7 ms·
Opera sees big jump in EU users on iOS, Android after DMA update
- netsharc 3y agoWell, considering the company's been bought by a Chinese consortium and this happened, https://www.engadget.com/2020-01-19-opera-accused-of-predatory-loan-apps.html https://www.engadget.com/2020-01-19-opera-accused-of-predato... , I'm not sure this is such a great news. One of the original Opera co-founders is now founder and CEO of the browser-maker Vivaldi
- mort96 3y agoAlso worth noting that both Opera and Vivaldi are just closed source Chromium skins (on the non-iOS platforms; on iOS they're both WebKit of course)
- methuselah_in 3y agoPoor souls still don't understand the why choose Firefox. If I remember right opera now funded by some chinese company https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_(web_browser) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_(web_browser)
- mozman 3y agoOn iOS it’s still powered by webkit
- drooopy 3y agoOh man, I wish we could get Gecko-based Firefox with addon support in iOS land.
- lxgr 3y agoIt's now possible, at least if you live in (and don't leave for more than 60 days) the EU. Now the ball is in Mozilla's court! I do wonder if they'd have to send their developers to the EU for on-device debugging as well.
- I_Am_Nous 3y agoAre you sure? As I understand it, iOS still uses Webkit at the base level, and any browser app on iOS has to use the Webkit engine. This EU ruling seems to be less about allowing alternate engines and more about removing "roadblocks" to user choice, even if the different browsers are more or less still Safari with a different coat of paint. For instance, Brave on iOS doesn't have built in TOR functionality like it does on non-mobile versions, so the browser is functionally limited to what Webkit allows.
- Am4TIfIsER0ppos 3y agoThe EU forced Henry Ford to paint the Model Ts in something other than black? What a load of fucking drama for nothing.
- mort96 3y agoI .. don't think the EU forced Ford to paint the Model T in colors other than black
- I_Am_Nous 3y agoI believe their point was more that if the whole push was just to inform users that other browser options exist, but they are still running on the same underlying engine no matter the "skin" the browser is using on top of Webkit, it would be similar to forcing Ford to offer alternate colors on the same vehicle in the EU and congratulating themselves on "regulation done well". As someone else pointed out, the legislation does force Apple to allow alternate browser engines, but creating one would be quite a burden for someone like Firefox.
- Am4TIfIsER0ppos 3y agoYou got it. Perhaps my analogies are too obscure. Firefox already has a browser engine all they need the possibility of running it and printing it to the screen. That possibility is what I thought the EU was going to force not just another "coat of paint", which already existed AFAIK.
- olliej 3y agoThe issue is not being controlled by a Chinese company. The issue is they’ve adopted the “sell user data” profit model that is super popular in all of tech. You should not be complaining about opera because they’re owned by a Chinese company any more than you would complain about chrome being owned by a us company. The complaint for both (and many other companies) should be the business model of selling user data is morally corrupt.
- kwhitefoot 3y agoHow do you propose that they generate enough income then?
- olliej 3y agoDevelop a revenue stream that doesn't depend on misleading people? Plenty of software exists that doesn't depend on violating user's privacy. Hell google's original Ad Words was built on putting ads relevant to content being read, but then they pulled a Boeing and reverse acquired DoubleClick so went all in spyware/"behavioral advertising". This obsession with selling out your users to make money is gross, and the absurd belief that that is the only path to income is absurd. Plenty of companies still exist and make money by selling products rather than users and the twisted belief that you can only make money by "giving away" your product (and then selling out your users) that you're exhibiting is just insane. It's especially laughable to point to a company like Opera (the modern one, not the original) which is just skinning chrome, and then say "they should be able to make a profit by selling out their users". If they are adding so little value, when the overwhelming majority of the work is done for free for them, that people don't want to actually pay for it, why should they make a profit? if their sales pitch involves misleading the consumers about what they are doing, why should they be making money?
- sebazzz 3y agoOpera regularly sponsors YouTube videos, Firefox doesn’t. Marketing works.
- tredre3 3y agoIt is a little weird how Mozilla doesn't advertise Firefox, isn't it? At least I've never seen them sponsoring anything, nor any ads. (50% of my browsing is without adblock, so I should have seen them if they exist. But maybe they do?) Like 1M/yr spent on sponsoring 1000 videos by top tech youtubers is nothing when they have 600M/yr revenue and it would bring in a massive audience. It's as if they're content with coasting and/or chasing even lower single digit market share?
