Opera announces 'gradual transition' to WebKit for desktop and mobi


Recommended Posts

Opera announces 'gradual transition' to WebKit for desktop and mobile browsers

Opera Software has announced that it will move away from its own Presto rendering engine in favor of WebKit, the software engine that powers the Chrome and Safari browsers. "It makes more sense to have our experts working with the open source communities to further improve WebKit and Chromium, rather than developing our own rendering engine further," says CTO H?kon Wium Lie. The company says there will be a "gradual transition" this year to WebKit and Chromium across desktop and mobile.

Details of a WebKit-powered mobile browser from Opera first leaked last month. Codenamed "Ice", CEO Lars Boilesen was quoted as saying that it was designed to take on Safari and Chrome in the mobile space; the browser will be formally revealed at this month's Mobile World Congress. But the revelation that Opera is planning to adopt WebKit on the desktop, too, marks the end of an era for the Norwegian company, which introduced Presto a decade ago with Opera 7. The announcement was made as the company celebrated reaching the milestone of 300 million monthly users across all its platforms.

Source: The Verge

FANTASTIC NEWS... my dream of unified web where we don't have to write 15 CSS lines and use polyfills for a single thing and tons of libraries to make stuff look the same across browsers is coming true.

Hopefully Mozilla joins Webkit train and finally we will have Microsoft forced to switch as well..

If this happens then we can truly start phasing out Flash as building for web will be beautiful. Not to mention that the tools we will get will be as good as Flash professional as there won't be compatibility issues due to unified rendering engine and spaghetti code for 5 different browsers. This fragmentation has been destroying web for a while now. And companies can contribute with cool features like Adobe is doing with CSS3 Shaders, Blend modes and so on and it can be quickly implemented on all browsers.

THEN, we can truly say open web and browsers offer now truly unified rendering and all the cool features Flash has now and that we can't (or have hard time) doing in HTML5/JS/CSS will be implemented in Webkit.

The dream.. is just a bit closer.

FANTASTIC NEWS... my dream of unified web where we don't have to write 15 CSS lines and use polyfills for a single thing and tons of libraries to make stuff look the same across browsers is coming true.

If you're writing 15 lines of CSS to do one thing you're either:

  1. Doing it wrong
  2. Using vendor prefixed CSS which isn't actually finalised yet
  3. Putting in CSS to override the different browser defaults which has nothing to do with the rending engine

So changing to webkit won't fix a lot except create another "Designed for X" period just like the IE6 days. The only way it can work with a single rendering engine is if it because a reference implementation of the spec - ie the rendering engine is the spec but that won't happen as different browsers will probably have different versions

  • Like 3

Nah, Mozilla wants an open, standards based web, and even Microsoft seems to want a standards based web now, which is seemingly more at odds with WebKit's "do whatever and get web authors to rely on it" attitude.

WebKit is the new IE6 now.

That is bull**** because WebKit is open source.

Nah, Mozilla wants an open, standards based web, and even Microsoft seems to want a standards based web now, which is seemingly more at odds with WebKit's "do whatever and get web authors to rely on it" attitude.

WebKit is the new IE6 now.

Um.. that makes no sense really.. why? Because IE6 was a proprietary browser.. Webkit/Chromium are open source web standards based browsers that anyone can contribute to.. not sure how this is the same at all..

Yeah sure.. there might be some webkit extensions that are on top of standards stuff but that's really not that big of a deal.. you can still build standards based stuff and it will work great..

Actually Chrome is the most innovative and fast browser that works great with all the newest HTML5 stuff and even beyond like Adobe proposed CSS3 Shaders and Blend Modes and so on..

The rest are slow at innovation, their browsers suck and they are just whining (especially Microsoft) because everybody wants new hot features and nobody plans on waiting for them to catch up.. this includes Mozilla as well.

This "bug" has been in WebKit for years now, and they have no plans to fix it.

W1Fdw9m.png

If WebKit becomes the "reference implementation" does that mean it should be part of the CSS spec?

I don't think you understand what web would gain if everyone switched to webkit.. actually I think Chromium is better because it's using V8 for Javascript and it's using Chromium Webkit API to render Webkit content fine. And it's open source too.

