To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Well, it is important to be first for both Opera and Safari. They aim for more customers and they get positive exposure in the media by being first. It is also about credibility. They can now claim that they follow standards better than Firefox. Personally I think it is great that it is getting so much attention since it puts more pressure on IE to comply with web standards.
I also agree.
Maybe Firefox or IE will not lose their popularity if they do not become in 100% standards compliant, but it talk a lot about the care and polish they put into their work.
Occurs the same when you create a program that works with mouse clicks but does not understand anything about tab or arrows or short cuts... your program works and it does what it should do... but if your program supports arrow keys, tab keys, shortcuts, can be used for people with visual problems and have a lot of "polishment", it talks about you and the dedication you put into your final product.
I fully agree.
It's clear that standards compliance isn't the measurement that defines popularity yet.
Firefox 2.x doesn't even pass the Acid 2 test yet, and it's not losing any popularity contests
It's "good enough" in most peoples minds - and that's what matters. Firefox has the added benefit of being open-source, which probably generates a lot more "selling power" to those who are "browser shopping". IE on the other hand doesn't even seem to aspire to be competitive on standards compliance, nor does it have anything else going for it other than pure market share by default.
Opera and Safari are going to maybe make inroads among those who want to claim to have "the fastest browser" or "the most standards compliant browser" ... but I guess it remains to be seen if that translates into real tangible market share or not.
I'm can't wait for a cross-platform open-source webkit based KDE web browser. If the KDE people design it correctly then I believe that they could very quickly gain massive amounts of market share.
I have a sort of related question to this. If you make Firefox-like extensions for a GPL-licensed program would those extensions also have to be GPL? As I believe a KDE based web browser would have to be GPL in order to use the free version of QT.
I love the renewed browser wars. Hopefully the next "war" will occur in office suites between OpenOffice, KOffice, and GNOME Office.
Right. Besides, Opera was the first browser to ship with tabs around version 3.6X if memory serves me right (although they were slightly different of what we see today on most web browsers, more like a MDI-style app I think) but that didn't stop the horde of clueless people giving credit to Mozilla for that.
And I have seen some people here on OSNews of all places suggest once or twice that Firefox came with that first and then Seamonkey and other browsers copied that "incredibly useful innovation", nonetheless... :|
Opera is against patents and they freely let people copy their features. A good deal of Firefox functionality and extensions are implementations of Opera-stuff.
Would be interesting if Opera was *not* against patents and held patents of all the stuff that they came up with.
Firefox(and probably other browsers as well) would be very different indeed.
Thankfully Opera instead of clinging onto patents instead try to drive forward and innovative. 






Member since:
2006-06-21
Why does it only matter who ships first? I don't see how a few months is going to make that much of a difference. I don't think we'll see Safari or Opera users going "oh, the other browser has 100% ACID3 compliance, I'm going to switch."