

Reply Score: 2

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Maybe "journalists" were the ones saying that...

Meanwhile http://www.opera.com/press/faq/

How does Opera make money?

Opera has two basic revenue models:

For enterprise products, such as Opera preinstalled on a mobile phone or a set-top box, Opera receives revenue as a mix of engineering fees, maintenance fees and shares of sales income. The balance varies from contract to contract. This model accounts for the majority of Opera’s income.

And from quickly glancing over (you're free to dig deeper) http://www.opera.com/company/investors/ ( http://www.opera.com/media/finance/2012/1Q12_presentation.pdf in particular) only minor part must have been from Google.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Luminair
by Luminair on Fri 25th May 2012 19:41 UTC
Luminair
Member since:
2007-03-30

opera for windows pared down into a browser compatible with facebook ideals would no longer be opera. hopefully they realize that and would fork it into two different browsers with different purposes.

opera for android, however, is already compatible with facebook ideals

Reply Score: 2

Something unique to Opera
by foldingstock on Fri 25th May 2012 20:06 UTC
foldingstock
Member since:
2008-10-30

It doesn't make sense to purchase Opera when there are dozens of open source browsers that could easily be forked and rebranded, assuming that FaceBook just wants to enter the browser market, of course. With this in mind, it seems to me that there is something specific about Opera (mobile? unite? one of the plethora of add-in features?) that FaceBook wants which other browser's do not (entirely or easily) offer.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Something unique to Opera
by ephracis on Fri 25th May 2012 20:25 UTC in reply to "Something unique to Opera"
ephracis Member since:
2007-09-23

I counter your logic with one Mark Z.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Something unique to Opera
by Morgan on Fri 25th May 2012 20:25 UTC in reply to "Something unique to Opera"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

I think it's something to do with the way Opera Mobile/Mini's HTTP requests are routed through Opera's servers and "optimized" for the small screen. During that journey there is a wealth of personal data to be mined for advertisers.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Something unique to Opera
by PresentIt on Fri 25th May 2012 22:05 UTC in reply to "Something unique to Opera"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

It doesn't make sense to purchase Opera when there are dozens of open source browsers that could easily be forked and rebranded

But they would have to share technology with Google (WebKit is the only realistic alternative).

With Opera, they would own the entire browser and have something special that they had 100% control of, unlike WebKit.

Reply Score: 1

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Yeah, but right now, does anyone actually test their css/html/js for opera? I admit to only occasionally doing it. Its mostly standards compliant, but it still does things differently than webkit, gecko, and ie when sites don't conform to the standards.

They'd have the "opportunity" to keep all their changes to themselves, but they'd be paying for all of the work that makes a browser a browser instead of sharing that cost with other companies like apple and google. I don't think it makes sense.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Something unique to Opera
by zima on Fri 1st Jun 2012 23:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Something unique to Opera"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Yeah, but right now, does anyone actually test their css/html/js for opera?

Most of CIS-based webdevs do that, I imagine (plus large part from central Europe, where Opera is close to 10%)

Edited 2012-06-02 00:05 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Something unique to Opera
by dionicio on Sun 27th May 2012 17:39 UTC in reply to "Something unique to Opera"
dionicio Member since:
2006-07-12

Maybe something about QT

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Something unique to Opera
by PresentIt on Mon 28th May 2012 12:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Something unique to Opera"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Maybe something about QT

QT? You mean Qt, which Opera isn't really using and hasn't ever used on anything but Linux?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Something unique to Opera
by libray on Wed 30th May 2012 02:00 UTC in reply to "Something unique to Opera"
libray Member since:
2005-08-27

Opera has tons of personal data on its users. That would be quite valuable for Facebook to purchase

Reply Score: 2

If they open source it....
by robojerk on Fri 25th May 2012 20:19 UTC
robojerk
Member since:
2006-01-10

I'm with Thom, that I strongly respect Opera and it would be sad if it was gobbled up by a large company.

I could stomach someone acquiring Opera if they open sourced it. It would at least allow a community to continue development if said corporation makes poor decisions.

With iOS, Window 8 (Metro), and MacOS becoming or already are walled gardens why would FB want to enter the browser market? Unless they're really planning to do a FB phone.

