Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 21st Feb 2008 15:26 UTC, submitted by Robert Kratky
Permalink for comment 301932
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-08-11
i second this!!
They make it sound like if they went open source they would somehow have to break open standards...?!
I think BOTH open standards AND open source are important, and most open source projects I know also support open standards. In most cases they support open standards better than their closed-source "equivalents".
So what is the point of saying open standards are more important? Its just an excuse for not opening up their code and I dont believe its a valid one.
If they made opera open source it would still meet the same open standards it does today. So the question should be asked again, "Why wont opera go open-source AND remain open-standards compliant?". Why?
Edited 2008-02-22 02:43 UTC