![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
I can't verify the information that "Opera's overall market share is about 11% on mobile devices" from the sources given. Remember that according to WP:NOR "anyone—without specialist knowledge—who reads the primary source should be able to verify that the Wikipedia passage agrees with the primary source. Any interpretation of primary source material requires another reliable source for that interpretation." Also, the references give usage share, although the article says market share. Are these copies of Opera that are installed but possibly not used? -- Schapel ( talk) 13:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
— Remember the dot ( talk) 17:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
I've removed the section "List of devices that ship with Opera". This is for two reasons. First, the Opera Powered products gallery, which was the main source for this list, is clearly incomplete, as it has no mention of cell phones or PDAs that come pre-installed with Opera Mobile (see [4] for an example). Secondly, it includes products such as the Nintendo DS and Wii, which do not come with Opera, but Opera may be bought for them. This throws into doubt whether or not any of the other products listed actually come with Opera, or whether Opera must be purchased separately.
For these reasons, I do not think that the current revision of "List of devices that ship with Opera" should be included in the article. If someone would like to improve it, making it more complete and backing it up with better citations, then we could put it back in.
For reference, here is the section that I removed:
Another option would be to boil this information down to one paragraph and add it to the "Market adoption" section (with better references, of course). — Remember the dot ( talk) 08:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Do the article need the second introduction paragraph "Development of the Opera suite began [...]" ? It belongs to the History section. -- Fenring ( talk) 12:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Can we add "page zooming", "mouse gestures" and "fit to width" (and explain it in "Usability and accessibility") to the enumeration at the beginning of the section ? These are very useful features. -- Fenring ( talk) 12:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
The lead states "Opera's overall security as measured by known, unpatched vulnerabilities compares favorably with that of other browsers." Opera does have fewer publicly known unpatched vulnerabilities as measured by Secunia. That is a concrete fact. Saying Opera's overall security compares favorable with that of other browsers is an interpretation of that concrete fact that amounts to original research. We need a reliable source for that interpretation. We should also be clear about the publicly known part, as there may be security vulnerabilities that are known but not publicly known, and the Secunia part, as other security sources such as SecurityFocus measure more unpatched vulnerabilities in Opera than in Firefox. Please stick to what the sources say. Misrepresenting what sources say looks to be the main problem with this article. -- Schapel 14:17, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
For the record, SecurityFocus reports 1 outstanding vulnerability for Opera 9.24, 1 outstanding vulnerability for Firefox 2.0.11, 11 for Safari 3.0.3, and 43 for Internet Explorer 7. But by all means, continue your discussion of how to best improve the article. Let's get this sorted out. — Remember the dot ( talk) 03:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Beginning with the "Opera Mini 4 final" version, the opera mini browser is using two new adware hooks: it adds undesired sites to your rss feeds and your bookmarks. No matter how many times you delete this spam, they will always appear again (restored by the server-side software). At this moment (December, 2007), the spamming ads that repetitively appear in my phone (connecting from Spain) are Terra.com, ELPAIS.com, Marca.com and two Opera self-advertisements (Opera Community and Opera Mini Blog). This takes more than 50% of the available screen space.
I think this new commercial behaviour should be cited in the "Other editions" > "Mobile phones" where it says "It is offered free of charge" instead of "It is distributed as adware" and where the article says "Opera is offered free of charge for personal computers and mobile phones" (first paragraph). 158.42.250.70 ( talk) 12:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Could someone please confirm that Presto is still being used in Adobe Creative Suite 3? Articles that need updating are Opera (web browser), Presto (layout engine), and Adobe Creative Suite. And please put your reference in those articles, thank you. Samsara noadmin ( talk) 12:17, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted this unsourced addition to the article twice:
The problem can't be that common since I can't find any site that talks about it. I checked and the English edition of Opera Mini does send "Accept-Language: en" (for English) when it requests a web page. Any Norwegian content must come from IP address sniffing to determine geographic location, which I will admit can result in ads targeted to Norwegians. However, if a web site disregards the Accept-Language header and instead decides to send a Norwegian-language page based on IP address sniffing, that is a bug in the web site, not a bug in Opera Mini.
