Why doesnt any distro uses Opera? [Archive]

Epilonsama

August 19th, 2007, 01:57 AM

WiseElben

August 19th, 2007, 02:11 AM

Epilonsama

August 19th, 2007, 02:13 AM

I think it's something about Opera's lack of uniformity. The themes and styles used in Opera don't match with any "standard." Also, Opera doesn't have as large a userbase as Firefox.

I tried Opera, but I still prefer Firefox.

Theres a Plastik theme for KDE users and theres a tango theme and a human theme, Im using KDE right now and im suing the Plastik theme and it looks sleek and uniform, il post a pic when i can, i was doubtful at first but now i use opera on all linux i use and windows machines.

Heres the Pic:

http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/4464/operakdehg0.th.png (http://img300.imageshack.us/my.php?image=operakdehg0.png)

Zzl1xndd

August 19th, 2007, 02:14 AM

Also might have something to do with the fact that Opera is not open source.

Epilonsama

August 19th, 2007, 02:22 AM

Also might have something to do with the fact that Opera is not open source.

I alredy say that but we know that lots of linux distros add Propietary software to Linux, why dont add opera to that distro, Of course if Firefox where as capable as Opera i wouldn be using it right now, the other browser that comes close to Opera's speed is Konqueror but making some wbesite to work with it is a pain and i dont like some things in Konqueror, like the fact that is also a file borwser.

Tux Aubrey

August 19th, 2007, 02:29 AM

I think most distros go with Firefox because it provides a point of familiarity for new users.

Personally, I don't care much what the default apps are - so long as the current versions of the ones I prefer are available in a distro's repositories.

Many distros try to avoid the licensing issues that come with having non-free stuff by default (even if its just a pop-up tick-and-flick license agreement). I don't think Ubuntu has any apps that are non-free. Codecs and drivers are a slightly different issue.

Epilonsama

August 19th, 2007, 02:34 AM

But we gotta admit Opera is a really advance web browser, Im still dont know how can a closed source dev team could pull of such a work of art, those guys most never sleep or something cuz its almost imposible for closed source to be this good.

Matthew Wiebelhaus

August 19th, 2007, 02:38 AM

Your right opera is good i just tested it on sabayon and it like it

Epilonsama

August 19th, 2007, 02:46 AM

Your right opera is good i just tested it on sabayon and it like it

Does Sbayon includes Opera in their distro or just in their repos?

Matthew Wiebelhaus

August 19th, 2007, 02:50 AM

repo but all i have to do is type sudo emerge opera and there is is perty fast compared to other installs.

Matthew Wiebelhaus

August 19th, 2007, 02:51 AM

I can actually get the developers to add it if you want to make the switch or something....

Epilonsama

August 19th, 2007, 02:54 AM

repo but all i have to do is type sudo emerge opera and there is is perty fast compared to other installs.

Hmm i see like typing sudo aptitude install opera, but i like the fact that a Geentoo based distro has an easy way to use Opera, I really wish the Opera Dev could realease the source code so we can see how they create opera.

starcraft.man

August 19th, 2007, 03:12 AM

cuz lets face it firefox is laging behind and the Presto engine is the fastest overal web browsing engine and is 100% compliant and also has lots of inovatives and cool out of the box feutures, they were the

Of course if Firefox where as capable as Opera i wouldn be using it right now

Ok... nice of you to bash Firefox, I knew that'd be somewhere in a thread with Opera in the title. You keep saying these things like they were facts I might add... For many users (like myself) Firefox does everything we need and then some. I take comfort in the fact that its OSS enough (I know not GPL, but approved) and that on a whim I can find nearly any functionality as an add on I need (if it's not present). I'll admit 2.0 has been a bit problematic but 3.0 brings me high hopes.

first to intruduce tabbed browsing before it was made popular by firefox.
Might wanna get your facts straight, just like the Apple fans... Wikipedia on Tabbed Browsing.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabbed_browsing#Tabbed_browsing) Opera wasn't the first, or even second.

And also, using Opera is completly Legal and with 0 cost its just sad that it isnt Open Source but who knows maybe in the future the guys at Opera realize the advantages of Open Source.

I am sceptical on this. I imagine they have clauses in their licensing for commercial entities (covering OS inclusion as well I imagine). I can't vouch for that with certainty though, I haven't read their licensing. If not, then I rescind this comment.

As for the question at hand. I think the simple fact is not many people use/care about Opera (you do, and others don't). From the estimates I've seen it's user base is a tiny 0.5%-1.0%, compare that to Firefox with around 20-25%. That seems to be the bottom line. If nobody knows/wants it, it doesn't get in.

init1

August 19th, 2007, 03:19 AM

Epilonsama

August 19th, 2007, 03:34 AM

Ok... nice of you to bash Firefox, I knew that'd be somewhere in a thread with Opera in the title. You keep saying these things like they were facts I might add... For many users (like myself) Firefox does everything we need and then some. I take comfort in the fact that its OSS enough (I know not GPL, but approved) and that on a whim I can find nearly any functionality as an add on I need (if it's not present). I'll admit 2.0 has been a bit problematic but 3.0 brings me high hopes.

