Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 23rd Mar 2010 16:26 UTC
Opera Software Think of Opera what you want, but those Norwegian guys and girls know how to get publicity. The company has announced it has submitted Opera Mini to the iPhone's App Store, and it has launched a website with a count-up timer, following how long it will take Apple to approve it - if at all, of course.
Thread beginning with comment 414971
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
fuzzywombat
Member since:
2006-11-21

Right now Apple is in a bit of a jam because technically Apple can reject Opera browser citing two specific reasons. One obvious one they've cited prior is the duplication of functionality rule. Second not so obvious restriction is the application cannot have it's own interpreter. This is reason why Commodore 64 emulator was not allowed to have a Basic interpreter. This opens the door for third party apps to run inside the interpreter. Javascript interpreter does indeed violate this rule.

An iPad will come with it's own book store which means suddenly Kindle Reader or Stanza is in violation of duplication of functionality rule. Does that mean Apple will pull those apps for the iPad but allow it for iPhone and iPod touch? If Apple allows third party ebook reader apps for the iPad, does that mean they should allow Amazon MP3 store app too?

Apple App Store's rules are already seen as very arbitrary and inconsistent as it is but it's about to get even worse. If Apple cuts a content deal with National Geographics, what happens to naked african woman pictures? What about art magazines with classical paintings of naked women? Will they have a different rule for magazine and book content while keeping current "no sexually suggestive" content rule for apps except Playboy and Sport Illustrated swim suit app? How will they reconcile these conflicting rules or will they even try?

Reply Score: 3

Praxis Member since:
2009-09-17

Second not so obvious restriction is the application cannot have it's own interpreter. This is reason why Commodore 64 emulator was not allowed to have a Basic interpreter. This opens the door for third party apps to run inside the interpreter. Javascript interpreter does indeed violate this rule.


Opera mini doesn't do any javascript on the phone though, opera's takes care of all of that server side. So current justification they have for that is duplicated functionality. Also in response to the rest of your post, I don't think apple is the least bit concerned with consistency or hypocrisy in its app store policies. There reasoning is that its there store and they can do whatever they want for whatever reason they want. And as long as developers go along with that they aren't going to change.

Reply Parent Score: 2

darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Opera mini doesn't do any javascript on the phone though, opera's takes care of all of that server side.


Not quite. The rendering etc is done server-side, but there's still a minimal local interpreter because it needs to be able to intercept javascript events and act on them. Even if all it does is forward the event to their server and send back the changed content, that's still enough grounds for Apple to reject as it's possible to run random 3rd party code in a 3rd party app.
Personally, I think Apple's controlling attitude is ridiculous, but the terms are very clear on this point at least. Many of their restrictions are arbitrary, but they seem pretty consistent with the no interpreters rule.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Jimbob Member since:
2005-07-07

There's a bit of a difference between tits-out to titillate, and tits-out because you live in the kalahari desert. They are not the same thing at all.

Reply Parent Score: 2

dumdiddydum Member since:
2009-10-29

If Apple cuts a content deal with National Geographics, what happens to naked african woman pictures? What about art magazines with classical paintings of naked women? Will they have a different rule for magazine and book content while keeping current "no sexually suggestive" content rule for apps except Playboy and Sport Illustrated swim suit app? How will they reconcile these conflicting rules or will they even try?


eventually apple will have to take a different stance on this because not every country has the schizophrenic view on nudity/sexuality as the US of A have. at the moment apple's just covering its ass against moronic litigations from even more moronic self proclamied guardians of decency and good christian family values (think of them as of the american equivalent of the iranian revolutionary guards). meanwhile guess where the world's largest porn industry is located.

more on topic: opera mini would definitely get a fat stamp of approval if i were to make that decision. i do think they will eventually but it will probably take a while. they may get back at opera about issues in some details but eventually these will be resolved.

Edited 2010-03-24 09:40 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3