Opera: Microsoft's 'minor tweak' of Windows 7 not enough


Recommended Posts

I should have known actually reading the whole article would be too difficult for you. Why don't you scroll down to Opera's explanation of what they feel would be enough. Here it is in Arial black:

Too bad the powers that be around here doesn't give out warnings for your arrogant and condescending attitude towards others.

How about Opera stops bitching and actually makes a good product? that might help them more.

I have never SEEN Opera on a computer (other then Adobe including it in apps) and most people I know that bought cell phones that come with Opera Mobile have ripped it off of their phone.

Firefox has risen, Opera hasn't because it blows, not because of Microsoft.

I've used Opera Browser for years and for me allot more user friendly then Firefox, but each to his own. Not trying to stir up a browser war here but I'm not seeing Firefox for mobile devices anywhere like Opera Mini has developed

You can flame Opera all you want, but in reality it doesn't matter one god damn bit what Opera's motives are. If Microsoft broke the law, they broke the law, and it will be up to the authorities to decide what course of action to take. I know only about three people on the entire forum will understand this, but whatever.

They did not break the law. Period. The justice system is ****ed up in the whole world. Microsoft is a easy target so they just go for them.

hmmm but GJ, Apple don't own 80%! of THE SHARE!! XD

Apple owns 100% of the market created by them and they do not allow anyone in their market.

whoa! Opera is really crybaby, so EU breastfeeding her son Opera.

(I am sorry If I was joking of that one.)

I really hate Opera so much, because I can see that Opera always complain to his mom, EU. I will remove opera from my Nintendo Wii soon.

I agree with you that Opera should set up thier own Opera OS someday as Google is going to build new OS soon. I will not buy Opera or Google in the future.

Gameboy

I've noticed in the past that people who support Opera's position in this battle will say that the average user doesn't even know other browsers exist beyond IE, and equate IE to the internet itself, and that this is the mindset they're trying to change.

I've also noticed that the average computer user doesn't CARE what their browser is, doesn't NOTICE the difference in page rendering, and doesn't care about initial launch speed. They also resent the idea that they should somehow learn more about it.

This idea that we have to bring IE down to make the average user happy is a load of crap, and it amazes me that people in the IT field--people who deal with this mindset every day--continue to believe it. Perhaps their own personal resentment toward the people they work with (and IT has always resented the client). All I can be sure of is, this magical Average Computer User doesn't give a crap what their web browser is. It's just a webbrowser to them. They'll use what's there from the beginning because it requires less effort. They don't want to look for something else to install. They don't want to figure out why this browser calls them Bookmarks and this one calls them Favorites and can't figure out why Firefox can't figure out how to import IE Favorites with the bloody folders sorted before the files.

Opera takes their web browser far too seriously. Maybe the real issue is that Microsoft isn't being anti-competitive: they took competition out of the equation entirely. Before MS came along with IE, web browsers actually WERE a market. Netscape cost. Opera cost. Internet Explorer destroyed that, and in so doing made the web a part of everyone's life. MS made the web what it is today. Mozilla adapted and is doing a phenomenal job of figuring out how to win market share.

Opera, the 92-year-old man of the bunch apparently, hates that rabbit and expects the world to change for it before it will change for the world.

No, but they do own 100% of their own market.

And Amiga owns 100% of the Amiga market!

:unsure:

What is the logic of sub-dividing the market to the point of absurdity?

Opera takes their web browser far too seriously. Maybe the real issue is that Microsoft isn't being anti-competitive: they took competition out of the equation entirely. Before MS came along with IE, web browsers actually WERE a market. Netscape cost. Opera cost. Internet Explorer destroyed that, and in so doing made the web a part of everyone's life. MS made the web what it is today. Mozilla adapted and is doing a phenomenal job of figuring out how to win market share.

Opera, the 92-year-old man of the bunch apparently, hates that rabbit and expects the world to change for it before it will change for the world.

Other than some versions of their mobile browser, how have they not adapted? Their current stream of revenue is pretty much similar to what Mozilla is doing right now, by funding through Google's searches.

And not to repeat this same point that has been previously mentioned, but Mozilla (and also Google) isn't exactly out of this current drama fest either. They're just not pursuing it that publicly, leaving everyone else to pick on the instigator - as you can see here.

Wouldn't adding a screen with a list of browser options only help the big 5 - Firefox, Safari, Internet Explorer, Chrome, and Opera?

That's not making the market competitive... that's picking a small portion of the choices and giving them all of the market. Opera are just in it for themselves, while making it look like they're there for the little guy.

...

