
Facebook To Buy Opera? Maybe. - ssclafani
http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/05/25/facebook-to-acquire-browser-maker-opera-maybe-heres-what-we-know/
======
damoncali
Can you imagine the privacy issues of Facebook owning a browser? I'd be afraid
to install the damn thing.

Edit: For those who point out Google, I would argue that Google has
demonstrated only a desire to show me ads (which I actually like). Facebook
has demonstrated a desire to show everyone everything.

~~~
forgotusername
After all, none of the other data-hungry vendors address bars behave exactly
like a keylogger ( _cough_ Chrome)

~~~
esrauch
The omnibox gets autocomplete recommendations which is a very useful feature,
how do you expect they could get autocomplete recommendations without sending
the prefix to the server? You can also easily disable the feature in settings,
it's even right on the front of settings not buried.

Edit: Also if you change your default search engine to Bing, then Chrome is
behaving as a keylogger for Microsoft by your definition.

~~~
gcp
The feature as written indeed can't work without sending every keystroke. That
doesn't mean it's any less intrusive. I'd even dare say it was probably not
accidentally designed that way.

~~~
mitjak
Still, it's a feature you can disable. I'd love to be able to disable
everything the Like buttons of the world do to unsuspecting visitors, but how?

~~~
gcp
Ghostery.

------
markessien
It would be strategically important to their growth. Opera Mini is the #1
browser in many developing countries, particularly in Africa and South East
Asia. These are the regions that are also showing the most growth (and have
the most potential) of new people coming online. If facebook dominates both
the mobile browser and the top site in all of these countries, then for newly
arriving users, facebook will be the internet. It will be their first
experience, and it's where they will feel most comfortable (like AOL was back
in the day).

Facebook understands the importance of mobile. If you view fb timeline on your
phone, it looks great. Facebook have made the transition to the mobile web
already - because mobile _will_ be the dominant entertainment consuming screen
in the future.

~~~
ajross
Surely Opera has that position because those markets are dominated by the
cheaper "feature phones" that don't run iOS or Android. That's not a tenable
market share: as real platforms push down into the commidity price range, so
will Mobile Safari and Chrome for Android. Is Opera actually winning against
"real" browsers anywhere it's competing in a browser-choice-based environment?

~~~
robin_reala
You forget that Mini is a proxy browser that does a large amount of data
compression. When your mobile network is constricted and data locally
expensive then you want to use the minimum possible.

~~~
ajross
Of course. But you're not controlling your variables. The developing markets
are "constricted" in precisely the same way that the first world markets were
about 6-9 years ago. So they need different hardware and software.

Opera was doing very well in the first world markets 6-9 years ago, for
exactly that reason. They lost the market almost entirely. So, why would the
developing world be any different?

~~~
roc
The argument was the browser as gateway to Facebook. So it wouldn't matter if
the browser was ultimately doomed. As long as those users became Facebook
users and stuck with Facebook even after they upgraded to newer
phones/browsers.

AOL, Compuserve, et al hung in for a very long time, even after people
begrudgingly ditched their dialup for broadband, solely because they were so
comfortable with AOL from that first experience.

Experience suggests it could very well work.

I think the bigger question is whether it would be cost-effective. i.e. to
what degree would that be effective in capturing social network market share
in those regions, is it the most cost-effective way to capture that share,
would it be enough to simply pay Opera to 'partner' with Facebook, etc.

------
stfu
I have been an Opera user for many years and truly love this browser. Somehow
I can't see myself using a piece of software that is controlled by Facebook -
ever.

~~~
deno
The same could be said about Chrome. As long as there’s Operium to Google’s
Chromium, I see absolutely no problem.

~~~
stfu
Therefore they would have to go open source first. I have my doubts that
Facebook would pay top dollar just to open source the software. On the other
hand that might be a move to put the current user base in a merciful mood, as
the userbase is probably the least likely aspect they are interested in for
that takeover.

~~~
deno
> I have my doubts that Facebook would pay top dollar just to open source the
> software.

They wouldn’t buy it just to open source it. Facebook will buy Opera for its
own strategic reasons, and they will open source it only because it’s the
optimal model for them to develop this kind of project.

They already open source bunch of stuff. They have the culture and the know-
how.

~~~
SkyMarshal
_> and they will open source it only because it’s the optimal model for them
to develop this kind of project._

Why would that be? Opera already has a very optimal closed source development
model.

~~~
deno
Opera Software ASA’s product is Opera Web Browser. Facebook wouldn’t buy Opera
to continue making money on licensing. And we know that Facebook uses Open
Source model for developing things they don’t profit directly from[1]. It also
makes everyone more easy about the privacy issues etc. The question really is,
why wouldn’t they open source it? The have plenty to benefit from and nothing
to lose.