When big guys join up (like Opera now) and hopefully Mozilla and Microsoft everyone would be contributing to the Webkit/Chromium code (whichever it is).

This would do several things;

1. Rapidly bring innovation and ubiquity among browsers.. new features would be matter of months to simply add and they would be immediately available on all other browsers.

2. Instead of writing 15 lines of CSS code and use polyfills and other garbage to work across browsers standards based stuff would just work the same on all browsers (including CSS)

3. Tools for animations, development would get into a second renaissance since Flash. Adobe and others could build awesome tools without worrying and generating kilobytes of code just to make simplest thing work on all browsers which in return makes it very hard to make good tools.

Right now, it's a mess and it's really killing the web as long as we have "Works exclusively with IE10" or "Works with Chrome" or whatever.. you wouldn't see that problem if they all agreed on one standards based, open source, browser engine.

Listen, the bottom line is this, web browser makers need to concentrate on bringing BROWSING features to their browsers and make them better, not to make everyone's lives a nightmare because they have their politics and are trying to dominate the browser market as that equals power on the web. So we get 5 different VMs, even Javascript incompatibilities ECMAScript 6 has been in development for a long time now and it's still like 5-10 years from actually replacing ECMAScript 5, we get prefixes, we get polyfills nonsense, we get specific IE extensions for Windows and everybody is trying to say how they are going to follow standards but they really don't.

I have no plan on waiting for next HTML improvements for another decade because of their own greed and desire for power. It's time they wake up and follow Opera.

I'm going to borrow a quite from a user called "kibwen" on Hacker News because I think it's a pretty good response.

You're committing an error here. Say you find a bug in Webkit. You patch it, but Apple declines to accept it upstream. You fork the project. Now how do you get your fork into the hands of your users? Unless you're secretly Google in disguise, you're SOL.

There's a bunch of non-standard stuff WebKit does on purpose (including the bug I showed earlier), if you write a patch to fix it it won't be accepted. So you fork WebKit to have a version focused on standards compliance (or whatever), how are you going to get people to use your variant? Google won't use it, Apple won't use it, etc. You changes never trickle down to people using Chrome or Safari or Android/iOS.

It seems kinda counter-intuitive to say "Everybody should use WebKit" and then say "Well you can just make your own version", which is it?

  • Like 2

It seems kinda counter-intuitive to say "Everybody should use WebKit" and then say "Well you can just make your own version", which is it?

When they all use the same thing they will have to contribute together and work together on it.. that's the whole point.. for everyone to contribute and make webkit better because it's in everybody's interest. If Chrome has that bug but other browser doesn't what browser do you think I'll be using.. the core compliance to standards is very unlikely to change..

Saying that browser makers shouldn't use one open source rendering engine amazes me considering in what fragmented mess we live today. How can this be even remotely worse than what we have now.. it can only be better not worse.

And btw.. we can already see that it works MUCH MUCH better on mobile.. we only have webkit browsers on 95% of mobile devices.. Safari and Chrome/Android default browser.. and when you build something for the mobile web the damn thing just works beautifully and is actually a joy to design and build (with the exception on some minor custom webkit stuff that Apple introduces on top of webkit core which is really not a big deal as your web app or site can work without it).

Not sure how this is worse than running 5 different JS VMs and HTML engines.

Having web standards drafted (they are not even final) and expecting that all these different browsers built differently will somehow magically work better than having everything on open source webkit is truly puzzling.. It's such a pipe dream it's not even funny.

It's not a pipe dream at all, that's the whole point of standards. How do you think Windows, OS X, Linux and *BSD all communicate while having different networking stacks? by using a common standard.

And the main browser causing fragmentation today is WebKit, even Microsoft is having issues with websites using non-standard WebKit stuff.

It's not a pipe dream at all, that's the whole point of standards. How do you think Windows, OS X, Linux and *BSD all communicate while having different networking stacks? by using a common standard.

That's why performance (for example canvas or audio/video) capabilities of HTML5 stuff today including CSS3 stuff works so great across browsers.. it really doesn't.

I don't see how they have so many issues when all the stuff MS is complaining works just fine on Firefox for example (mostly they complain about Google's own services).

