Opera representative interview (browser) updated

A few days ago we were given the opportunity to ask some questions to someone in charge of / linked to the development of the web browser Opera.

I leave them here for you to read, the answers are really interesting:

<° Linux: Good,

First of all, very much pleasure, my name is Francesco and we are very honored with this opportunity that you have given us. It is certainly an honor that a representative of this excellent browser can assist us.

chaals: Good Francesco,

Am Charles McCathie Nevile (known as Chaal's to make life easier 😉), Director of Standardization at Opera, Spanish-speaking despite being Australian. Sorry for the delay in answering, I'm on vacation ...

<° Linux: When we talk about the internet, we talk about standards, we talk about different languages ​​and different ways of programming websites, which often cause the same website to display well in one browser and not in others. How do you think the internet is at the moment? Are these standards being respected?

chaals: The web is a living and evolving thing, so something of its nature is always changing. In the last 10, 5 and 2 years, respect for standards has grown a lot, although this does not imply that the entire website is made complying with all relevant standards.

Remember that some sites are not in development, they will never change, although they still exist. Others will change slowly and in cases like banks or industrial applications with millions of users, it is understood that sometimes their developers are a little fearful. However, the use of standards is now well recognized as the best way to ensure that a site will have a long and useful life, working best in browsers.

And we must also take into account evolution and innovation. To create a new standard, you must first test it in the real world. A specification is easy to write, but it may not meet everyone's needs. That's why a process that exposes a new technology to a large and diverse audience is important. Some sites may test these technologies in development, but today I think the most common way that developers get it wrong is to use non-standard technology for a task that should be general in nature. For example, if I want to create a game to earn money, I don't mind telling the public that they have to use such a browser, such a telephone, etc., but if I do something for a public university, or a general service, it is an abuse to impose on the general community the choice of such device or operating system and many times, although I have the right to decide to do that, because it is a private project like a newspaper, I can lose a lot of market in addition to selling myself to the provider of the system on which I am based for needing them to to be able to sell my service.

<° Linux: In about the last two years, there has been a lot of speculation that languages ​​like HTML5 or libraries like jQuery could come to replace Flash in the future. What do you think about this? Is really HTML5 a viable alternative?

chaals: Clearly nowadays there are things that are done with Flash. The "Web Platform", which includes HTML5, CSS3, SVG, ECMAScript (to give the formal name to Javascript), and many APIs and technologies, can replace much of what is done with Flash today, it is also in development. Opera and many others are innovating to improve the capacity of the "web platform", following the best ideas and standards through the W3C in collaboration with many, many people around the world.

But there are many developers with years of experience in Flash who do not know HTML5 or its capabilities, and who are capable of making a product (an app, or even a "website") in flash, and they will continue to sell that for a long time. still.

<° Linux: Everyone knows that Opera is multiplatform, we can find it on Symbian, Linux, Windows, Mac and Android. What goal have you set for the future? Do you plan to continue bringing Opera to all these platforms, as I assume it represents extra work for you?

chaals: If it represents some work to bring Opera to so many systems. But not so much -we are much stronger in doing development «cross-platform» (multi-platform)-. We keep looking at the markets and changing according to priorities. For example, we no longer support Solaris, Amiga or BeOS, because they do not have a market that can justify the effort. But yes, providing the best browser on any relevant platform is an overarching goal that we will uphold.

<° Linux: One of the star options of the Opera browser is its Mail Client. Would it be crazy to think that one day it could separate from the browser, become independent and form a team like Firefox / Thunderbird?

chaals: Crazy no, but that doesn't mean we'll do it. See my answer to the "Opera Lite" question, below ...

<° Linux: What brings me to this question is to think of Opera simply as a browser. Maybe an "external" client could include the IRC Client, the Mail Client, and the like.

chaals: «See answer below ...»

<° Linux: What is the reason for the high consumption of Opera? Well, if we compare it with other browsers, it has a high consumption of RAM. Is RAM consumption really a negative thing or could it be beneficial for the browser?

chaals: RAM consumption depends on what the user wants to do. Having more allows a faster function, for example to go to the back page (previous), see the previewed pages, or manage an «Inbox» of 11902 messages (which I have right now). Whether it is a problem or not depends on some factors such as what the user wants to do, if he is just browsing, why not use all the available memory to give the best experience?

At the same time, it is important to be able to function with little memory if it is what there is, and clearly to use memory in an efficient way. We have always worked on that, and right now the big browsers have been thinking about the same things. We always want to improve, for example, it is quite difficult now that Opera crashes or fails due to lack of memory in any situation, and this involved a hard work to achieve. We continue to look at the choices we will make between more efficient use of memory and providing an improved user experience, as well as seeing if we can improve the operation of the program itself.

