Opera Mini approved for iPhone(opera.com)
opera.com
Opera Mini approved for iPhone
http://www.opera.com/press/releases/2010/04/13/
25 comments
Maybe I'm overly accustomed to the "feel" of Apple's native apps, since there's just something about the app that just doesn't "feel" good to use.
The zooming-in and out is a big downside, as I often tweak in or out from what Safari gives me as a default when I double-tap.
The scrolling deceleration brakes to a halt sooner than native apps. Again, maybe I'm just being fickle, but if the physics don't match the native feel, then it just doesn't feel right.
Don't understand why they created their own form of copy/paste.
The zoomed-out small fonts are completely illegible. I can't even make out header or subheader text, or titles of articles.
Startup time, at least for me, was about 3 seconds, compared to immediately for Safari. I just have the 3G, and I'm sure it would be much faster on the 3Gs.
When going from vertical to horizontal view, the page does not resize. I have to reload the page for it to fit to the full width.
Despite the innovations that I was very excited for, it's the little things, the details, that will keep me from using this app. To me, good execution is in the details. Some of the things above, for me, are simply musts. An example would be a car that must feel good to sit in, have sharp steering control, easy-to-reach controls and a solid-feeling gearbox. Extra-cool features without this are non-starters. These are the things Safari gives me which Opera lacks.
The zooming-in and out is a big downside, as I often tweak in or out from what Safari gives me as a default when I double-tap.
The scrolling deceleration brakes to a halt sooner than native apps. Again, maybe I'm just being fickle, but if the physics don't match the native feel, then it just doesn't feel right.
Don't understand why they created their own form of copy/paste.
The zoomed-out small fonts are completely illegible. I can't even make out header or subheader text, or titles of articles.
Startup time, at least for me, was about 3 seconds, compared to immediately for Safari. I just have the 3G, and I'm sure it would be much faster on the 3Gs.
When going from vertical to horizontal view, the page does not resize. I have to reload the page for it to fit to the full width.
Despite the innovations that I was very excited for, it's the little things, the details, that will keep me from using this app. To me, good execution is in the details. Some of the things above, for me, are simply musts. An example would be a car that must feel good to sit in, have sharp steering control, easy-to-reach controls and a solid-feeling gearbox. Extra-cool features without this are non-starters. These are the things Safari gives me which Opera lacks.
So Opera Mini for rapid access to the read-only web, Safari for deep access to the read/write web.
Having the right tool for the job: why "duplication of functionality" is a good thing.
Having the right tool for the job: why "duplication of functionality" is a good thing.
[deleted]
If you double-tap in Safari on iPhone, it will snap to columns which is useful when you want to read an article on a site and avoid the sidebar ads and navigation.
[deleted]
It doesn't scroll to the top of the page when you tap the status bar. Hate when apps neglect to do that.
I would love it if shake-to-undo undid this. Hate when I tap it accidentally.
you never shake your phone accidentally?
Shake to undo always prompts for confirmation to undo the last action. Touching the top of the screen to scroll to the top of the page does not ask for confirmation, which is a pain when you are 3/4 of the way through a very long article.
Thus, being able to shake to undo the action of auto-scrolling to top of the screen would be a nice solution.
Thus, being able to shake to undo the action of auto-scrolling to top of the screen would be a nice solution.
Agree with much of what you've said. I think opera have nailed the tab switching UI, its so much quicker to use then safari.
Couple of things I dont like
- They've implemented their own copy/paste controls. I guess this is nessesary due to the 'long click' for opening new tabs etc, but its kind of annoying.
- Not really Opera's fault but because of the new useragent, alot of sites deliver the 'normal' mobile version of their site instead of the iphone version I'm used to (usually much prettier).
Couple of things I dont like
- They've implemented their own copy/paste controls. I guess this is nessesary due to the 'long click' for opening new tabs etc, but its kind of annoying.
- Not really Opera's fault but because of the new useragent, alot of sites deliver the 'normal' mobile version of their site instead of the iphone version I'm used to (usually much prettier).