I'm not saying Microsoft doesn't have a point.. but I'm telling you that everyone doing their own browsers will never make that web standards utopia you believe in. I'm far more skeptical because I know how these guys think.

V8 and Webkit based Chromium are simply the most advanced browser/VM today.. and instead of everyone peddling their own things they should all work on the same thing.

The situation is not any better since WHATWG split with W3C.. now they'll be pushing new features that are not really a part of the standards until W3C takes another decade to evaluate and try to make them standard if that happens, in the meantime you will see the same things happening as they have in the last 5 years with HTML5 (wild wild west). Promise of ubiquity that just works that is clearly pure BS and is still nowhere near ready for prime time.

When they all use the same thing they will have to contribute together and work together on it.. that's the whole point.. for everyone to contribute and make webkit better because it's in everybody's interest.

No this is absolutely the wrong approach, specs are the only thing developers should ever share, and that is even pushing it.

Oh for crying out loud, another think-i-know-it-all loudmouth.

"When big guys join up (like Opera now) and hopefully Mozilla and Microsoft everyone would be contributing to the Webkit/Chromium code (whichever it is)."

Ever actually looked at what data chrome sends back to google about what you do?

Also please show me where the phasing out of other competition has ever been a good thing? (I'll save you some time - it hasn't)

  • Like 2

Not great news. The less competition the more we end up with sub-standard standards implementation and propriety hacks. As much as i currently love WebKit, it's well on it's way to becoming the next IE6.

  • Like 1

Oh for crying out loud, another think-i-know-it-all loudmouth.

"When big guys join up (like Opera now) and hopefully Mozilla and Microsoft everyone would be contributing to the Webkit/Chromium code (whichever it is)."

Ever actually looked at what data chrome sends back to google about what you do?

Also please show me where the phasing out of other competition has ever been a good thing? (I'll save you some time - it hasn't)

You, and all the other fearmongers like you do realise that the data Chrome sends back has nothing to do with Webkit... right? And exactly the same data gets sent back to Microsoft every time you opt into their requests to send usage stats. I've been using Chrome for 3 years and strangely enough I haven't had anything bad happen to me yet. Nobody's stolen all my money, nobody's hacked my PC, the feds haven't busted my back door in...

V8 and Webkit based Chromium are simply the most advanced browser/VM today.. and instead of everyone peddling their own things they should all work on the same thing.

The situation is not any better since WHATWG split with W3C.. now they'll be pushing new features that are not really a part of the standards until W3C takes another decade to evaluate and try to make them standard if that happens, in the meantime you will see the same things happening as they have in the last 5 years with HTML5 (wild wild west). Promise of ubiquity that just works that is clearly pure BS and is still nowhere near ready for prime time.

I'm pretty sure you're switching everyone working on a standard with everyone working on an open source project. It's going to create the same mess, with each company forking it for their own purposes. Except now, it's even worse. They'll still be arguing over what should be the standard behavior. The result is:

-webkit-moz

-webkit-ms

-webkit-appl

-webkit-chrome

At least standards are enforceable. You can blame a company for breaking standards, you can't blame a company for forking an open source project.

Not great news. The less competition the more we end up with sub-standard standards implementation and propriety hacks. As much as i currently love WebKit, it's well on it's way to becoming the next IE6.

Not quite. Remember that when IE6 was around, their competition was the slowly dying Netscape Navigator, and it was the beginning of the "let's put all of our workplace applications online!" phase, mostly using Active-X, so there were huge development costs and basically no alternative.

Also, today the fight is mostly over high-level client side UI elements, a lot of which can be simulated or replaced with JavaScript. There's less demand from businesses for proprietary web technologies, and any outside company that targets one browser is shooting itself in the foot.

FANTASTIC NEWS... my dream of unified web where we don't have to write 15 CSS lines and use polyfills for a single thing and tons of libraries to make stuff look the same across browsers is coming true.

Hopefully Mozilla joins Webkit train and finally we will have Microsoft forced to switch as well..

If this happens then we can truly start phasing out Flash as building for web will be beautiful. Not to mention that the tools we will get will be as good as Flash professional as there won't be compatibility issues due to unified rendering engine and spaghetti code for 5 different browsers. This fragmentation has been destroying web for a while now. And companies can contribute with cool features like Adobe is doing with CSS3 Shaders, Blend modes and so on and it can be quickly implemented on all browsers.