<° Linux: Could a "Light" version of Opera be possible? That is, only browser and reader RSS.

chaals: Of course it is possible, but it involves quite a lot of work. And deciding what is and what is not necessary for the "light" version is not so clear, that is, why RSS and not Mail? And vice versa? BitTorrent client functionality is a useful thing for some users, and others neither know nor need to know that it exists. Looking at the possibilities, we could think of changing some functionalities to "addons" (Dragonfly, the developer tool works that way, although this integral part of the product in its development). But separating features that 5 to 10 percent of users need doesn't help across the board. Currently we have a super-small download for a browser (it refers to the weight in MBs), whose functionalities are there for those who want without imposing themselves on others.

<° Linux: Opera may have been the misunderstood browser, there is much more talk about others, perhaps because these others invest a lot in advertising and mobilize their users much more, or perhaps not. Could you share your growth expectations regarding Opera in the Browser market? Why, if it is not inferior to the others, has it not managed to penetrate among the users?

chaals: Surely a part has been the advertising. Google, Apple and Microsoft are paying millions to put ads on TV, we can't put that much money on marketing. Firefox It has grown thanks to a community that believes almost in a religious mission, in addition to having gained many of its users because Google paid for the advertising and even the facilities themselves. It is interesting to note where Opera has been very successful: in the ex-Soviet countries, which have a generally very high level of technical knowledge. We must also confess that asking for money for the browser has historically cost us (although we have abandoned that for years and years), especially in the Americas and Europe (it did not involve any problem for the Russians, but they did not pay either) .

<° Linux: I mentioned earlier that a lack of "success" (looking at "success" from a market share point of view) may be due to little publicity, but it could be other factors.

chaals: Sure.

<° Linux: By this I mean that many users have no problems using Opera as a browser, however many, seeing that their license is exclusive, refrain from doing so (mainly the GNU / Linux community)

chaals: In general terms, it is not a very large community, so it cannot represent a super-important factor. That is not to say that it is not a factor.

<° Linux: Why is Opera not OpenSource?

chaals: It is not Open Source historically because we had a super-efficient browser, which we have sold to many manufacturers for money, and with these profits we have paid our developers. Being a company mostly dedicated to making browsers, unlike the others (there I include Mozilla / Firefox, historically paid for by Google, IBM, Sun and AOL after the disappearance of Netscape as a serious company, around the year 2000), it was important to be able to sell the advantages that we offered.

In addition, our strategy of what to open was different from Google / Apple / Nokia etc. Instead of taking KHTML as a base that was already open source developed by a community, we have developed the engine, Presto. There are not many in the world who are experts in that type of code, so when we find them we use them (and of course, we pay them). But the part that is the user interface has always been very open in Opera, allowing a large community to exchange their customizations, which they have done through my.opera.com and sites 100% external to Opera.

<° Linux: Don't you think this could be an advantage and increase the pace of development of the browser and its components?

chaals: In general, no. Firefox pays a lot of bosses to manage the work of the community (as companies, Mozilla Inc. and Opera have had quite similar incomes every year), the other manufacturers of medium-open browsers pay large teams in addition to a lot of marketing. We pay engineers directly, which allows us to focus on our priorities, and our engineers create many innovations that have been highly successful.

<° Linux: What would you say to those users who don't use Opera based mainly on the type of license?

chaals: "How are you?"

Seriously, I don't mean to say what a user should, or shouldn't, be aware of. But it really seems to me that there are users who are losing for choosing like this. It is a question of needs, and of thinking about the advantages and disadvantages. Sure, open source allows you to change the product, but only to those who have the capacity to do so. For example the famous OLPC (the $ 100 laptop) insisted on open source, although it was impossible for them to include or compile the code on the computer, the Mozilla code was too heavy, and they had to cut functionalities, when Opera worked as is with many more capabilities.

On the other hand, users must insist that their browser supports the standards, because only then could they freely decide that they want to change their browser, if tomorrow another is faster, or has some interesting functionality, or a more attractive color, or whatever.

<° Linux: What advantage does Opera have over other browsers?

chaals: Your logo is easier to recognize. The rest depends on what the user does. For me the important advantages are:

  • Mail, IRC, RSS / Atom and BitTorrent clients.
  • The ability to customize.
  • Being able to mix "private mode" with normal navigation in different tabs.
  • Better SVG support and especially the animation part.
  • Being able to share things through a super-simple and personal server (not in the cloud) by Unite.
  • Being able to easily share my work environment on many platforms (I carry Mac, Linux, Symbian, Android and UIQ devices before I go cyber with what there is).
  • Keep my privacy well with high security.
  • Operate Turbo.
  • Remote Debugging (for mobiles, or for friends) with Dragonfly.

For other people I know, in addition to things that matter to me, they enjoy the speed, the fact that it works with old systems as well as modern ones.