Killer feature 3: instant back button.
I hate saying this, but I am having the opposite issue. It is not responsive at all; I tried clicking on any of the links and it just hangs.
Are the intermediate servers being slashdotted or something, I wonder? I'll give it a shot again later on this week I guess.
Are the intermediate servers being slashdotted or something, I wonder? I'll give it a shot again later on this week I guess.
For me, Opera seemed to forget tab contents after opening just 2-3 of them. It also displays a "please refresh" message instead of automatically reloading the contents.
I've also seen a bug where all the tabs turn to grey, inactive rectangles. You have to kill the app and lose all your tabs.
I've also seen a bug where all the tabs turn to grey, inactive rectangles. You have to kill the app and lose all your tabs.
For an app where one of the main selling points is to cut down on the number of bytes sent, not auto reloading pages should be seen as a feature. If I need the page reloaded I can do so when I need it, and if I don't then doing so is just a waste.
What does it do with encrypted pages and logins?
[deleted]
I look at this as kind of amusing; my previous phone could only run Opera Mini, and the prospect of having a real web browser was one of the things which drove me to the iPhone. Mobile Safari's UI and its actual support for decently rendering pages (coupled with the privacy concerns Opera Mini's proxy system naturally raises) are so far ahead that I'm a bit surprised anyone would actually choose to use Opera Mini -- it's like I've stumbled into a bizarre parallel world where people are clamoring for the right to install and use IE6 as a replacement for Firefox or Chrome.
In my few hours of use so far Opera Mini is the clear winner in terms of page load time, caching, and battery life. This is on a 3G. I have no good answers on the privacy side.
Well put. Well people started making a fuss about Opera Mini getting approved I couldn't understand why. Safari on the iPhone is the best mobile browser out there in terms of both specification conformance and performance.
Because there is a percentage of people heating long waits... Safari is very nice but not responsive enough, and sometimes if you want just to read a news site, the user experience is just the same. Also I think that EDGE users will enjoy the fact that finally it's possible to have decent loading times of web pages.
I live in a city covered by 3G but when I from in my home town it's almost impossible to suft the web with Safari, while it was ok with Opera Mini on a Nokia N70 phone.
Opera Mini is surely not a drop in replacement for Safari Mobile, but it surely is a useful tool, much more useful than most of the other top-downloads in the Appstore.
I live in a city covered by 3G but when I from in my home town it's almost impossible to suft the web with Safari, while it was ok with Opera Mini on a Nokia N70 phone.
Opera Mini is surely not a drop in replacement for Safari Mobile, but it surely is a useful tool, much more useful than most of the other top-downloads in the Appstore.
I hardly ever use my mobile browser, so I can't speak much for which one's better - but if nothing else, I think it's good that there's now more selection and variety available.
Does anyone know how Opera makes money from this version? Surely the bandwidth and computational costs of processing, compressing and sending out webpages would exceed revenue from Google search, right?
Usually, OEMs pay Opera to have it preinstalled on their devices. That's obviously not the case with Apple...
Well they know every page everyone visits and everything they click on, etc. What does the privacy policy say?
Opera does not store any users’ private information. Opera generates statistics of the usage of Opera Mini, but these are aggregated numbers and no information can be linked to a single user.
http://www.opera.com/mobile/help/faq/#privacy
http://www.opera.com/mobile/help/faq/#privacy
I guess it's a bit about brand awareness
Link to the AppStore http://itunes.apple.com/uk/app/opera-mini-web-browser/id3637... — It's not as fast as I expected, but still
For now: "un-zommed" content is unreadable, for instance, nytimes.com in Opera http://cl.ly/JIP vs Safari Mobile: http://cl.ly/J9i (which is also unreadable, but well, I can distinct letters)
For now: "un-zommed" content is unreadable, for instance, nytimes.com in Opera http://cl.ly/JIP vs Safari Mobile: http://cl.ly/J9i (which is also unreadable, but well, I can distinct letters)
Says "not currently available in the US store".
