Opera Wants More From Microsoft

[petrossa]

What you're cheerfully ignoring is that Opera, not Mozilla, is still complaining. AFAIK, Mozilla was more than happy with just the browser ballot. Besides, this thread isn't about Mozilla or Apple or any other browser company.

Sorry assuming facts not in evidence. Opera responds to the call for review by the interested parties from the EU on the MS ballot proposal. So do Google and Mozilla but less publicly evidently as they stand to loose more then Opera does from MS's wrath.

I hadn't quite figured out that this thread was actually called:

Nail Opera to the pillory for no valid reason and let's throw eggs.

I find it really surprising that people here have allowed the Opera trolls to keep repeating this lie as their final bastion of defense for so long.

Please provide evidence that any body of authority has actually decided that Microsoft is guilty in this case.

sorry i know it's just Wikipedia but there's a lot of proper links to actual judgments. One does not get fined almost .5 billion because you happen to have an OS on the market.?

[Eice]

So do Google and Mozilla but less publicly evidently as they stand to loose more then Opera does from MS's wrath.

Which is exactly why Opera is behaving in such a pathetically shameless manner. They stand to gain a lot more than they lose, hence their going all-out. The number of people they disgust is nothing compared with their potential profits.

[Eice]

sorry i know it's just Wikipedia but there's a lot of proper links to actual judgments. One does not get fined almost .5 billion because you happen to have an OS on the market.

I can't believe this load of bull.

Are you really serious in trying to pass off the WMP case, settled back in 2007, as the current one? Who do you think is going to fall for it?

[petrossa]

Listen, MS has been fined for anti-competitive behavior by usurping it's market position to favor it's own products over others.. This is just more of the same. The complaint against IE bundling is firmly based in the first issue. Settling for a fine doesn't make the crime go away. And if you have the brass balls to just go on breaking the law, well expect them to glow over hot coal fire.

Which is exactly why Opera is behaving in such a pathetically shameless manner. They stand to gain a lot more than they lose, hence their going all-out. The number of people they disgust is nothing compared with their potential profits.

Call it what you want, in the end it's the EU who asked their opinion and they gave it. And made some valid points in the process that set everyone thinking.

[RvXtm]

I don't know abut opera's history, the thing i knew last time was that opera had ads in it's browser shell. But after testing Opera 10 and Opera Unite , I am pleased to say it came a long way from what it was.

Opera or any other browser is still better then IE8, and always will, hell, ie8 is good from ie6, but it's not comparable to other browsers as opera,safari,firefox,chrome.

And no, it's not so much about benchmarks, but ie8 doesn't even support canvas, and it's slow when browsing pages with a lot of content. I personally like Safari.

[Neoauld]

i tried the latest opera

it rendered something on the main page of neowin wrong, and i only wanted to see those visual tabs

i dont see how its any faster than FX though, both loaded pages rather instantly

[Eddo89]

Valid point or not, is getting annoying.

Is one thing complaining about it, is another doing it. If Opera decides to foot the bill for what they are asking for, I'm all ears. But why did I get the distinct impression all their whining.

And pet, I'm sorry but you sorely missed the point of what people is trying to say. The matter is not whether is right in a court of law or whatever crap you trying to use to defend Opera. The most important thing is people find the ways Opera is trying to make a name for themselves as distasteful. These are opinions, there are no facts that you could argue against it, and it is an opinion shared by most. For a general indication, just look at this very poll on this topic. This whole saga had gone before who is lawfully correct.

[DDStriker]

So you have a real grief with reporting criminal activities to the authorities? Wow.

Wow are we even in the same discussion? why do you keep going back to this? they have already reported these "criminal" activities and this topic is not about that

its about Opera gaining a small amount of leverage over microsoft due to the EU's lack of reasoning, its about opera abusing its stance to help advertise their browser

my real grief is with them being ******** and taking advantage of a situation that doesn't call for it they shouldn't have any say in the kind of punishment microsoft should suffer that should be purely upto to EU yet opera keeps whispering in their ears about these pointless changes

Opera has more users than Chrome, so if Chrome is very popular, then so is Opera.

Last i checked chrome had a larger market share so its far more popular then opera because opera has been out for a long time and chrome is still new yet it was able to surpass the number of users currently on opera

yeah opera was popular enough to make a small imprint on the net but nothing as effective as firefox/chrome (i'll exclude ie since people will jump on their high horse and mention how its built in~ even though firefox is built in on linux and i'm pretty sure chrome will be built in on google os)

Chrome's JS engine is irrelevant on the real web. It was created specifically to do well at artificial benchmarks like V8 and SunSpider. Improved JS won't really help much on today's sites since JS is not the main bottleneck today.

Wow that is rather ignorant of you i must strike you :laugh:

It raised the bar and its very relevant for the real web i know alot of javascript heavy websites that greatly benefited from this new compiled js approach greatly cutting down rendering time it even allowed more complicated programs to be available due to the extra power (client-side sorting) sure you probably won't see many benefits on the clients end for a simple website but for a highly interactive site its been more then welcomed.

[Eice]

Listen, MS has been fined for anti-competitive behavior by usurping it's market position to favor it's own products over others.. This is just more of the same. The complaint against IE bundling is firmly based in the first issue. Settling for a fine doesn't make the crime go away. And if you have the brass balls to just go on breaking the law, well expect them to glow over hot coal fire.

Tell you what, how about YOU listen. Nobody has decided that bundling IE with Windows is a crime. It's nothing but a bold-faced lie, made up and propagated by Opera fanboys as a desperate defense for Opera's pathetically shameless behavior.