[1] <https://developers.facebook.com/opensource/>

~~~
gcp
_Facebook wouldn’t buy Opera to continue making money on licensing._

Opera makes quite some money on advertising, by channeling traffic into
Google.

------
naner
Opera Software also owns Fastmail.fm and AdMarvel. It would be kind of sad to
see Fastmail go to Facebook.

Though I doubt there's much truth to this rumor.

~~~
wib
No way I'd renew my paid Fastmail.fm account if Facebook buys the company.

~~~
Auguste
Agreed. If Facebook acquires Opera, I'm out of there. I'm quite fond of
Fastmail, so I'm really hoping this is just a rumour.

------
amitamb
I bet something similar is going to happen sooner than later.

But what is stopping Facebook from forking Chromium(/Webkit) for their own
use? Or for that matter even Mozilla might be open for partnership.

~~~
deno
With Chrome Google added some real value to Webkit (V8, sandboxing, etc.), and
in the process they created a unique product.

Just forking Chromium will make it look like Oracle’s Unbreakable Enterprise
Linux, i.e. a cheap knockoff of Redhat.

If Facebook wants to enter the game they need something more. At that point
doing new frontend for Webkit from scratch is probably not going to be any
cheaper than buying Opera. And they’d need to hire people to do that, which
buying Opera would also solve.

~~~
krrrh
> At that point doing new frontend for Webkit from scratch is probably not
> going to be any cheaper than buying Opera

The article notes that Opera's current estimated market cap is $670M, which is
a lot of money for a browser frontend. I think it's more likely that they want
to lock-in the feature phone user base.

~~~
Aqwis
It's not just a browser front-end, it's also a browser engine. If they
acquired Opera and pushed it to increase its market share Facebook could gain
a lot of influence on HTML and the adoption of web technologies.

~~~
m_for_monkey
And even more: a first-class, very innovative developer team. How many now
common browser features originate from Opera?

~~~
jarek
For those not familiar: tabbed browsing (complete with closed page history and
undo), whole page zoom, a search engine search bar (and then address bar
searching), a download manager, middle click to open in new tab, speed
dial/"top sites" for quick navigation in new tabs, and restoring open
pages/tabs after the browser has closed or crashed are some of the features
"Opera had first."

~~~
cwzwarich
NetCaptor had tabs before Opera, and that probably wasn't the first browser to
have tabs either.

------
deno
Called it first! Or whatever… :)
<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4021065>

------
Flow
I wonder when we instead of having incognito modes have separate sandboxes per
domain. Say one domain that only have data from facebook.com and is only
reachable if you are actually visiting facebook.com.

Yes, this will make the web less hyper, but right now some behaviors is out of
control for the user.

~~~
kijin
Separate sandboxes per domain sounds a bit extreme. A lot of websites are made
up of content from different domains, like images pulled from CDNs.
Whitelisting each of them would be an even bigger headache than managing
NoScript.

What I'd like to see in the short term is per-tab isolation. If I'm logged
into Google/Facebook/etc in one tab and browse other sites in another tab, I
want to have the ability to prevent the second tab from knowing which user I'm
logged into in the first tab. This could also solve a lot of CSRF problems.

Unfortunately, Firefox -- the only browser that is likely to support such
behavior either as a built-in feature or as an add-on -- doesn't even run tabs
in separate processes. One tab freezes, the whole browser freezes. Urgh.

------
robin_reala
Makes sense. Facebook’s next expansion is going to be developing markets.
These are heavily invested in mobile internet, and the way you access the
internet on low-end mobiles is Opera Mini. They have a very large group of
potential customers and the wherewithal to buy access to them.

------
mike-cardwell
Great. That's exactly what the World needs. Another browser controlled by an
Advertising company.

------
smashing
This reminds me of when Palm bought Be Inc. Everyone thought Palm would start
using BeOS instead of Palm OS 5, but really Palm just wanted the patents. So
my guess here is, if Facebook really does make a purchase, it will to acquire
intellectual property as either patents or evidence of "prior art".

~~~
deno
Facebook doesn’t have a browser already. They don’t need patents. Your analogy
works if you replace Facebook with Google.

~~~
smashing
I think it is becoming increasing clear, especially with the Yahoo patent
suit, that Facebook desperately needs a patent portfolio. Additionally, what
makes you so certain Facebook doesn't needs patents? Please, explain.

~~~
deno
If they need a patent portfolio is beside the point. They don’t have a browser
and are shopping for one, any patents they acquire would only be a bonus at
that time.

~~~
smashing
Why does Facebook need a browser? This is a space I would honestly never
consider them "innovating" in.