Frustratingly, it's not available on the Canadian App Store. I wonder if there's a reason for that, or if it just hasn't propagated yet.
A lot of the apps don't trickle down from the US store to local stores :-/
Downloaded in Canada.
This is a major problem. Without even being able to read the article titles, there is literally nothing you can scan to decide where you want to look, what you want to click, or even just what you want to zoom in on. I can make out the Sheraton logo though? Maybe Opera takes a cut of banner ad clicks and wants those to be the only things we can read without zooming in?
Does the Opera browser app itself not interpret javascript? Is it offloaded to the iPhone's WebKit/rendering engine? Otherwise this would seem to fly in the face of the recent change to 3.3.1.
Think of Opera Mini as an interactive image viewer. They interpret all JavaScript on the server side and sent result back to the client using OBML[1]. Or at least that's how it works on other device.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Mini#FunctionalityInteresting. The section on JavaScript support is not encouraging actually. Can anyone report on attempting to use a js-heavy web-app through Opera Mini, e.g. Gmail?
It's not great at AJAX. My brother has a Blackberry and mainly uses Opera, and the fact that Sporcle(.com) worked on my iPhone shocked him. Apparently Opera can't do onchange.
Gmail just gives the normal HTML mobile version, like it did in the bad old days before iPhone.
Gmail just gives the normal HTML mobile version, like it did in the bad old days before iPhone.
I just tested, and sporcle.com works well on Symbian. Does blackberry have it's own version of opera too?
From my experience with Opera Mini in Windows Mobile (since it's still not available in App Store), Gmail just fallback to the Basic HTML mode. It's safe to assume most JavaScript-heavy web apps won't going to work at all.
Even Opera on the desktop doesn't work so hot with Gmail.
huh? yes it does. I use it every day and it works great.
Every time I vote up a comment the page reloads and starts at the top.
The app is Opera Mini, not Opera Mobile, so no, it does not. Opera Mini is a proxy browser: all the heavy lifting, including JavaScript and most rendering, happens on one of Opera's proxy servers. The Opera Mini app receives a heavily pre-processed and compressed version of the webpage, in some custom data format. The app itself only does rendering, not processing or interpreting.
No, the Opera app does not run JavaScript itself. The app communicates to Opera's server, and it's the server that does HTTP with the website, runs the JavaScript, and compresses the HTML and sends it down to the app.
The restriction on downloading and executing code has been in the developer agreement since the beginning. It's not a recent thing.
The restriction on downloading and executing code has been in the developer agreement since the beginning. It's not a recent thing.
[deleted]
Just did a 20 minutes test: I'm loving it.
It's amazing how I'm happy to trade features for speed. Also the UI is so much... like Fast Tracker :) That 2D interface that is clearly primitive but reacts like a videogame, instantaneously.
Saving pages and fast access to favorites is also very cool, but speed is the real killer feature here IMHO.
It's amazing how I'm happy to trade features for speed. Also the UI is so much... like Fast Tracker :) That 2D interface that is clearly primitive but reacts like a videogame, instantaneously.
Saving pages and fast access to favorites is also very cool, but speed is the real killer feature here IMHO.
I wrote up my initial impressions here:
http://thedailyt.com/2010/04/opera-mini-for-the-iphone-initi...
I have to agree with most posters here. It's a nice start and I think it's a very good thing there's now a competing browser engine in the App Store. It has quite a few non-native feeling elements to it, so if they iron out the kinks and give it a bit more of an iPhone feel it'll be a good contender.
The usual Opera instant back function (no reloading of pages on clicking the back button) is killer!
http://thedailyt.com/2010/04/opera-mini-for-the-iphone-initi...
I have to agree with most posters here. It's a nice start and I think it's a very good thing there's now a competing browser engine in the App Store. It has quite a few non-native feeling elements to it, so if they iron out the kinks and give it a bit more of an iPhone feel it'll be a good contender.
The usual Opera instant back function (no reloading of pages on clicking the back button) is killer!