Edited 2012-05-25 20:20 UTC

Reply Score: 6

RE: If they open source it....
by Bishi on Fri 25th May 2012 21:49 UTC in reply to "If they open source it...."
Bishi Member since:
2009-08-27

I actually would be okay with this. My browser of choice is Opera, and right now I trust them. But I don't trust Facebook. I'd go back to Chromium and Firefox.

Furthermore, the Opera guys have been the major force behind HTML5, and have always acted against pushes to tailor the spec to the likes of some companies.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Fri 25th May 2012 20:44 UTC
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

I think it's bad. Facebook is not trustworthy as a company. On the other hand it would be good for Opera to become open sourced really.

Reply Score: 1

Don't Touch My Opera, DO YOU HEAR ME?
by jmarka on Fri 25th May 2012 21:01 UTC
jmarka
Member since:
2012-05-25

Don't Touch My Opera, DO YOU HEAR ME?

Reply Score: 12

Oh hell no... please f***ing no...
by UltraZelda64 on Fri 25th May 2012 21:22 UTC
UltraZelda64
Member since:
2006-12-05

I respect Opera, and despise Facebook. Facebook buying Opera out would be one of the worst things that could happen to the company, in my opinion.

Reply Score: 8

Fastmail
by Requested_Username on Fri 25th May 2012 21:46 UTC
Requested_Username
Member since:
2012-05-25

Opera owns fastmail.fm. I do NOT want Facebook owning my email! Time to find a new IMAP provider. Pity, I've been a happy paying customer of Fastmail for many years.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Fastmail
by PresentIt on Fri 25th May 2012 22:06 UTC in reply to "Fastmail"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Opera owns fastmail.fm. I do NOT want Facebook owning my email! Time to find a new IMAP provider. Pity, I've been a happy paying customer of Fastmail for many years.

You are looking for a new IMAP provider based on mere rumors? Shouldn't you at least wait until the rumor is confirmed before you resort to knee-jerk reactions?

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Fastmail
by bornagainenguin on Sat 26th May 2012 05:16 UTC in reply to "RE: Fastmail"
bornagainenguin Member since:
2005-08-07

PresentIt asked...

You are looking for a new IMAP provider based on mere rumors? Shouldn't you at least wait until the rumor is confirmed before you resort to knee-jerk reactions?


Not really. The time to start looking at alternatives is before you need them so you know where to jump when the time comes. Note that he didn't say he was leaving right away, just that he was going to start looking around to see who else could offer him the needed services should Opera (and fastmail) end up going to an untrustworthy or privacy hostile corporation.

Or at least that's what makes sense to me.

--bornagainpenguin

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Fastmail
by PresentIt on Sat 26th May 2012 09:44 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Fastmail"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

The time to start looking at alternatives is before you need them so you know where to jump when the time comes.

There will be time after the acquisition has been announced. Panicking before that will just waste your time.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Fastmail
by bornagainenguin on Sun 27th May 2012 05:03 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Fastmail"
bornagainenguin Member since:
2005-08-07

PresentIt posted...

The time to start looking at alternatives is before you need them so you know where to jump when the time comes.
There will be time after the acquisition has been announced. Panicking before that will just waste your time.


I would say that by researching their options now they are doing the opposite of panicking, they are taking careful reasoned steps on what they will do if such an acquisition were announced. Who gets hurt by shopping around?

--bornagainpenguin

Reply Score: 3

Hopefully not true
by jessesmith on Fri 25th May 2012 22:18 UTC
jessesmith
Member since:
2010-03-11

I'm a big fan of Opera and have used it fairly consistently as my main browser for about ten years now. One of the reasons is its sane and its slow rate of change where the interface is concerned. It's fast, it's stable, it's standards compliant. It has a ton of features, but has a smaller footprint on the system than most other mainline browsers.

Compare that to Facebook, an entity which is constantly changing its update, has a terrible security/privacy record and is painfully buggy. I can only assume Opera getting acquired by Facebook would be bad news for Opera users.

Reply Score: 3

A Lot Of Mixed Feelings.....
by Pelly on Fri 25th May 2012 22:41 UTC
Pelly
Member since:
2005-07-07

After seeing this article, I immediately read it. I just can't see any long-term benefit of Opera being purchased by FaceBook. At least no to the Opera users & community.

I started using Opera 8-9 years ago with Linux & Windows and have always been impressed with the performance of it. I still use the current versions simply because I like the way it works.