I'm fed up of this, really. I think Neowin as a collective group of members should do something to shut Opera up once and for all. Regardless of where we're from we all seem to have a similar opinion, they just need to stop complaining.

If we do this, I think numerous other tech communities might join us.

Wouldn't adding a screen with a list of browser options only help the big 5 - Firefox, Safari, Internet Explorer, Chrome, and Opera?

That's not making the market competitive... that's picking a small portion of the choices and giving them all of the market. Opera are just in it for themselves, while making it look like they're there for the little guy.

True, but to be honest, the rest of the market doesn't really amount to much. :p It's either freeware IE-based shells, a few Gecko-based browers (i.e. K-Meleon), browsers that don't run on Windows to begin with (Konqueror on Linux, iCab on Mac), and of course text based browsers which are out of the question.

But as I've said before, I don't agree with the browser options suggestion.

Edited by rm20010
Operas been **** for awhile now, the older versions werent bad in their day but the latest definately is not as fast as the latest firefox, safari or chrome:

http://www.betanews.com/article/Is-Google-...ooks/1247847145

I personally have not used Chrome because it doesnt have a single feature that appeals to me that Opera doesnt have, but I have tried the latest Firefox and it still feels that Opera is faster. Remember, synthetic benchmarks are an OK comparison, but they are nothing like real-world applications.....for what I use it for, Opera is much faster than Firefox AND it includes all the main features I use right out of the box without having to go find them.

Obviously you do not agree but Opera is much more innovative than any other browser developer and they have IMO improved their browser immensely since the older version (pre-9 was crap IMHO, now its the best browser around). So please, stop passing around your opinion as fact, you may feel that way, but your not entirely correct.

Why doesn't Opera make their own damn operating system and then they can do what they want?

It's Microsoft's operating system. They can bundle w/e the hell they want in it.

Well actually, they have laws against this sort of thing.

If only Opera were compatible with everything I used. Outlook Live, Bing Maps, Google Maps....

Their product is not nearly compatible enough to be viable. It really is a shame, their ad blocking and smooth scrolling is wonderful and 2nd to none.

If only Opera were compatible with everything I used. Outlook Live, Bing Maps, Google Maps....

Their product is not nearly compatible enough to be viable. It really is a shame, their ad blocking and smooth scrolling is wonderful and 2nd to none.

Opera works fine on both Bing and Google maps, can't test Outlook live but i'd expect it's just not supported rather than not compatible.

I personally have not used Chrome because it doesnt have a single feature that appeals to me that Opera doesnt have, but I have tried the latest Firefox and it still feels that Opera is faster. Remember, synthetic benchmarks are an OK comparison, but they are nothing like real-world applications.....for what I use it for, Opera is much faster than Firefox AND it includes all the main features I use right out of the box without having to go find them.

I don't know about you, but this is how Opera fares on my machine. Vista SP1 32-bit, 512k wireless, IPv6 enabled. Page load times are in seconds and averaged over 5 runs.

post-300072-1248031347_thumb.jpg

This may come as a HUGE shock to you, but the US DOJ has no jurisdiction in Europe and does not make rulings for the whole world.

You're welcome.

Which is why as the previous poster explained to you that the former case has nothing to do with the current case. You are the one that seems to want it both ways for Opera.

The reason Opera has no market share is the browser just plain sucks. I've used it, including very recently and even tried out Beta 10. Opera has major rendering issues and is very unintuitive for even basic task. It is a horrible browser, bloated, to many useless features included like a email client and bittorrent. I just want a browser and not the Swiss army knives of browsers.

Opera should concentrate on their mobile browser which is one of the best in that space and quit trying to force people to use their crappy desktop browser.

I'm fed up of this, really. I think Neowin as a collective group of members should do something to shut Opera up once and for all. Regardless of where we're from we all seem to have a similar opinion, they just need to stop complaining.

If we do this, I think numerous other tech communities might join us.