First impressions:
1. It renders pages in exactly the same way it does on my Blackberry.
2. The UI is just as awkward.
Amazing.
1. It renders pages in exactly the same way it does on my Blackberry.
2. The UI is just as awkward.
Amazing.
Friend of mine:
"Opera Mini's flagrant disregard for UI conventions would get any other app rejected."
Pretty much sums up my thoughts. It's bad on so many levels and somehow received special treatment.
"Opera Mini's flagrant disregard for UI conventions would get any other app rejected."
Pretty much sums up my thoughts. It's bad on so many levels and somehow received special treatment.
Maybe it's fine to duplicate existing functionality on the iPhone if you do it so badly that there's no danger of anyone actually using it.
That's the overruling statement right there for most of this App store shenanigans.., if something sucks people won't use it, and it won't be a threat.
So, wait: you think it should have been rejected for not following UI conventions?
My first thought is that plenty of games have UIs built from scratch. I think the conventions are just that: conventions.
My first thought is that plenty of games have UIs built from scratch. I think the conventions are just that: conventions.
Downloaded it for the Find in Page feature and uninstalled pretty much immediately - I thought it would be serious competition for my Find In Page plugin for Safari and finally deliver this functionality in a native way.
Instead, over 60% of the screen is permanently covered by the toolbar at the top and the keypad at the bottom. No way to scroll either while in the Find in Page mode. No way to step backwards throught search results either - next button only. What were you guys thinking?! Find in Page could have been a killer feature for you over Safari, and it falls way short.
In addition, the app does not feel Cocoa Touch-like - UI elements look faked and the feel is different. Sorry, I had much higher expectations for days waiting for the release, and it just did not deliver iPhone-like experience. Better luck in the next version, I guess. BTW, love Opera on the desktop!
PS: almost forgot - PDF is not supported at all and is delegated to Safari instead!
Instead, over 60% of the screen is permanently covered by the toolbar at the top and the keypad at the bottom. No way to scroll either while in the Find in Page mode. No way to step backwards throught search results either - next button only. What were you guys thinking?! Find in Page could have been a killer feature for you over Safari, and it falls way short.
In addition, the app does not feel Cocoa Touch-like - UI elements look faked and the feel is different. Sorry, I had much higher expectations for days waiting for the release, and it just did not deliver iPhone-like experience. Better luck in the next version, I guess. BTW, love Opera on the desktop!
PS: almost forgot - PDF is not supported at all and is delegated to Safari instead!
I'm shocked.
The app is still somewhat crippled though, all links from other Apps can only be opened in Safari. So, not the same as switching a browser on your desktop or laptop. Nonetheless it seems like a step in the right direction.
The app is still somewhat crippled though, all links from other Apps can only be opened in Safari. So, not the same as switching a browser on your desktop or laptop. Nonetheless it seems like a step in the right direction.
The counter is still counting...
http://my.opera.com/community/countup/
edit: They've added a message, although the counter is still going
edit: They've added a message, although the counter is still going
Just enough time to send in a last minute guess then? :P
It's not available in the store yet.
On the competition page it does say
When do you think Opera Mini will be approved by Apple?
When do you think Opera Mini will be approved by Apple?
And the last status update says "Opera Mini for iPhone was officially submitted to the [app store]".
Although I find this hard to believe, signs point to Opera being late in updating the page. The time in Norway is 2:15 AM, but still...
Although I find this hard to believe, signs point to Opera being late in updating the page. The time in Norway is 2:15 AM, but still...
Scrolling requires repeated swipes. Links and buttons require multiple taps to activate, and some cannot be activate at all.
(stay signed in checkbox on myOpenID). Initial zoom levep is useless with unreadable text. Zoomed in level feels too zoomed in without ability to adjust.
But worst of all, the text area editor is custom--no autocorrection. This comment has takem far too long to edit.
In short, a really poorly executed app that should not have been approved, save for the crapstorm banning it would have caused.