Might wanna get your facts straight, just like the Apple fans... Wikipedia on Tabbed Browsing.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabbed_browsing#Tabbed_browsing) Opera wasn't the first, or even second.

I am sceptical on this. I imagine they have clauses in their licensing for commercial entities (covering OS inclusion as well I imagine). I can't vouch for that with certainty though, I haven't read their licensing. If not, then I rescind this comment.

As for the question at hand. I think the simple fact is not many people use/care about Opera (you do, and others don't). From the estimates I've seen it's user base is a tiny 0.5%-1.0%, compare that to Firefox with around 20-25%. That seems to be the bottom line. If nobody knows/wants it, it doesn't get in.

Cool off , jeesh im not bashing Firefox, is just that Firefox 2.0 has dissapointed me and I think Opera is better and I want to know what other ppl think about it, and Im also waiting for Fx 3.0 but in the mean time im suing something that works for my needs and Opera is that web browser, also Firefox is popular because of the massive campaing The Mozilla Corp. is creating with Firefox not because is better, just like Windows is more popular than Ubuntu Linux.

Steveway

August 19th, 2007, 03:36 AM

At least my Browser is not spying on me.
Prove me that Opera doesn't do it, you can't?

Epilonsama

August 19th, 2007, 03:40 AM

At least my Browser is not spying on me.
Prove me that Opera doesn't do it, you can't?

Meh, is not like I have something to hide, but im sure that if Opera is spying on its users we would have found out :popcorn:, remember Opera doesn gain that much income on its desktop brosers but it does gain a lot of income with Opera Mini and Opera for the Nintendo Wii and DS so they wouldnt risk that income by spying on their users.

aysiu

August 19th, 2007, 03:41 AM

I think even distros that include proprietary software will do so only if the open source counterpart doesn't offer the end user basic functionality in "the real world." For example, Ekiga may be great, but if all your friends are on Skype, too bad for you. Or being able to play Ogg may be great, but if you can't watch most streaming video on the web or listen to streaming audio on the web, then too bad for you.

The inclusion of Opera, however, doesn't offer basic functionality in "the real world." In fact, I've found more sites incompatible with Opera than with Firefox these days (two or three years ago, this wasn't the case--Firefox was just as likely to "not work" with sites as much as Opera was). Firefox is usually the gateway drug for Windows migrants who move from Windows to Linux. It is also (marketshare-wise) a more popular browser than Opera. I don't see why any distro would want to include Opera by default, even if many people consider it "better" than Firefox "hands-down."

Firefox
Open source
Already used by many Windows users before migrating to Linux
Used by a larger percentage of people than Opera

Opera
Closed source
Touted by a vocal minority of Linux users to be "better" than Firefox
Used by a smaller percentage of people than Firefox

Doesn't seem like much of a contest for me which would be the default on almost all Linux distros.

Andrewie

August 19th, 2007, 03:44 AM

At least my Browser is not spying on me.
Prove me that Opera doesn't do it, you can't?

can you prove it is spying?

Epilonsama

August 19th, 2007, 03:46 AM

Steveway

August 19th, 2007, 03:54 AM

can you prove it is spying?

Only the Opera-devs can by giving out the sourcecode.
So we have to rely on those people, it's closed-source it could do anything like deleting our /home at 12.08.2010.

starcraft.man

August 19th, 2007, 03:55 AM

Cool off , jeesh im not bashing Firefox, is just that Firefox 2.0 has dissapointed me and I think Opera is better and I want to know what other ppl think about it, and Im also waiting for Fx 3.0 but in the mean time im suing something that works for my needs and Opera is that web browser, also Firefox is popular because of the massive campaing The Mozilla Corp. is creating with Firefox not because is better, just like Windows is more popular than Ubuntu Linux.

Just pointing things out like I see them, and I almost always retain my cool (I didn't see anything in my words to suggest otherwise really, I am a little poignant/curmudgeonly all the time).

As for the marketing thing, that's tough luck for Opera. They've been around for longer than Firefox (Opera had it's first public version 1996, Firefox some time 2004 I believe). They had all that time to do something and attain market penetration and uptake and yet their means of promotion have gone (and to some extent still go) largely ignored. Firefox on the other hand, came out with a bang, and by being OSS (at least approved so) generated an interested and vibrant community who wanted to help code it and the many add-ons available. They equally leveraged said community for grass roots promotion by word of mouth and spread Firefox campaigns, and have come up with a sustainable model for income.