Do you have any examples of sites that display in Norwegian instead of English when using Opera Mini? — Remember the dot ( talk) 00:36, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Please don't put weekly builds in the infobox. The weeklies are not preview software. They are pre-preview, and only available momentarily to enthusiasts from a blog. They disappear as soon as a new one appears. The preview versions, however, persist on the official web site, forever. :) -- Mareklug talk 22:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
mmh, but on the opera server i can find every weekly, so they don't disappear... mabdul 0=* 15:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree that historically, a feature of Opera has been high performance compared to other browsers. On the other hand, Safari is fast, and recent performance improvements to Firefox make it about as fast as or even faster than Opera. I'd like to see a source that states that Opera has "high performance" compared to Safari or Firefox to justify saying that high performance is a current feature of Opera. If Opera is simply faster than Internet Explorer, I think the statement should be clarified to state that instead. -- Schapel ( talk) 18:35, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
User:Nexia90210 added a market share table at the start, but I'm not sure the source is adequate. As mentioned in the reference, the source is Net Applications, "a marketing company which obtains its data from the Alexa Toolbar or related products". But how can you gather web browser statistics using client-side browser-dependant software? Opera never had an Alexa toolbar. I think that a better source would be the W3C browser statistics page (although that one probably also has a slight bias as web developers visit W3C websites more than casual users). -- Vladimir ( talk) 10:59, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The page you linked to is not the W3C browser statistics page. That website (w3cschools.com) is not run by the W3C. It's actually run by a team of programmers in Norway. Found this out from their about page: http://w3schools.com/about/about_refsnes.asp
And also, this page: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=0 seems like a good source for browser market share data. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.23.91.47 ( talk) 23:35, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Looks like there was also some stuff related to Secunia vulnerabilities copied over, but it doesn't seem to be doing anything. Wouldn't be bad for the article if it did :) -- Vladimir ( talk) 11:06, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
I can't verify the information that "Opera's overall market share is about 11% on mobile devices" from the sources given. Remember that according to WP:NOR "anyone—without specialist knowledge—who reads the primary source should be able to verify that the Wikipedia passage agrees with the primary source. Any interpretation of primary source material requires another reliable source for that interpretation." Also, the references give usage share, although the article says market share. Are these copies of Opera that are installed but possibly not used? -- Schapel ( talk) 13:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
— Remember the dot ( talk) 17:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
I've removed the section "List of devices that ship with Opera". This is for two reasons. First, the Opera Powered products gallery, which was the main source for this list, is clearly incomplete, as it has no mention of cell phones or PDAs that come pre-installed with Opera Mobile (see [4] for an example). Secondly, it includes products such as the Nintendo DS and Wii, which do not come with Opera, but Opera may be bought for them. This throws into doubt whether or not any of the other products listed actually come with Opera, or whether Opera must be purchased separately.
For these reasons, I do not think that the current revision of "List of devices that ship with Opera" should be included in the article. If someone would like to improve it, making it more complete and backing it up with better citations, then we could put it back in.