What do you suggest we do? Ban Opera users? Ban talk of Opera? Start a petition of some sort?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Stellarium 26.2 by Razvan Serea Stellarium is a free open source planetarium for your computer. It shows a realistic sky in 3D, just like what you see with the naked eye, binoculars or a telescope. It is being used in planetarium projectors. Just set your coordinates and go. Stellarium key features: Realistic simulation of the sky, sunrise and sunset Default catalogue of over 600,000 stars Downloadable additional catalogues for up to 210 million stars Catalog data for all New General Catalogue (NGC) objects Images of almost all Messier objects and the Milky Way Artistic illustrations for all 88 modern constellations More than a dozen different cultures with their constellations Solar and lunar eclipse simulation Photorealistic landscapes (more are available on the website) Scripting support with ECMAScript (a few demo scripts are included) Extendable with plug-ins: 8 plug-ins installed by default, including: artificial satellites plug-in (updated from an on-line TLE database) ocular simulation plug-in (shows how objects look like in a given ocular) Solar System editor plug-in (imports comet and asteroid data from the MPC) telescope control plug-in (Meade LX200 and Celestron NexStar compatible) The major changes of this version: Added new sky culture Added new plugin: Planes Many improvements in plugins Many improvements in Core and GUI Many updates in sky cultures. [full release notes] Download: Stellarium 26.2 (64-bit) | 456.0 MB (Open Source) View: Stellarium Home Page | Other Operating Systems | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NASA: This asteroid may not kill us but it probably won't be far off either by Sayan Sen Image by Zelch Csaba via Pexels New observations by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope have eliminated the last remaining impact threat posed by asteroid 2024 YR4, ruling out the possibility that the near-Earth object could strike the Moon in December 2032. NASA said observations collected by Webb on February 18 and 26, 2026, enabled scientists to refine the asteroid's orbit enough to "rule out a chance of lunar impact on Dec. 22, 2032." Instead, asteroid 2024 YR4 is now expected to pass the Moon at a distance of about 13,200 miles (21,200 km). The agency stressed that the update "reflects improved precision in our understanding of where the asteroid is expected to be in 2032 rather than a shift in its orbital path." The announcement closes a remarkable chapter in planetary defence that began in late 2024, when the approximately 60-metre-wide asteroid briefly became the most closely watched near-Earth object in the world. Discovered on December 27, 2024, by the ATLAS telescope in Chile, 2024 YR4 initially appeared to have a small chance of colliding with Earth on December 22, 2032. As astronomers gathered more observations, the impact probability briefly climbed to around 3%—the highest ever recorded for an asteroid of its size—before steadily falling as its orbit became better understood. By early 2025, international observations had ruled out any significant risk to Earth. However, astronomers were left with another possibility: a roughly 4% chance that the asteroid could instead strike the Moon. "The probability that asteroid 2024 YR4 will strike the Moon on 22 December 2032 is now approximately 4%," the European Space Agency (ESA) had said last year, noting that "there is a 96% chance that the asteroid will not impact the Moon." ESA said such an impact, while unlikely, would have presented an extraordinary scientific opportunity. "It is a very rare event for an asteroid this large to impact the Moon – and it is rarer still that we know about it in advance. The impact would likely be visible from Earth, and so scientists will be very excited by the prospect of observing and analysing it," said Richard Moissl, Head of ESA's Planetary Defence Office. "It would certainly leave a new crater on the surface. However, we wouldn't be able to accurately predict in advance how much material would be thrown into space, or whether any would reach Earth," he added. The asteroid also exposed an important blind spot in planetary defence. Because 2024 YR4 approached Earth from the direction of the Sun, it remained hidden from ground-based telescopes until after its closest approach. "We looked into how Neomir would have performed in this situation, and the simulations surprised even us," Moissl said. "Neomir would have detected asteroid 2024 YR4 about a month earlier than ground-based telescopes did. This would have given astronomers more time to study the asteroid's trajectory and allowed them to much sooner rule out any chance of Earth impact in 2032." He added, "As an infrared telescope, like Webb, Neomir would have also immediately given us a much better estimate for the asteroid's size, which is very important for assessing the significance of the hazard." The latest NASA observations underscore the value of space-based infrared telescopes in tracking faint asteroids. According to NASA, Webb made "among the faintest ever observations of an asteroid," extending the object's observational record by nearly eight months at a time when it had become too faint for other telescopes. That additional data allowed scientists to eliminate the remaining uncertainty surrounding its 2032 flyby. Although asteroid 2024 YR4 is now confirmed to pose no threat to either Earth or the Moon, scientists say its discovery remains one of the most significant real-world tests of the international planetary defence system, demonstrating how continued observations can rapidly transform an object once considered hazardous into one whose future path is known with high confidence. Source: NASA, ESA This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Yup. Google is just scraping the entire internet for their own ad profits without sharing revenue with the sources. It's obviously stealing, but since these sites depend upon Google's search scraps to survive... As for me, I just stopped using Google for anything except Reddit searches. If Reddit's own search wasn't complete crapola, I'd never use Google search again.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
    • Apprentice
      daryld went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Contributor
      Carltonbar went up a rank
      Contributor
    • One Month Later
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      418
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      130
    4. 4
      Xenon
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!