You may believe Opera to be the better browser (I would beg to differ, even 2.0) but in the end if no one knows about it, it's as good as not there. It's not Firefox's fault for promoting itself so well, it's Opera's for doing nothing more than 1% in 10 years of being around.

Oh and doesn't Opera have a spell checker? Your making an awful lot of typos...

aysiu

August 19th, 2007, 03:57 AM

Only the Opera-devs can by giving out the sourcecode.
So we have to rely on those people, it's closed-source it could do anything like deleting our /home at 12.08.2010.
But for those of who don't inspect source code or wouldn't even know how to make sense of source code, this argument is irrelevant. For all I know, Ubuntu could be doing the same thing. Programmers may take comfort in being able to see the source code, but non-programmers usually have no idea what any program is doing behind the scenes, source code availability present or not.

I think it makes sense to say that Opera would have nothing to gain by deleting people's home directories on August 12, 2010.

aysiu

August 19th, 2007, 04:00 AM

As for the marketing thing, that's tough luck for Opera. They've been around for longer than Firefox (Opera had it's first public version 1996, Firefox some time 2004 I believe). They had all that time to do something and attain market penetration and uptake and yet their means of promotion have gone (and to some extent still go) largely ignored. I think part of that may have had to do with Opera being pay-for for a long time (remember the big banner ad that used to be at the top of Opera's cost-free version?). It may also have to do with Opera's adherence to W3C standards.

My wife and I abandoned Opera (even though we both loved it) numerous times when it wouldn't work properly with certain websites. Firefox, now at roughly 15-30% of the browser market (depending on what country you're in), works for every website we visit (even the ones we don't visit regularly). Of course, if web designers adhered to W3C standards, that wouldn't be an issue...

Still, Opera is the official web browser of the Wii, I think. That's something. Maybe their new strategy is for Opera mobile and embedded?

starcraft.man

August 19th, 2007, 04:11 AM

I think part of that may have had to do with Opera being pay-for for a long time (remember the big banner ad that used to be at the top of Opera's cost-free version?). It may also have to do with Opera's adherence to W3C standards.

My wife and I abandoned Opera (even though we both loved it) numerous times when it wouldn't work properly with certain websites. Firefox, now at roughly 15-30% of the browser market (depending on what country you're in), works for every website we visit (even the ones we don't visit regularly). Of course, if web designers adhered to W3C standards, that wouldn't be an issue...

Aye, I know Opera used to be paid as well as their issues with some pages. Those were choices they made (especially the paid/ad free version, the w3c is sort of not their problem entirely... I give that). In the end though, even if we only talk post Firefox (say you don't believe the market was viable for all those years), they've still yet to make any appreciable impact and they've certainly had every available opportunity to do so. At this rate, I wonder if Safari on Windows will displace Opera's share...

Still, Opera is the official web browser of the Wii, I think. That's something. Maybe their new strategy is for Opera mobile and embedded?
I've noticed that. I guess maybe they're just not that interested in desktop browsing so much?

Matthew Wiebelhaus

August 19th, 2007, 04:34 AM

In linux web browsers dont matter for me they all do the same thing execpt some may be faster. I cant even get www.fidelity.com there is suppose to be a quote box and a search box at the top not just the search and quote buttons and when i log in it still says log in............

Kingsley

August 19th, 2007, 04:55 AM

In linux web browsers dont matter for me they all do the same thing execpt some may be faster. I cant even get www.fidelity.com (http://www.fidelity.com) there is suppose to be a quote box and a search box at the top not just the search and quote buttons and when i log in it still says log in............
It seems like bad coding. Are you sure the site doesn't behave the same in IE?

Tux Aubrey

August 19th, 2007, 06:34 AM

Oh and doesn't Opera have a spell checker? Your making an awful lot of typos...

:lolflag: Proving conclusively that relying on spell checking does not lead to better English.

Epilonsama

August 19th, 2007, 02:45 PM

Oh and doesn't Opera have a spell checker? Your making an awful lot of typos...

:lolflag: Proving conclusively that relying on spell checking does not lead to better English.

I couldn't say it better myself :lolflag:

It seems that you also aren't using Firefox , are you proud by saying you spell "correctly" thanks to Firefox spellchecker, Don't rely to much on it cuz in the Real Word there isn't a spell checker that's why I stopped using it, even on Firefox.

Matthew Wiebelhaus

August 19th, 2007, 03:17 PM

It seems like bad coding. Are you sure the site doesn't behave the same in IE?
Wes it works in firefox ie 6 and opera in windows

Epilonsama

August 19th, 2007, 04:57 PM

It seems like bad coding. Are you sure the site doesn't behave the same in IE?