I'll be watching this and I'm keeping my fingers crossed. My initial reaction was, 'Looks like Opera will either be killed by FB or become junkware.'

By,'junkware,' I refer to my fear of FB integrating so much of their operations into Opera that future releases will be virtually (or totally) useless as a stand-alone browser.

I hope I'm proven wrong and Opera will still be a terrific web browser for many more years.

Reply Score: 2

features
by fran on Fri 25th May 2012 23:06 UTC
fran
Member since:
2010-08-06

"Opera is one of those products that I have the utmost respect for, even though I personally don't even like or use it. As a company, Opera has been incredibly innovative, and has always been at the very forefront of supporting the open web and web standards. However, I find the browser has just too many features for my own liking, and as such, it just isn't for me."

Well the features is not in ones way.
Opera is not complicated.
The extra functionality is just there when you need it.
It's bookmarking view and management for instance is unmatched.

Reply Score: 4

I use Opera
by mfaudzinr on Fri 25th May 2012 23:28 UTC
mfaudzinr
Member since:
2008-02-13

Opera has been my main browser for a very long time. I like it that it is independent and standard compliant. Nowadays hardly any page would have any rendering issues. On Facebook buying Opera, I'm on the fence on this. I'd rather have Opera independent but then again Facebook is hot property right now (Maybe not so hot on Nasdaq), I'd like to see Opera become hot property. For once maybe Opera shall be the glamor child of browsers, who knows.

Reply Score: 2

Try to see into this perspective...
by Jason Bourne on Sat 26th May 2012 02:04 UTC
Jason Bourne
Member since:
2007-06-02

Think for a moment and try to see this perspective... It's about time Opera kicks everyone asses.

Now if you don't use it, the reason to keep it underground is something beyond selfish...

Reply Score: 2

Ah crap!
by win2linconvert on Sat 26th May 2012 04:38 UTC
win2linconvert
Member since:
2012-02-02

I sure hope not. If Facebook acquires Opera, I'm finding a new browser to use. Am I the onlyone who is sick and tired of all of these acquisitions. These companies are too big and too arrogant. Pretty soon we are going to have only two or three companies owning everything. Can you say "Monopoly".

Reply Score: 2

RE: Ah crap!
by Morgan on Sat 26th May 2012 10:24 UTC in reply to "Ah crap!"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

I would imagine it would be much cheaper for Facebook to build their own browser out of WebKit or some other open project, especially given Zukerberg's history as a software guy. It might take a little bit longer, but would involve less spending, less lawyers and much more positive publicity in the tech circles.

On the other hand, Facebook lately seems to have the "throw a wad of cash at it" approach to innovating.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Ah crap!
by PresentIt on Sat 26th May 2012 10:41 UTC in reply to "RE: Ah crap!"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

I would imagine it would be much cheaper for Facebook to build their own browser out of WebKit or some other open project, especially given Zukerberg's history as a software guy. It might take a little bit longer, but would involve less spending, less lawyers and much more positive publicity in the tech circles.


It would probably not be cheaper in the long run because they would be competing with Google and Apple over the best WebKit engineers.

They would also have to share with Google and Apple, and wouldn't have full control.

On the other hand, if they buy Opera, they get complete control of the entire browser and don't have to share anything with anyone. They get access to exclusive technology with a bunch of experts who know it inside and out.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Ah crap!
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 29th May 2012 00:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ah crap!"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

You have to keep in mind zero percent of Opera's innovation has been related to the browser engine itself. Zero. All of it has been the features of the browser application itself: tabs, tunneling requests to remote server to pre-render page, Mouse gestures, ect. They could have done all of those with a webkit engine without having to share any of it. Web kit communizes the uninteresting part and splits up the costs of developing it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Ah crap!
by zima on Fri 1st Jun 2012 23:58 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Ah crap!"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

How they strive to keep their engine light & high certainly contributed to their mobile successes, at least (focus on standards compliance probably helped, too). Part of innovation process, I'd say.

Edited 2012-06-02 00:06 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Comment by marcp
by marcp on Sat 26th May 2012 07:28 UTC
marcp
Member since:
2007-11-23

What a reduculous idea would be for users to have "site-dedicated" browser. Total nonsense. And it doesn't matter how juge is the community focused around that site.

