Opera Sees "Dramatic" Rise From Microsoft's Ballot 378
Posted
by
kdawson
from the fat-lady-warming-up dept.
from the fat-lady-warming-up dept.
TheReal_sabret00the notes a TechRadar piece reporting that Opera Software has seen a doubling from normal download numbers on average since Microsoft's browser-choice screen lit up in Europe. The UK saw an 85% increase and for other countries it was larger still: Poland 328%, Spain 215%, and Italy 202%. Hakon Wium Lie, CTO of Opera Software, said "A multitude of browsers will make the web more standardised and easier to browse."
Nintendo? (Score:2, Interesting)
Death of the proprietary browser monopoly? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Give me a break.... (Score:4, Interesting)
I still find it a little strange that Microsoft is being required to "promote the competition" in their own product.
Microsoft isn't required to do anything by anyone. The Browser Ballot Screen is entirely thought up and implemented by Microsoft themselves.
Re:Correlation/causation (Score:4, Interesting)
The numbers don't mean too much not for the reason you mention (as others have pointed out, they probably correlate the IP address used for the download to the IP address's entry point and check the referrer for that hit) but because these are only downloads.
How many of those Polish potentially swayed by the "Opera Turbo technology - speed up your Internet connection" are actually going to -stick to- using Opera, rather than going back to IE or using another browser they might have downloaded through that same choice screen?
The only thing we can even remotely suggest is that if nothing else, the browser choice screen may have brought choice -awareness- to the masses more than any other effort has done so far. That alone is a Good Thing(TM)
Isn't that Web Purpose FAIL: less portability (Score:4, Interesting)
Right now, you're still lucky if they test on IE 6-8, Firefox 2-3 and Safari 2-4... I'd guess 90% of web developers don't even do that, and that's what I (personally) consider the bare minimum.
I count that as eight different platforms (assuming we only count integer-valued version numbers). How many desktop OSes are in use, discounting those used by less than 0.1% of the market? Windows, OS X, Linux, iPhone OS, and uhm... yeah?
So when you think about creating an application and you worry about porting it between different clients, the decision "let's make it a web app! We'll have to test fewer platforms" runs counter to your purpose, right? In other words: people have turned the web into something it wasn't meant to be---a portability nightmare.
Yeah, writing desktop apps exposes you to differences between OSes. Okay, but all OSes have files, can count time, probably can make you some random numbers, TCP sockets and so forth: they do the same things but in slightly different ways. Wrap the differences in libportability and get over it.
Maybe my attitude betrays my lack of coffee, but isn't it basically right? You don't have worse portability for desktop applications than you do for web applications.
Re:Give me a break.... (Score:3, Interesting)
I find it a little strange that USA prosecuted Microsoft as an illegal leverager of a monopoly - this should have happened sooner. Maybe the IE team wouldn't have been disbanded.
Microsoft put out a crappy browser and then stopped developing it, thinking people would just give up on standards and write for IE. I find that strange as well.
I'm sure there are other aspects which qualify as strange.
Re:Frist ps0t (Score:3, Interesting)
>>>the ballot is presented by IE
Correction - The ballot WAS presented by IE, but Opera and others objected, so the EU ordered Microsoft to use a generic window.
Re:Testing burden (Score:2, Interesting)
I always test on Opera because I can't install Chrome at work. (Well, I can, but it insists on ignoring my organization's Windows policies, and installs itself to Documents & Settings, which is wiped every time I log out. )
So I test on Firefox 3.6, Opera, and IE7. (Because my organization hasn't moved to IE8.)
I've never run into an instance where Opera didn't match either IE7 or Firefox 3.6. (this is mostly testing other people's shit.)
No, it's probably not ever going to be the first thing I test. But I always hit all four major rendering engines before shipping things out the door (Gecko, Webkit, Presto, and Trident.) If it works on all of those, it's highly unlikely that your design will ever break. And that's worth a final test.
Re:That's very nice Opera (Score:5, Interesting)
Opera must be doing something right, that all the other browsers are missing. Go ahead, look at market share in eastern Europe, and especially among people who use the Cyrillic alphabet. It seems that a LOT of people take Opera seriously.
I've tested it, in several incarnations now. I'll bet I could still find my license file somewhere, if I tried hard enough. It has some pretty neat features, no matter what language you speak. That sharing thing, for instance - any idiot can share files, photos, whatever with their family, in a reasonably secure manner, without jumping through a lot of hoops.
You should drive it, before you dump on it.
I'm not switching, because Firefox suits my needs and wants, but if I were to switch, Opera would be a good browser to consider. In fact, it comes in side by side with Chrome, in my books.
Re:Same old mistakes (Score:4, Interesting)
When there are differences between standards compliant browsers, theres something wrong with the standard imho.
What's wrong with W3C standards is that there's never been a reference implementation, which means there's a lot of room for interpretation, and interpretations can vary a lot. And after they've been implemented, people start discussing which implementations are closest to what the standard intended, after which people need to fix their browser, and in the mean time, we've got a big bloody mess.
Reference implementations are important.
Re:an anti-swpat company doing well (Score:3, Interesting)
Because they are expressions of ideas, more like mathematical proofs than real, mechanical, inventions - and neither ideas nor mathematical theories are patentable.
While I'm generally against software patents, this does bother me somewhat. If you come up with an amazing algorithm - which is really just math - to do something, for example, like RSA, why shouldn't you be able to patent the process? An algorithm can be very real in the sense that it takes input (like a machine) runs some process (like a machine) and yields meaningful output (like a machine). Why shouldn't the work that went into the creation of this system be patented (like a machine)?
Yes, the system is abused by people like Amazon and their "one click" crap, but the normal patent system is abused as well. It seems like the real answer is more stringent patent review and oversight, not outright banning of software patents.
An interesting idea would be to require a company applying for a software patents to release the source code. Normal machines can be investigated to determine if they violate an existing patent, why not hold software to the same requirement? If I create algorithm B that takes the same input and yields the same output as your algorithm A, but does it in a completely different way, I'm not in violation of your patent, but the only way to know this is to see the source code for both.