It most be a Linux issue :cry:

toon

August 23rd, 2007, 05:29 PM

Only the Opera-devs can by giving out the sourcecode.
So we have to rely on those people, it's closed-source it could do anything like deleting our /home at 12.08.2010.
Actually, not so.

First of all, to accept incomming connections in general, the program would have to bind to some port, which is very easy to spot. They might masq it on port 80 (not on linux though, you need special privileges to bind to a post < 1024), but it would still be an _incomming_ connection.

If the program on the other hand initiated the connection itself, it would ofcourse have to send out packets every now and then to some ip/domain you are not visiting. Again, also very easy to spot with basic admintools.

For any serious softwarecompany to do this just because the code wasn't opensource hence "imune" to these findings, would be commercial suicide, IMO. Antispyware programs everywhere would flag Opera as spyware pretty quickly. It would be a top-story on Digg within minutes after the first program flags it for sure. How do you think all these programs figure out a closed-source program is spyware or not? Lucky guess?

I must say I love Opera but like other people are pointing out, I don't like how it feels so "disconnected" from the rest of my KDE. In particular, it has a very close connection to that filthy gnome - all the default apps are the gnome-counterparts, the menus are ugly etc. Also, it is a bit slow on the interface side, like tabs-switching etc.

I hear good things about Opera 9.5 and linux though, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed :)

igknighted

August 23rd, 2007, 06:01 PM

There are a bunch of distros that ship Opera. When I helped out with SAM Linux we had contacted Opera and had a license to distribute it. It definitely shipped with 2007. I am not so sure about 2007.1.

Anyways, its a moot point because konqueror > FF or Opera.
</flamebait>

toon

August 23rd, 2007, 06:20 PM

Anyways, its a moot point because konqueror > FF or Opera.

I wouldn't mind using konq IF:

they allowed tabs to be VERTICALLY on the left side of the screen (this itself is a dealbreaker for me - I have a widescreen hence a lot of white spare space on 99% of the sites I visit, not to mention I usually have some 40 tabs open.. If you do that horizontally there is no way to tell which is which)
they supported the MDI interface and not just TDI
mousegestures were given some love so it doesn't fail as much as it does (compared to opera for me atleast)
they allowed you to easily use alternative stylesheets, uniformily zoom _everything_, have a good "undo close" and session manager (the current one *works* but opera also keeps the history)

There are a lot of other stuff I love about Opera, but if konqueror supported these things I'd easily use konq more than I currently do.

Edit: Not sure about KDE/QT4, but it would be nice if there was some native MDI support, I miss it in other things as well such as konversation.

stimpack

August 23rd, 2007, 06:32 PM

Only the Opera-devs can by giving out the sourcecode.
So we have to rely on those people, it's closed-source it could do anything like deleting our /home at 12.08.2010.

Little misconception on what OpenSource is. All programs are human readable, Assembler may be a sadly dying art, but there is nothing stopping you looking at the code of any software. Fire up a debugger and see for yourself it is not going to delete your /home.

Open Source is a whole philosophy far beyond providing C++ code with comments.

FyreBrand

August 23rd, 2007, 06:58 PM

Opera is an alright browser. For Linux users it's definitely not as friendly to get Java and Flash up and running.

As aysiu pointed out there isn't anything it provides natively (other than integrated bittorrent) that firefox doesn't also provide. The fact that firefox has a fat footprint is not a deal breaker for most people.

In fact Firefox provides easier extensibility and customization without a "widget".

Firefox provides easier to use script control via NoScript than the Opera Javascript site control.

A deal breaker for me and many people is the use of Google. Even if I want to try and learn Opera's interface it provides zero integration with Google outside of some third party widgets not authored by Google. I have no Google Notebook integration with Opera. There is no Google Toolbar or Google Browser Sync. Third party widgets are great for checking weather or getting news or daily quotes. They aren't acceptable to me for accessing my mail or storing my Google account information.

The other deal breaker for me is that Opera is not certified on some sites. Some US government, tax prep sites, and banking sites either don't work or won't accept responsibility if something goes wrong using an unsupported browser.

Erik Trybom

August 23rd, 2007, 08:44 PM

Distros that offer proprietary software out of the box are often driven by commercial companies and have a heavy focus at getting a lot of users.

Firefox is a far stronger brand than Opera - I'd even say it might be stronger than Linux. I'm quite certain there are more Firefox users on the desktop than there are Linux users. I'd even say that most of the people trying out Linux for the first time have already tried Firefox on their Windows computers.

That's what makes it so attractive to bundle in a Linux distribution. "Surf the web using Firefox!" makes people feel at home because they know what Firefox is and they know they can handle it. Opera on the other hand might be totally different to use. (Not that it actually is, but people don't know that.)

