why did opera browser change like this?
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by Raven:
If they did it to increase market share, they're clearly failing:
See browser statistics by version: Opera 12.1x is holding its ground with only about 1/5th of users having switched to the Chromium-based versions.
The same is corroborated by Sitepoint's Craig Buckler's analysis of StatCounter numbers:
The Blink editions of Opera (version 15+) account for 0.2% of the market — or 18% of the browser’s user-base. Opera users normally upgrade quickly so it seems not everyone is convinced by the new version.
If we are to take the company's current tagline "we are concentrating on our strengths" literally, then this must indicate that after a feeble attempt at a Chrome clone they will dump desktop browser for good, because this is evidently not their strength. They may keep it only as a mirror and testbox for the mobile browser.
-
frenzie last edited by
Originally posted by ersi:
If we are to take the company's current tagline "we are concentrating on our strengths" literally, then this must indicate that after a feeble attempt at a Chrome clone they will dump desktop browser for good, because this is evidently not their strength. They may keep it only as a mirror and testbox for the mobile browser.
But I literally can't use the mobile browser. :right:
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by Frenzie:
Originally posted by ersi:
If we are to take the company's current tagline "we are concentrating on our strengths" literally, then this must indicate that after a feeble attempt at a Chrome clone they will dump desktop browser for good, because this is evidently not their strength. They may keep it only as a mirror and testbox for the mobile browser.
But I literally can't use the mobile browser. :right:
Looks like Opera 12 literally can't follow those disqus links. However, I think I found your comment.
Space is a grave issue, yes, on top of the hardware requirements.
How about the Classic Mobile version?
-
artmil last edited by
Originally posted by ersi:
Looks like Opera 12 literally can't follow those disqus links.
Jumps to and highlights those links just fine here -O12.16
//edit
Originally posted by ersi:
If we are to take the company's current tagline "we are concentrating on our strengths" literally, then this must indicate that after a feeble attempt at a Chrome clone they will dump desktop browser for good
Looking at what they are doing now, selling fastmail, closing my opera i would say that that's pretty plausible.
For now the desktop browser is one of the main sources of income. But if it will continue the way it is now...
Or as von Tetzchner said they'll focus on the advertising business. -
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by artmil:
Originally posted by ersi:
Looks like Opera 12 literally can't follow those disqus links.
Jumps to and highlights those links just fine here -O12.16
Possibly my urlfilter.ini is too strict then. The new comments section is misformatted otherwise too. But I will leave it so.
-
frenzie last edited by
Originally posted by ersi:
Looks like Opera 12 literally can't follow those disqus links. However, I think I found your comment.
Works for me, after whitelisting a bunch of Disqus scripts.
Originally posted by ersi:
How about the Classic Mobile version?
That one works as flawlessly as ever, of course.
-
kentonagbone last edited by
Originally posted by ersi:
Originally posted by Raven:
If they did it to increase market share, they're clearly failing:
See browser statistics by version: Opera 12.1x is holding its ground with only about 1/5th of users having switched to the Chromium-based versions.
The same is corroborated by Sitepoint's Craig Buckler's analysis of StatCounter numbers:
The Blink editions of Opera (version 15+) account for 0.2% of the market — or 18% of the browser’s user-base. Opera users normally upgrade quickly so it seems not everyone is convinced by the new version.
If we are to take the company's current tagline "we are concentrating on our strengths" literally, then this must indicate that after a feeble attempt at a Chrome clone they will dump desktop browser for good, because this is evidently not their strength. They may keep it only as a mirror and testbox for the mobile browser.
I was waiting for someone to link some numbers! I was curious if this Blink gambit and releasing very early/first was paying off. I am kind of disappointed that it didn't (0.2% ?!) but not terribly surprised. Opera 17 is the best Chrome browser so far, and I like it for that, but it still pales in comparison to 12.16. So now I often have both versions of Opera running these days.
I really hope that the dev team continues to work hard on Opera Blink to get some of the cool features that Presto had. But after seeing these numbers I am even more wary than before.
-
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by Raven:
If they did it to increase market share, they're clearly failing:
See browser statistics by version: Opera 12.1x is holding its ground with only about 1/5th of users having switched to the Chromium-based versions.
The same is corroborated by Sitepoint's Craig Buckler's analysis of StatCounter numbers:
The Blink editions of Opera (version 15+) account for 0.2% of the market — or 18% of the browser’s user-base. Opera users normally upgrade quickly so it seems not everyone is convinced by the new version.
Sorry, but how can you be so dumb?
How do you want to compare the adoption of a browser version delivered via auto-update and one which there's no notice it's available?Check this for real numbers:
http://www.zdnet.com/time-to-move-on-final-patch-for-opera-12-due-by-mid-2014-7000023427/About half of the Opera desktop users are on 15+ by now.
(Note: there's no way to know how many are upgrading from a prior version and how many are new users.) -
leocg Moderator Volunteer last edited by
Originally posted by rafaelluik:
How do you want to compare the adoption of a browser version delivered via auto-update and one which there's no notice it's available?