<° Linux: Users of desktop environments such as Gnome, Xfce, KDE and few other times we have had problems of type "appearance" with Opera. Unbelievably good with Gnome being the environment like KDE, Opera always renders smoothly. Would you be so kind as to briefly explain why this is?

chaals: 

Ah. We have an abstraction between the functionality and the appearance of the interface that we have been doing for years for each platform, MVC style ("Model, View, Controller", a fairly common methodology in theory). For Unix (varieties of Linux, BSD, Solaris, and even the versions of linux that are very common in devices such as TV, "set top box", etc) we have had years of ensuring that we get it right, instead of using a Linux distribution and leave the rest for the Linux world to solve the problems.

(To specifically answer the question "it would not improve the code if it were open, here is a demonstration that the answer may be 'not necessarily' ...")

We have a fairly large investment in linux that costs us more than for Windows. We have a lot of Linux users, but almost all of them are from companies paying according to the traditional model, and we still have more users on Windows. However, it is an important platform (many of us are Linux users, for example) that we continue to support to offer a good alternative ...

<° Linux: Much has been debated on the net through forums and others, about the innovations that Opera has brought to the world of software. Tabbed browsing, FastDial, visualization or preview of the site by placing the mouse cursor over the tab, are just some examples of what is thought and said, that Opera has created / invented.

How much truth is there in this? If something of the aforementioned is true, what do you think about the rest of the browsers on the market using some functionality first developed by and for Opera?

chaals: It is true that we have introduced many features that others have copied. And it must be so. The worst is when someone tries to restrict, for example by patents, innovation and the adoption of ideas that can improve the web for the world.

<° Linux: Windows has Internet Explorer as the default browser. Chrome OS would have Chrome, Gnome as a desktop environment has Epiphany, KDE with Konqueror (although rekonq is making its way already). Where I am going with this is, have you ever considered trying to tackle some desktop environment?

In other words, the idea that Opera is the default browser in some Linux distribution that uses KDE or Gnome, is not wrong at all. Have you considered this option?

chaals: Sometimes. Not being the manufacturers, it happens when they ask for Opera. Historically, a lot has happened with telephones, TV, and other devices, and sometimes with desktop platforms, that is because the manufacturers want it, or because a distributor wants it, for example many telephone companies ask their manufacturers to include Opera and / or It operates mini on the mobile versions that they will sell or promote.

<° Linux: OperaMini is the browser with the highest percentage of the market in Smartphones. What do you think is the reason for this incredible success?

chaals: It's super-useful, it works well, and companies like Telenor, Vodafone, AT&T etc. have advertised it. But also because countries where Opera already had an interesting market share, such as the former USSR, were leaders in the growth of the mobile web. (It has a higher share in mobiles in general - because it works not only on "Smartphone" but also on smartphones from 10 years ago, which are already quite "stupid" and where there is not much real alternative).

<° Linux: Are you concerned that Opera as a desktop browser has an undeserved market share?

chaals: Clear. But it is not a threat to the existence of Opera but a great inconvenience.

<° Linux: Do you have something in mind that could turn the situation around completely, or do you just trust that at some point it could change?

chaals: We work to change it as much as we can. You can want everything, but you can't have it, so we develop products to offer a better user experience, we try to explain to the user what they can enjoy or take advantage of, and we also work to remain safe as a company, making products for the markets that want them.

<° Linux: We have read reviews on Opera 11.60 on some websites, where they stated that many of the options incorporated in this version are not special, since other browsers such as Chrome or Firefox already had them. The problem is that little is known about Opera Next, the Rolling Release version of Opera, where certainly the changes / innovations come much earlier. Could you explain as simply as possible, what is Opera Next, as well as its advantages and disadvantages with respect to the "frozen" versions that they release?

chaals: Opera Next is the development version. It allows you to try things of the latest generation, but it may not have the necessary stability to be used as a work platform. The "frozen" versions have undergone a tougher process to ensure their quality, so they do lack some new features, but are more reliable for everyday use.

<° Linux: Currently, how would you describe Opera's support for HTML5 and CSS3?

chaals: Pretty good, since HTML5 and CSS3 are not defined yet.

With the inclusion in version 11.60 of the HTML5 processor (called Ragnarök), like all browsers we have more or less support for the fairly stable parts of HTML5 / CSS3. There are differences, and there is work for everyone, but when HTML5 is finalized it will not be long to have support.

Someone who says «we support HTML5'But it's so stupid not to know that it's impossible while the specification itself keeps changing, or thinks we're stupid enough to believe it.

As parts of the specs stabilize, we implement them in Opera, sometimes before everyone bringing innovations to HTML5, sometimes with everyone, sometimes afterwards to ensure we don't have to change something after putting it in the browser (what which often happens with the first versions of functionalities).

