You are here {——— Opera is here ———} People who want better compatibility with real web sites are here.

Opera is stuck in the middle. With a certain amount of resources, it has to balance implementing cool stuff, and getting real sites that rely on IE garbage working. Sites that don’t work is one of the main complaints you see when reading the forums at my.opera.com.

Let me emphasize that again: Microsoft is likely a part of (if not the main) reason for Opera not having time to implement more of upcoming standards, since Opera is forced to mimic bugs and irregularities in IE in order to work on real web sites.

Thus, if the complaint is successful, Opera will in fact have a lot more time and resources to implement those cool things you so crave.

You should be supporting Opera’s complaint, and you should hope that it goes through and that Microsoft is forced to play nice, so that Opera can free up resources to improve support for open web standards.

First, thanks for speaking up!

I agree that Microsoft is in a different market position than Opera, so is victim to certain burdens. I agree with Mr. Lie’s point that Microsoft should in fact be required to keep up with standards. I’m not missing his key point that Opera feels Microsoft should be compelled due to its market position.

I get it.

However, my issue is that an interoperable web isn’t dependent upon just the monopolists keeping up with standards, and therefore it shouldn’t just be Microsoft that’s held to the standard. It’s about all the browser vendors keeping up. By and large Opera is one of the most standards-compliant browsers in the market. However, Opera hasn’t kept up with implementing certain CSS properties, despite some of them being in the wild for years now. I believe that despite Opera’s relatively small market share, they should be concentrating more on implementing those missing features and leading by example, rather than being preachy with political/legal/showboating maneuvers.

In particular, where’s my RGBA colors? Focus on that, please. People that make websites will be more grateful for that than they are for several dozen columns in newspapers where Mr. Lie reminds us all where Microsoft falls short.

Microsoft is guilty of abusing its monopoly power to prevent competition in the market. As such, it has to play by other rules than companies who are not in a monopoly position, and have certainly not abused such a position.

If Microsoft had not been convicted of using illegal means to abuse their position in order to prevent competition in the market, they would not have been forced to play by specific rules created to right the wrongs made by the monopoly abuser in the first place.

Opera is not a convicted monopolist. As such, there is no need to force Opera to follow the special rules of convicted monopolists in the market.

If Opera ever was in a position to abuse its monopoly power, then it would be useful to start talking about how Opera should follow these rules specifically for convicted monopolists. But as it is today, Opera is in no way impeding on competition in the market place. It isn’t even close to being able to manipulate the market the way Microsoft can due to its strong market share.

Opera’s complaint to the EU asserts that Microsoft has engaged in activities in the market that impedes competition. If the EU finds Opera’s assertion to be correct, then Microsoft should indeed, by law, be required to follow special rules for convicted monopolists which Opera would not be forced to follow because it is not in Microsoft’s position.

Opera isn’t saying that all other browsers should be forced to follow specific rules it does not have to follow itself. It is saying that a monopolist abusing its market share to prevent competition should be forced to follow those rules.

Glad you enjoyed the comic!

You’re right about a number of details. Filing a complaint with the European Commission isn’t taking legal action against Microsoft. However, I think it’s fair to say that Opera is hoping to have a situation where Microsoft is compelled to follow the series of guidelines laid out by Mr. Lie. My objection to the tactics used is the focus of the comic itself, specifically that Opera isn’t fully compliant with its own demands.

Yes, Opera is a much, much, much, much, much better browser than any version of Internet Explorer. Yes, of those three properties listed only one truly stands up to the litmus test at all once 9.5 comes out. However, the fact is that Opera is listing very specific requirements for how they feel Microsoft should act. One of those very specific requirements is the point #5 I have in this post, and the key text in there is “described in a publicly available specification”. Nothing there indicates the stability of the specification, or the preexistence of a property in a product prior to arriving in the specification, or any other qualifying factors. By Mr. Lie’s strict guidelines, if it’s in a publicly available spec and supported in two or more major browsers, it needs to be included.

The fact is, if you’re going to hold Microsoft to compulsive behavior on how to design their product, you need to hold yourselves to the exact same standards. Goodness knows I don’t use word-wrap. But if I did, I’d be annoyed that your browser, worked on by the father of CSS himself, doesn’t include it. Yes, every browser should equally support standards. Yes, Microsoft is abysmal at that and needs to be constantly egged along. I just feel that Opera doing it in the fashion they have, while missing details themselves, isn’t the right way to go about things, and ultimately generates more ill will than genuine benefits.

Go back to eating your nuts or we’ll set SVGorilla on you.