Now, I can perfectly understand motives and intensions: Facebook's incentive for world internet domination, but that just doesn't sound right. It reminds me of Netscape and AOL. People thought that Netscape/AOL *is the actual internet*.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by marcp
by Neolander on Sat 26th May 2012 07:39 UTC in reply to "Comment by marcp"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

As far as I'm concerned, a web browser with "integrated", unremovable Facebook functionality is exactly like a phone OS with the same "feature", which already exists. So it seems that the market is there.

However, I can't wait to hear about a variant of Cyanogenmod for web browsers if that would happen ;)

Edited 2012-05-26 07:40 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by marcp
by anda_skoa on Sun 27th May 2012 09:58 UTC in reply to "Comment by marcp"
anda_skoa Member since:
2005-07-07

What a reduculous idea would be for users to have "site-dedicated" browser.


While it sounds ridiculous when phrased that way, this is exactly what we already have on mobile platforms. They call those site-dedicated browsers "apps".

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by marcp
by Andre on Sun 27th May 2012 10:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by marcp"
Andre Member since:
2005-07-06

Oh, I hate the word, "apps".

A while ago, the facebook app was quite different from the site. Nowadays, the site and the app are exactly the same. So, I really wonder if it is just a "site-dedicated-browser" indeed.

As for facebook-opera. I hope Opera will remain independent. No facebook browser please. Besides all of that, from my experience, it always felt to me opera was less-supported by facebook then gecko or webkit based browsers.

Reply Score: 1

I'd have to stop using Opera
by Gooberslot on Sat 26th May 2012 08:22 UTC
Gooberslot
Member since:
2006-08-02

If this happened I'd have to stop using Opera. My already low self esteem couldn't stand being seen using the "Facebook Browser."

Reply Score: 3

RE: I'd have to stop using Opera
by orestes on Sun 27th May 2012 15:39 UTC in reply to "I'd have to stop using Opera"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

Likewise. I'd drop it in a heartbeat if it got anywhere near Facebook.

Reply Score: 2

...
by Hiev on Sat 26th May 2012 14:44 UTC
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

For an acquisition two are needed, the buyer and the seller, so don't just blame Facebook, Opera may be a sold out.

Edited 2012-05-26 14:45 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE: ...
by PresentIt on Sat 26th May 2012 16:43 UTC in reply to "..."
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

For an acquisition two are needed, the buyer and the seller, so don't just blame Facebook, Opera may be a sold out.


Or they may genuinely believe that having a huge and extremely powerful corporation behind the browser is going to take it to the next level.

Also, who's blaming Facebook? For what?

Edited 2012-05-26 16:44 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: ...
by Fergy on Sat 26th May 2012 21:24 UTC in reply to "RE: ..."
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

Also, who's blaming Facebook? For what?

Destroying the way the internet works? Creating a walled garden internet? Not caring about privacy?

You would think it would be obvious to a technical user why Facebook is bad.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: ...
by PresentIt on Sun 27th May 2012 10:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

What?? Please read the context:

"For an acquisition two are needed, the buyer and the seller, so don't just blame Facebook"

So clearly someone is claiming that someone is blaming Facebook for something related to the acquisition.

Please pay attention!

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: ...
by Fergy on Sun 27th May 2012 12:02 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: ..."
Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

What?? Please read the context:

"For an acquisition two are needed, the buyer and the seller, so don't just blame Facebook"

So clearly someone is claiming that someone is blaming Facebook for something related to the acquisition.

Please pay attention!

If Opera might be bought by a friendly trust worthy company there would be no issue. Facebook is the problem here not the buying of Opera.

Reply Score: 2

brajbir
Member since:
2012-05-26

I love opera. I can trust them with my data, my browsing history, my bookmarks, hell even my passwords... Can't say as much about facebook. I type this on an opera-next alpha browser.

Reply Score: 2

Fergy Member since:
2006-04-10

I love opera. I can trust them with my data, my browsing history, my bookmarks, hell even my passwords... Can't say as much about facebook. I type this on an opera-next alpha browser.

That's weird why would you run alpha when beta is out and the RC is almost ready.

Reply Score: 2

FastMail as well
by Vorbisophile on Sun 27th May 2012 12:24 UTC
Vorbisophile
Member since:
2006-01-06

I don't use Opera anymore (Chrome convert), but my email provider FastMail was acquired by Opera a short while ago and I really don't want to see Facebook getting hold of my email accounts. I can choose currently to not use Facebook's email system, Opera being bought out would essentially nullify that.

