Opera Wants More From Microsoft

[Kosh Naranek]

Firefox got its market share (hardly the majority btw) by getting idiots to use it who believed all the crap they spouted, it then became "cool" to use firefox and install it on parents PCs etc. Of the people I know who have used it or use it, none of them can give any real reason why the actually use it so if it's as good as people say, they should be able to list at least a couple of things about it.

Thank you for calling me an idiot !!!

I use Firefox simply because of it's extensions and simply because I like it waaaaay better than Opera. Which BTW I think is utter crap.

If Opera can't figure out how to have the browser check for updates on it's own, then they should just stop making a browser

or maybe they need to start focusing more on security which isn't great compared to FF.

[Lechio]

Or maybe Opera want it generally opened so we don't need Google, Sun, Apple and whoever else creating their own update checkers that run 24/7 for no reason

I remember reading a thread on here where people said a global update checker would be good but when Opera hint at something it's suddenly the worst idea ever

Here's the thread in question: https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=789374

This, of course, would be in benefit of the users. (Y)

Some people (trolls is the correct term) just jump in and start posting with senseless arguments when the word "Opera" or even "EU" is mentioned on a thread (when the two are combined it becomes a troll fest).

[petrossa]

Guess what, hdood, i totally agree with you? ;)

To my mind when MS gave the EU the finger in 2004 they woke a sleeping giant.

EU cool on ballot

MS bit off more then they can chew

As the EU invited all plaintiffs to shed their light on the MS ballot offer, since the EU has no timelimit in delivering it's verdict, since EU's verdict will be retroactive, since MS has a an october deadline guess who's in trouble now?

[Yusuf M. Veteran]

Some members here really need to improve their reading comprehension. Opera isn't suggesting that Microsoft exclusively distribute their security updates with Windows Update. They're suggesting that Microsoft should distribute the security updates of browsers (notice the "s" at the end?) with Windows Update. I'm a huge fan of Firefox and I haven't used another browser for a very long time. I tried Opera every once in awhile but I always found myself going back. With that said, I think it's a decent idea. It'd be nice to use Windows Update to get updates for your browser. Especially since it's security-related.

This time, I agree with Opera. A move like this will benefit everyone.

[hdood]

Some members here really need to improve their reading comprehension. Opera isn't suggesting that Microsoft exclusively distribute their security updates with Windows Update. They're suggesting that Microsoft should distribute the security updates of browsers (notice the "s" at the end?) with Windows Update.

Actually, if you read BoomyBoy's source (the only source of anything in this thread), it seems like they actually want Microsoft's online-based services to be usable in other browsers than IE, not access to the services themselves:

But von Tetzchner noted that integration would be meaningless unless rival browsers also got equal access to online sites such as Windows Update and Microsoft Update for patches and fixes - or Windows Live OneCare, Microsoft's re-launched security service.

It's not yet clear whether the APIs Microsoft has offered would open up Windows so rival browsers could download and install things like security updates.

"I?m looking at the basics here, like being able to access the Microsoft network or the developer network, to access and get upgrades to the operating system," von Tetzchner told The Reg.

I think that's fair enough, although Windows/Microsoft Update doesn't use the browser anymore. The last version to do that was the discontinued XP.

[Mike]

Thank you for calling me an idiot !!!

No problem, although not sure where i called you an idiot personally...

If Opera can't figure out how to have the browser check for updates on it's own, then they should just stop making a browser

or maybe they need to start focusing more on security which isn't great compared to FF.

They already have an update checker, but as i said (and what Opera are hinting at), wouldn't it be better to have a central one rather than a separate one for each application? (Most people in the other thread seemed to think so)

As for security, security focus has 8 pages for firefox going back 5 years. Opera on the other hand has 5 pages going back 8 years, so yea... security, good ain't it?

[Yusuf M. Veteran]

Actually, if you read BoomyBoy's source (the only source of anything in this thread), it seems like they actually want Microsoft's online-based services to be usable in other browsers than IE, not access to the services themselves:

I think that's fair enough, although Windows/Microsoft Update doesn't use the browser anymore. The last version to do that was the discontinued XP.

It seems as though I missed that post. I was only going by the initial post. In that case, however, the same thing still applies. Opera wants it for "rival" browsers and not just themselves.

[HighwayGlider]

Thank you for calling me an idiot !!!

I use Firefox simply because of it's extensions and simply because I like it waaaaay better than Opera. Which BTW I think is utter crap.

If Opera can't figure out how to have the browser check for updates on it's own, then they should just stop making a browser

or maybe they need to start focusing more on security which isn't great compared to FF.

I'd like to point out that Opera has an update checker, I'm currently using Opera 10 Beta3.

Now, before jumping to any conclusion when hearing Opera, people should use a little bit of their logic. Its impossible for Microsoft to track every software update, but what they can do is to make the Windows Update API available so that 3rd party softwares can include themselves in the updates list. This will really help Chrome, Safari, FF, Opera users and keep them safe.

Edit:

I agree with you +Anaron, by implementing this, not only Opera will benefit from this, but other browsers as well. And if MS makes the WU API accessible, then almost any software can use this feature.

[Explore]

Opera needs to stop bitching to the EU.

