Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Dvorak Says MS Should Buy Opera

Posted by CmdrTaco on Thu Dec 22, 2005 02:40 PM
from the why-does-everybody-want-it-suddenly-huh dept.
patro writes "Should MS beef up cranky old Internet Explorer for today's standards? Dvorak thinks buying Opera would be a smarter move. It works on all the major platforms including the Mac which IE won't support anymore and $400 million for it is pocket money for Microsoft."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:42PM (#14320733)
    NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

    (filler text to get around message filters)
  • Yeah, well... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by killmenow (184444) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:42PM (#14320735)
    ...Dvorak is a hack...so, there you have it.
    • Re:Yeah, well... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Golias (176380) on Thursday December 22 2005, @03:03PM (#14321047)
      ...Dvorak is a hack...so, there you have it.

      You got modded as a troll, but your comment is 100% correct. Dvorak has made a career out of spouting sensational bullshit (which even he must know is nonsense) in order to generate more hits for his site. He's one of the most successful trolls on all of the Internet.

      If the editors are going to pay any attention whatsoever to submissions about his articles (and they ought not), then Slashdot needs a "Dvorak" category, so we can filter it out.
      • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 22 2005, @03:13PM (#14321159)
        Dvorak has made a career out of spouting sensational bullshit (which even he must know is nonsense) in order to generate more hits for his site. He's one of the most successful trolls on all of the Internet.

        It's easy to criticise, but when was the last time that YOU had the same last name as someone who came up with a keyboard layout? Hmmmm? Didn't think so.
      • I second this motion. The last thing I want to read on Slashdot is anything related to Dvorak.
      • So many errors... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Kelson (129150) * on Thursday December 22 2005, @05:02PM (#14322416) Homepage Journal
        Shall I start with the bit about how Microsoft has no reason to develop Mac programs anymore becuse they can just use the Intel-based versions? He seems to have forgotten that fact that the platform is more than just a processer archtecture, there's the OS API as well. It takes a lot of glue code to get an x86 Windows app to run on x86 Linux (and even then it's rarely perfect), and the same would be true on x86 Mac.

        Then he goes off on the whole "Opera identifies itself as IE so we don't know how many people use it" bull that's been debunked over and over and over again. Opera IDs itself as IE in the same way that IE identifies itself as Netscape -- and for the same reason. If you're paying any attention at all, you can tell the difference.

        Some examples:
        Netscape 4: "Mozilla/4.7 [en] (WinNT; U)"
        IE 6: "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)"
        Opera 7: "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1) Opera 7.50 [en]"

        You'll note that IE spoofs Netscape, that Opera spoofs IE (including the Netscape spoof), and that all three are easily distinguishable if you're looking in the right place.

        Does this guy have a clue what he's talking about?
    • Re:Yeah, well... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by drsquare (530038) on Thursday December 22 2005, @04:10PM (#14321855)
      Yeah, Microsoft should spend $400 million on a browser because it runs on a platform they don't want to support anymore? Only a genius like Dvorak could have come up with that.
  • Imagine that... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Mente (219525) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:43PM (#14320743)
    Last week everyone thought Opera was being bought by Google. So now its obvious that MS should buy it first to keep it out of the hands of Google.
    • by Geno Z Heinlein (659438) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:58PM (#14320976)
      Last week everyone thought Opera was being bought by Google. So now its obvious that MS should buy it first to keep it out of the hands of Google.

      Wait, I think I've figured out the pattern!
      Google == China
      buying Opera == sending astronauts to the Moon
      Micro$oft == George "Dubya" Bush
      Now if we can just get Google to promise not to be evil... oh, wait, my analogy is breaking down.

    • Re:Imagine that... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ottothecow (600101) <ottothecow.gmail@com> on Thursday December 22 2005, @03:01PM (#14321017) Homepage
      And this week Dvorak pretends anti-trust laws dont exist.

      Generally, buying up your competetors (especially one of the very few competitors that could actually be bought) doesnt look so good when you've already been a convicted monopoly.

    • Re:Imagine that... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by larry bagina (561269) on Thursday December 22 2005, @03:33PM (#14321409) Journal
      Google gave Opera (and Mozilla foundation) a chunk of cash in exchange for Opera being totally free (as in no ads) and google being the preferred search engine. There could be other terms to their agreement as well...
      • Actually, one of Microsoft's classic tricks is tricking their compeititors into investing in white elephants. As seen recently when they bid up the price of AOL before feeding it to Google.

