First class response, Jan!
Best laugh I've had all day.
Apple has allowed Opera's desktop browser into its new Mac App Store, but it has decreed that no one under 17 years old can download the thing. Jan Standal, vice president of desktop products for Opera Software, takes issue with Apple's stance. "I’m very concerned,” he said in a statement. “Seventeen is very young, and I am …
"In order to avoid the slightest risk of anyone confusing a Formula One car with a pick-up truck... the men from Maranello have decided that the car will lose the F that precedes the number 150 and which stands for Ferrari," the Italian team said in a tongue-in-cheek posting on its website's 'Horse Whisperer' column.
"It appears that this could have caused so much confusion in the minds of the consumer across the Pond that, at the same time as losing the F, the name will be completely Italianised, replacing the English "th" with the equivalent Italian symbol."
- Ferrari F1 team repsonse to Ford copyright infringement threat:
This is just Apple playing their usual mind games.
I suspect it's targeting parents, who don't understand the Interwebs. They have no idea *why* there should be such a restriction, but a family-friendly company like Apple wouldn't do it without a very good reason, right?
Ahhh... Whatever this 'Opera' thing is, it must be some gadget thing that the other kids in the playground are using to browse pr0n, buy drugs and "hook up with girls in your area" etc. Just like that Bit Torrent brand of DVD player I read about in the Daily Mail or something.
Well there's no way *my* little Johnny, who incidentally is as pure as the driven snow and I'm going to keep him that way, is having this preverted 'Opera' thing on his phone. If I see him even looking at it I shall confiscate his phone, ground him and revert to driving him (safely) to and from the sixth form centre every day.
And Norwegian?!! That's where they legalised all the pr0n in the 70s or something! Proof!
<valium src="www.dailymail.co.uk" dosage="60mg" period="daily">Won't someone think of the children!</valium>
Yeah, this makes no sense! LAME!!!1 Apple hates thinking, smart, awesome people like us. They only like stupid sheep. We are 2 l33t for them. Werd. "Apparently some Apple users still know how to think!" LOL that is so true1!
No, you got me, I'm being sarcastic. Doesn't Safari (and other built-in Mac software) have parental controls? Wouldn't downloading Opera from the Mac Store be a very, very, simple way to get around them? Yes, sure, parental controls are for n00bs and any halfway technical kid will get around them. Still, this whole "Apple == teh thought police" narrative is getting a bit old and tired for anyone over, say... 24 or so. Could have gone with 17, but being generous.
Techies need to start thinking themselves instead of reacting with this knee-jerk manner to anything they don't understand.
Way to go downvoters!
I don't agree with the Apple policy, but this post offers a very believable and perfectly justifiable reason for restricting access to Opera (assuming it really doesn't offer parental controls).
Usually the commenterati on here have a pretty expert view of security related subjects. Maybe the downvoters are just providing a knee jerk reaction to an Apple-positive comment. Whatever.
For excessive use of exlamation marks and capitalisation, more insults than I usually enjoy accepting from a comedian with an actual sense of humour and enough leet speak to make ones ears bleed.
Too bad. Your point is actually valid and could have been well received (even if pro Apple posts generally are not).
Love the way Opera flips apples obtuse decision making processes back on themselves.
All the while generating more publicity for the product off the back of it. (remember the countdown to when Opera Mini was 'allowed' onto the iphone)
You know, if apple weren't so creepily odd, more people might like them.
remember they proved msn feeds their particular browser some crap html and released bork edition? Everyone had a great laugh.
On the other hand, they also politely sued the hell out of msft and rumour says, they may have won 500M Euros.
suits at apple must be careful laughing, it seems Opera ASA jokes while they plan to bite (rightfully).
Probably right, as the many above you who said the same thing... But if Opera is free to download how will they prevent those under 17 from downloading it anyway? Are they going to ask "Are you 17, Yes/No?" or require a credit card for a "free" purchase?
I certainly would not trust Apple with my credit card information.
Wasn't there a story a while back about a 1 year old who managed to bill $12,000 in apps with an iPad? Are Apple's parental controls really worth this nonsense given that fact?
This has nothing to do with preventing kids from knowing they can install apps that didn't come from the app store. This has to do with the mac's parental controls. Safari ties into them. Opera (and other programs) do not. That is all this is about.
(and no, I am not an apple fanboy. I don't even have any of their products.)
If that is the case, then how come if you enable parental controls and try to go to an adult oriented site, Safari does block you, but you can go to Opera and download Opera for the Mac. Now you would need to have administrator access to install the program though, which you would still need if you used the app store though; so that is a moot point. Apple has once again overstepped their bounds, it is as simple as that.
Safari wont let you browse pron if parental controls are enabled. The app store won't let you install a 17+ app if they are enabled (and you don't need an admin login to install from the app store). If a parent installs an app then they are warned that it may provide access to 17+ content (do you really want your sprog to be able to do this?). How is this any worse than PC apps like Net Nanny?
Apple treats any app where there's even a hint of seeing objectionable things as needing the 17+ rating. That is, I wrote a chat program for iOS, and the dictum was to either get the 17+ rating, or filter out all the naughty words that people wrote. Pretty much anything that connects to an uncontrolled source (Like, say a webbrowser) gets this 17+, even if they use Apple's own web browser tech. As stupid as the rules may be, at least this is a case of consistency.
For some reason, the parental control feature on the iPhone or iPad doesn't limit what people can access with Opera, even though it does limit what people can access with Safari.
Parental control software for PCs doesn't behave that way - it is not tied to the browser, but filters everything coming into the computer, because it has to. So Apple doesn't get off the hook if parental control is the issue, since they chose to put it where it would give them an excuse to obstruct competitors.
I think the AC here outsmarted the downvoters. He said that would destroy competing products. He is implying here that everyone with an IQ over 80 is already using Safari and that only idiots are using other browsers.
Of course, the exact opposite is true. Everyone knows that Safari is the least secure browser of the decade.
Does this mean all web browsers based on webkit are also insecure?
I'm not quibbling, I'm asking - I genuinely don't know - last time I kept up with this sort of thing was back in the IE/firefox days.
I stopped keeping up when I realised that by far the most insecure bit was the fleshy thing pressing the keys.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019