7 ms·

I worked for Opera the summer of 2010 and I've also been using the browser the last couple of years. Compared to Google, Apple, Microsoft - it is important to

I worked for Opera the summer of 2010 and I've also been using the browser the last couple of years. Compared to Google, Apple, Microsoft - it is important to understand that Opera is a small, very small, company. I'm very happy to see their resources better used to innovating and improve their exiting product, rather than trying to catching up to the other browsers. A big loss for the general state of rendering platforms though, with now only Webkit, Trident and Gecko as serious contenders.

Arelius 14y ago
It breaks my heart to know that Presto is going to most likely be left to bitrot in some SCM somewhere. But on the same note, I understand that using webkit will be better for Opera as a browser.
- fpgeek 14y ago
  I wonder if Opera will consider open-sourcing it, or if it (typically) has too many problematic dependencies for that to be worthwhile.
  - Arelius 14y ago
    Considering they are switching to an open source rendering engine, I think there is likelihood they would have open-sourced presto already if that was possible. I suspect that like much proprietary software, there are too many licensed dependencies. It's a pity, because it'd be very cool to get a source dump of the final presto engine. Even if it was never integrated into a new browser, the historical value alone would be significant.
    - rplnt 14y ago
      Opera's response to Open-Sourcing always was, that they would have no business that way. Apple doesn't care I believe, Google/Microsoft are in it for search and ads, Firefox isn't a business (and they make all money from search I think). While Opera makes a lot of money from search, they have a lot of OEM deals that they are afraid to lose. So if there was no legal constraint, Presto could see day of light. If nothing else, then in patches to webkit :)
      - zanny 14y ago
        Mozilla is absolutely a business, they are just non-profit.
  - yread 14y ago
    that is probably the case. Do a opera:about and look at the list of Third Party Software...
    - jarek-foksa 14y ago
      I can see almost exclusively Open Source libraries there, they are listing them because this what MIT/GPL/MPL licenses require.
cpeterso 14y ago
I wonder if Opera is making an overture to get acquired by Google or Apple. Opera's innovative browser features have always been a bigger draw than the details of its Presto rendering engine.
- UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
  I seriously doubt it. What IP or userbase does Opera have that either Google or Apple would want? If either of the two of them wanted to copy Opera's browser features they would just go ahead and do so. If anything this makes Opera less interesting as a potential purchase. Their rendering engine was a massive piece of original IP.
  - rplnt 14y ago
    > If either of the two of them wanted to copy Opera's browser features they would just go ahead and do so. They mostly do. Dozens and dozens and features. But it works other way around as well, and it's a great thing in the end. The most beneficial features are virtually on every browser.
    - Dylanlacey 14y ago
      As an aside, feature copying was one of the greatest sources of irritation my friends had when Opera was still this really weird, unique thing that I used and they didn't. It was quite regular to have them excitedly tell me to switch to Firefox because "Dude, there's tabbed browsing, it's SO great!" Uh, thanks, I've... I've had that for years. But I'm glad you're discovering it too!
  - geon 14y ago
    > Their rendering engine was a massive piece of original IP. How can it be worth anything when the competition is free?
    - gcp 14y ago
      If it runs faster, with less memory, or is easier to port to new platforms that the other browsers have problems reaching. Do you remember how long it took Google to port Chrome to Android? There was a Firefox and Opera release for Android even before Google got their own browser ported to their own OS.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
pkorzeniewski 14y ago
I don't think it's a loss, I wouldn't mind if every browser switched to Webkit. Problems with cross-browser rendering differences would be gone, all browsers would use the same newest technologies and the engine would evolve much faster.
- afhof 14y ago
  ...until differences in ideas about how a rendering engine /should/ work came up and webkit is forked.
  - takluyver 14y ago
    That's not really a problem. Experimenting by forking the dominant rendering engine is much more convenient than experimenting by building your own rendering engine from scratch. If your fork has advantages, it's also easier for other people to use your work.
    - gcp 14y ago
      Experience suggests this works for small evolutions, but not more revolutionary changes.
- keeperofdakeys 14y ago
  There is a big difference between a standard and an implementation. If you only have one implementation (webkit), then developers will start being lazy and depending on certain quirks of that implementation. You reach a point where these quirks can't be changed, otherwise half the internet will stop working. Having multiple rendering engines means these quirks are more likely to be fixed, and not relied upon. It's also impossible to say if webkit will still be the dominant engine in 5-10 years. For the same reason, this also leads to degradation, and slows down the evolution of the engine. A good example is gcc vs clang. For years gcc was the compiler for *nix, then clang comes along. This led to a new found enthusiasm to make parts of gcc better. The same happened for firefox when chrome came along. and works the other way. We even have half-decent IE releases now.
- 14y ago
gcp 14y ago
Compared to Google, Apple, Microsoft - it is important to understand that Opera is a small, very small, company. That's true, but those companies also make much more products. Mozilla has significantly less employees than Opera. What gives Google, Apple and Microsoft power is that they also own the platforms. (And now you'll understand why Firefox OS is a thing)
- ralfd 14y ago
  > Mozilla has significantly less employees than Opera Hu, really? Would have thought the opposite as Mozilla gets 100 million dollars a year from Google.
  - ianb 14y ago
    Wikipedia says that Opera has 777 employees as of a year ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Software http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Software That's a couple hundred more than Mozilla has now (after Mozilla added a lot of employees in the past few years). OTOH, the numbers are no longer that significantly different.
  - mtgx 14y ago
    Mozilla should be asking more from Google. A lot more. Apple is charging them $1 billion per year, and they only have 50% more users than Mozilla.