------
rjsamson
Here's the source link for those of you not wantint to give TNW pageviews:
[http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/45795/facebook-browser-
opera...](http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/45795/facebook-browser-opera-
software-buyout)

~~~
robinwauters
We have our own sources on top of what Pocket-lint reports, for what it's
worth.

------
flexeble
Let’s face® it the company behind Opera could use the money that this
purported acquisition would bring. Facebook on the other hand could use Opera
to build a better user experience on the holy grail of social media engament,
mobile!

------
harrylove
Facebook: The Opera. Sounds about right. And then create an off-Broadway play
and they've hit the trifecta.

Do you know what's coooooooooooool? Coo-hoo-hoo, hoo-hoo-hoo, hoo-hoo-
hooooooollll-ah?

------
metatronscube
The browser wars appear to be heating up again. Its happened before and will
no doubt happen again. I think this will be a bad thing because I could see
each browser becoming a weapon to control privacy and the Internet in the way
they see fit.

Imagine installing a browser that forces you to have a facebook account! and
facebook logins for websites all over the place. yikes.

------
WiseWeasel
As a web developer, it's been great not having to worry about
supporting/testing with Opera's rendering engine, (or simply another rendering
engine, nothing against Opera in particular) thanks to its low market share. I
hope this doesn't mean I have to start testing with yet another browser. Can't
FB use Webkit like everyone else?

~~~
Zirro
Having around three-four rendering engines on the market is a good thing, they
each separately fuel development of new standards and other projects. We don't
want Webkit to become the new IE6.

~~~
mibbitier
Webkit is open, and actively developed.

IE6 was closed, and laid stagnant for years.

~~~
gcp
Webkit by itself can't fuel the development of new standards. You need several
competing parties for that.

------
eblackburn
\- Access mandated via FB connect \- Mini (proxy) allow integration between
opt in site on FB platform via http headers? \- Proxy sniffs traffic and gets
a hi-fi profile of users. Super targeted advertising, avoiding cookies. \-
Emerging markets; FB account is used to transfer money, for those without bank
accounts.

------
nextparadigms
Facebook will ruin Opera if they buy it.

------
cpeterso
I'm surprised Facebook has not acquired RockMelt. Like Instagram, Marc
Andreessen is an investor in both companies. From Day 1, RockMelt seemed like
its business plan was "Get acquired by Facebook." Presumably Facebook is more
interested in Opera's mobile browsers and users.

~~~
Achshar
Maybe because opera's market share and reputation is alot better than
rocklmelt?

------
Rudism
I stopped using Facebook around a year ago due to the crazy privacy issues.
Just recently (as in days ago) I also switched from using Google Apps for my
email to FastMail.fm for the same reason.

If Facebook buys Opera (who own FastMail.fm), I might as well just quit the
Internet.

~~~
zobzu
What about lynx, links, w3m you insensitive clod?!

Or you know, just Firefox. Not cool enough for you? The above 3 are very
trendy.

~~~
marekmroz
I think you missed the OP's point. He was complaining about email
provider/service, and you gave web browser alternatives...

------
dm8
I like Opera. It needs some serious design love. It would be great if FB's
all-star design team do overhaul of design if they buy Opera

------
melvinmt
> Its market cap currently hovers around $670 million

Ah, should be a piece of cake right? Mark simply needs to bid $1 bn overnight.

------
g8oz
It would be a great ending for a brave little company. For the company, not
its users.

------
rch
Though obviously impossible, I'd prefer it if Opera were to purchase Yahoo.

------
zvrba
Noooo! But if it happens, I'll have an excuse for trying IE once more.

~~~
tfb
Why not Chrome, Safari, or Firefox?

~~~
zvrba
Firefox = bloat and I don't like it.

Safari is affiliated with Apple and I won't touch products of a company whose
products and way of running business are antithesis to openness, freedom and
hacker culture.

Chrome.. no special reason. I don't particularly like it, nothing I could
point the finger at, but.. blah. Is there a way of disabling plugins in
Chrome, as in: a placeholder is displayed on the page and the plugin is
activated when I click the placeholder?

IE, on the other hand, has "suggested sites" feature which I'd like to test
more. Maybe it helps me with discovering some new content on the net.

~~~
ivanbernat
It's not bloat that moved me away from FF, it's their lack of HTML5 video
support on Mac, which makes it completely utterly useless.

~~~
gcp
To this I can only say "Huh"?

Or do you mean they don't bundle patented codecs like H264? They support HTML5
video just fine AFAIK.

------
mossplix
how hard would it be to build their own on top of webkit?

------
drivebyacct2
Are headlines that ask _and answer_ questions dumb? Yes.

------
mathetic
One billion dollar? I don't think so.

~~~
chucknelson
I didn't see any purchase price mentioned, but would you be surprised? Billion
is the new Million!

------
mtkd
Impatient acquisitions when stressed to try and fix numbers/strategy can make
any issues 10x worse down the line.

Better to do nothing for 3 months. Take some time out of the office and do
some deep thinking.