<° Linux: Without a doubt, plugins or add-ons are something important when choosing a browser. However, when we visited the plugins site for Opera we were somewhat disappointed, as this magnificent browser does not have quality plugins as you might expect. Could you explain the reason for this situation?

chaals: There are two things to keep in mind. First, the add-ons themselves are not the important thing, the important thing is what can be done with the browser. For that, accessories are a way to do things, no more and no less. Opera has always included by default much more functionality that other browsers could only offer through plugins, so it has not been so important to have the extra add-ons because the browser already has many extra functionalities.

So, we have spent a lot of time thinking about how to make an extension system that responds to the wishes of users and developers. Actually, we just started with that (and my own work within Opera, includes development of new possibilities for extensions that we will put in new versions of Opera). Firefox has spent years with a system of addons, generally essential to use the browser in the real world. Google has put a lot of money to achieve the same. Opera grows in a more organic way, and starts from a point where you don't need so many features.

All that said, we continue working to improve the possibilities and the available extensions.

<° Linux: If someone wants to contribute a plugin for Opera to the community, is there a guide, tutorial or document that can be used to guide them, know who to consult, license issue, etc?

chaals: Sure, there is a lot of information (tutorials, API documentation, examples, etc) at http://dev.opera.com/addons/extensions

If you have a basic understanding of HTML, and Javascript, you can make a "hello world" plugin in minutes. If not, here are the instructions:

  1. Write esto in a file called config.xml
  2. This other in one called index.html
  3. Y this other in a third, called popup.html

For developer mode, open the file config.xml in Opera, and you can start playing ...

If you have questions, please contact me.

regards

Chaal's


37 comments, leave yours

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

*

*

  1. Responsible for the data: Miguel Ángel Gatón
  2. Purpose of the data: Control SPAM, comment management.
  3. Legitimation: Your consent
  4. Communication of the data: The data will not be communicated to third parties except by legal obligation.
  5. Data storage: Database hosted by Occentus Networks (EU)
  6. Rights: At any time you can limit, recover and delete your information.

  1.   perseus said

    Good job friend 😉

  2.   David Segura M. said

    Well, the truth is, excellent interview I really liked

    because it works not only on “Smartphone” but also on smartphones from 10 years ago, which are already quite “stupid” and where there is not much real alternative) ./ cite

    This is totally true, I knew Opera a long time ago by opera mini that I used in an old Siemems, and it worked wonders, now I have been encouraged to use it as an alternative to firefox on my netbook to see how it works.

  3.   elav <° Linux said

    About this interview I would have many things to argue, but I will only focus for now on this part:

    <° Linux: Why is Opera not OpenSource? Chaals: It is not Open Source historically because we had a super-efficient browser, which we have sold to many manufacturers for money, and with these profits we have paid our developers. Being a company mostly dedicated to making browsers, contrary to the others (there I include Mozilla / Firefox, historically paid for by Google, IBM, Sun and AOL after the disappearance of Netscape as a serious company, around the year 2000), it was important to be able to sell the advantages that we offered. In addition, our strategy of what to open was different from Google / Apple / Nokia etc. Instead of taking KHTML as a base, which was already open source developed by a community, we have developed the engine, Presto. There are not many in the world who are experts in that type of code, so when we find them we use them (and of course, we pay them). But the part that is the user interface has always been very open in Opera, allowing a large community to exchange their customizations, which they have done through my.opera.com and sites 100% external to Opera.

    I think friend Chaals got fame to his head. Ok, I accept it, Opera It is a great browser and throughout history it has proven to be a good product, but is it completely effective? I do not think so.

    It is true that Mozilla (for example) is not a company that is dedicated to creating browsers to "sell" them, but they are very serious and have greatly influenced the development of the web. You have to look at the history of Netscape to know that thanks to Mozilla, Firefox is where it is today. And there is what is truly admirable, they have created a product (Firefox) that is not only free and open source, but also surpassed Opera with all the company it may have behind it.

    The guys at Opera developed Presto, well that's admirable but what good is it that they have done something that still isn't behaving as it should? Not to mention technical things, but from my personal experience, Firefox has always shown the elements of a website better than Opera.

    Anyway, there are things that I don't understand:
    1- What do you mean by saying that the user interface has always been very open?
    2- The fact that they sell to companies does not have to influence that Opera is not open source.

    1.    Ares said

      I do not see the answer wrong, it certainly says something true, they have made a good, "super-effective" product, enough so that there are companies that have paid and continue to pay for it and thus have survived in a place where others went bankrupt and they failed.

      Firefox is where it is not only thanks to Mozilla, but also many thanks to Google and its money and many other thanks to the fanatic of users where I have been included for a long time. To say that it was all thanks to Mozilla is very unfair, not only with reality and with his usual sponsoring companies, but with the people who supported him and preached to him for free.