        However, Opera might have some value to MS on PocketPC. It has no real value to Google.
        • Re:Imagine that... (Score:4, Interesting)

          by itomato (91092) on Thursday December 22 2005, @03:15PM (#14321193)
          First time I've heard of that..

          Usually it seems that Microsoft buys out a company that is most enticing to it's competitors, then turning that heralded technology into a White Elephant on their own.

          If they can't buy it, they re-implement it - badly.

          IE, Xbox, J++, .Net, WebTV, C#, Citrix, SoftPC, Hotmail, the list goes on.. It's the Story of Microsoft - all the way back to DOS.

          What they can't come up with on their own, they imitate or buy.
          more. [vcnet.com]

          Google could do good with Opera. The only reason Microsoft would buy it is to suffocate it in a dark closet.
  • by ThatGeek (874983) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:44PM (#14320759) Homepage
    Microsoft doesn't want their stuff to work on all other platforms... After all, they intentionally discontinued work on IE for mac, and have bought several companies only to immediately axe their Linux offerings.

    Microsoft is not a company selling apps, Microsoft is a company selling lock-in. As long as customers are sticking with them, they don't really need to spend "pocket change" to keep up with technology.
    • You must keep in mind that Microsoft has no intention of directly supporting Linux in any sense. If they buy a company because they like its product, why should they spend more of their dollars to continue Linux development?

      I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but you're being rather speculative in assuming that they bought companies specifically to shut down their Linux offerings. It seems more likey to me that they simply wanted the Windows version of the technology then saw no reason to continue Linux d
    • Microsoft already covered this when they based IE on Mosaic years ago. Mosaic used to run on more platforms. They could just take the Opera code base and do the same thing they did with Mosaic, knee-cap and labotomize it.

      Seriously though, I think it's one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. I don't see why MS should want to sink so much money into something that they already have and don't really make money on anyway. It may be pocket change for MS at this point, but that doesn't mean they should th
      • Worst idea? From a standards standpoint, it is a great idea. Opera is perhaps the most standards compliant browser out there. So developers would stop complaining that IE isn't standards compliant.Imagine, all the webmill people would shut up. Further, they could beef up Opera, and give it some access to those belove Microsoft API's, give it the packaging of Microsoft and well, now the browser wars have been won, all over again, before most of mainstream people even knew that that there was an arms built up
  • Great idea! (Score:5, Funny)

    by BushCheney08 (917605) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:44PM (#14320771)
    Wow! That's the best idea I've ever heard. There should be absolutely no problems shoehorning it into Vista by next year. Way to go, Dvorak! You deserve a raise!
    • Re:Great idea! (Score:3, Interesting)

      I'm sure they could get it to work in Vista.... As an application.

      Of course if they could do that it'd prove that all the "IEs part of the OS and can't be removed" stuff was bunk. Wheter that's actually provable already is also up for debate.
  • Sure (Score:5, Funny)

    by mugnyte (203225) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:45PM (#14320785) Homepage Journal

    Then after the "MS Opera" release, firefox would have even less competition.
  • Dvorak has apparently forgotten all the work that Microsoft put into stuffing Internet Explorer and its components into every unlikely corner of the Windows operating systems. You can't just easily rip that out and replace it with a new browser..
  • by MmmmJoel (26625) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:46PM (#14320801) Homepage
    Opera can be uninstalled.
  • by CastrTroy (595695) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:46PM (#14320804) Homepage
    Wouldn't this be in violation of antitrust laws? Microsoft can't just buy out all of their competition out there. I don't think the government would allow it. At least they shouldn't. That's why I like Open Source, Because you can't buy it out. I think this is Microsofts greatest fear. A competitor they can't defeat, simply by buying it out.
  • by Jason1729 (561790) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:46PM (#14320806)
    This makes me think I overestimated him.

    MS chooses to stop supporting the Mac with IE. For whatever reason, they think that's in their best interest. Now Dvorak thinks that's MS should spend $400M to abandon the browser they've been pushing for 10 years, to buy one that supports an OS they just walked away from.

    MS hasn't even stopped supoport for IE yet, just annouced it. If they changed their mind and think it's such a big mistake, they can continue IE on MacOS.
  • by lpangelrob (714473) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:47PM (#14320817)
    If I were Microsoft, with the amount of money it would take to buy Opera, I'd rather just yoink 1.5 stable of Firefox and rebrand it as Internet Explorer. Releasing the code for all changes they make, of course.

    They can stuff it with their links, write in their ActiveX/DLL extensions, make a better Windows-like skin... whatever.

    Of course, I can't imagine them risking putting open source software in such a high-visibility area, but a web developer can dream.