But worst of all, the text area editor is custom--no autocorrection. This comment has takem far too long to edit.
In short, a really poorly executed app that should not have been approved, save for the crapstorm banning it would have caused.
Sorry for the typos--i was correcting as I went along if you can believe that.
For those that want to test for Opera Mini without the iphone: http://www.opera.com/mobile/demo/
Also, don't forget to add the user agents: http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/designing-with-opera-mini...
Also, don't forget to add the user agents: http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/designing-with-opera-mini...
I wonder if Apple keeps ambiguous apps like this on hold for when they really need a PR win. Maybe we'll see Google Voice next?
20 days isn't that long though. Just think about the time it takes to get anything approved by the government...
The iPad + OS 4.0 backed up the approval process. We submitted before Opera, took about 14 days. Previously it's been about 5-7 days for new apps as Apple has been making a lot of improvements.
I'd garner that approvals for an application are drastically different then government approvals. At least stringent government requirements are there for a reason.
USA: it's in the app store: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/opera-mini-web-browser/id3637...
[deleted]
Opera: Irrelevant on yet another platform.
Opera mini is great on a normal phone, but silly and pointless on a platform with with a real browser like the iPhone OS and Android.
Opera mini is great on a normal phone, but silly and pointless on a platform with with a real browser like the iPhone OS and Android.
No, not really.
Not everybody has great broadband mobile connections.
Android has a very good browser with WiFi, but it is totally useless with my Edge connection. Opera on the other hand is amazingly fast with any connection I have tested.
YMMV
Not everybody has great broadband mobile connections.
Android has a very good browser with WiFi, but it is totally useless with my Edge connection. Opera on the other hand is amazingly fast with any connection I have tested.
YMMV
I've just visited acid3.acidtests.org. That was funny on several levels :)
What are plans for iPad version? Would love tabs for the browser.
Now its time for Chrome!
Opera complements Safari in a sense. It's an app to browse with on the ancient networks with bad reception. Chrome might conflict too much with MobileSafari's core functionality, so it would really be a miracle if it was approved.
+ Does Google even want to compete there? Chrome on the desktop may have some strategic value beyond spreading the Google brand, but is there anything exceptional made 'the Google way' in the Android browser?
+ Does Google even want to compete there? Chrome on the desktop may have some strategic value beyond spreading the Google brand, but is there anything exceptional made 'the Google way' in the Android browser?
Firefox mobile next?
Unlikely. Opera Mini works by doing all the rendering on the server-side, and then sending the pre-rendered website to the client. It's not actually a browser, so much as an app that gets screenshots from a server-side browser.
Firefox, on the other hand, would be a real browser, running Javascript rendering and Gecko on the phone itself, which would not be allowed.
That said, I don't understand why anyone would want Firefox anyway. The iPhone's limited memory and CPU would likely make Firefox nearly unusable, while extensions would eat away at what little free space was left. Firefox isn't optimized for the mobile space, and I can't think of any features it would provide that would make it a better choice than Safari (or, on Android, the built-in WebKit browser).
Firefox, on the other hand, would be a real browser, running Javascript rendering and Gecko on the phone itself, which would not be allowed.
That said, I don't understand why anyone would want Firefox anyway. The iPhone's limited memory and CPU would likely make Firefox nearly unusable, while extensions would eat away at what little free space was left. Firefox isn't optimized for the mobile space, and I can't think of any features it would provide that would make it a better choice than Safari (or, on Android, the built-in WebKit browser).
The Firefox Mobile runs ok on N900 which has RAM- and CPUwise very similar hardware to iPhones, but 2x more pixels to render.
Why would someone want it instead of Safari? I'm sure lots of people use Firefox on their Macs too. Competition usually benefits us consumers.
Do I think we will see it on iPhone? Definitely not (I'm pretty sure both Apple and folks at Mozilla agree).
Why would someone want it instead of Safari? I'm sure lots of people use Firefox on their Macs too. Competition usually benefits us consumers.
Do I think we will see it on iPhone? Definitely not (I'm pretty sure both Apple and folks at Mozilla agree).
