5 ms·

Ahah yeah. That's true. All in all this is bad for the open web (both ways). At least, there's no Facebook browser yet. But hey, it might happen as well. The

by zobzu 14y ago

Ahah yeah. That's true. All in all this is bad for the open web (both ways). At least, there's no Facebook browser yet. But hey, it might happen as well. They both want control over the net. Complete control. Client, servers, data.

Arelius 14y ago
Is it? It seems to me that suggesting browsers that are not the most common, actually does much more for the open web than the alternative.
- zobzu 14y ago
  All in all yes. Sure they put Opera in there but those are actually very common and well known browsers. You know... IE, Firefox. (and Opera is still quite well known). That being said it's their little war for total web control (again client+server+data) which is really bad, and what I meant to express in the comment.
  - Arelius 14y ago
    They don't control IE, Firefox, or Opera. This seems really like they are fighting against Google's war for total web control. Which I'll reiterate, is a good thing.
deno 14y ago
> At least, there's no Facebook browser yet. But hey, it might happen as well. They should buy Opera and open source it :) No idea if that makes any sense for Facebook from the business point of view, but it’d be really cool. And they definitely can afford it. EDIT: Now that I think about it, Facebook getting their own browser makes a lot of sense. They have a real chance of pulling off the mythical Social Browser. Opera already has an extensive email client which they could integrate with Facebook Messaging, they have widget system which would also fit nicely with Facebook apps. Opera was always about integrated experience, full functionality out of the box, and Facebook could take it to the next level.
- vasco 14y ago
  If people talk about the Chrome botnet I can only imagine what would be said of a facebook browser.
- balakk 14y ago
  HELL no. Please keep Opera private, play your open source wars with other browsers.
- geon 14y ago
  > They should buy Opera and open source it :) No need to buy anything. Webkit is free.
  - daeken 14y ago
    Err, Opera isn't Webkit based at all. It runs on their own custom, proprietary layout engine.
    - SquareWheel 14y ago
      I think geon knows this, but is saying that Facebook could just build their own Webkit browser for free rather than having to buy a layout engine.
- dazbradbury 14y ago
  Was this the start of the current rumour?! http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/25/facebook-could-be-looking-to-buy-opera/ http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/25/facebook-could-be-looking...
  - deno 14y ago
    It’s most likely just a coincidence, but it was very eery seeing that post on the frontpage just a day after I’ve made that comment. I’ve googled "Facebook+buy+Opera" that day to see if anyone had similar idea. The top story was something mentioning Facebook Opera in a literal sense, as an emotional roller coaster about some random privacy issue. 15 hours later, it’s all about the rumors. So weird! :)
myko 14y ago
> They both want control over the net. Complete control. Client, servers, data. This is ridiculous. I don't trust Facebook/Google with all of my private data, but this claim is outrageous. Care to back this assertion up?

by zobzu 14y ago

Arelius 14y ago

Is it? It seems to me that suggesting browsers that are not the most common, actually does much more for the open web than the alternative.

zobzu 14y ago
All in all yes. Sure they put Opera in there but those are actually very common and well known browsers. You know... IE, Firefox. (and Opera is still quite well known). That being said it's their little war for total web control (again client+server+data) which is really bad, and what I meant to express in the comment.
- Arelius 14y ago
  They don't control IE, Firefox, or Opera. This seems really like they are fighting against Google's war for total web control. Which I'll reiterate, is a good thing.

deno 14y ago

> At least, there's no Facebook browser yet. But hey, it might happen as well. They should buy Opera and open source it :) No idea if that makes any sense for Facebook from the business point of view, but it’d be really cool. And they definitely can afford it. EDIT: Now that I think about it, Facebook getting their own browser makes a lot of sense. They have a real chance of pulling off the mythical Social Browser. Opera already has an extensive email client which they could integrate with Facebook Messaging, they have widget system which would also fit nicely with Facebook apps. Opera was always about integrated experience, full functionality out of the box, and Facebook could take it to the next level.

vasco 14y ago
If people talk about the Chrome botnet I can only imagine what would be said of a facebook browser.
balakk 14y ago
HELL no. Please keep Opera private, play your open source wars with other browsers.
geon 14y ago
> They should buy Opera and open source it :) No need to buy anything. Webkit is free.
- daeken 14y ago
  Err, Opera isn't Webkit based at all. It runs on their own custom, proprietary layout engine.
  - SquareWheel 14y ago
    I think geon knows this, but is saying that Facebook could just build their own Webkit browser for free rather than having to buy a layout engine.
dazbradbury 14y ago
Was this the start of the current rumour?! http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/25/facebook-could-be-looking-to-buy-opera/ http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/25/facebook-could-be-looking...
- deno 14y ago
  It’s most likely just a coincidence, but it was very eery seeing that post on the frontpage just a day after I’ve made that comment. I’ve googled "Facebook+buy+Opera" that day to see if anyone had similar idea. The top story was something mentioning Facebook Opera in a literal sense, as an emotional roller coaster about some random privacy issue. 15 hours later, it’s all about the rumors. So weird! :)

myko 14y ago

> They both want control over the net. Complete control. Client, servers, data. This is ridiculous. I don't trust Facebook/Google with all of my private data, but this claim is outrageous. Care to back this assertion up?