  • by Svartalf (2997) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:48PM (#14320847) Homepage
    He's just another utterly clueless pundit. To have them buy Opera is to admit that they didn't have what it takes to secure and extend the thing. MS flatly won't be inclined to do that if they can help it- this suggestion is in the same class as saying MS ought to do a Linux version of MS Office.
  • Not compatible (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wombatmobile (623057) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:49PM (#14320853)
    Unlikely. Opera isn't compatible with Microsoft's business strategy since it implements web standards [webstandards.org].
  • by srock2588 (827871) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:50PM (#14320866) Journal
    1. Write some code 2. Slip Dvorak some free booze 3. Get bought by Microsoft for "pocket change" 4. Move to Grand Cayman
  • by Serveert (102805) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:54PM (#14320930)
    Microsoft doesn't want a very nice UI for the web unless they control it. If the standards supported a nice neat replacement for your typical win32 gui then Microsoft is pretty much out of business as they currently stand. It's inevitable that the web GUI encroaches on win32 GUI applitions hence why MS is getting more and more into online services. The writing is on the wall and they'll resist the writing as long as possible - which means a crippled IE with lagging features for all of us.
  • Why so much Dvorak (Score:5, Insightful)

    by guaigean (867316) on Thursday December 22 2005, @02:59PM (#14320985)
    Why does Dvorak even make it on here? I'm not trying to troll, just noticing that every Dvorak post made is a HUGE flamewar against his ignorance in computing. I mean, sure, he can have his opinion. But why does it make slashdot EVERY single time he makes a comment?
  • by Quiet_Desperation (858215) on Thursday December 22 2005, @03:04PM (#14321054)
    It'd just be funny, is all.

    He could be their mascot, and beat up the Linux penguin and the Mac... whatever the hell that thing is in the Mac logo.

  • Dvorak is a fool. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) <john DOT oyler AT comcast DOT net> on Thursday December 22 2005, @03:41PM (#14321519) Journal
    IE was woven into the codebase for Windows itself. I doubt Microsoft has the talent to untangle it, even with Vista.

    Or maybe they wouldn't, and just leave the bloat there, with another userland application plonked down on top of it. Would be their style.
  • by ThinkFr33ly (902481) on Thursday December 22 2005, @03:51PM (#14321635)
    As usual, Dvorak's knowledge of the topic at hand is shallow and his conclusions are simplistic and short sighted.

    Microsoft is not interesting in gaining browser market share outside of the Windows platform. Sure, they might be able to steer more people toward MSN and thereby make more in advertising revenue, but how much more? If 90% of the market already uses Windows, and gaining that extra 10% is fairly difficult for a wide variety of reasons, it may not be worth it to them.

    Even if it was, it has nothing to do with why Microsoft dropped support for the Mac. The direction Microsoft is taking IE is different than the direction everybody else is taking web browsers. Microsoft sees IE as an application that will allow users to access both web pages and smart client applications.

    They see the future as a mesh of standard web apps and smart client applications created with things like ClickOnce [microsoft.com] (at first), and eventually IE-hosted Avalon [microsoft.com] applications. (WPF.) Their hope is that eventually the line between web apps and client apps will blur, and since it will be (they hope) via IE and Avalon, it will draw even more people to using Windows since the UI/functionality experience is so much better than standard web applications. At least that's the business point of view.
  • by pavera (320634) on Thursday December 22 2005, @03:52PM (#14321648) Journal
    All the posts here are saying this would be a terrible idea but no one has mentioned why.

    Yeah it would suck because MS would inevitably discontinue opera on all platforms besides windows, rename it, integrate it into the OS and make it uninstallable, and, then, MS would really have the best browser offering, and we'd all have nothing left to complain about.

    But, that is why it would be such a good move. Fixing IE is gonna take alot of developer time and money, probably about as much as they'd pay to purchase Opera. Yeah, to fit into MS's strategy they'd have to completely hobble Opera and basically destroy all the good things about it.. But, they'd get a secure, fast, bloat free, feature rich browser that was coherently developed.

    I think you're all opposed to the idea because it would be about the worst thing that could happen to OSS/Mozilla/Firefox. It would be a complete slap in the face, and it would destroy Firefox's momentum overnight. I'm against the idea too, cause I like opera, and it would be sad to see it destroyed by MS, but I don't think its a bad idea for MS. I think it would be about the most intelligent/strategic thing they could do right now.

    One post mentioned "why spend money on something that you don't make money on" well they've been spending money every year for developers to build IE it doesn't seem to be a problem, another poster said "why spend money on something you already have" MS doesn't have an Opera-calibur browser, and making IE an opera-calibur browser is going to take alot of time and money.

