Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 19th Jan 2013 14:22 UTC
Opera Software This is actually pretty big news - both exciting and tragic at the same time. Opera has revealed Opera Ice, its next mobile browser, to PocketLint. This new browser represent a big shift in both user interface as well as rendering engine, since it has a new, unique interface, as well as a new rendering engine... New to Opera, that is, as it's a WebKit-browser.
Thread beginning with comment 549438
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: ...
by vaette on Sat 19th Jan 2013 14:30 UTC in reply to "..."
vaette
Member since:
2008-08-09

I don't, the webkit monoculture on mobile is increasingly terrifying.

Reply Parent Score: 15

RE[2]: ...
by Hiev on Sat 19th Jan 2013 14:58 in reply to "RE: ..."
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

I has its advantages, this is the argument I used to convince to my superiors we needed to standarize the company browser to Chrome, that webkit is in every movil OS, macs, windows and Linux, and now, all I have to do is program to webkit, but, only to HTML5 not to webkit's special features, and, now with Opera running on top of webkit, we can switch from Chrome to Opera, cause I don't trust Google to be spying in our company.

Edited 2013-01-19 15:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: ...
by zima on Sat 26th Jan 2013 23:13 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

and, now with Opera running on top of webkit, we can switch from Chrome to Opera

This rumour isn't even about the desktop Opera, just about some new mobile browser (it's right there in the summary) ...I don't suppose you do development work on mobiles. ;p

Edited 2013-01-26 23:15 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: ...
by Chris_G on Sat 19th Jan 2013 15:01 in reply to "RE: ..."
Chris_G Member since:
2012-10-25

It doesn't bother me too much. If WebKit development ever stagnated, the browser makers would just fork it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: ...
by Kroc on Sat 19th Jan 2013 17:13 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

And then do what?

You can't change the default browser on iOS. Forking WebKit won't change what Apple choose to do. It won't change what Google do. Forking WebKit achieves almost nothing as far as user-freedom is concerned in real terms.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: ...
by saso on Sat 19th Jan 2013 16:46 in reply to "RE: ..."
saso Member since:
2007-04-18

I don't, the webkit monoculture on mobile is increasingly terrifying.

This is only terrifying if you want to preserve W3C's power over the web, rather than a self-governing open web. What I mean by that is that it doesn't matter what the name of "standard" is (be it WebKit, or HTML5, or whatever), as long as it is open, developed in a cooperative fashion and has multiple players in it (which WebKit certainly has). We can see multi-dev agreements on web protocols and formats all over the place (between Mozilla, WebKit users, MS, etc.) without the need for a formal institution like the W3C. That's why I don't share your fear of monopolization of the web as happened in the 90s with IE.

Edited 2013-01-19 16:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: ...
by PresentIt on Sat 19th Jan 2013 18:23 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

There's nothing terrifying about the W3C. They are basically the only true guarantee that the web stays open.

You can't compare WebKit to HTML5. WebKit is a project run by someone who controls it and its directly. HTML5 is a standard agreed on by basically everyone.

You are extremely naive if you think companies are going to suddenly start supporting each other. And if they are going to agree on standards, they basically need an independent organization. And then you're back to the W3C.

You can kill of W3C but another W3C will still be needed.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: ...
by shmerl on Sun 20th Jan 2013 01:50 in reply to "RE: ..."
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

Mozilla is the only alternative now.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: ...
by dsmogor on Sun 20th Jan 2013 12:21 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

There's IE engine. Dolphin browser currently also features custom engine (that is faster than anything else anyway)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: ...
by cb88 on Mon 21st Jan 2013 17:28 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
cb88 Member since:
2009-04-23

For what it is worth Netsurf is maturing. Has lots of rendering backends for different operating systems and is starting to grow javascript support. Its also more modular than any of the alternatives from what I can tell.

It used to be about on par with dillo but now there is alot more CSS support and from what I understand DOM support is being improved alot.

As far as dillo it is pretty stagnant... considering one person forked it and made a way better version in a few months im not impressed with the current main developers. DPlus (the fork) is nice on very old hardware and for speed. The biggest change for me being that it doesn't leave background processes like dillo if and when it crashes.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: ...
by drstorm on Sun 20th Jan 2013 02:30 in reply to "RE: ..."
drstorm Member since:
2009-04-24

I don't think Hiev actually means it. It seems to be a Futurama movie reference. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: ...
by Macrat on Sun 20th Jan 2013 02:49 in reply to "RE: ..."
Macrat Member since:
2006-03-27

I don't, the webkit monoculture on mobile is increasingly terrifying.


Does the Apache monoculture on servers terrify you as well?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: ...
by Soulbender on Sun 20th Jan 2013 06:59 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

There's no apache monoculture on servers. Apache is continuously losing ground to better and lighter alternatives like nginx.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[3]: ...
by PresentIt on Sun 20th Jan 2013 11:01 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

What Apache monoculture?

Any monoculture is bad. Especially for security.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: ...
by woegjiub on Sun 20th Jan 2013 11:50 in reply to "RE: ..."
woegjiub Member since:
2008-11-25

One of the worst things about it is that Firefox for android is actually excellent, yet somehow remains a niche player.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: ...
by Johann Chua on Sun 20th Jan 2013 13:26 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
Johann Chua Member since:
2005-07-22

Firefox for Android won't install on my phone (Galaxy Ace). Not enough RAM, apparently. Things might change when even low-end Android phones have at least 512 MB of RAM.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Yea, could anyone have believed that 15 years ago?
by dsmogor on Mon 21st Jan 2013 12:00 in reply to "RE: ..."
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

Hey, we're experiencing the OSS guys dream come true.
Could KHTML developers back then even dream of that?

Reply Parent Score: 2