Comments on: Apple rejects Opera Browser, not surprising, but still upsetting

By: ColinS

ColinS — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 12:19:37 +0000

Have we any word from Opera’s developers stating these news reports are accurate, or is the only source this one second hand report all we have to work with. Personally I like to have things confirmed by a second source prior to assuming we have all the facts.

Check out this article http://daringfireball.net/2008/11/opera_app_store, his argument seems more likely, and if true, Apple’s decision more reasonable.

By: Joe Anonymous

Joe Anonymous — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 12:33:17 +0000

Why would I want to use software written by a company that’s not even smart enough to read the SDK rules before investing money in development?

By: thomas

thomas — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:57:39 +0000

Safari on the Mac is useless? Funny, I don’t use anything else and have successfully used the internet a lot of times. I’ve even posted this very message with Safari! Define ‘useless’, please.

By: AdamC

AdamC — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 06:41:11 +0000

@Gary
I used to use Firefox and it got slower and slower, I don’t know about the latest because I have not went back.
Safari is for me and I am using the webkit, it’s fast and it has built in spell check. I don’t need extensions to enhance Safari. It is stable enough for me because I restart my Mac every few days.
Anyway to each his own.

By: jb

jb — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 02:46:50 +0000

This is just silly.

Safari isn’t a terrible browser, but going out of your way to lock customers into it is just ridiculous. As a desktop platform, I love Mac OS X and Apple hardware — but I run Camino as a browser.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: I had little problem with Apple not allowing (or providing tools) for any third party development on the iPhone. But picking and choosing the way it has is silly — especially given the amount of pure crap in the App Store.

By: Gary

Gary — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 22:08:00 +0000

Safari is pretty useless on a mac. I’ve never used Opera, But the web is a lot better on Firefox than Safari. And does many things Safari doesn’t do such as Stumble upon, proper RSS feeds, customizable search bars…

If Safari was a more usable browser I wouldn’t mind but as of now it isn’t very good so Apple’s arguement on duplicating functionality doesn’t stand.

It is nice they have the App Store but exercising this kind of control is dangerous.

By: + simonas

+ simonas — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:36:35 +0000

I hate Apple for this. If I had an iPhone, it would definitely be jailbroken. That’s it. I support my friends who choose G1 over iPhone.

By: e

Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:00:06 +0000

This is no different than what Apple said when they released the SDK. Why should this be news?

By: Steve K.

Steve K. — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 15:28:49 +0000

Opera can still be on the iPhone! It’s all about the jailbreak! Choice is good!

By: Graeme Sheridan

Graeme Sheridan — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 13:40:19 +0000

While it may seem a little nuts, it’s not as if any other big Firm hasn’t done the same.
opera for Windows CE/Mobile is only a java app, and not a fully usuable programme, so it’s no different on other platforms. Maybe Google will get it right with Android, one can only hope.

By: Terry Henderson

Terry Henderson — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:56:25 +0000

I don’t like Opera anyway, even on the Mac desktop; and the reason Apple rejected it is quite clear to me:
Opera requires Flash to run properly, and we all know what that means. Apple has already stated: No
Flash on the iPhone; as it’s a resource PIG; and requires a lot of stuff running in the back round. This
We All Know Apple has Stated is Against the EULA in the SDK for The App. Store.