THEN, we can truly say open web and browsers offer now truly unified rendering and all the cool features Flash has now and that we can't (or have hard time) doing in HTML5/JS/CSS will be implemented in Webkit.

The dream.. is just a bit closer.

Seriously, are you really that blind? I sure wouldn't want you anywhere near any websites.

http://www.neowin.ne...#entry595407240

Funny how fast people forget, or why you never responded to that. ^^

You're completely blind if you think Apple doesn't retain ultimate control of WebKit, it wants a WebKit monoculture. If Apple ever wants to put it's foot in, it can.

I feel if Opera switches to WebKit, that's even less of a reason to use it, since it won't render any differently from Safari or Chrome, and I thought one of the appeals of Opera was its own rendering engine.

  • Like 3

Nah, Mozilla wants an open, standards based web, and even Microsoft seems to want a standards based web now, which is seemingly more at odds with WebKit's "do whatever and get web authors to rely on it" attitude.

WebKit is the new IE6 now.

And gecko is in much better shape then presto when it comes to sites supporting it. Presto was/is a good standards compliant engine, but it had a small user base so site compatability was often still a problem. Firefox/gecko doesn't have that problem and there's no real reason for firefox to move to webkit. Firefox also has more resources for developing a browser engine than opera's small team. I do think its important that all browsers don't switch to webkit. Webkit is an excellent engine, but as you mention if EVERYONE starts using it we will run into another ie6 type situation where the web is developed for webkit and not developed with standards.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • NetSpeedTray 1.3.3 by Razvan Serea NetSpeedTray is a lightweight, open-source Windows network monitor that shows live upload and download speeds directly on the Taskbar. Designed for efficiency, it quietly sits in the system tray, conserving CPU and battery with dynamic updates. It blends seamlessly with Windows 10/11, adapts to light/dark themes, and auto-positions to avoid overlaps. Features include accurate interface detection, customizable display, optional mini-graph, color coding, granular font and unit control, detailed per-interface history graphs, safe data management, and easy CSV export—bringing the network monitoring Windows forgot. NetSpeedTray key features: Lightweight & Efficient Runs quietly in your system tray without consuming resources. Features a "Dynamic Update Rate" that lowers refresh frequency when the network is idle to save CPU and battery life. Native Look & Feel Blends seamlessly with Windows 10/11 UI. Smart detection for light and dark taskbar themes ensures text is always visible. Intelligent & Adaptive Positioning Automatically finds empty space next to your system tray and shifts to make room for new icons, preventing overlaps. Seamless OS Integration Behaves like a native Windows component. Hides instantly with auto-hiding taskbar Hides when a fullscreen app is active Smart Network Monitoring Accurate by Default: Auto mode identifies your main internet connection and ignores noise from VPNs or virtual adapters. Easy Interface Selection: Switch effortlessly between Auto, All, or Selected network interfaces via intuitive radio buttons. Total Visual Customization Free Move Mode: Unlock and place the widget anywhere on your screen. Optional Mini-Graph: Real-time graph of recent network activity with adjustable opacity. Color Coding: Customize colors and speed thresholds to quickly see network status. Granular Display Control Text & Font: Adjust font family, size, weight, and alignment. Units: Automatic (B/s, KB/s, MB/s) or fixed Mbps display. Precision: Set decimal places and always show them for uniform appearance. Detailed & Intelligent History Graph Smart Scale: Logarithmic scale shows low-level traffic and large spikes clearly. Per-Interface Filtering: View speed history for specific adapters (Wi-Fi, Ethernet, VPN). Safe & Efficient Data Management: Adjustable retention, automatic cleanup, optimized database. Easy Data Export: Export raw data to .csv or save high-quality graphs for reports. NetSpeedTray v1.3.3: The Updater Fix A stabilization release that repairs a critical regression in v1.3.2: the app shipped without OpenSSL, which silently broke every HTTPS request — including the built-in update checker (the "Could not check for updates" error many of you hit). This release restores it, hardens the build so it can't happen again, and fixes a startup crash plus four other reported bugs. Changes: Fixed update checking — Resolved a critical issue that prevented the app from checking for updates ("Could not check for updates"). Fixed startup crash with Auto-Cycling — The app no longer crashes on launch after enabling Cycle display mode. Fixed incorrect network speeds on 10GbE adapters — Multi-gigabit network cards now display speeds correctly instead of being stuck at 0. Improved color coding — Default color is shown when idle, and color/threshold changes now apply immediately without restarting. Fullscreen visibility fix — The widget now correctly stays visible over fullscreen apps