Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 27th Jul 2009 07:29 UTC
Opera Software Last week, the European Commission announced that Microsoft is willing to implement a browser ballot screen in Windows so that users can select a browser to install when installing Windows or when setting up their OEM computer. While this makes Opera very happy, Opera would like to see Ubuntu and Apple offer such a ballot screen too.
Thread beginning with comment 375320
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
problem with opera
by Kishe on Mon 27th Jul 2009 08:02 UTC
Kishe
Member since:
2006-02-16

Opera used to be big player when they were slim and fast browser but they lost lot of users when they desided to incorporate lots of useless bloat.

right now Opera is stuck in "Us too" style of development model, unable to produce anything that would take them above the competition.

Reply Score: 5

RE: problem with opera
by issvb on Mon 27th Jul 2009 09:17 in reply to "problem with opera"
issvb Member since:
2009-01-12

Opera used to be big player when they were slim and fast browser but they lost lot of users when they desided to incorporate lots of useless bloat.


So when did Opera stop being slim and fast? Its install is still small, it's fast and to me personally it still "feels" like one of the more faster browsers. Yes, there is a lot of stuff I don't need (like the mail client, widgets and now Unite), but really, I never had the mail client, some widget or Unite pop up without any reason! It's there, but if you don't use it you won't even notice it. If that is your definition of bloat than just about anything can be called "bloated"

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE: problem with opera
by Laurence on Mon 27th Jul 2009 12:48 in reply to "problem with opera"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Opera used to be big player when they were slim and fast browser but they lost lot of users when they desided to incorporate lots of useless bloat.

right now Opera is stuck in "Us too" style of development model, unable to produce anything that would take them above the competition.


I read comments like this a lot and they bug me for the following reasons:

1/ Opera continually performs excellently in various rendering benchmarks when compared to other leading browsers

2/ Opera continually pushes new ideas which other browsers latter copy (tabs, gestures, dial pad, etc) and promote as their own "competition leading features"

3/ You're whole bloat argument is paradoxical as you then go on to argue about a lack of new features. (after all, one mans bloat is another mans feature - and visa versa)



I think the reality of Opera's problems are the following:

1/ crappy UI (particularly it's lack of native widget support, but also how a lot of settings are tucked away in counter-intuitive locations and it's unpopular default toolbar settings)

2/ lack of publicity:
-> Chrome is a big name thanks to Google's already established web dominance,
-> IE is preinstalled in windows,
-> Safari is preinstalled on OS X plus has windows installs thanks to Apples PR/brand name
-> Firefox had to gain their market share the hard way, but they've now reached "critical mass" where by the computer-illiterate have heard of the application and thus recommend it to their like-minded technophobe friends (after all, the majorety of computer users aren't geeks like us)
-> Opera, however, neither has the backing of a big brand name, nor the critical mass of Firefox.


However, this doesn't mean i particularly agree with Opera's actions. While I sympathise with their situation, I don't think this is the "right" way to go about marketing themselves.

Edited 2009-07-27 12:53 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: problem with opera
by diegocg on Mon 27th Jul 2009 15:30 in reply to "RE: problem with opera"
diegocg Member since:
2005-07-08

Opera used to be innovative. But the "new ideas" that they have been adding lately have been that stupid proxy that reduces the quality of images for dialup/phone people. Did I mention that they made the "turbo mode" ("great" name, BTW) button visible in the main UI? Oh, they also released Opera Unite. Which was supposed to revolutionize internet. Except that it didn't.

Opera used to be really fast - but these days, benchmarks show that opera javascript engine is slower than webkit and firefox and chrome. And the Next Big Thing in browsers is what they call "multiprocess". IE8 does it, Chrome does it, Firefox will do it....Opera doesn't.

So where's the innovation? I just don't see it. It has moved elsewhere.

Edited 2009-07-27 15:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: problem with opera
by bert64 on Mon 27th Jul 2009 18:24 in reply to "RE: problem with opera"
bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

Firefox had the advantage of being open source, and thus being the preferred choice for users on non windows platforms (except maybe osx)... and also being derived from netscape, which some people had fond memories of.

Firefox has pretty much become the default browser for non windows/osx systems, as netscape was before it.

However the Linux market is far more competitive, firefox does nothing to lock people in, there aren't any linux users stuck with a browser they don't want, it's easy to remove/replace firefox... If a browser that's much better comes along, people will switch... If Chrome becomes good enough then it may well replace firefox as the most popular browser on linux.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: problem with opera
by Delgarde on Mon 27th Jul 2009 21:13 in reply to "RE: problem with opera"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

I think the reality of Opera's problems are the following:


Personally, I think Opera's problem is that they think they can sell web browsers when no fewer than four larger organisations (Microsoft, Mozilla, Apple, Google) are giving them away for free. That is *not* a good business model...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: problem with opera
by deathshadow on Mon 27th Jul 2009 16:04 in reply to "problem with opera"
deathshadow Member since:
2005-07-12

... and another person who makes a claim about Opera that apparently never used it.

Bloated? Even WITH united Opera 10 beta, the most 'bloated' version has a memory footprint equal to firefox (around 38 megs with only google open), doesn't chew memory as fast (first five articles for OSNews open in Opera, 89 megs, first five articles for OSNews open in FF, 110 megs)... and let's talk distribution size:

FF 3.5

7.7 megs Windows
9.5 megs Linux

Features: Allows you to install extensions

Opera 9.64 -

5.4 megs English Windows
7.2 megs Internationalized Windows
7.5 megs Linux (x64 .deb)

Features: mouse gestures, flip navigation, mail client, bittorrent client, widgets engine, user javascript, adblock, speed dial, custom launch buttons, trash, session saving, dragonfly, "The Wand", etc, etc.

Opera 10 Beta -

6.7 Megs Windows
7.5 megs Linux (x64 .deb)

As above, but add more speed dial options, Opera Unite, improved dragonfly, Opera Turbo, inline spell check (was actually in previous versions all the way back to 7.2 but you had to install ASpell separately to make it work, now it's integrated)

Oh yes, but at a megabyte smaller distribution with more built in features Opera is "Bloated" - RIGHT. Tell me another one Josephine.

Of course Google is smart enough to hide their bloat behind a download manager ;)

Edited 2009-07-27 16:08 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4