Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google Businesses The Internet

Google Default Search For Opera Mobile 106

Posted by Zonk from the goopera dept.
sayanchak writes "Reuters reports that Opera Software has agreed that Google will be the default partner for its mobile Internet browsers. Google will be the default search partner for the mobile browsers, Opera Mobile and Opera Mini." From the article: "Oslo-based Opera Software is a tiny competitor of Microsoft in the Internet browser market, but the fast-growing part of its business is in browsers for mobile phones and other mobile electronic devices."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Default Search For Opera Mobile More

Google Default Search For Opera Mobile

Comments Filter:

  • Firefox? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Isn't it the same with Firefox? Except, well, Google didn't have to pay for it.

    • Re:Firefox? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 01, 2006 @08:42PM (#14376509)
      Isn't it the same with Firefox? Except, well, Google didn't have to pay for it.

      You're kidding, right? One of the main reasons for the search bar in Firefox is the money that Mozilla's partners (e.g Google) pay to be convieniently and visibly embedded in your UI. Our eyeballs pay Mozilla's wage bill.

      (For the more defensive types out there, note that this isn't a negative criticism).
      • That's not strictly true. Google was the default search in both the browser and the search bar even back when Mozilla was still an AOL project. A deal certainly developed afterwards, but the primary reason is one of quality. Not everything is about the benjamins.

          - Chris

    • Re:Firefox? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Baricom ( 763970 )
      Mozilla Corporation gets a cut every time you click on an ad from a Google search.

  • Aha?! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Cee ( 22717 ) on Sunday January 01, 2006 @07:56PM (#14376380)
    Does this outrule the rumor that Opera has a deal with Microsoft then? (No, I didn't RTFA.)

  • Reuters is light on details. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ScottCooperDotNet ( 929575 ) on Sunday January 01, 2006 @07:58PM (#14376389)
    The Reuters article is light on details. How much is Opera going to make by signing with Google?

  • Web translates badly to mobile devices... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by defile ( 1059 ) on Sunday January 01, 2006 @07:59PM (#14376392) Homepage Journal

    The problem with mobile devices isn't that they have low bandwidth or weak hardware (well, arguably), but that network access is extremely high latency. Most web sites are a chore to use through a mobile interface. If Opera's Mobile Browser has full blown ``AJAX'' support, some sites become much more pleasant to use. Notably, GMAIL. No doubt this is what Google has in mind...

    AJAX's problems, however, are compounded when the underlying transport is so slow. If a user navigates away from a page with an outstanding background request, or if they issue a second request while the first is outstanding, the results are effectively undefined. : /

    The really great mobile applications won't come around until industry stops trying to cram PC oriented web pages at pocket devices.

    • Re:Web translates badly to mobile devices... (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      If a user navigates away from a page with an outstanding background request, or if they issue a second request while the first is outstanding, the results are effectively undefined. : /

      What do you mean? If a user navigates away from a page, any outstanding requests for that page should be disregarded. You don't hear people complaining when people navigate away from a page before images have finished loading, do you? That's exactly the same thing.

      As for two simultaneous requests, the problem is tha

    • Re:Web translates badly to mobile devices... (Score:5, Informative)

      by smittyoneeach ( 243267 ) * on Sunday January 01, 2006 @08:27PM (#14376468) Homepage Journal
      The really great mobile applications won't come around until industry stops trying to cram PC oriented web pages at pocket devices.
      Dude: look at how cleverly industry sold laptops with just a slightly bigger screen every year throughout the 90's, then went towards a wider, less-square form factor (driven by Apple?) post 2000.
      There will be no end-point, "really great mobile applications". Closure is as anti-sales as giving people the source code: WTF the coercion?

    • Re:Web translates badly to mobile devices... (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The problem with mobile devices isn't that they have low bandwidth or weak hardware (well, arguably), but that network access is extremely high latency. Most web sites are a chore to use through a mobile interface. If Opera's Mobile Browser has full blown ``AJAX'' support, some sites become much more pleasant to use. Notably, GMAIL. No doubt this is what Google has in mind...

      What the fuck are you talking about?