- didntcheck 3y agoThat would go against their mission to spend time and money on everything but the one product that anyone cares about
- tharne 3y agoAs a loyal Firefox user, I hate the leadership at Mozilla for this.
- joshspankit 3y agoPersonally: If the product is excellent and already being used by people who are happy then you don’t really need to spend money on marketing, you need to keep focused on making an excellent product. In fact, marketing can take resources away from excellence. If I ever see a FireFox marketing campaign on YouTube I will worry about them. The best “marketing” they can do in my opinion is something they already do: MDN.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 3y agoI met with top execs at Opera while working for one of the top-3 European IPS (was right-hand man of the global partnership director). They showed us, in details, how their core business model is all about capturing personal data and resell it to various buyers. That's why they promote so many services like VPN and AI, as deeply integrated as possible into their browser. I'll never touch an Opera product again.
- lxgr 3y agoVery interesting and concerning if true, if not entirely unexpected. I really miss the old Opera. > while working for one of the top-3 European IPS What's IPS in this context, or is that a typo for ISPs?
- stavros 3y agoIsn't Vivaldi basically the old Opera?
- pjerem 3y agoNot exactly, Vivaldi was founded by former Opera employees but is built on a chromium base. Opera had its own browser engine (Presto) and had a native UI (or if it wasn’t, it felt like it because it was really snappy). Vivaldi is more like Chrome (performance wise) but with loads of features.
- morvita 3y agoUnfortunately, since 2013 Opera is also built on Chromium. They dropped Presto a long time ago.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- microtonal 3y agoOpera had its own browser engine (Presto) and had a native UI (or if it wasn’t, it felt like it because it was really snappy). I think for some period they used Qt on some platforms. But early Opera was really a fast and innovative browser. Opera was one of the first (if not the first) browser with tabs and popup blocking. Opera Software even owned Fastmail for a few years (until an employee buyout). It's sad that they have gone down the drain.
- gandalfian 3y ago15 years ago awesome. Last time I used it too many adverts inserted? Rumour has it that their main business is predatory African money lending. Which is just weird.
- nottorp 3y agoYep, random link here: https://www.androidcentral.com/opera-accused-offering-predatory-loan-apps-interest-rates-above-300 https://www.androidcentral.com/opera-accused-offering-predat... There was a better one on HN but of course I can't find it any more.
- proxysna 3y agoOpera was the most popular browser in Belarus in late 2000s. Happened mostly because of word of mouth and bunch of features that allowed to save data when browsing. Most users at that moment had metered connections like 800 megabytes per month, but up to 100mbit/s or really slow 30kbit/s but unlimited.
- Narishma 3y agoThe current Opera has pretty much nothing to do with the old one you remember.
- pm3003 3y agoOpera had useful data saving features and an efficient compression, which is also why Opera Mini (with the old engine Presto) was very popular on mobile for a long time. I used it on Symbian...
- manojlds 3y agoOpera was the first proper browser for phones. It was super popular in Symbian (Opera for S60 or something) and the features phones (via Opera Mini). It was a sad day when Opera was bought over. Current Opera, like current Nokia, is not the same company.
- rightbyte 3y agoYe it was domimating among techies at some point. I think the tab feature was the selling point?
- jacamera 3y agoWell that's unfortunate and exactly what Apple was trying to protect their users from.
- lxgr 3y agoHow? Opera has been available on iOS for many years (using WebKit). A custom WebKit browser can collect/sell/lose your personal data just as easily, assuming that's your concern.
- beretguy 3y agoNo, Apple was not trying to protect users from using spyware. They just wanted users to stay inside of their own ecosystem. Apple is not the good guy.
- I_Am_Nous 3y agoIt's kind of a chicken and egg issue. Apple wanted users to stay in their ecosystem because they control it so tightly, which can increase the general security/trustworthiness of the ecosystem, but it also keeps those users for Apple's benefit. It's as though it's Apple's goldmine, which has restricted access, so the guy trying to bring in TNT to blast everything open isn't allowed in for both the safety of the authorized people in the goldmine AND the protection of the revenue stream in general.
- pastorhudson 3y agoApple can want to lock in users and also want to protect users. These are not mutually exclusive incentives.
- sloowm 3y ago"Protect their users" by installing Google Search Engine by default for $18 billion a year: https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/26/23933206/google-apple-search-deal-safari-18-billion https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/26/23933206/google-apple-se...