I don't think it's entirely image based - how can I search for text inside a page if it's sent as an image?
what about encrypted/secured pages?
The connection is only encrypted between the web site and Opera's servers, and Opera's servers and your phone. Opera's servers see all the data in its unencrypted form. From their FAQ[1]:
Is there any end-to-end security between my handset and — for example — paypal.com or my bank?
No. If you need full end-to-end encryption, you should use a full Web browser such as Opera Mobile.
Opera Mini uses a transcoder server to translate HTML/CSS/JavaScript into a more compact format. It will also shrink any images to fit the screen of your handset. This translation step makes Opera Mini fast, small, and also very cheap to use. To be able to do this translation, the Opera Mini server needs to have access to the unencrypted version of the Web page. Therefore no end-to-end encryption between the client and the remote Web server is possible.
[1]http://www.opera.com/mobile/help/faq/#security
Is there any end-to-end security between my handset and — for example — paypal.com or my bank?
No. If you need full end-to-end encryption, you should use a full Web browser such as Opera Mobile.
Opera Mini uses a transcoder server to translate HTML/CSS/JavaScript into a more compact format. It will also shrink any images to fit the screen of your handset. This translation step makes Opera Mini fast, small, and also very cheap to use. To be able to do this translation, the Opera Mini server needs to have access to the unencrypted version of the Web page. Therefore no end-to-end encryption between the client and the remote Web server is possible.
[1]http://www.opera.com/mobile/help/faq/#security
[deleted]
They must've planned this as a way to placate pissed off app developers.
They don't give a crap about the developers or what the developers think about them.
Then why would they invest millions, if not billions, in creating, enhancing, and supporting developer tools?
Obviously they only do so to benefit themselves, but it's quite clear from their actions that Apple does care about developers.
Obviously they only do so to benefit themselves, but it's quite clear from their actions that Apple does care about developers.
Put it this way: they don't care about what the developers have to say about their platform or their policies and they assume that whatever minority of developers has left their platform will be replaced by an army of new ones. I mean, how many people have actually dropped their development for the iPhone/iPad? Have you noticed it?
out of my friends (who develop for the iPhone)? One or two.
Most are still staying onboard (maybe... 25 or so).
Don't forget this is the internet; like most things the disgruntled developers will be the most vocal. That doesn't necessarily make them a majority - or even a large minority.
Most are still staying onboard (maybe... 25 or so).
Don't forget this is the internet; like most things the disgruntled developers will be the most vocal. That doesn't necessarily make them a majority - or even a large minority.
They should, or else they'll lose developers to a platform run by a company that does.
Hopefully...
You have to wonder how much of this is PR damage control considering how the developer community pretty much called out their BS.
My original guess (on the first day) for when it would be approved was pretty close; I was two days off.
congratufuckinglations
1. it's very responsive. Much snappier than Safari; the difference is very noticeable.
2. pages download much quicker
3. zooming in and out is faster, but you only have two zoom levels. If you "pinch to zoom" it immediately zooms in all the way.
4. the home screen with 9 favorites works great
5. it's a little buggy (clicks don't always register)
6. killer feature #1: it automatically stores the entire app state, so you can open a few tabs, switch apps, go back and have everything the way you left it. This is a big deal, because Safari forgets your pages eventually, which is so frustrating when you have your travel plans in a safari tab and 3G is not exactly reliable.
7. killer feature #2: you can save pages
8. In full screen mode it makes for a pretty decent reader.
9. It doesn't suffer from "too small font" syndrome.
10. It has this "Snap to column" thing where your view automatically snaps to the column edges. This makes reading more like reading on Instapaper and less like safari.
11. It loads instantly, even when I have 3 tabs open. It's really that fast.
The only real downsides I know of so far are that it has trouble rendering more complex web pages, invades my privacy and doesn't do Javascript. Flash content simply doesn't appear (so you don't even know it should be there) and YouTube links don't link to the YouTube app. Still very impressive.