      "AJAX" still has to do a full HTTP request, so if the latency is high it'll take just as long as r

    • Re:Web translates badly to mobile devices... (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I have to disagree with your subject line...I happen to be posting this using Opera mini on a Motorola v635, and though it's far from a laptop, I still find the browsing experience more than satisfactory...even on graphics-intensive pages like Slashdot. That said, I'd like to be able to change the default search. Google is a great search engine, but I'd prefer to run my queries on Wikipedia first.
    • The reason that there aren't more sites directed at mobile devices is that there are not really any good mobile browsers. Once some decent browsers are made available, mobile borwsing will be used more often and more sites will be directed at this audience. The sites will follow, once there is an audience.
    • Latency is definitely one of the constraining factors for mobile devices, but it isn't the predominant one. Bandwidth and slow processors (fast processors are not only expensive they consume batteries, and long battery life is essential for a phone) are more likely to slow down mobile web browsing. Even so it is a good idea to consider latency, e.g. avoid having one style sheet calling another one as that would mean three sequential roundtrips to be able to style the page.

      AJAX-like techniques can both allev

  • Typical... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 01, 2006 @08:04PM (#14376401)
    "Oslo-based Opera Software is a tiny competitor of Microsoft in the Internet browser market, but the fast-growing part of its business is in browsers for mobile phones and other mobile electronic devices."

    Yet again, we're comparing everything to bloody Microsoft! Opera are a tiny competitor to Microsoft!? Everybody is! So why can't we have Opera duke it out against Firefox and Safari for a change? We know IE is crap, we know it comes with every installation of Windows, and we know that Windows accounts for a huge percentage of shipped OSes, so can we have a little less obvious journalism - less on the obvious victories of today and more about the battlefields of tomorrow please...

    Why oh why is software always be compared to the equivalent product with the greatest market share, regardless of technical merit?

    Please, can we just get off the market share thing, it's irrelevant and pointless, as long as you're using what's best.

    • Re:Typical... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by st0rmshad0w ( 412661 ) on Sunday January 01, 2006 @08:18PM (#14376444)
      is a tiny competitor of Microsoft in the Internet browser market

      Isn't Opera the biggest name in browsers for mobile devices?

      • Re:Typical... (Score:1, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Isn't Opera the biggest name in browsers for mobile devices?

        Perhaps the biggest *name*, but not the biggest player.

        I see a lot more of Openwave [openwave.com].

    • Re:Typical... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ClamIAm ( 926466 ) on Sunday January 01, 2006 @08:33PM (#14376487)
      Why oh why is software always be compared to the equivalent product with the greatest market share, regardless of technical merit?

      Why are you complaining about this? If some new upstart starts making cars, we would compare them to GM and Toyota. When Microsoft entered the console business, everyone compared them to PC gaming, Nintendo, Sony & Sega. Maybe if you'd explain why comparing things is "irrelevant and pointless", it'd be easier to understand what you're talking about. As your comment stands, it just sounds like you're complaining (not that there's anything wrong with that).

    • I wouldn't call Sony a tiny competitor to Microsoft.

    • Re:Typical... (Score:2, Informative)

      by Tylerious ( 836357 )
      Agreed, Opera should be compared to something like Firefox than IE.

      In my experience on a 266 Mhz Slackware box, Opera has operated way faster than Firefox. And all the extensions (like session saver) I use on Firefox are built-in anyways. Unlike the Mozilla Firefox was forked from, it doesn't seem to bloat the software. I completely understand why Opera is becoming such a leader in mobile internet browsing.