when Keep Visible is enabled. Improved AMD Ryzen temperature detection — More reliable CPU temperature monitoring for Ryzen processors. Cleaner upgrades — Installer now removes outdated application files during upgrades, preventing DLL/version conflicts while preserving user settings. Improved stability — Fixed potential DLL loading issues by excluding critical OpenSSL and NumPy components from UPX compression. Better settings window — Scrollbars removed and layout improved for a cleaner experience. Localization improvements — Updated translations and completed missing UI text across all supported languages. More reliable releases — Added regression tests covering recent critical fixes, bringing the test suite to 196 passing tests. [full release notes] Download: NetSpeedTray 1.3.3 | 87.9 MB (Open Source) Download: NetSpeedTray Portable | 101.0 MB View: NetSpeedTray Home Page | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Why Delta Chat is the best decentralized messenger you have probably never tried by Paul Hill There is no shortage of messaging apps out there; we have WhatsApp, Messenger, and Telegram, just to name a few. While Meta has taken steps to incorporate encryption into Messenger and WhatsApp, they still leave a lot to be desired. If you are in the market for a messaging app that promotes security, privacy, and optional anonymity, you'll want to read what I have to say about Delta Chat. For those not familiar with Delta Chat, rather than relying on centralized servers as you do with Facebook Messenger, it relies on email. Essentially, it is a chat interface that feels like a messaging app, but secretly in the background, it is firing off emails. In the past, you used to have to sign in with your email account. When you sent messages to people, it would just be sending encrypted messages to their inbox, which their Delta Chat client would decrypt. When I first learned about Delta Chat, it required users to sign in with an email account, but I was pleasantly surprised upon trying it in 2026 that this is no longer a requirement, or the preferred method was to use the app. Recently, I’ve tried UAD-ng on my old Nokia 3.4 to disable most of the Google apps because the bootloader is locked, and this is the next best option. While finding replacement apps in F-Droid, I came across Delta Chat again, and it has undergone quite a big change since I last used it, with its new chatmail relays, which no longer require you to sign in to your own email account, providing anonymity, and they offer greater security. Android and Desktop Delta Chat apps. Not only does it run on my de-googled phone, but it also works on desktop computers and iOS, making it truly ubiquitous. For me, Delta Chat is a wonderful alternative messenger because it gives you more control. It supports switching between different profiles, which you can set up super quickly; you don’t register a username, you don’t register a password. The only thing you do have is a random string email address on a chatmail relay (which you don’t have to memorize). To maintain access to your profile, you just need to add a second device to your account via QR code or make a backup of your account, which you can restore later. Fail to do these, your account is gone - as it should be if you don’t want to leave accounts that could get hacked later on. My decision to block Google stuff on my Nokia was done for practical reasons; the device sucked when it launched, and it sucks even more now. The nice thing about F-Droid and the apps within is that they’re usually lightweight, free of bloat, and work well on that device. What was inconvenient for me was that it was hard to send messages from that device, say if I wanted to copy a code over to my main phone or send family members a link from that device. That’s when I decided to look at the available chat apps and saw Delta Chat. Another nice thing about Delta Chat is its notifications. Some messaging apps rely on Google’s ecosystem for notification transport on Android; however, with Delta Chat, it can use Google’s solutions if you have Play Services or MicroG installed. Otherwise, it is able to keep a background connection to the chatmail relay server so that you can get notified when you receive a message. As free software, the code of Delta Chat is open for all who want to take it and build upon it. In the future, if the developers of Delta Chat make a catastrophically bad decision and take the app in an undesirable direction, users can take the code and fork the project. This contrasts with closed-source apps from corporations that can take their products in any direction they like. By relying on free software instead of closed-source programs, you actually control your computing. I’ve spoken at length about how running this type of software is like owning your own home rather than renting it. The same applies here; if you use Delta Chat, you don’t need to worry about it going away in the future. Whether it is Telegram, WhatsApp, or Messenger, you are required to register a username and password to use these services. A major flaw in this design is that anyone can try various passwords and potentially break into your account with your complete chat history intact. Sure, there