Could switch to another provider but I've no idea how many accounts are linked to any particular email address unfortunately, and would be loath to give any up...

Reply Score: 1

rumour...
by TomF on Sun 27th May 2012 21:16 UTC
TomF
Member since:
2010-01-22

urm... "rumour" says O to be bought by FB?

ok... lets start a new "rumour": FB will merge with MS, and buy ORA... then will rename to SKYNET ..

ok ?

Tom UK

Reply Score: 1

RE: rumour...
by PresentIt on Mon 28th May 2012 13:00 UTC in reply to "rumour..."
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

ok... lets start a new "rumour":


It doesn't work that way. This is not just a random rumor from some random guy's comments. It's posted on a well known tech site. No, two of them. And then spread around to others.

Reply Score: 1

What Facebook wants ?
by Lennie on Sun 27th May 2012 23:30 UTC
Lennie
Member since:
2007-09-22

As I understood it, they don't want to get in the browser market so much. But Facebook wants a more knowhow in the mobile market.

Reply Score: 2

Mozilla is independent
by Lennie on Mon 28th May 2012 00:22 UTC
Lennie
Member since:
2007-09-22

As I see it:

Mozilla receives a lot more money than they spend. (the old financial report is now a 404 page not found, so the next sentence is from memory). In 2010 they spend, I think, only 1/4 of the money they received.

Every year since 2009 or 2008 at least they've received more money.

In 2010 they already had almost as much cash in the bank (or other financial assets) than they received from searchegines that year.

Google can't stop giving money to Mozilla, because Mozilla might put Bing as the default search engine in their browser.

So I think Mozilla can run for years without any financial help from anyone and Mozilla is a non profit with the goal to improve the web and keep it open for everyone.

Opera is a business and also receives money from Google, Microsoft, Yandex and so on.

Does that make Opera less or more independent than Mozilla ?

I know one thing, Facebook can't but Mozilla.

Reply Score: 2

crap
by aargh on Mon 28th May 2012 08:04 UTC
aargh
Member since:
2009-10-12

Holy shit! This just made my hair stand up. I hope Opera won't get facked up. Where's the dislike button on Osnews? DO NOT RECOMMEND.

Reply Score: 1

znby
Member since:
2012-02-03

Can't they just license the technology off Opera?

Reply Score: 1

Opera has enough problems already...
by Dave_K on Mon 28th May 2012 13:58 UTC
Dave_K
Member since:
2005-11-16

I find the current state of Opera depressing enough as it is.

A lot of the more advanced and unusual features that made Opera my favourite browser have been neglected or broken. Customisation options are missing, don't work properly with new features, or rely on extensions that cause as many issues as they solve. I've encountered more annoyances and frustrations in the last few Opera releases than in every previous version I've used put together.

To me most of the changes made to Opera in the last couple of years have been for the worse, but even if they just fixed the bugs it would return to being my favourite browser. Unfortunately many of the most annoying glitches have been hanging around for years now with no sign that they'll be fixed.

People who want a simple browser have plenty of choice, but Opera's really the only browser to fill the feature rich "power user" niche. It'd be a shame to lose that completely and see Opera utterly dumbed down.

It's hard to imagine Opera not becoming much, much worse if Yahoo were controlling its direction.

Reply Score: 2

Dave_K Member since:
2005-11-16

Facebook, not Yahoo. Doh!

Reply Score: 2

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Well as far as personal anecdotes go... I find recent-ish releases very pleasant, recapturing the nice feel of 9.27 (there was a havoc since 9.5 - but only till the end of 10; I guess the direction of browser market developments took Opera ASA by surprise, and in rushing js engine improvements they neglected other parts, for a time)

Reply Score: 2

It does make sense for Facebook
by Priest on Mon 28th May 2012 15:57 UTC
Priest
Member since:
2006-05-12

If Facebook wants to be able to go head to head with Google, Apple, and Microsoft, they need to be more than just facebook.com, they need to be software and framework.

Google sees the browser as the platform of the future and with the rise of web apps, cloud computing, HTML5 etc. I can't say they are far off the mark.

I'm not saying I like Facebook, but if they want to open an app store and move into mobile Opera makes sense.

Reply Score: 2