      I haven't yet tried Firefox 1.5, so I won't comment on it's speed, but it needs quite a boost to catch

  • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • From what I recall, Microsoft doesn't really have that big a foothold in the handheld browser area. So unlike in the PC world, where MS is the defacto standard, they cant just muscle in and make everyone use their browser. I would liken it more to their recent attempts at getting into the console business via the XBOX. They actually have competition, and can't just win by making the thing cheap.
      • Bingo. Opera's not competing against MS (has Opera even released a Pocket PC version? And nobody uses IE on Windows Smartphones, they use Opera.) They're competing against OpenWave (which they blow away on features, if not speed - then again, I'm comparing the native version of OpenWave for my phone, versus Opera Mini, which is a J2ME applet) and NetFront (which they beat in rendering quality and speed.)
    • I don't think MS is concerned, and I don't think they will be until Opera becomes big enough to effect Billy's income, or until MS thinks they can expand their income by assimilating the small Oslo company.
    • Could Microsoft's reputation for poor security and strongarm tactics work against them in the portable market?
    • Right. Opera is tiny compared to MS. And we all have seen what MS has done to every other tiny company that's attempted to compete with them: Bought them out, or simply drove them into irrelevance (if not bankruptcy).

      Amazing.

      The vast majority of marketshare that Opera has gained (no, I don't have stats - all I have are anecdotes of my own experience and those of peers and friends) has been at the expense of Mozilla cum Firefox. Generally someone either just uses what Microsoft produces/they're a raving pro-
    • What's to stop Microsoft from undercutting Opera's prices on some fancy (or un-fancy!) new version of IE for mobile devices?

      There is a edition of IE for Windows Mobile called Pocket Internet Explorer. From what I heard, it's limited compared to desktop IE.
    • Look, every Nokia phone around you having an operating system (symbian) has Opera installed.

      IE for mobile exists, it is a sad joke.

      Opera Mini runs on ANY J2ME (midlet) enabled phone. It is so good that I could post this reply using that 95kb wonder. I am signed into Slashdot even using that.

      Wireless World is different. Opera is the king there.
      http://opera.com/products/ [opera.com]

  • Nice (Score:1, Informative)

    by protomala ( 551662 )
    I like this, opera mini is really good software that works like a charm on my Siemens C60 I just got from my brother on christmas (he bought a new one and gave me the old one). Everbody that want good search results will use google, it's is the best search engine out there today, so this deal make a lot of sense, both for google and opera.

  • I knew it! (Score:1, Redundant)

    by Eric Pierce ( 636318 )
    "Reuters reports that Opera Software has agreed that Google will be the default partner for its mobile Internet browsers."

    See!? I told you! I just knew Google bought Opera!!
  • Looks like the opera PR machine is running at full tilt these days.

  • Must. Try. To. Care. (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    ...

    Nope, sorry. I just don't care.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Sunday January 01, 2006 @09:05PM (#14376563)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • NetFront? (Score:2, Informative)

    by linj ( 891019 )
    NetFront 3.2, as of now, is the incumbent ruling web browser for Windows Pocket PCs, excluding IE Mobile (Opera Mobile is still in beta/alpha/unreleased stage).

    It, too, uses Google as the default search. Really, what *would* they use... MSN search?

  • Er... So? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Akdor 1154 ( 910963 )
    Oh my God! Google is the default search engine for Opera Desktop too! What a coincidence!

  • Google is a marketing Co. not a technology Co. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by wintermute42 ( 710554 ) on Sunday January 01, 2006 @10:38PM (#14376788) Homepage

    I find it interesting that Google is rapidly becoming a marketing company rather than a technology company. As an increasing number of sites offer search that is at least almost as good, Google is concentrating more on marketing and defense of its position. The justification for the AOL deal (which cost Google $1 billion) was to avoid having AOL go to Microsoft. Now there is some kind of deal with Opera, again based again on marketing, without any obvious technology edge.

    This raises the question of wither Google. There's the search engine and Google Maps, but not much else that I've found compelling. If their innovation starts to flag, will they try to follow the path of Coca-Cola (marketing, sugar, caffine and not much else).

    This could be a big change for Google's corporate culture. They appear to think of themselves a a software company that hires "really bright" software engineers. Apparently the idea is that these really bright people are going to be the ones who deliver Google's future innovation. This flys in the face of what seems to increasingly be the "facts on the ground", where Google is increasingly driven by marketing deals.

  • I just wish that they'd make the mobile versions free too. I have a Windows Mobile Smartphone and I liked Opera a little bit more than the IE both WM2002 and WM2003 have (I haven't tried WM5 yet, although I've already downloaded the roms for my mpx200 ^_^). Problem with Opera's mobile browsers is that if you don't pay you can only use it for 14 days and I'm not willing to pay 30 euros for a mobile internet browser, that's for sure.
    • Why don't you use Opera Mini then?
    • We all wonder the price of that Windows Mobile Smartphone you use and why you bought such a device while Symbian exists for years.