is encryption in Messenger, where you need a second PIN and two-factor authentication in Telegram, but breaches happen all the time. Unlike before, when you used to sign in to your email account to send and receive messages, the primary way to do it now is to create an account on a chatmail relay. The resulting email address is a random string followed by the name of the relay you pick. This means you can start and begin adding contacts Without a username and password, you either need to ensure you have a backup or at least one device running your Delta Chat profile. The primary way to log in on another device is to go to the settings and add a second device. Then, you’ll just scan a QR code with your new device, and it’ll log in to your account and sync all your chat history and contacts. To end users, Delta Chat just looks like any instant messenger; however, it is really sending your messages as encrypted emails to your contact. This is pretty cool from a censorship perspective, as it makes the service more difficult to block. Previously, the main way to use the app was by logging in with email, but nowadays, it’s recommended that you use chatmail relays. Chatmail relays temporarily hold messages in case your device is offline. They are cheap, simple servers that don’t store data as group states. Other information, like your name and avatar, only exists on your device and the devices of those you share your contact information with. The relays are also decentralized and operated by various groups and individuals. It is even possible to set up your own chatmail relay, but most people will want to use one hosted elsewhere. To keep your messages secure, Delta Chat uses a secure subset of the OpenPGP standard that gives you automatic end-to-end encryption. It also uses Secure-Join to exchange encryption setup information through QR-code scanning or invite links. Autocrypt is also used to automatically establish end-to-end encryption between contacts and all members of group chat, but sometime this year Autocrypt v2 will be rolled out, bringing post-quantum resistant encryption and forward secrecy. The Delta Chat FAQ is an interesting read that explains many more details about the app. Credit: Pexels Delta Chat is unique among messaging apps because it is built on email, a technology that’s decades old and isn’t going anywhere soon. What’s more is that email is not centralized either, so it’s far more difficult for any authoritarian regime to disrupt the Delta Chat app. I haven’t spoken too much about features yet, so I will do that now. Delta Chat allows you to do one-on-one chats, group chats, and create channels. It also supports file sharing and making audio and video calls when chatting one-to-one, but it’s not available for group chats right now. At the time of writing, the calling functionality is disabled and can be enabled in Settings > Advanced > Debug Calls. I have used the video calling feature, and the quality is excellent. It works over WebRTC, another open standard. The app also lets you send voice notes, enables disappearing messages, and has its own app ecosystem. I did try playing chess one time there, but it was a bit spotty; though, we did manage to complete the game with a victory for me. To add people to Delta Chat, you can either give them your Delta Chat link or your QR code to scan. These are the only ways to add users, so you won't have any spam bots bothering you. If the people you want to chat with don't have the app yet, just send them your link, and it will take them to a webpage where they can install the app and then add you. It's really quick for them to install it and get started, which is nice. Credit: Microsoft. The Majorana 2 quantum chip unveiled in 2026. I do not think quantum computers are too far out now, and I do hope that Delta Chat is able to push out Autocrypt v2 sooner, rather than later, so bad actors do not attempt to collect encrypted communications and then decrypt them in the future using quantum computers. By getting people’s messages post-quantum-safe now, users won’t have to worry when quantum computers start cracking legacy encryption. Overall, I would recommend this app to people who are already past WhatsApp and Messenger and have perhaps begun using apps like Telegram or Session. It shares a lot of characteristics with these apps and goes a lot further than Telegram in terms of security. By being based on email, it is also resistant to censorship, and the lack of a username and password makes you anonymous (if you want to be) and safe from brute force password cracking attempts. Let me know in the comments if you’ve tried Delta Chat recently. Do you think it's a good bulwark against governments that are tightening their grip on the internet?
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      OffsetAbs earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      OffsetAbs earned a badge
      Reacting Well
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      471
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      217
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      156
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      73
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!