So, in short, I think it is mainly for marketing reasons.

clblanchard

August 23rd, 2007, 09:12 PM

I was using IceWeasel the other day. Isn't it a completely open source version of FF? If so why isn't it the default browser. You can hardly tell the difference. Oh, btw, anyone that uses Opera is a LUNATIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! J/K hehe. But seriously, give IceWeasel a try.

happysmileman

August 23rd, 2007, 09:17 PM

Only the Opera-devs can by giving out the sourcecode.
So we have to rely on those people, it's closed-source it could do anything like deleting our /home at 12.08.2010.

People can track all incoming and outgoing packets to see if they're spying on you, and you could disassemble the program and search for anything that looks like it would delete your files.

The reason they don't give away source despite it being free is probably because they make big money from the Wii and opera Mini and stuff, it would be a bad choice financially.

While i'm not saying closed source isn't evil in general, opera seem to make it work, and they still provide browsers for all OSes for free, and it is a good program, if the code was made open, they would lose the profit made by licensing it's use to Nintendo etc. and therefore the browser itself would suffer.

Sporkman

August 23rd, 2007, 09:24 PM

Firefox is usually the gateway drug for Windows migrants

:lol:

clblanchard

August 23rd, 2007, 09:30 PM

While i'm not saying closed source isn't evil in general, opera seem to make it work, and they still provide browsers for all OSes for free, and it is a good program, if the code was made open, they would lose the profit made by licensing it's use to Nintendo etc. and therefore the browser itself would suffer.

I wonder why a company like Nintendo would need to license a browser when they could probably develop one in house to take special advantage of their system's unique properties such as the WiiMote. Not to mention tailor it to run explicitly for their hardware. I tend to think maybe Opera paid Nintendo, kinda like a sponsor for a race car. Talk about the advertising you'd get.

SOULRiDER

August 23rd, 2007, 09:48 PM

SOULRiDER

August 23rd, 2007, 09:50 PM

I wonder why a company like Nintendo would need to license a browser when they could probably develop one in house to take special advantage of their system's unique properties such as the WiiMote. Not to mention tailor it to run explicitly for their hardware. I tend to think maybe Opera paid Nintendo, kinda like a sponsor for a race car. Talk about the advertising you'd get.

You have to remember Opera is also made for mobile phones, and theres a version for the Nintendo DS.

happysmileman

August 23rd, 2007, 09:52 PM

Right now im using firefox because of some websites not wanting to work properly with Opera. Also, firefox has Ad-block which is a big plaus and AFAIK opera doesnt have anything like that.

It has a popup blocker, and you can right click and click "Block Content...", then click on the ad, it'll add it to the list (and anything in the same folder as that ad)

Dimitriid

August 23rd, 2007, 10:51 PM

But for those of who don't inspect source code or wouldn't even know how to make sense of source code, this argument is irrelevant.

Principles are most certainly not irrelevant: Do you have to be a lawyer to be for or against decisions if they are not justified with the law? Do you have to be an Economist to be concerned about sudden rise in prices or unemployment?
Do you have to be a social worker with 20 years of active experience on the field to care about whenever or not people should have access to some basic needs?

I did not think so, and I do not have to know how to build my own kernel from scratch and custom make my own distro to care about whenever a company uses dubious practices or not.

aysiu

August 23rd, 2007, 11:28 PM

Principles are most certainly not irrelevant: Do you have to be a lawyer to be for or against decisions if they are not justified with the law? Do you have to be an Economist to be concerned about sudden rise in prices or unemployment?
Do you have to be a social worker with 20 years of active experience on the field to care about whenever or not people should have access to some basic needs?

I did not think so, and I do not have to know how to build my own kernel from scratch and custom make my own distro to care about whenever a company uses dubious practices or not.
Please do not quote me out of context. I care about open source v. proprietary.

The argument I was responding to said that if it's not open source, you can't know if it's going to delete your /home directory or send private information somewhere. To someone who can't read source code, closed source and open source are practically the same in this regard.

There's no need to make straw man arguments.

Hex_Mandos

August 24th, 2007, 02:31 AM

The argument I was responding to said that if it's not open source, you can't know if it's going to delete your /home directory or send private information somewhere. To someone who can't read source code, closed source and open source are practically the same in this regard.

Actually, open source also protects people like you and me too. Even if you don't examine your programs yourself, you know that many people do, and that anyone could. And nobody is going to inclued malicious features in a program anyone can audit. So maybe we aren't going to detect flaws ourselves, but we're covered by the eyes of those who do watch.

aysiu

August 24th, 2007, 02:43 AM

Actually, open source also protects people like you and me too. Even if you don't examine your programs yourself, you know that many people do, and that anyone could. And nobody is going to inclued malicious features in a program anyone can audit. So maybe we aren't going to detect flaws ourselves, but we're covered by the eyes of those who do watch.
I agree wholeheartedly:
Open Source for Non-Programmers (http://ubuntucat.wordpress.com/2007/07/18/open-source-for-non-programmers/)

kerry_s

August 24th, 2007, 02:57 AM

Right now im using firefox because of some websites not wanting to work properly with Opera. Also, firefox has Ad-block which is a big plaus and AFAIK opera doesnt have anything like that.