Also, there are (or there were at least) many sites that identifies Opera 15+ as Chrome so the numbers may not be so correct.
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by rafaelluik:
Check this for real numbers:http://www.zdnet.com/time-to-move-on-final-patch-for-opera-12-due-by-mid-2014-7000023427/
Hahahaha! Oh my, Rafael! You couldn't have picked a worse link than this particular ZDNet article to support your premise!
Liam Tung actually wrote in that post that Opera 12.16 HAD NOT BEEN RELEASED! (The post was made on November 20, 2013)
Yes...that was me that pointed that inaccuracy out...wizard57m-cnet...the post you flagged as spam! Yeah, I know, you're
wondering how in the world do I know that? Hehehe...figure it out on your own.Now, to gain a bit of perspective, perhaps a quote from that particular blog post is in order, caution...it demonstrates that Opera's
user base is indeed shrinking, especially on the "desktop"...
quote
"Over the past year, Opera's desktop users have fallen from 55 million to 51 million, meaning it still has around 25 million users that it risks losing if they don't like the change.But perhaps more importantly for the company, the value of those users in revenue terms has fallen even faster. Opera's desktop revenues in the third quarter of this year, driven by search dollars from Google under a two-year search deal set to expire in August 2014, were just $13.8m.
That was down 25 percent on the $18m in desktop revenues it earned a year ago — when it was Opera's largest source of income. Now desktop is a distant third to mobile advertising and carrier dollars, which brought in $30m and $17m respectively that quarter."
End quote.Now, Rafael, please explain what "auto-update" and "no notice available" have to do with any of the statistics mentioned in the ZDNet article?
Wizard57M
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by Raven:
If they did it to increase market share, they're clearly failing:
See browser statistics by version: Opera 12.1x is holding its ground with only about 1/5th of users having switched to the Chromium-based versions.
The same is corroborated by Sitepoint's Craig Buckler's analysis of StatCounter numbers:
The Blink editions of Opera (version 15+) account for 0.2% of the market — or 18% of the browser’s user-base. Opera users normally upgrade quickly so it seems not everyone is convinced by the new version.
The number you posted above may be correct. There are several reliable sources show the same number that means it's believable:
http://clicky.com/marketshare/global/web-browsers/opera/
Marketshare is calculated from nearly 500 million daily page views across the 500,000+ web sites that use Clicky Web Analytics
After Opera 18 released, the percentage number of O17 drop from about 0.2% to 0, and O18 rose about the same amount.
29/Nov/2013:
O18: 0.2%
O12.1: 0.42%
O11.1: 0.16%
Opera: 1.4%30/Nov/2013:
O18: 0.26%
O12.1: 0.54%
O11.1: 0.24%
Opera: 1.81%...about 14% users base.
======================
to Wizard57M:
I find the funny thing on this ZDNet advertisement is that, the statistic 50% people move to Chr---what ever is base on this:
Kolondra thinks the numbers so far suggest they might stick around. "We're getting close to we will have 50 percent of people already on the new browser. We're really excited about that. Even without forcing uptake, we see uptake is quite encouraging."
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by rafaelluik:
Check this for real numbers:
http://www.zdnet.com/time-to-move-on-final-patch-for-opera-12-due-by-mid-2014-7000023427/About half of the Opera desktop users are on 15+ by now.
That's great. And according to reliable sources 90% of users have stopped using bookmarks.
-
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by Wizard57M:
Now, to gain a bit of perspective, perhaps a quote from that particular blog post is in order, caution...it demonstrates that Opera's
user base is indeed shrinking, especially on the "desktop"...
quote
"Over the past year, Opera's desktop users have fallen from 55 million to 51 million, meaning it still has around 25 million users that it risks losing if they don't like the change.Why do you readily ignore Opera went from 60 million users (1Q 2012) to 52 million (2Q 2013) when only Opera 11.x and 12.x were released?
And again you ignore there's no notification about the new versions, which means users may still be leaving Opera altogether (because of 11.x/12.x) without even knowing Opera 15+ is available.Originally posted by Wizard57M:
inaccuracy
It doesn't matter what's said about 12.16 release date. Kolondra is directly quoted. I don't believe the article author injected something there inside the quote.
Originally posted by Krake:
according to reliable sources 90% of users have stopped using bookmarks.
??? You fail miserably at making a joke. I'd say 90% of Opera users indeed don't need bookmarks.
Originally posted by cyxovi:
The number you posted above may be correct. There are several reliable sources show the same number that means it's believable:
And how do you know this one is indeed reliable so you can count them among these "several reliable sources"? There's no way to know their method is infallible.
You need to read the posts from Haavard's blog regarding market share so you'll understand how these sources (no matter how big and well known) were never reliable compared to the official declarations of number of users the companies make.
http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/2008/12/12/net-applications-again-opera-vs-chrome-actual-numbers-vs-claimed-market-sha
http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/2009/11/03/browser-stats
http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/2010/01/02/odd-browser-statsAs a matter of curiosity I checked StatCounter last 7 days bar spreadsheet data, it gives Opera 10~12.1x about 0.64% and Opera 15+ about 0.45% of the total market.
