toggle

AAPL Stock: 497.67 ( -11.79 )

Adobe products to use Opera rendering engine

updated 09:20 am EDT, Tue September 30, 2003


Opera Software today that it has reached a licensing agreement with Adobe to include Opera's Mac/Windows Web rendering engine in future Adobe product releases. Opera says its cross-platform, standards-compliant rendering engine with built-in Small-Screen Rendering (SSR) technology can "save users the hassle of testing their Web pages for different browsers, devices or screen sizes." Content developers can embed the company's engine in both Carbon and Cocoa applications using the company's easy-to-use API. Other licensees include IBM, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Symbian, and Macromedia.


by MacNN Staff

print
email
(10)

TAGS :

 Graphics/Web Design

Related Articles

Recent Articles

toggle

Comments

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    09/30, 09:36am | report spam | Reply |

    OPERA?

    I'm all for supporting the underdog, But I've seen opera do a pretty mediocre job of interpreting style sheets, etc. Maybe it will improve.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    09/30, 09:42am | report spam | Reply |

    Opera? Ugh...

    I guess I can't blame them for using a cross-platform solution. Can't expect a company who makes cross-platform software to use OS X only rendering (even if it IS built-in to the OS...). But Opera? Why Opera? It's one of the worst browsers I've seen as far as compatibility goes. It's HARDLY going to keep me (and I hope others) from having to test in other browsers. It certainly doesn't support everything every browser should.

    Ya know, it would be a nice treat if the OS X versions of these apps used WebCore but I doubt Adobe would do something like that.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    09/30, 10:00am | report spam | Reply |

    cross-platform??

    the pc version of golive 7 uses the IE6 rendering engine, only the mac version uses opera (same goes for dreamweaver mx 2004).

    why not webcore? simply because there was no webcore when adobe made this decision. might change in future versions.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    09/30, 11:00am | report spam | Reply |

    opera?

    weren't they the company who every 3 to 6 months claims they will stop supporting the mac with their browser? kudos to opera for trying. didn't they also sign a deal with macromedia as well for bundling and such?

    don't get me wrong... SOMEone needs to unseat IE, but i just don't think it's gonna be opera.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    09/30, 11:13am | report spam | Reply |

    free options

    Why pay to license Opera when there are free options that are just as good, if not better?

    Mozilla's free cross platform Gecko engine is very robust and is arguably the most stable and most completely standards compliant rendering engine.

    Or Adobe could have gone with the free cross platform KHTML engine like Apple has used in Safari and WebCore.

    What does Opera offer that these free options do not?

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    09/30, 12:26pm | report spam | Reply |

    Why not WebCore??

    Their mac products are for os X only now, and for having see the small lapse of time it took for others to use webcore, i'm pretty sure adobe could do it very fast too

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    09/30, 12:28pm | report spam | Reply |

    ** out of ***** - No way

    Seeing this article made me think... Maybe it's time to give Opera another look. A quick look at VersionTracker's ratings and user experiences disabused me of that wishful thinking. Good thing Apple decided to develop Safari (whose first BETA was far more workable than Opera). Sad... True.

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    09/30, 03:50pm | report spam | Reply |

    This MIGHT be good

    Perhaps, then, web developers who design on a PC wont lock their sites in to Internet Explorer-specific code. Opera is at lease standards-compliant and should render well with Safari (WebCore) or Mozilla (Gekko).

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    09/30, 06:30pm | report spam | Reply |

    Opera is $%&#ed up...

    I wrote a JavaScript menuing system and embedded it into HTML with many nested tables. opera for Mac came in second worse (iCab was worst). Many rendering errors, barfed on standard JavaScript, etc.

    Adobe usually doesn't make such bad technical decisions...

  1. MacNN.com Reader

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2001

    0
    10/03, 10:49pm | report spam | Reply |

    Opera

    OPERA? - MacNN.com Reader 126883
    9/30/03, 9:36 am EDT
    I'm all for supporting the underdog, But I've seen opera do a pretty mediocre job of interpreting style sheets, etc. Maybe it will improve.

    And what do you use? Opera has some of the best Style Sheet handeling in any browser. Far superior to IE and somewhat better than Mozilla/KHTML

    Opera? Ugh... - MacNN.com Reader 126884
    9/30/03, 9:42 am EDT
    I guess I can't blame them for using a cross-platform solution. Can't expect a company who makes cross-platform software to use OS X only rendering (even if it IS built-in to the OS...). But Opera? Why Opera? It's one of the worst browsers I've seen as far as compatibility goes. It's HARDLY going to keep me (and I hope others) from having to test in other browsers. It certainly doesn't support everything every browser should.

    Ya know, it would be a nice treat if the OS X versions of these apps used WebCore but I doubt Adobe would do something like that.

    Doesn't support what? It supports everything I know of. And what are these compatibility issues you speak of? Do you call standard compliance an issue?

    free options - MacNN.com Reader 126890
    9/30/03, 11:13 am EDT
    Why pay to license Opera when there are free options that are just as good, if not better?

    Mozilla's free cross platform Gecko engine is very robust and is arguably the most stable and most completely standards compliant rendering engine.

    Or Adobe could have gone with the free cross platform KHTML engine like Apple has used in Safari and WebCore.

    What does Opera offer that these free options do not?

    Two things. One, Adobe is after Opera's small screen rendering engine, one of the best I've ever seen. They aren't after the main browser. Secondly, it's well known that KHTML is far behind either Gecko or Presto (Opera 7's rendering engine)

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

 
close
Photo
toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

10 Most Read

Recent Reviews

Logitech Cube

The world of mice could often be described charitably as stagnant: it's an endless sea of ergonomic shapes that assume you're sitting ...

NewerTech and Targus USB Hubs For Gifts

A useful holiday present to resolve an ongoing frustration is a multi-port hub. Whether as a stocking stuffer, Chanukah present, or an ...

X-Rite ColorMunki Photo

Color calibration is the art of tweaking your monitor so that the colors represented on screen better match real life and your printer ...

toggle

Most Commented

10 Most Discussed

 

Popular News