Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 5th Nov 2008 16:03 UTC, submitted by Cam
Last week we had some contradicting reports regarding Opera Software and its Opera Mini web browser. The New York Times' Bits weblog and Daring Fireball's John Gruber contradicted one another concerning a possible iPhone version of Opera Mini - or more specifically, about whether or not Opera had actually submitted Opera Mini to Apple. The Bits weblog has now settled the issue.
Thread beginning with comment 336408
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-01-16
Thom, you disappoint me when you write things like this:
If this little episode tells us anything, it's that Apple's policies towards the iPhone and its developers is a hot iron, and it most likely will be for the foreseeable future.
This little episode by itself tells us nothing of the sort.
Had Opera consulted Apple on the subject of releasing Opera Mini at all then one could infer such a conclusion. They did not.
It has been made clear that Opera did not submit their app to Apple. From the blog article it would seem that they did not communicate with Apple and consult with them on the possibility of releasing Opera Mini in any way. They merely read the license agreement.
The license was clear, and this was a license condition that has been widely known for quite some time.
All we can conclude from this is that some Opera developers experimented on the iPhone, and they have a version of the Opera Mini codebase that is not dependant on Java. That is all.