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by cyxovi:
The number you posted above may be correct. There are several reliable sources show the same number that means it's believable:
Sorry everybody, my bad.
The number you (Raven) posted above may be correct. There are several independent sources show the same number that means it's reliable.
-
Deleted User last edited by
Originally posted by rafaelluik:
Originally posted by Krake:
according to reliable sources 90% of users have stopped using bookmarks.
??? You fail miserably at making a joke. I'd say 90% of Opera users indeed don't need bookmarks.
I'd go a step farther and say that 100% of browser users don't need bookmarks.
Everybody can store addresses with a text editor. -
A Former User last edited by
Originally posted by cyxovi:
Originally posted by cyxovi:
The number you posted above may be correct. There are several reliable sources show the same number that means it's believable:
Sorry everybody, my bad.
The number you (Raven) posted above may be correct. There are several independent sources show the same number that means it's reliable.
No difference, you're still unable to prove their methodology is effective to reflect reality.
-
blackbird71 last edited byOriginally posted by rafaelluik:
... Why do you readily ignore Opera went from 60 million users (1Q 2012) to 52 million (2Q 2013) when only Opera 11.x and 12.x were released? And again you ignore there's no notification about the new versions, which means users may still be leaving Opera altogether (because of 11.x/12.x) without even knowing Opera 15+ is available. ...
So are you suggesting that users were/are leaving Opera 11.x/12.x simply out of boredom? Or, if it's because old Opera no longer works well for their favorite sites, rather than check into why or how to fix it (at either Opera's sites or out on the web, in which case they'd find out Opera 15+ exists), they instead seek out another browser brand, install it, migrate their personal data to it, and switch over to using it as primary? To me, that all seems far more unlikely than the mere possibility that they just might not like what they currently experience with any of Opera's offerings, 12x or 15+, as they now stand... Old Opera because of site-compatibility issues, and New Opera because of its spartan feature set and odd "feel" compared with Old Opera and other browsers.
-
tradeofjane last edited by
Originally posted by leushino:
Perhaps von Tetzchner was simply out of step with the times. It may be that his vision is partly what kept Opera as a browser suite that was not even on the radar of most users worldwide and perennially at 3% or lower. Who can really say? But he's gone and while he's entitled to his opinions, that's all they are. Furthermore, I don't agree that "Opera would have had more users if the company had continued to invest in its products" (i.e. Presto). The facts do not support that view. In fact, they suggest just the opposite.
If Opera had continued to invest in its products they'd have a better browser. Market share doesn't = better. Just look at Internet Explorer. And during Jon Stephenson von Tetzchner's time as CEO, Opera became the only commercial web browser available for the Nintendo DS, DSi and Wii gaming systems and was winning numerous awards.
Originally posted by leushino:
Yes, I'm aware of all of this. My previous statement was made with tongue in cheek regarding another's claim that Opera's 18 years of 3% was the result of a lack of marketing. Opera never had any "fame" as you put it. If that were so, word of mouth on the internet would have brought in droves of users over those 18 years. But it never happened because Opera's feature set, as you put it, was seen as too geeky, too convoluted, too bloated out of the box to be worthwhile. And saddled as it was with an email client did not help matters either.
IE and Safari are the “default” browsers on their respective operating systems. Google’s brand positioning is simplicity and speed. Firefox is that it's the most customizable browser and has strong support from the open-source community. Opera is alone. If they started offering Opera as the perfect Facebook browser for example they would quickly move up.
-
j7nj7n last edited by
The new Opium is as close as it gets to a "Facebook browser" because it relies on all functionality being implemented on the page itself rather than around the browser.
They could offer it as a "secure" broser that gives its operator control over what is normally not controllable, such as advertisements that get loaded. Of course ad blocker is not anything unique anymore, and perhaps they could add more options for extracting useful content out of the web, like selective flash downloading. However, that could risk them being banned from some webites though and thus decrease the usage share.
-
blackbird71 last edited by
Originally posted by j7nj7n:
... perhaps they could add more options for extracting useful content out of the web, like selective flash downloading. However, that could risk them being banned from some websites though and thus decrease the usage share.
Which, in extremis, raises a generic question about what might actually shape any browser's design going forward. If sites en-masse sniff a browser (via UA, JavaScript, etc) to determine whether it's on their internal list of "unfavorites" because of the privacy or ad-blocking features a browser model is designed to contain and if they block users with such a listed browser, then the Internet as we know it will have changed considerably for the worse. The site providers would then be calling all the shots about content, who views what, and how. Browsers, to be successful at the most popular sites, would have to be designed for the lowest common denominator of what the site operators demand... which easily could eventually mean full ad display, prohibition of browser privacy settings, acceptance of tracking cookies, and so on - else the site wouldn't work with browsers that allow a user to guard against such things. All in all, a rather chilling prospect...