    I think MS is really pretty scared about the competition from google, from the web finally starting to matter in a real way. As MS loses market share in browsers, they lose hits to msn.com. honestly how many of you firefox users have your homepage set to msn.com? But IE comes with msn.com as the default homepage on every computer I've ever used. That loss of hits costs them money. They have no choice but to try to maintain 90%+ browser market share, if they were to drop to 50% market share, they'd really be hurting. I don't think anyone uses msn.com through an active choice... People choose to use Yahoo, Google, whatever, the only people who use msn.com are those who haven't changed their default home page. In short MS's only competitive advantage on the web is that they have a huge userbase that uses their browser... If they lose that, they lose everything else on the web, everyone will be at Google or Yahoo.
  • flase premise (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bokmann (323771) on Thursday December 22 2005, @04:05PM (#14321796) Homepage
    His entire argument is predicated upon the false premises that Microsoft wants to support open standards and that they want to support the Mac.

    Microsoft has virtually bottomless resources - if they really wanted to, they could crank out a secure cross-platform web browser that supported relevant standards. What Microsoft has is exactly what they want - vendor lock-in with a mediocre product that through its various 'feature-driven' incompatibilities gives them some sense of control.

    If Mircosoft can't own the roads, they want to own the potholes.
    • Re:What? (Score:3, Interesting)

      This guy proves he is once again off his rocker. IE 7, even in beta (with the latest builds of Vista), is a damn fine browser. Better than even Firefox/Mozilla dare I say it. Microsoft's browser team is doing just fine on its own.

      I don't use either IE7 or Firefox but so what? IE7 is a "damn fine browser" for now... IE overtook Netscape because it was the better browser at the time that MS was using other tactics to force its wide and successful adoption.

      Do you really think that IE7 will continue to be a "
    • Opera developers (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Tumbleweed (3706) on Thursday December 22 2005, @03:09PM (#14321104) Homepage
      Opera has (had?) some great developers. They don't get the credit they deserve for innovation

      Now THERE you're really hitting the point, but not even completely. It's not just their innovating new features, but the performance they're able to achieve with their application. The speed and memory requirements are fantastic compared to everything else out there. IE and FF can't touch Opera for memory usage OR speed (in most cases).

      I just wish it's renderer was better; it produces goofy results too often. I'd like to see them take the Gecko renderer and run it through the Opera-resource-debigulator(tm) and use that in Opera. I'd also like them to make an email client that doesn't require 30Meg of RAM, and actually performs at a reasonable speed. Ugh. Let's hope Thunderbird 1.5 is a big improvement in the performance arena, though I have no hope it'll be anything other than worse in the resource requirements arena.
    • Well said.

      I have often wondered the same thing. IE is quite usable, and quite nice.

      Firefox and Opera are great, and I use them both a lot of the time, but I also use IE often. On a Windows machine, IE seriously has some benefits that FF does not. For instance, doing an ftp://foobar [foobar] gets me a nice interface in IE. In FF, Fireftp crashes so often that I stopped using it. As for adblocking, Google toolbar gives me the same thing. If you are careful about your security settings, IE can also be a safe browser.

      No
    • I just don't see any real technical / usbility reason to switch. Plus, if i type "C:\" in the address bar of IE, it looks normal and usable, not like firefox, which puts me in the wayback machine to 1994 UI land, so I can actually interoperate between my local PC and web browsing easily.

      You want to talk about 1994 UI land?

      Number one: why are you typing "C:\" into a web browser's address bar? It's not a valid internet URL.

      Number Two: "C:\" itself is 1982 UI, so you're really stretching the complaint.

      • Well now that you mention it, I occasionally need to run IE at work. Instead of booting into Windows, I run IE using Wine under Fedora Core 4.

        I wish I could say it worked great. It doesn't. But it works well enough that I can modify server side rule in exchange by using the Web interface. Yes, the web interface works in non-ie browsers, but doesn't handle enhanced mode -- so you can't do things like make rules. And, evolution doesn't implement exchange server side rules.

        I also need to use ie to enter m
      • When I read the headline, I immediately thought, "yeah, right." Love or hate MS, IE 6 usability and look and feel pretty much kicks ass.

        What?... What?!?

        IE 6 is crap, through and through. It doesn't even have tabbed browsing. It is ugly. It violates plenty of basic UI principles. It does not have a build in, working ad blocker. The pop-up blocking is sub par. The security is abysmal and it can't even properly render Web pages written in WC3 standards set half a decade ago. It is ugly and unusable in my