Arelius 14y ago

It breaks my heart to know that Presto is going to most likely be left to bitrot in some SCM somewhere. But on the same note, I understand that using webkit will be better for Opera as a browser.

fpgeek 14y ago
I wonder if Opera will consider open-sourcing it, or if it (typically) has too many problematic dependencies for that to be worthwhile.
- Arelius 14y ago
  Considering they are switching to an open source rendering engine, I think there is likelihood they would have open-sourced presto already if that was possible. I suspect that like much proprietary software, there are too many licensed dependencies. It's a pity, because it'd be very cool to get a source dump of the final presto engine. Even if it was never integrated into a new browser, the historical value alone would be significant.
  - rplnt 14y ago
    Opera's response to Open-Sourcing always was, that they would have no business that way. Apple doesn't care I believe, Google/Microsoft are in it for search and ads, Firefox isn't a business (and they make all money from search I think). While Opera makes a lot of money from search, they have a lot of OEM deals that they are afraid to lose. So if there was no legal constraint, Presto could see day of light. If nothing else, then in patches to webkit :)
    - zanny 14y ago
      Mozilla is absolutely a business, they are just non-profit.
- yread 14y ago
  that is probably the case. Do a opera:about and look at the list of Third Party Software...
  - jarek-foksa 14y ago
    I can see almost exclusively Open Source libraries there, they are listing them because this what MIT/GPL/MPL licenses require.

cpeterso 14y ago

I wonder if Opera is making an overture to get acquired by Google or Apple. Opera's innovative browser features have always been a bigger draw than the details of its Presto rendering engine.

UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
I seriously doubt it. What IP or userbase does Opera have that either Google or Apple would want? If either of the two of them wanted to copy Opera's browser features they would just go ahead and do so. If anything this makes Opera less interesting as a potential purchase. Their rendering engine was a massive piece of original IP.
- rplnt 14y ago
  > If either of the two of them wanted to copy Opera's browser features they would just go ahead and do so. They mostly do. Dozens and dozens and features. But it works other way around as well, and it's a great thing in the end. The most beneficial features are virtually on every browser.
  - Dylanlacey 14y ago
    As an aside, feature copying was one of the greatest sources of irritation my friends had when Opera was still this really weird, unique thing that I used and they didn't. It was quite regular to have them excitedly tell me to switch to Firefox because "Dude, there's tabbed browsing, it's SO great!" Uh, thanks, I've... I've had that for years. But I'm glad you're discovering it too!
- geon 14y ago
  > Their rendering engine was a massive piece of original IP. How can it be worth anything when the competition is free?
  - gcp 14y ago
    If it runs faster, with less memory, or is easier to port to new platforms that the other browsers have problems reaching. Do you remember how long it took Google to port Chrome to Android? There was a Firefox and Opera release for Android even before Google got their own browser ported to their own OS.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

pkorzeniewski 14y ago

I don't think it's a loss, I wouldn't mind if every browser switched to Webkit. Problems with cross-browser rendering differences would be gone, all browsers would use the same newest technologies and the engine would evolve much faster.

afhof 14y ago
...until differences in ideas about how a rendering engine /should/ work came up and webkit is forked.
- takluyver 14y ago
  That's not really a problem. Experimenting by forking the dominant rendering engine is much more convenient than experimenting by building your own rendering engine from scratch. If your fork has advantages, it's also easier for other people to use your work.
  - gcp 14y ago
    Experience suggests this works for small evolutions, but not more revolutionary changes.
keeperofdakeys 14y ago
There is a big difference between a standard and an implementation. If you only have one implementation (webkit), then developers will start being lazy and depending on certain quirks of that implementation. You reach a point where these quirks can't be changed, otherwise half the internet will stop working. Having multiple rendering engines means these quirks are more likely to be fixed, and not relied upon. It's also impossible to say if webkit will still be the dominant engine in 5-10 years. For the same reason, this also leads to degradation, and slows down the evolution of the engine. A good example is gcc vs clang. For years gcc was the compiler for *nix, then clang comes along. This led to a new found enthusiasm to make parts of gcc better. The same happened for firefox when chrome came along. and works the other way. We even have half-decent IE releases now.
14y ago

gcp 14y ago

Compared to Google, Apple, Microsoft - it is important to understand that Opera is a small, very small, company. That's true, but those companies also make much more products. Mozilla has significantly less employees than Opera. What gives Google, Apple and Microsoft power is that they also own the platforms. (And now you'll understand why Firefox OS is a thing)

ralfd 14y ago
> Mozilla has significantly less employees than Opera Hu, really? Would have thought the opposite as Mozilla gets 100 million dollars a year from Google.
- ianb 14y ago
  Wikipedia says that Opera has 777 employees as of a year ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Software http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Software That's a couple hundred more than Mozilla has now (after Mozilla added a lot of employees in the past few years). OTOH, the numbers are no longer that significantly different.
- mtgx 14y ago
  Mozilla should be asking more from Google. A lot more. Apple is charging them $1 billion per year, and they only have 50% more users than Mozilla.