My mom uses Opera in Windows.

opera has adblock it's a hidden feature.

the only thing i really hated about opera is plugin support. everything else maybe advanced, but there plugin support is stone age. when they can get past that, i may look at it again.

Fbot1

August 24th, 2007, 04:00 AM

Little misconception on what OpenSource is. All programs are human readable, Assembler may be a sadly dying art, but there is nothing stopping you looking at the code of any software.Fire up a debugger and see for yourself it is not going to delete your /home.

That's not true.

CDL-WarChilde

August 24th, 2007, 05:15 AM

I like Opera but quit using it when they started the ad supported versions, I just didn't feel right cracking it all the time and quit paying for it eventually. I recently started using them again when they offered the browser for free. I check my banking online, just switch it to mask as IE and I'm good to go. I didn't have any issue with that fidelity site, meaning I didn't have to have Opera mask as another browser. (F12----->Network, you can either identify or mask)

I'm really satisfied with how far Opera has come along. I used to have issues with yahoo e-mail, but those have been resolved. I also use Opera from a flash drive to check e-mail and a few other things.

I installed Opera on my feisty fawn install and was able to bring over everything from my windows install, favs, notes, etc...

I'll continue to use Opera as long as it is free.

In feisty, Flash and java worked fine for me, just by pointing to the FF plug-in directory.

vexorian

August 24th, 2007, 05:19 AM

Because it is a market drug.
And you'll probably need to pay those guys just to include a browser in your distro.

Not a good deal.

RAV TUX

August 24th, 2007, 05:19 AM

Problably because is Propietary but theres lots of distro that include not so legal propietary content in their distro, like non free codecs and stuff so what would you guys think of a distro that includes Opera as the default web browser cuz lets face it firefox is laging behind and the Presto engine is the fastest overal web browseing engine and is 100% compliant and also has lots of inovatives and cool out of the box feutures, they were the fiorst to intruduce tabbed browsing before it was made popular by firefox.

And also, using Opera is completly Legal and with 0 cost its just sad that it isnt Open Source but who knows maybe in the future the guys at Opera realize the advantages of Open Source.

Interesting thread, so much so I am writing while on vacation.

I know of 2 distros that do come with Opera:

1. Puppy (version 2.00 with Opera) (http://www.puppylinux.org/user/downloads.php?cat_id=1)
2. Oz GNOME 1.0 (http://cafelinux.org/OzEnterprise/node/10) (Oz GNOME 1.0 also comes with Firefox)

I also remember Sabayon used to come with Opera by default...but this was last year, since then Sabayon won't even work on my computer.

I am sure there is one or two more distros that come with Opera, but I can't recall which ones right now.

Joer4x4

August 24th, 2007, 05:34 AM

Onyros

August 24th, 2007, 05:41 AM

As much as I like Opera there are a lot of little things it still doesn't display correctly or displays correct data. I know a few sites where it is way off and I have to resort to Firefox.

If Firefox can display a site correctly then I have to guess that Opera needs work in the standards area.Maybe it's the sites that need work in the standards area.

arsenic23

August 24th, 2007, 05:43 AM

As much as I like Opera there are a lot of little things it still doesn't display correctly or displays correct data. I know a few sites where it is way off and I have to resort to Firefox.

If Firefox can display a site correctly then I have to guess that Opera needs work in the standards area.

Which is funny since I was under the impression that Oprea, Konqueror, and Safari were the 3 most standards compliant browsers on the market.

Onyros

August 24th, 2007, 05:45 AM

Which is funny since I was under the impression that Oprea, Konqueror, and Safari were the 3 most standards compliant browsers on the market.Yep, one word for that: Acid2 (http://www.webstandards.org/files/acid2/test.html).

Now try that on Firefox and then on Opera. :P

August 24th, 2007, 11:05 AM

There is only one reason why Opera is not shipped by default on many distros.

You are not allowed to redistribute it.

Distros that do ship it have made agreements with the parent company.

"Opera Browser Information: LICENSE.TXT
===========================================
Copyright (C) Opera Software 1995-2007

(snip)...

You may not sell, rent, lease or sublicense the Software, without the explicit
written consent of Opera Software ASA"

stimpack

August 24th, 2007, 11:21 AM

That's not true.

Why is it not true?. Find me a program that you can't disassemble and find out what its doing. Bear in mind I was in the Windows crack scene for many years, so be careful :).

popch

August 24th, 2007, 01:59 PM

Find me a program that you can't disassemble and find out what its doing.