For reference, here is the section that I removed:
Another option would be to boil this information down to one paragraph and add it to the "Market adoption" section (with better references, of course). — Remember the dot ( talk) 08:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Do the article need the second introduction paragraph "Development of the Opera suite began [...]" ? It belongs to the History section. -- Fenring ( talk) 12:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Can we add "page zooming", "mouse gestures" and "fit to width" (and explain it in "Usability and accessibility") to the enumeration at the beginning of the section ? These are very useful features. -- Fenring ( talk) 12:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
The lead states "Opera's overall security as measured by known, unpatched vulnerabilities compares favorably with that of other browsers." Opera does have fewer publicly known unpatched vulnerabilities as measured by Secunia. That is a concrete fact. Saying Opera's overall security compares favorable with that of other browsers is an interpretation of that concrete fact that amounts to original research. We need a reliable source for that interpretation. We should also be clear about the publicly known part, as there may be security vulnerabilities that are known but not publicly known, and the Secunia part, as other security sources such as SecurityFocus measure more unpatched vulnerabilities in Opera than in Firefox. Please stick to what the sources say. Misrepresenting what sources say looks to be the main problem with this article. -- Schapel 14:17, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
For the record, SecurityFocus reports 1 outstanding vulnerability for Opera 9.24, 1 outstanding vulnerability for Firefox 2.0.11, 11 for Safari 3.0.3, and 43 for Internet Explorer 7. But by all means, continue your discussion of how to best improve the article. Let's get this sorted out. — Remember the dot ( talk) 03:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Beginning with the "Opera Mini 4 final" version, the opera mini browser is using two new adware hooks: it adds undesired sites to your rss feeds and your bookmarks. No matter how many times you delete this spam, they will always appear again (restored by the server-side software). At this moment (December, 2007), the spamming ads that repetitively appear in my phone (connecting from Spain) are Terra.com, ELPAIS.com, Marca.com and two Opera self-advertisements (Opera Community and Opera Mini Blog). This takes more than 50% of the available screen space.
I think this new commercial behaviour should be cited in the "Other editions" > "Mobile phones" where it says "It is offered free of charge" instead of "It is distributed as adware" and where the article says "Opera is offered free of charge for personal computers and mobile phones" (first paragraph). 158.42.250.70 ( talk) 12:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Could someone please confirm that Presto is still being used in Adobe Creative Suite 3? Articles that need updating are Opera (web browser), Presto (layout engine), and Adobe Creative Suite. And please put your reference in those articles, thank you. Samsara noadmin ( talk) 12:17, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted this unsourced addition to the article twice:
The problem can't be that common since I can't find any site that talks about it. I checked and the English edition of Opera Mini does send "Accept-Language: en" (for English) when it requests a web page. Any Norwegian content must come from IP address sniffing to determine geographic location, which I will admit can result in ads targeted to Norwegians. However, if a web site disregards the Accept-Language header and instead decides to send a Norwegian-language page based on IP address sniffing, that is a bug in the web site, not a bug in Opera Mini.
Do you have any examples of sites that display in Norwegian instead of English when using Opera Mini? — Remember the dot ( talk) 00:36, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Please don't put weekly builds in the infobox. The weeklies are not preview software. They are pre-preview, and only available momentarily to enthusiasts from a blog. They disappear as soon as a new one appears. The preview versions, however, persist on the official web site, forever. :) -- Mareklug talk 22:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
mmh, but on the opera server i can find every weekly, so they don't disappear... mabdul 0=* 15:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree that historically, a feature of Opera has been high performance compared to other browsers. On the other hand, Safari is fast, and recent performance improvements to Firefox make it about as fast as or even faster than Opera. I'd like to see a source that states that Opera has "high performance" compared to Safari or Firefox to justify saying that high performance is a current feature of Opera. If Opera is simply faster than Internet Explorer, I think the statement should be clarified to state that instead. -- Schapel ( talk) 18:35, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
User:Nexia90210 added a market share table at the start, but I'm not sure the source is adequate. As mentioned in the reference, the source is Net Applications, "a marketing company which obtains its data from the Alexa Toolbar or related products". But how can you gather web browser statistics using client-side browser-dependant software? Opera never had an Alexa toolbar. I think that a better source would be the W3C browser statistics page (although that one probably also has a slight bias as web developers visit W3C websites more than casual users). -- Vladimir ( talk) 10:59, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The page you linked to is not the W3C browser statistics page. That website (w3cschools.com) is not run by the W3C. It's actually run by a team of programmers in Norway. Found this out from their about page: http://w3schools.com/about/about_refsnes.asp
And also, this page: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=0 seems like a good source for browser market share data. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.23.91.47 ( talk) 23:35, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Looks like there was also some stuff related to Secunia vulnerabilities copied over, but it doesn't seem to be doing anything. Wouldn't be bad for the article if it did :) -- Vladimir ( talk) 11:06, 28 June 2008 (UTC)