      Yes, your product has surpassed Opera but only if we talk about market quantity; in quality and functions that I would like the most but there is not even close to it.

      Finally you say that Presto fails because "it does not behave as it should", you should ask yourself two things, the first is if what it does not show you is something standard or not, or if what it does not show you is by browser sniffing or directly because it was tested and adapted for a browser and the same work was not done for Opera. Firefox "does not show the elements of a website better", developers make their websites in Firefox so they will all look good here. Even today, in 2012, the merit of showing a site well is not due to the browser but to the creator who tested it in detail in the browser that did it.

      1.    elav <° Linux said

        When I became a Firefox fan (back in the beginning) It was not because of Google or any advertising, it was because of all the browsers that I tried at that time (Opera, IExplorer, Maxton ... etc) he was the only one who behaved "as he should." Time passed and Firefox was improving as well as its opponents and although I can use Chromium, Opera or any other browser, Firefox is still the only one that shows me things as they are.

        If, as you say, the cause is that developers make their sites testing on Firefox, why is it? It is not to detract from anyone, but their motives must have. Furthermore, a web developer or programmer who makes his site only for a browser, does not respect himself (my very personal opinion). So, how is it that sites that receive visits from millions of users, from different countries, operating systems and browsers they show 100% fine in Firefox and not in others?

        I do not know, there is something there that does not filter ...

        1.    Ares said

          I swear I don't like answering so long XD.

          There are those who became a fan thanks to Google advertising, others thanks to the evangelization of someone who was already a fan and others on their own. But the reason is not the important thing, the important thing is that these people were responsible for taking Firefox to where it arrived, denying it is unfair and anti-historical.

          When I tried Firefox or whatever it was called at that time, it was not the only one that "behaved as it should" because at that time both IE4 and IE5 did and the reason was because the webs were made for them. In fact, a browser that adhered to the standard was going to be ugly showing the web and I remember that at that time it was said a lot (by way of pride by the way) that Firefox implemented many things trying to "emulate" the behavior of IE; of course it was implied that this was at the cost of sacrificing fidelity to the standards but that was not mentioned.

          In his time, many of us changed to Firefox not because of "behavior" since this could never be a reason to change, but for other rather silly reasons such as "the fight for the monopoly", "the crusade for the free internet" and others Epic straws that seem to be taken from Lord of the Ring, but childish and everyone who has not experienced them to throw the first stone.

          It is important to note that these things only rained down on Firefox and not on all the alternatives to IE even though in theory it should be, that's why I say that the final all was evangelizing and fanatical chatter. After one switched (to Firefox), one discovered and took a liking to some things, such as eyelashes (despite the fact that they existed for a long time in other options) and even the rarity of extensions.

          Why do developers make their sites for Firefox? it may be for whatever reason, But taking it for granted that it is for a correct reason is fallacious logic.

          There are several reasons that occur to me why this happens:
          - Because it is a browser with a lot of quota and as always the developers make their sites for popular browsers. The reason for a lifetime.
          - Because developers are human and humans tend to fanaticism and in the case of software they tend to fall in love with applications.
          - In addition, on the Internet, and more abundant in the group of developers, there is an almost religious crusade summarized in the epic crusades that I said before, which is limited to military like PRO Firefox and ANTI IE.
          - Because it exists the noxious widespread idea that Firefox is the standard. Because there are many who erroneously apply the false equation of "it looks good in Firefox the site is fine", "if it does not look good in Firefox the site is bad", "if it is according to the standards it should work in Firefox", etc. Firefox nowadays far from being the fresh air of the web is a cancer for the web for that reason, it is supplanting the standard and it has been doing it for years, almost since it exists.

          That the developer who makes his websites for a single site is not respected? Well there are and many. I guess the real world works in a different way than the "moral" way, the "dignified" way and so on.

          Moreover, in another answer I put a link where the respondents confessed this procedure, which was also no secret and can be seen in many places, especially in those dedicated to development issues; it's practically dogma develop en Firefox.

          Why do the big and popular sites comment on such laziness? Besides what I said before, you know. Perhaps the web development department applies the common rule of making a talk and saying that there are thousands of browsers and it is not worth working for everyone and with only 1, 2 or 3 it is enough because they are 90% of the market and that if someone comes 10% of them put a sign that warns them to "update" to another browser, which seems to be a "morally accepted" rule in that union, or they simply do not say anything since "they are the ones who know" and the More than a few supervisors believe what buzzes you, at least in the recesses of technical issues.

          Above all, these sites, although it may not seem like it, are not infrequently in constant change, so with a change it is very expensive (for the site) or very laborious / expensive (for developers) to give full support and correct.