- latexr 3y agoApple was trying to protect users from an app they allowed in their own App Store? If that were true they would simply have rejected the submission or removed it after the fact.
- axus 3y agoOpera GX is marketed to "gamers", every niche counts I guess!
- Nextgrid 3y agoAnother comment suggests it blocks YouTube ads by default. That's frankly a useful feature that no other browser currently has (not by default) so it explains why people might be choosing it.
- daghamm 3y agoOK, here is a radical suggestion: The list should only include browsers that meet certain security and privacy criteria in the default install. The EU law should not be abused to give the new data stealing Opera more downloads.
- zrn900 3y agoThe recent Eu laws already turned into vehicles for using against the US in the low key Eu-US trade war that has been ongoing for a decade. Moreover, there came to being a crop of Euparl politicians who basically make their careers on these issues as these issues are domestically safe since no major political segment can object to things like privacy etc. But the machine must keep going, so they keep creating outrage and then using it to keep their politics going and push laws for that. The original pure, simple intents to protect the free internet and the user have transformed into an increasing cascade of legal complexity due to something no different than how EPDs have to keep adding features to apps in order to justify their salary. Also there is a very ugly thing in the making: It looks like certain major European software interests are using this dynamic to attempt to build regulatory moats to keep domestic and foreign competition away by making things more difficult. An even nastier one was how Ashton Kutcher et al, literal foreigners, have come to push a law to spy on online chats 'against pedophilia' to be able to sell the spying software that their foundation produces, by using such politicians. All in all, despite coming from the pirate party culture of the early Internet, I have started to be wary of this dynamic and the legal quagmire it started to produce...
- Brajeshwar 3y agoMy daughter just told me she has a separate profile, mostly for her games that runs on Opera GX[1]. And her side question was, “Why are we paying for YouTube again?” “No Ads.” “Opera GX has no YouTube Ads by default.” Opera seems to kicking up their sales channels everywhere. 1. https://www.opera.com/gx https://www.opera.com/gx
- jwells89 3y agoOpera GX sponsors a lot of popular YouTubers and YouTube/Twitch livestreamers. Wouldn’t surprise me a bit if this has lead to it be disproportionately popular with younger people.
- Nextgrid 3y ago> Opera GX has no YouTube Ads by default It's funny how if you actually provide useful functionality to the users, your marketshare increases (even if there is malware/spyware/user-hostility under the hood). Mozilla should take note, but enough people have been banging that drum for long enough that we already know they won't.
- oniony 3y ago"This data suggests a growing interest among iOS users in exploring browser alternatives like Opera." Or that users select the first option in the list.
- latexr 3y agoThe list order is random, so if that were the cause the other browsers should be seeing a similar increase. Are they?
- junaru 3y ago> "We see this as indicative of two things: for one, the importance of regulation to provide a more level playing field, and for another, that users are hungry for new and innovative products that can deliver a superior online experience." It's only indicative that popups work and users without any idea of whats going on click on pretty icons.
- siva7 3y agoOpera of the 90s has nothing to do with this mobile browser. They're just sharing the name.
- melodyogonna 3y agoUnsurprising, seeing as Sefari is trying its best to turn into the Modern MS Explorer - what with refusing or delaying to implement W3C recommendations
- lacker 3y agoIt seems like a detail but I think it's a shame that this screen shows browsers in a randomized order. It rewards the janky browsers that will never be large but get above the threshold (like this Opera browser) and then use this boost in popularity to essentially prey on their users. Instead, I wish they just showed the browsers in popularity order. Sure, that means Apple and Google get to be on top. But it makes it a lot more viable for a decent browser to fight to get up to #5, #4, #3, and get rewarded for that improvement.
- shagie 3y agoI suspect that this is a requirement for Apple to not favor its own products. Any ordering other than random would implicitly have Apple at the top of the list and then you've got lawyers and regulators asking questions again. Having it be random avoids that and Apple can clearly point to the "the order is random, we cannot favor or disfavor ourselves or anyone unfairly."
- Twirrim 3y agoI love percentages. 164% up from what, exactly? 164% growth on 100 users isn't that many in sheer numbers terms, a drop in the ocean in the browser segment. I'm happy to see the change that has hit Android and iOS as a result, and I like that it's drawing attention to other browsers and opening the market more, I just really dislike useless and potentially misleading percentages that suggest things may be dramatically different instead of negligibly so.
- Distilitron 3y ago[flagged]