Skype?

stimpack

August 24th, 2007, 02:03 PM

popch

August 24th, 2007, 02:39 PM

Hmm I think you are talking EULA restrictions now? :). Still you could do it in your own home and not tell anyone, you can disassemble Skype yes.

That's is a pretty evil EULA though, I hope these things don't stand up in court.

The issue is - in that case - not that you are not supposed to do it. According to sources (http://www.ossir.org/windows/supports/2005/2005-11-07/EADS-CCR_Fabrice_Skype.pdf)it is nearly impossible. They appear to have encrypted part of the code. Google 'skype analysis', for instance.

toupeiro

August 24th, 2007, 04:32 PM

I've only ever used Opera on the Wii :-D I like what I see, but then again it might be because surfing the web in my living room with a bluetooth "wii-mote" is pretty damn novel!

SOULRiDER

August 24th, 2007, 04:58 PM

I like how you can turnt he Wiimote sideways and the little hand turns too ^_^

RAV TUX

August 24th, 2007, 05:38 PM

Yep, one word for that: Acid2 (http://www.webstandards.org/files/acid2/test.html).

Now try that on Firefox and then on Opera. :P

Actually that rendered better in Opera, Firefox rendered the image completely mutilated.

Fbot1

August 24th, 2007, 05:47 PM

Why is it not true?. Find me a program that you can't disassemble and find out what its doing. Bear in mind I was in the Windows crack scene for many years, so be careful :).

I don't need to, what you are saying the halting problem is decidable.

Fbot1

August 24th, 2007, 06:01 PM

Firefox is lagging behind and the Presto engine ... is 100% compliant

Wikipedia disagrees with both:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_%28HTML%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_%28XML%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_%28XHTML%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_%28graphics%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_%28CSS%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_%28DOM%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_%28HTML5%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_%28ECMAScript%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_%28SVG%29

Onyros

August 24th, 2007, 11:58 PM

Actually that rendered better in Opera, Firefox rendered the image completely mutilated.That was the point I was trying to make, mate ;) (I'm an Opera fanboy, yep)

stmiller

August 25th, 2007, 12:20 AM

Distros that offer proprietary software out of the box are often driven by commercial companies and have a heavy focus at getting a lot of users.

Gentoo offers commercial and proprietary software in its' official repositories. Gentoo is a 100% free / open distro.

Mandriva has a similar take with one of their versions. They include stuff.

Ubuntu just takes on a somewhat Debian-conservative sort of take on licenses. (mp3/mpeg is not allowed; non-GPL not allowed; etc.)

For example: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/edgy/+source/linuxsampler/+bug/84451

linuxsampler is "not allowed" by Ubuntu or Debian, even though it qualifies for the universe repos for Ubuntu.

"LinuxSampler - free, open source pure software audio sampler with professional grade features."

http://www.linuxsampler.org/

Kiddalee

August 25th, 2007, 12:51 AM

I sure hope it's not about theme. Regardless, I prefer Opera's flexible GUI.

August 25th, 2007, 02:24 AM

Gentoo offers commercial and proprietary software in its' official repositories. Gentoo is a 100% free / open distro.

Mandriva has a similar take with one of their versions. They include stuff.

Ubuntu just takes on a somewhat Debian-conservative sort of take on licenses. (mp3/mpeg is not allowed; non-GPL not allowed; etc.)

For example: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/edgy/+source/linuxsampler/+bug/84451

linuxsampler is "not allowed" by Ubuntu or Debian, even though it qualifies for the universe repos for Ubuntu.

"LinuxSampler - free, open source pure software audio sampler with professional grade features."

http://www.linuxsampler.org/

You are wrong. No where does it say in that bug report that Linuxsample is "not allowed" in Debian. It is simply no longer maintained in Debian (the maintainter quit) You are perfectly welcome to take on the job.

In Debian, it would go into "non-free". In Ubuntu, it would go into multiverse, not Universe, since it is not GPL-compliant. The only condition to being included in multiverse is that the software is redistributable. Ubuntu offers lots of non-GPLed software in the multiverse repo. Please get your facts straight.

I am repeating myself, but OPERA IS NOT REDISTRIBUTABLE. READ ITS LICENSE.

It's not that Ubuntu does not want it - it's not available! The only people that are allowed to distribute Opera are Opera software ASA and affilates. I am sure that any distro that distributes Opera is affiliated (in other words, paid for the privilege).

stmiller

August 25th, 2007, 04:06 AM

You are wrong. No where does it say in that bug report that Linuxsample is "not allowed" in Debian. It is simply no longer maintained in Debian (the maintainter quit) You are perfectly welcome to take on the job.

In Debian, it would go into "non-free". In Ubuntu, it would go into multiverse, not Universe, since it is not GPL-compliant. The only condition to being included in multiverse is that the software is redistributable. Ubuntu offers lots of non-GPLed software in the multiverse repo. Please get your facts straight.

