4 ms·

It would be an interesting investigation into why Chrome and Firefox have done so well in growth and Opera (a quite nice browser) never seems to have done well.

chaosmachine 16y ago
Google pushes Chrome on the front page of Google.com. And they pushed Firefox for a few years before Chrome. Also, Opera has a terrible name in comparison to the competition. Makes word of mouth less effective. That's also my theory on MySQL vs Postgres.
- tocomment 16y ago
  I'd kind of agree with you on the names. I can't even pronounce Postgres so I tend to sit quietly instead of recommending it when the topic comes up. I'll be sure to run my next product name by you.
  - mattyb 16y ago
    Just listen to this: http://twit.tv/floss18 http://twit.tv/floss18 TL;DL: It's Post-Grez-Que-Ell
- jsankey 16y ago
  Google also advertises Chrome in the Real World - e.g. several London tube stations are plastered with Chrome ads. I've not seen anything that high profile for Opera.
Goladus 16y ago
I tried Opera once a long time ago and it had ads in the browser. I became a firefox user and never looked back. Subsequently, firefox was the browser I'd recommend, etc..
- dangoldin 16y ago
  It's interesting how that one experience completely changed your perception of Opera even now. Definitely applicable to startup life - don't take the easy monetization, it may come back to haunt you.
  - elblanco 16y ago
    I agree. I think that there are all kinds of lessons to be learned from the Opera experiment, which is why I asked the question.
  - Goladus 16y ago
    To be clear, I have no opinion about Opera now. My negative opinion expired a long time ago. Opera is merely one of the "browsers I don't use" in the same category as Konqueror, Safari, and Epiphany. What it did was lose me at the only point it ever mattered for a product with a long life. Firefox has satisfied my needs since, and I've never had the will to evaluate Opera again.
jsz0 16y ago
Lots of little reasons probably. Didn't Opera have those built-in toolbar banner advertisements for a long time? That probably didn't help. I agree the naming has always been a problem. Not that Firefox, Chrome or Safari are more descriptive names but they at least do not associate themselves with an art form that is generally considered to be lame or elitist. (not sure I agree but that's the perception in the US at least) Then again, to this day, a lot of people seem to think it's actually pronounced Oprah which is probably equally confusing but less negative to most people.
houseabsolute 16y ago
I think Opera has historically focused on features that power users find interesting, maybe because most of their user-base is power users. But that has negative implications for mainstream adoption.
- megablast 16y ago
  I disagree. Opera was also the browser than could fit on a 1.44mb floppy, it was always had the smallest footprint of browsers, as well as memory. The problem was the in the wild west of the web, a lot of pages didn't work quite right on Opera. So you always had to have IE or Netscape handy.
  - houseabsolute 16y ago
    > it was always had the smallest footprint of browsers, as well as memory So . . . features for power users, right? > didn't work quite right on Opera Sounds like something power users put up with more readily than most other people. > have IE or Netscape handy. Using more than one browser is something power users do.
  - elblanco 16y ago
    >So you always had to have IE or Netscape handy. That's a very interesting point. I guess when Opera first came out, it didn't quite work right, IE and Netscape were the 800 pound gorillas fighting it out, and Firefox simply inherited the mindshare of Netscape. Opera was simply a third dancer in a waltz.

chaosmachine 16y ago

Google pushes Chrome on the front page of Google.com. And they pushed Firefox for a few years before Chrome. Also, Opera has a terrible name in comparison to the competition. Makes word of mouth less effective. That's also my theory on MySQL vs Postgres.

tocomment 16y ago
I'd kind of agree with you on the names. I can't even pronounce Postgres so I tend to sit quietly instead of recommending it when the topic comes up. I'll be sure to run my next product name by you.
- mattyb 16y ago
  Just listen to this: http://twit.tv/floss18 http://twit.tv/floss18 TL;DL: It's Post-Grez-Que-Ell
jsankey 16y ago
Google also advertises Chrome in the Real World - e.g. several London tube stations are plastered with Chrome ads. I've not seen anything that high profile for Opera.

Goladus 16y ago

I tried Opera once a long time ago and it had ads in the browser. I became a firefox user and never looked back. Subsequently, firefox was the browser I'd recommend, etc..

dangoldin 16y ago
It's interesting how that one experience completely changed your perception of Opera even now. Definitely applicable to startup life - don't take the easy monetization, it may come back to haunt you.
- elblanco 16y ago
  I agree. I think that there are all kinds of lessons to be learned from the Opera experiment, which is why I asked the question.
- Goladus 16y ago
  To be clear, I have no opinion about Opera now. My negative opinion expired a long time ago. Opera is merely one of the "browsers I don't use" in the same category as Konqueror, Safari, and Epiphany. What it did was lose me at the only point it ever mattered for a product with a long life. Firefox has satisfied my needs since, and I've never had the will to evaluate Opera again.

jsz0 16y ago

Lots of little reasons probably. Didn't Opera have those built-in toolbar banner advertisements for a long time? That probably didn't help. I agree the naming has always been a problem. Not that Firefox, Chrome or Safari are more descriptive names but they at least do not associate themselves with an art form that is generally considered to be lame or elitist. (not sure I agree but that's the perception in the US at least) Then again, to this day, a lot of people seem to think it's actually pronounced Oprah which is probably equally confusing but less negative to most people.

houseabsolute 16y ago

I think Opera has historically focused on features that power users find interesting, maybe because most of their user-base is power users. But that has negative implications for mainstream adoption.

megablast 16y ago
I disagree. Opera was also the browser than could fit on a 1.44mb floppy, it was always had the smallest footprint of browsers, as well as memory. The problem was the in the wild west of the web, a lot of pages didn't work quite right on Opera. So you always had to have IE or Netscape handy.
- houseabsolute 16y ago
  > it was always had the smallest footprint of browsers, as well as memory So . . . features for power users, right? > didn't work quite right on Opera Sounds like something power users put up with more readily than most other people. > have IE or Netscape handy. Using more than one browser is something power users do.
- elblanco 16y ago
  >So you always had to have IE or Netscape handy. That's a very interesting point. I guess when Opera first came out, it didn't quite work right, IE and Netscape were the 800 pound gorillas fighting it out, and Firefox simply inherited the mindshare of Netscape. Opera was simply a third dancer in a waltz.