  4.   michaelSOG said

    Opera is my favorite browser, and I really do not miss those "extensions" that they mention so much about other browsers, it will be that I do not require too many functionalities in a browser, or that the ones that I need are already provided by default and do not I see the need to search for more.

    1.    elav <° Linux said

      First of all MichaelSOG:
      My point of view is like yours, but in reverse. Opera includes many things that I do not need (such as the mail client). It's an excellent browser, but if I could take away the things I don't need (Mail, Bittorrent, maybe the RSS reader) to make it lighter, maybe it would be among my first alternatives.

      Greetings and thanks for stopping by

  5.   pandev92 said

    elav, that your experience with this browser is bad, does not mean that for others too, to this day it has never given me an error, except with the issue of flash when it has more than one tab with flash and I have been able to try hours and hours, while downloading, reading mail and writing on the irc with opera.

    In the rest of the things I agree with Chaals, especially on the subject of licenses, when you don't have to advertise like chrome or firefox, it is difficult to open your code, simply because someone could come, modify, redistribute it and make your For example, famous browsers, besides that I would not be surprised if there were patents in the middle with the manufacturers.

    1.    elav <° Linux said

      How much do you use the browser (Opera)? I am not talking about an error when entering YouTube, or playing something in flash (that too). I am referring to the way in which Opera displays the elements of a website, which is even capable of loading the css style that have text fields, checkboxes, radiobuttons and others. I still haven't managed to resize an image when I post in WordPress, although neither was Chromium doing it. Who does it? Firefox ..

      1.    pandev92 said

        I use the office to publish in wordpress so I would not know what to tell you, but I use the opera for more than 10 hours a day, although in the last weeks I have been using ie in windows

      2.    Ares said

        Resizing an image I suppose it will be with javascript, right?

        In that case, let me tell you that Opera a Sol de hoy is the one that most and best supports the standard in Javascript. In the ECMA test he has an almost perfect score, the best so far.

        Why does that only work for you in Firefox? The answer is not because Firefox is the standard; I have said the answer before, it is because they did that to work in Firefox and nothing else. Before, things were made to work in IE4, in IE5 and the rest to eat it.

        Nothing has changed, only the de facto standard, now it is no longer called IE5 but it is called Firefox.

        1.    elav <° Linux said

          So you're telling me that WordPress is optimized solely for Firefox? I have a question, because I am not a web programmer. Isn't JavaScript the same for any browser? It's as if you told me that 1 + 1 for me is 2 and for others it is 3 .. 🙁

          1.    KZKG ^ Gaara said

            The JS is the same, but the engine and way of interpreting it is different in each browser.

          2.    Ares said

            Answering your first question, I do not know because I do not use that site or have seen the code, but according to your testimony that seems, difficult for it to be anything else.

            To your second question, really No. because it depends on several things.

            First, no browser implements 100% of the standard specifications, whether due to time, complexity, human error or a mere whim, there are even those that implement other (non-standard) specifications "for compatibility".
            Yes, it is true, there are browsers that often say in their advertising that they are "the standard" but it is not the truth.

            Second other thing is that it is «the same javascript» for all browsers because there is something called Browser Sniffing which basically consists of looking if it is X browser then I give it one code, if it is Y browser then I give it another code, it is any other browser then I don't give it anything because: it gave me laziness to do something special too, or I didn't want to test if the above already worked, or I give it a generic thing that doesn't even work.

            Now, another thing is that the javacript specification (ECMAScript) is a single one, which it is, but as I said before another thing is the implementation of the browsers.

            Today Opera is the browser for which 1 + 1 is 2 in the almost absolute entirety of the ECMAScript specification.

            1.    elav <° Linux said

              Thanks for the clarification .. ^^


  6.   Arturo Molina said

    Opera mini the truth has all my respects.
    And in the pc version what I love is being able to switch between private and normal tabs. As stated above, some pages look good in some browsers and are intractable in others.
    Having a netbook, my only complaint is the amount of RAM it consumes, otherwise it would easily be my favorite. Although I would add that the interface differs a lot from the others, but that is already a matter of taste. Regards.

  7.   mitcoes said

    If I had to give you some advice, I would tell you to make a Linux distro similar to Chrome OS, but based instead of rpm on Sabayon or Arch which are the fastest.

    And of course with Opera as the interface. With GTK3 you can even run a competitor's browser within another browser.

    Menu templates and easy-to-program interfaces, so, being the same platform, everyone could choose the look they liked the most or invent new ones.

    Publication of this interface to be installed in other distros

    And of course make an ARM version of this OS, which is installed as an app via VNC or natively as the mozilla project intends to make an OS for mobiles with HTML5 apps.

    That if they do not take away my Dr. Presto, a gadget for Opera to kill great things.