I am repeating myself, but OPERA IS NOT REDISTRIBUTABLE. READ ITS LICENSE.

It's not that Ubuntu does not want it - it's not available! The only people that are allowed to distribute Opera are Opera software ASA and affilates. I am sure that any distro that distributes Opera is affiliated (in other words, paid for the privilege).

Linuxsampler was removed from Debian b/c of the license, not b/c there is no current maintainer. It could go into non-free, but you can read the comments about that and why they decided no, about seven messages down:

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=328121

And I should have been more specific, as that Debian and Ubuntu don't allow [edit: non-free!] software in the standard / official / main repos. Yes we all know we can download gstreamer codecs, and other non-GPL packages etc. with the other repos enabled. I should have been more specific in my initial post.

And as far as opera not being able to be distributed, it is available in Gentoo via 'emerge opera' , as well as in Mandriva repos, Suse repos, and perhaps others.

ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/10.2/rpm/i586

ftp://ftp.planetmirror.com/pub/plf/mandrake/2007.1/non-free/release/binary/i586

Hex_Mandos

August 25th, 2007, 04:10 AM

When you people say "non GPL", are you sure you don't mean "non free (as in speech)" or "closed source"? Because I'm pretty sure stuff like Perl, x.org, Python, PHP, Apache, Firefox and other non-GPL stuff is in both Debian and Universe.

August 25th, 2007, 06:40 PM

linuxsampler is "not allowed" by Ubuntu or Debian, even though it qualifies for the universe repos for Ubuntu.

"LinuxSampler - free, open source pure software audio sampler with professional grade features."

http://www.linuxsampler.org/

Linuxsampler was removed from Debian b/c of the license, not b/c there is no current maintainer. It could go into non-free, but you can read the comments about that and why they decided no, about seven messages down:

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=328121

The quote is:
No, this is really an additional restriction over the GPL, thus
rendering the software undistributable for everyone but the
original author.

But that means that it's not because of Debian that it is not in the repos, but because of the non-redistributable characteristics of the license. It does not qualify for the Universe repository in Ubuntu either. I think it could go into multiverse, though, if it had a maintainer. I know there is non-commercial-licensed software in multiverse.

And I should have been more specific, as that Debian and Ubuntu don't allow [edit: non-free!] software in the standard / official / main repos. Yes we all know we can download gstreamer codecs, and other non-GPL packages etc. with the other repos enabled. I should have been more specific in my initial post.

And as far as opera not being able to be distributed, it is available in Gentoo via 'emerge opera' , as well as in Mandriva repos, Suse repos, and perhaps others.

ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/10.2/rpm/i586

ftp://ftp.planetmirror.com/pub/plf/mandrake/2007.1/non-free/release/binary/i586

This is not about putting Opera in one repo or another. You are not allowed to redistribute it. Period.

I am repeating myself:

Any distro that distributes Opera must get permission (or pay for it). It's not that Ubuntu does not want it - it's not available! The only people that are allowed to distribute Opera are Opera software ASA and affilates.

stmiller

August 25th, 2007, 06:54 PM

The quote is:
No, this is really an additional restriction over the GPL, thus
rendering the software undistributable [SIC] for everyone but the
original author.

But that means that it's not because of Debian that it is not in the repos, but because of the non-redistributable characteristics of the license.

Yes. :) That is what I was saying in the first place. So you take back your original statement that it is not in Debian simply because there is no maintainer. [Or did you mean to say Ubuntu?]

This is not about putting Opera in one repo or another. You are not allowed to redistribute it. Period.

I am repeating myself:

Any distro that distributes Opera must get permission (or pay for it).

Define 'redistribute,' as we all can see Opera is clearly in those repos. ?
I'm also pretty sure OpenSuse, Gentoo, and others are not paying Opera to have it in their repos. You are right- they probably just ask and I'm sure the Opera company is delighted that they want to include it.

This is probably a question for the opera.com forum staff to clear up for us...

RAV TUX

August 25th, 2007, 07:50 PM

That was the point I was trying to make, mate ;) (I'm an Opera fanboy, yep)

Thanks for clearing that up, Opera is a great browser, so is Firefox. I use them both equally.

Also for reference, I have signed the Opera Distribution agreement, and in the agreement it specifically states that the Opera Browser can be distributed via CD, DVD, or USB Stick. While the agreement it self is copy righted , I did not copy and paste it here, but anybody can view it....via this link, after registering and signing up to distribute Opera:
I want to distribute Opera (http://www.opera.com/distribute/)

After you have signed the agreement you will be given this statement:

Distribute Opera
Welcome to the Opera Distribution System

Distribute multiple copies of Opera to your school, university, company, organization, or on a CD, USB stick etc.