I even did a test with my family (it's big) and few people at school on the Mac computers and i told them to try it and i seen them try it and they did not like it. The said they prefer Firefox, Safari, and IE then Opera 9 (or 10, i did Beta 1 at school).

[Syanide]

Centralized update system is one of the reasons I've decided to stick with Linux, it's incredibly useful, simple and uses less resources, but I doubt Microsoft will ever do such thing. And I doubt it would be that hard to enable, it might need some co-ordination and solid preparation, but would really be useful.

[Soldiers33]

im getting tired of people complaining about ms. just cos they have better products and more advantage dont mean they have to help other companies.

[+BeLGaRaTh Subscriber¹]

One thing, why would you need to get security updates for browsers etc through windows update, I use Fx and IE8 (for some particular sites that only allow IE to access them) and Fx automatically updates itself when there is a new version/security update, so why not just do that? I assume other browsers including opera do a similar thing, so if that is the default browser it will update itself anyway?

[jakem1]

The real question is, why should MS have to pay for the bandwidth required to push Opera's updates out to users. As others have noted, Opera already updates itself so the only reason for this would be related to bandwidth. What is Opera prepared to pay to make this happen?

[Mike]

That's only assuming the updates will be via MS servers and not be available from the software publishers site

[Pallab]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/11/op...indows_ie_apis/

NEW SOURCE!

The want equal access to Windows Services like Windows Update...

From reg :

But von Tetzchner noted that integration would be meaningless unless rival browsers also got equal access to online sites such as Windows Update and Microsoft Update for patches and fixes - or Windows Live OneCare, Microsoft's re-launched security service.

I am actually a bit confused. Is he talking about distributing Opera updates through Windows Update or is he talking about enabling webservices like Windows Update on other browsers (so that user won't be forced to use IE?).

[darkmanx21]

15 people actually voted yes..wow. Maybe they can pass along whatever they are smoking.

Bunch of cry babies. Just buy them. Fire everyone. Shut the company down. This seems like the only solution. Or perhaps add them to your fiscal filings with the SEC. Lol.

The question is, since MS is actually doing all the things asked..what's going to happen after all this hoopla?

Answer: nothing. No one wants to use Opera. Which is the real issue here. Not when FF is already a perfectly good alternative. Do you hear the makers of Maxthon complaining?

[+BeLGaRaTh Subscriber¹]

From reg :

I am actually a bit confused. Is he talking about distributing Opera updates through Windows Update or is he talking about enabling webservices like Windows Update on other browsers (so that user won't be forced to use IE?).

Windows update is now done in its own app, it no longer needs to be done via the browser.

[BoomyBoy]

From reg :

I am actually a bit confused. Is he talking about distributing Opera updates through Windows Update or is he talking about enabling webservices like Windows Update on other browsers (so that user won't be forced to use IE?).

Opera wants all the browsers to be updated via Windows Update...

[Mike]

15 people actually voted yes..wow. Maybe they can pass along whatever they are smoking.

Yes because having a central update checker is a bad thing :rolleyes:

[Growled Member]

Opera, the worrisome little wart that won't go away.

[Syanide]

One thing, why would you need to get security updates for browsers etc through windows update, I use Fx and IE8 (for some particular sites that only allow IE to access them) and Fx automatically updates itself when there is a new version/security update, so why not just do that? I assume other browsers including opera do a similar thing, so if that is the default browser it will update itself anyway?

1. Because it's easier to have an all-in-one solution.

2. Because you don't need to start the application or have the application running to update it. Or to have a process in the background that does god knows what (Google Chrome).

3. Because one application that checks your updates uses less resources than having ten apps doing it by themselves.

4. One click install for the entire system.

5. Because a trusted platform (for example a server that would have to pass some criteria to be trusted by MS) minimizes the eventual effect if someone had put a malicious code and tried to cover it as an update.

6. Again, if MS would co-ordinate this with other app developers, they would need to be careful to co-ordinate it back with Microsoft in order not to break anything on the system with their apps.

The list goes on and on. Like I said, that is one of the features Linux has that was a huge PRO when I've decided if I was going to use it as my main only platform.

Edited August 14, 2009 by Symod

[tunafish]

Part of me thinks yes this is a good idea, open up the update API, but i can see this being annoying because when i next go to update windows oh noes theres a billion othger 3rd aprty programs that need updating.

As what happens if an update from windows update for a browser fails to install, who are the users going to blame and moan to first, well it sure aint gonna be opera or anyone else, they will go right for MS, jsut because it's Windows Update

[Pallab]

It may actually be doable without Ms's direct involvement. They just need to make the API's available to relevant trusted 3rd parties.

[coresx]

Would be neat to just have one update program but I imagine it would end in tears. I don't think programs even need this. Some developers just don't know how to make a slick program with no extra services. Why can't the user just launch the program which is turn checks for updates while it's being used like Firefox does quietly. That's how they should all work or similar for plug ins when a browser is launched, it checks for updates, keeping things secure.

[Lechio]

Part of me thinks yes this is a good idea, open up the update API, but i can see this being annoying because when i next go to update windows oh noes theres a billion other 3rd party programs that need updating.

Yeah, because it's nice and safe to be running unpatched and outdated software.