  8.   Courage said

    Firefox has grown thanks to a community that believes almost in a religious mission

    That was more than anything to avoid bad rolls

    1.    pandev92 said

      Yes, but hey, I see more religious those who use chrome xD

  9.   Andrés said

    Excellent interview, is the only thing I have to say, Opera has been my default browser for more than 7 years, I use it on my netbook with Arch, on my sister's PC with Windows, on my workstation with Fedora, on my girlfriend's macbook, and my Nokia x2, all in sync.

    I think a very important detail is missing, Opera Turbo and its ability to navigate in slow networks, I am from Colombia and I work with indigenous communities, and when traveling to remote territories where there are no wi-fi connections, or wired, it only remains to use a modem 3G, and while firefox tries to load a page at EDGE speeds or lower, Opera turbo allows me to open many pages at an acceptable speed, without reloading the RAM by blocking plugins like flash and java (yes, opera becomes opera mini), and the "low bandwidth mode" in the email client allows me to use my GMail, GMX and MyOpera email accounts without any problem.

  10.   MetalByte said

    The interview is very interesting, I agree on many of Chaals' positions. For example, it is true that they took a toll on wanting to charge for their browser, and then offer it as shareware with advertising. When they reacted Firefox had eaten them.

    In other things I do not agree so much, nor with some of the questions, specifically one: the supposed high consumption of RAM. If we talk about memory, Opera consumes less than Firefox (which has long since ceased to be that devouring resources that some accuse it of) and much less than Chrome. Another thing is that each one refers to his experience as far as "feeling of heaviness" is concerned. That is different. And for the record, I prefer Firefox and Chrome than Opera, precisely because of their status as Open Source software (although Chrome is not entirely open source), which is another point in which with all due respect I sweep home with a little of cheek.

    Opera has always had a good number of evangelizing users, and if they have not received grants like Firefox they cannot complain, because it has been precisely because it is a closed source development (I agree that according to what assumptions it has been able to help them, but to affirm something like resounding ...), in addition to its market share, that Firefox is not given the money either.

    Opera is great software, but so are Firefox and Chrome, and the advantages between these browsers are so diffuse in what matters that in the end the user, their tastes and needs (and where their knowledge and interest go, of course). Today, for example, any user of Google services who uses Opera should not be very happy, as is the case with Chrome and Firefox (and today, Google weighs a lot more than Opera). And I imagine that it is Google's fault, which also punishes Konqueror in this regard with KHTML, but it is something that the ordinary user does not give a damn about.

    By the way, Opera did not invent tabs, in any case popularized them.

    Well, greetings and congratulations on the interview, it has been very good 🙂

    1.    pandev92 said

      Hello metalbyte, a pleasure to read you here and thanks for writing :).

    2.    elav <° Linux said

      In other things I do not agree so much, nor with some of the questions, in particular with one: the supposed high consumption of RAM. If we talk about memory, Opera consumes less than Firefox (which has long since ceased to be that devouring resources that some accuse it of) and much less than Chrome. Another thing is that each one refers to their experience as far as "feeling of heaviness" is concerned. That is different. And for the record, I prefer Firefox and Chrome than Opera, precisely because of their status as Open Source software (although Chrome is not entirely open source), which is another point in which with all due respect I sweep home with a little of cheek.

      Man What version of Opera do you use? Because none of the ones I've used consume less than Firefox or Chromium. I don't think it's only on my PC, other users (example KZKGGaara) had the pleasure of seeing the increase in consumption (700Mb only Opera). But hey, if from your personal experience you say that you consume less, then I am not the one to refute anything.

      1.    MetalByte said

        Well, I always use the last one, now 11.60. In fact, right now I am with two computers, Xubuntu 11.10 and openSUSE 12.1 (KDE) and in both the difference is clear with respect to Firefox 9, and as with Chrome / Chromium open 10 tabs, forget it. But it is something that I have very proven, which is why it surprises me so much that now it is said that Opera consumes a lot when something like this has never been said.

        Just out of curiosity, can someone post a screenshot to take a look?

        And for the windoseros of the place, which I see there are a few, now we are hearing a lot of Maxthon 3, they put it as the fastest on the market and the best in HTML5 handling (the specifications will not be finished, but it is quite present on the Internet ).

        1.    KZKG ^ Gaara said

          Try it with Opera Next ... I assure you that it will have many improvements.

    3.    Mafuns said

      Chrome is not entirely open, but if I'm not wrong chormium yes. After searching a bit I found this information. Although it is not a closed subject for me and I think about it often, the freedom of the code is a priority for me, in browsers or in any software.

        1.    Mafuns said

          Thanks for the information.

          When I get home I will try it.

          My question now is whether in chrome / chromium privacy can be configured to such an extent that you are not monitored, or is there always a minimum.