Call it what you want, in the end it's the EU who asked their opinion and they gave it. And made some valid points in the process that set everyone thinking.

The defense of using the EU to cover Opera's arse presumes that people accept the EU's decisions are noble and respected. Here's a newsflash from the real world: how about you read this thread, and maybe you'll find out that people think the EU is just as retarded as Opera is.

[iamwhoiam]

Wrong. Opera has a huge pile of cash. It's also profitable. They never said anything about not being able to afford advertising. On the contrary.

That's funny considering Opera has said they don't have the cash to get the browser on OEM machines and doesn't have the budget for advertising like the others do. The article was here on Neowin.

[TheTempestSonata]

I apologize for the derailment, but I read this topic as: Oprah Wants More From Microsoft

Carry on.

[petrossa]

Valid point or not, is getting annoying.

This whole saga had gone before who is lawfully correct.

like i said:

I hadn't quite figured out that this thread was actually called:

Nail Opera to the pillory for no valid reason and let's throw eggs.

[XerXis]

I'll give you a practical example, now don't just go and accuse me of bringing Free Software into this (that's subject for another topic):

host:~$ date
Fri Aug 14 15:46:09 WEST 2009

host:~$ sudo apt-get update
Hit http://archive.canonical.com jaunty Release.gpg
(...)
Fetched 141kB in 1s (80.7kB/s)
Reading package lists... Done

host:~$ date
Fri Aug 14 15:46:15 WEST 2009

One second to check for updates (and I do have a bunch of servers on the apt system). Yes, that's ONE second.

now throw in apt-get upgrade after the apt-get update and i'll give you a credit. Because now you have updated only the package list and not the actual software. Congratulations on your linux knowledge

[carmatic]

guys, im asking again.... dont the browsers already have an auto update mechanism? why would they even need windows update?

[tablet_user]

Its microsofts own fault this is happening. Dont they remember what thier teachers said in grade school?

"If you give the dumbass bullies what they want they will keep asking for more."

[Eice]

Its microsofts own fault this is happening. Dont they remember what thier teachers said in grade school?

"If you give the dumbass bullies what they want they will keep asking for more."

A pity that this advice doesn't really work when the teacher (EU) is on the bully's (Opera) side.

guys, im asking again.... dont the browsers already have an auto update mechanism? why would they even need windows update?

Why shoulder the bandwidth costs themselves, when they can get Microsoft to do it for free?

[petrossa]

Well talk about being clueless. The EU continues it's battle against the abuse of market position, MS puts up a proposal, the EU invites interested parties to respond.

Mozilla finally speaks out.

Go start a thread about that.

[Lechio]

now throw in apt-get upgrade after the apt-get update and i'll give you a credit. Because now you have updated only the package list and not the actual software. Congratulations on your linux knowledge

That's supposed to be what, a distortion of what was said?

It was not implied that upgrading a Linux system would take only one second, it obviously takes more than one second to upgrade a system. It took only one second to check for updates on a server, that's what it was said, and it was made in response to this post:

It's still on their servers and has to be checked when WU does it's pass.

Look at what was said:

One second to check for updates (and I do have a bunch of servers on the apt system). Yes, that's ONE second.

Congratulations on trying to create confusion, or was that only ignorance?

[Lechio]

Why shoulder the bandwidth costs themselves, when they can get Microsoft to do it for free?

No, the updates do not need to be on Microsoft's servers and that's not how it should work. An updater only needs to check application's versions.

[Pupik]

That's supposed to be what, a distortion of what was said?

It was not implied that upgrading a Linux system would take only one second, it obviously takes more than one second to upgrade a system. It took only one second to check for updates on a server, that's what it was said, and it was made in response to this post:

Look at what was said:

Congratulations on trying to create confusion, or was that only ignorance?

The argument wasn't about the length of the update check. It was about the used bandwidth in the first place.

And if you multiply only the data that used to result a "no new updates available" by x millions (a small percentage of Windows machines worldwide), it's a lot of used bandwidth (without even downloading any updates).

[petrossa]

that's a bizarre argument. Usual everyday users have 1 browser installed. So that's 1 update check. So it doesn't matter if it's IE or FF or Opera, it's the same bandwidth.

[ToneKnee]

A pity that this advice doesn't really work when the teacher (EU) is on the bully's (Opera) side.

Why shoulder the bandwidth costs themselves, when they can get Microsoft to do it for free?

It's not Microsofts job to do that.

[petrossa]

it's Microsofts obligation to follow EU directives or suffer the consequences. If that's what makes the EU happy, they can either comply or stop selling in the single greatest PAYING market potential they have.

[Eice]

Well talk about being clueless. The EU continues it's battle against the abuse of market position, MS puts up a proposal, the EU invites interested parties to respond.

Mozilla finally speaks out.

Go start a thread about that.

Point out to me where Mozilla pushes for utterly shameless and retarded suggestions where they benefit for free at Microsoft's expense, then we'll talk.

it's Microsofts obligation to follow EU directives or suffer the consequences. If that's what makes the EU happy, they can either comply or stop selling in the single greatest PAYING market potential they have.

I hadn't quite figured out that this thread was actually called:

Nail Microsoft to the pillory for no valid reason and let's throw eggs.

[petrossa]

I hadn't quite figured out that this thread was actually called:

Nail Microsoft to the pillory for no valid reason and let's throw eggs.

+1 very funny?:laugh:: i like that.