      They produced some technical wonder (still can't believe it runs on 7650, 2mb RAM) and charging for it. You know, to pay wages.

      I had no problem with Windows 2000 or XP while running Intel, e.g. I am not anti Microsoft but Microsoft is a huge joke on Mobile computing. I have seen total Joe Sixpack friends NOT buying a device they loved just because it runs "Windows". I have also s
      • Because I can do some nice things with my cellphone that Symbian can't do :-P (And because the cellphone cost me 9 euros ^_^ So that answeres the guy that asked for the cellphone for free. It wasn't free, but almost. Hahaha!

        As for stability... I haven't had many stability problems. You said that mobile devices shouldn't fail, I've seen Symbian crash more than once so that wouldn't make Microsoft's worse in that sense. I've also haven't seen no BSOD in my cellphone, maybe yor friends' devices were buggy o
  • Mobile now? They joined with AOL to dominate the IM market. Orkut: the largest social network (or is it friendster?). GMail leads free email. Not to mention they already have the market of internet search. And Froogle, and...

    Now... Put it all together. A single account that keep tracks of you preferences, your friends, what you buy, what you like, what you do. And that all the time and everywhere with mobile technology. Add a social network / semantics analises software that they will be the only organizati
  • I'm a webmaster and I know most websites are "desighned for Internet Explorer", so lots of them will looks a little strange in Opera. I will move back to IE even if my mobile phone has the default Opera program built in.
    • You evidently haven't used Pocket IE, where "a little strange" would be the least of your problems. Pocket IE is even more technologically behind than IE for Windows is. Opera isn't just more advanced, it is far better at adapting the web page to the phone.
      • If it opens a slashdot page on my Sony Ericsson k700i (GPRS, not EDGE) faster than my broadband connected Mac, it is "more advanced".

        Gee I can even sign in to Slashdot using it.

        I am speaking about Opera Mini, the server side rendering, data compressing J2ME application.

        I hope you speak about same thing. If you are speaking about "real" Opera, e.g. the one running on Symbian, it is a damn real browser. I know people buying Symbian stuff just to use it. Especially business.
    • You haven't seen any of these browsers, have you?

      Pocket IE is technically a completely different thing than desktop MSIE and it barely displays any page, even those "optimized for IE".

      OTOH mobile Opera has same rendering engine as desktop Opera, which now handles IE-tagsoup very well. If you disable SSR you'll get more MSIE-like rendering on mobile Opera than Pocket IE.
  • So, opera makes Google the default homepage for it's mobile browsers.
    What's so special about this? FireFox did it without an agreement, hundreds of people not using opera make Google their homepage every day as well.
    • "So, opera makes Google the default homepage for it's mobile browsers. What's so special about this? FireFox did it without an agreement"
      No they didn't. Mozilla got good money for making Google the default startup page. And Mozilla makes money every time you do a search from the search box in Firefox.
  • My P910 from several months ago came with Google as the default search engine in Opera. I fail to see how this can be called news...
  • IMO Mozilla will soon be the most powerful competitor in the world of mobile Internet browsers. I tested "Minimo" ver0.2 - the mobile version of FireFox on my HP iPAQ 3950, I just can say to the beta software is "WOW". I'll rate it 4/5 stars. Operas browser only runs on phones, not on PDAs, and a lot of browsers ignore frames or have limited JavaScript support-they do terrible jobs. With Minimo, it will render OK.

    Although Opera has developed mobile browser for 6 years, I believe Minimo can repeat the mir
  • Minimo 0.3, due in January, will include improved Web page navigation for mobile phone users. At present, phone users need to linearly tab through every link on the page to get to the right link, but the new technology will let people move between links on the Web page using the arrow keys. That's really great!

    --
    Keylogger [waresight.com] killed my marriage, but saved my life.

Slashdot Top Deals

I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them. -- Isaac Asimov

Close