          Thank you very much and sorry that it is so heavy 😀

          1.    KZKG ^ Gaara said

            The browser is not the only thing with which one (the user) interacts with the network, so the browser does, it is important to carefully choose the browser, as well as the OS (Operating System), as well as we ourselves must have be careful what we put on the net.

            Do not worry, in a few hours I will publish a post about internet security, tips, etc 😉
            I recommend that you wait for it and read it, believe me it will be very interesting 😀

            regards

            PS: HAHAHA no not at all, it's a pleasure to help haha

  11.   Ares said

    In general they have been good answers but I am amused by an "or do you think we are so stupid to believe it", because the truth is that there are many, many "stupid" people who do believe the stories of HTML5 support and overvalue and gives real value to HTML5 tests and HTML5 demos, etc.

  12.   yunier j said

    One thing Mr. Chaal overlooked is that Google does not pay Mozilla, this issue has been taken up many times and people always misunderstand. That they maintain contracts is true but this man is going very far.
    And although Google stops financing (we will have to wait until 2013), Mozilla has the conditions created so that it does not influence it so much.

    1.    Ares said

      What he said is something that actually happened and does not refer precisely to the contract that is heard a lot today.

      Google first from "day one" adopted Mozilla and passed money on it, even without it being anything in life. In fact, Google in this way won the affection of many geeks by appearing to be a good guy "not evil" who supported free projects to end the evil Microsoft and IE. Although it was always "special" with Mozilla, it also did it with other projects (Wikipedia, OpenOffice, etc).

      Another thing is that it paid for Firefox installations and advertising. For example, if you had a site and you put the "Download Firefox" button, for each person who clicked on it, Google paid you one dollar. Of course, many people also put this button on their own without registering in AdSesne and of course they did not charge anything, perhaps they did it by imitation without knowing that it was a paid initiative.

      Anyway, I gave it publicity and financing, in fact perhaps my memory is wrong, but I think there was even a time when when you entered with an old IE it would appear in Google "you are using an old browser install Firefox." And tell me that another browser has a Google page for it.

      These are things that happened but that many seem to not know.

  13.   LesterZone said

    My humble opinion:
    Do I use Firefox? YES, reasons are unnecessary,
    Do I have opera? yes,
    Why? because it is multi-platform and because I don't know which browser the clients use and obviously I have to verify my work (In Firefox, Chrome, Opera)
    Do i have IE? Not because? because it is not multi-platform,
    How do I check if what I do in IE works or not? Simple, I don't, QA does it for me (I am an exception in the company).
    Greetings.

  14.   msx said

    Opera was historically my preferred browser until they started to lose their way back in version 8 (I think the last version I used was 7.56, until then I was a fan of Opera).

    Currently it is not a bad browser, on the contrary, Presto is a great engine and Dragonfly is excellent, really useful, but there are some details that I need to fix to make it my favorite browser:
    1. Opera Light! (Or Mini): please stop your nonsense with your concept "Let's put everything people use into Opera so they don't use anything other than our product."
    If the browser goes back to being that, a browser, it will earn a lot of points. Only the browser, without mail client, RSS, BitTorrent (WTF!), Unite or any other nonsense, which at most are addons / plugins / extensions, but not a fundamental part of the browser.
    2. Opera is too resource intensive, just like Chrome / Chromium but without having all the tab sandboxing subsystem that these browsers have.
    3. Smooth-scroll: it may seem silly, but since I started using Firefox and Chromium with this feature activated (through third-party plugins) it has been practically impossible for me to navigate the web, inertial scroll is one of the great inventions Apple… (in Chromium «Wheel Smooth Scroller» and in Firefox «Yet Another Smooth Scrolling»).
    4. Using Gmail with Opera is torture - yet! It is too slow, even Qupzilla is much better than Opera with Gmail (is it Presto's problem?)

    Nice interview, it was short!

    1.    Ares said

      It operates precisely - I think it is the only browser that has smoothscroll and it works quite well, it would be precisely Chrome and Firefox who do not have it, that feature is given by an extension.

      Now, I don't know if that smoothscroll is disabled by default, but I suspect that you think it doesn't have it because you're looking for a smoothscroll with accelerations / decelerations as those extensions seem to have. If it is because of this, it could also be in Opera, also by means of an extension or even by means of a Userscript since this is done with simple javascript, the detail is that nobody has left to create it.

      1.    msx said

        Yes, I was referring to acceleration.
        I do not know the issue that it is easy not to do it in Opera, the browser plugin system is extremely precarious and until the API is evolved and expanded there are many things that will not be able to be done, for example Xmarks, essential to synchronize bookmarks between the different browsers - the version for Opera is a loaded one, it redirects to the company's website where they clarify that at the moment Opera does not have the flexibility to port the plugin, in fact Lastpass, also from the same company, is pale reflection next to its version for Chrome / Chromium and Firefox.