Got a tip for us? Share it...

Opera Mini Not Rejected? [Updated]

In a profile this past week of Opera Software, the New York Times had indicated that Opera's Mini Browser had been rejected from the App Store based on anti-competitive grounds. Apple has rejected other applications claiming the submitted application's feature set mirrors one of Apple's too closely; a practice which has drawn heavy criticism.

This particular case, however, may not be entirely accurate according to further research by John Gruber.

My understanding, based on information from informed sources who do not wish to be identified because they were not authorized by their employers, is that Opera has developed an iPhone version of Opera Mini - but they haven't even submitted it to Apple, let alone had it be rejected.


Gruber had previously believed that the browser had been rejected due to a built-in JavaScript interpreter, however he clarifies that this was incorrect. In fact, Opera Mini does not contain such interpretive code. As explained by Gruber:

In a nut, it works like this: You request a URL in Opera Mini. Opera Mini makes the request to a proxy server run by Opera. Opera's proxy server connects to the web server hosting the requested URL, and renders the page into an image. This image is then transmitted (in a proprietary format called OBML - Opera Binary Markup Language) to the Opera Mini client. Opera Mini displays the rendered image on screen. This may sound convoluted, but apparently the result is very effective - its faster to transmit, because only OBML (a compressed binary format) is transmitted to the mobile device over the phone network, and far faster to render on slow mobile processors.


However the current version of Opera's Mini browser for other platforms is coded using Java (and BREW) which is not supported on the iPhone and is against the terms of the SDK. In order for Opera Mini to be made officially available, the program would have to be ported to C/Objective-C.

Update: Upon further investigation, the differences between the New York Times and John Gruber's accountings may be based in semantics rather than substance.

An Opera employee blog seems to indicate that Apple is indeed using anti-competitive reasoning for keeping the Opera Mini browser off the iPhone. However, neither the employee's blog entry nor the New York Times article indicate that the browser was officially submitted to the App Store and rejected, the point to which Gruber took issue. It remains possible that Apple and Opera have been communicating via channels outside of the App Store submission process.

Top Rated Comments

(View all)

43 months ago
I think this was commented on by a few in the first forum. Regardless, it is nice to see clarification posted up on the subject.


Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
43 months ago
Very interesting if this is true....
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
43 months ago
Not to be cynical, but it still doesn't mean that it is likely that Apple would accept it if and when it is submitted. But we'll have to see what ends up happening.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
43 months ago
well see how this all turns out soon hopefully
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
43 months ago
So where do those bloggers, posters and news outfits that posted kneejerk opinions based on no facts on the matter apologize?

I won't hold my breath for any retractions.
:rolleyes:
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
43 months ago
So every website shows up as an image? How would you click links/watch movies...? Or do they just use the term "image" to mean a watered down HTML (OBML) page?
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
43 months ago
umm, does anyone actually care about a third party browser if it can't do flash or java?
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
43 months ago

So where do those bloggers, posters and news outfits that posted kneejerk opinions based on no facts on the matter apologize?

I won't hold my breath for any retractions.
:rolleyes:


Right now we have a case of he says she says (well, more like he says he says). I tend to think Gruber is on the right track, but I wouldn't be demanding retractions or clarifications yet from NYT.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
43 months ago

umm, does anyone actually care about a third party browser if it can't do flash or java?


Does anyone care about a third-party browser in general? I wouldn't want one.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
43 months ago
1. daringfireball.net is more often than not an apology site for Apple. Anonymous "sources" quoted there, assuming they exist, are likely to have their story spun...

2. ...for example, maybe it was a port of Opera Mobile, rather than a complete rewrite of Opera Mini?
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives

[ Read All Comments ]