Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 21st Feb 2008 15:26 UTC, submitted by Robert Kratky
Opera Software Opera Software's CEO Jon S. von Tetzchner explains why they will not release the Opera browser as open source, arguing that open standards are more important than open source. Von Tetzchner also talks about the company's antitrust complaint to the European Commission in which it accuses Microsoft of abusing its dominant position by tying Internet Explorer to Windows.
Thread beginning with comment 301892
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: hrmmm
by TheBadger on Thu 21st Feb 2008 19:45 UTC in reply to "hrmmm"
TheBadger
Member since:
2005-11-14

"open standards are more important than open source"

I can agree with that.


I think we'll have to agree to disagree. ;-)

I can see the benefit of open standards - it would be a stagnant Web browser scene if the only thing providing Web browser capabilities was the Mozilla code base and you had to go through and figure out what it was actually doing, but at least you could do that if it were open source (which it is, of course). Indeed, the power of verification is there for all to explore.

I'd rather have open source, ahem, Free Software. The level of control is superior, the barriers to involvement are lower. Opera do themselves a disservice in several respects by insisting on remaining proprietary: the important GNU/Linux distros won't touch their stuff unless it's open enough (even Firefox only makes the grade rebranded in some cases); people who support Free Software don't care as much about some proprietary vendor's battles with Microsoft as they do about one of their own.

What still amazes me is that Opera is still around. It's not a tiny company, and it would appear that they've spread their focus in order to make up for the loss of revenue from selling the browser to end-users, even though there are some corporate licensees who haven't yet switched to something else. The resulting strategy doesn't seem particularly convincing.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: hrmmm
by Redeeman on Thu 21st Feb 2008 21:12 in reply to "RE: hrmmm"
Redeeman Member since:
2006-03-23

well..

open standards ARE more important than the licensing of an individual piece of software.

Who cares what license the software someone uses is, as long as its always possible to replace it, and freely compete, which a free and open standard ensures. I dont give a rats ass if your browser is opensource, as long as i can view the pages with my free browser..

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: hrmmm
by Doc Pain on Fri 22nd Feb 2008 00:14 in reply to "RE[2]: hrmmm"
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

Who cares what license the software someone uses is, as long as its always possible to replace it, and freely compete, which a free and open standard ensures.


I'd like to apply an example here to show why I primarily agree with your statement:

I'm actually working on a software project in the healthcare sector. This application is closed source and costs money. But it only uses open standards (e. g. XML) for its files, and the file layouts are documented, too. So it's easy to create free software that can make use of the files from the proprietary software (that's what I'm doing at the moment), this is because of the open standards that allow it. I don't need to have a license for the expensive product, but I can still "interoperate" with it - or replace it, as you've mentioned correctly.

As long as an application is compliant to existing documented standards, it's okay, in my opinion.

As an addition, I'd like to express that I see the high value of open source / free software. Sadly, the commercial world seems to have the credo "If it does not cost anything, it's worthless", which of course isn't true, but leads decisions which software to run. Of course, as you surely will know, these decisions are made by people who don't have the neccessary clue, that's politics as usual. :-)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: hrmmm
by aesiamun on Thu 21st Feb 2008 22:06 in reply to "RE: hrmmm"
aesiamun Member since:
2005-06-29

Please don't speak for me. Open standards, in my opinion, are much more important than Open Source.

Reply Parent Score: 3