From time to time I read about the question, why Opera has only little market share, although it is such an outstanding application (e.g. Why hasn’t Opera been able to attract more users? by Daniel Goldman).
Often the given answers are technically driven, but with learning some lessons from the Browser Wars technical aspects, even technical leadership, seems to be pretty irrelevant. Equally I don't believe that there is something wrong with the name Opera or the logo. 
In this article I'll first think about the steps necessary to become and be an Opera user. Then I look for the reasons of higher market share of Internet Explorer and Firefox. In the end I take a look for possible starting points to spread Opera. …
A) Steps to become an Opera user
case 1 – some other browser is installed
It is easy just to list the sequence of steps necessary to become an Opera user if Opera is not installed by someone different.
(1) know about Opera as browser
(2) get the Opera files
(3) install Opera
(4) use Opera
(5) keep using Opera
case 2 – Opera is installed
If Opera is installed on the system not on purpose by the end user then the first 3 steps of case 1 are done by
- another person (like an administrator in companies, computer service of a shop or a friend) or
- another software (like operation system or a bundled software)
Remarkable is that end users do not even have to know it is Opera – it is enough to have something one can access internet, no matter the name or technical background. At least on desktops usually a different browser and not Opera is installed this way.
B) Why Internet Explorer and Firefox have bigger market share
Microsoft Internet Explorer
The strongest reason for the big market share of Internet Explorer (IE) is the enormous marketing power. Mostly hidden from end user just the system providers and responsible people in companies have to be convinced to install Windows and IE.
There is no need to (1) know about IE and it is not necessary to (2) get any files or to (3) install anything. Thinking of updates it is just the same like the anyway necessary updates for Windows. IE is just well integrated (in aspects of visibility and ease to start) that (4) using IE is just like usning internet (lots of people don't have any background about this). If there is no pull towards another browser people are just (5) going on using it.
The readers of this text probably think there are more than enough reasons against IE. But lot's of people just don't know or don't care about this or they are helpless or anxious to use another browser.
Mozilla Firefox
Things are different with Firefox (FF), as it is normally not the preinstalled browser on Windows systems.
FF is mostly default on Linux systems, what has an effect for Windows, too. The majority of Linux users still are more computer literate, are more likely to have a second system with Windows running and more probable giving support to Windows users that need help and therefor influence the number of installed FF on Windows systems.
For most of the FF users on Windows the same steps apply like for Opera in case 1. So why Firefox has a much bigger market share than Opera? Let's take a look to the steps:
(1) Who knows about Firefox? I suppose nearly everybody who is at least a little bit interested in internet / browser technology.
Words about FF are found in a lot of places: Web pages often give the hint they support IExx and FFxx (but not Opera regardless whether the pages are working in Opera or not). There are comparisons and tips for FF in computer magazines (IE is also found often, but about Opera it is really seldom). Pretty often there had been reports about FF in no-tech magazines – especially about cultural or economical aspects (much more often than about IE and/or Opera).
But why there is that much attention towards FF? Today part of the reason is just the bigger market share, therefor more people like to read about tips for FF. But not that long ago market share was at about the same low rate like Opera. And deriving the public interest from market share will soon lead to a question similar to chicken-and-egg problem. But there is a pretty easy answer: the rocketing career of FF was driven by the Firefox-hype (information was first and market-share increased afterwards). As it is not really possible to create a hype on purpose (at least success is very improbable) there is no need for a broad discussion. I just want to name two involved points: FF is open source and mainly created by volunteers and there are some visions of a better economy without the need of companies and money (this could grow towards a similar influential movement like flower power, although the hype about this seems already ended). FF did unusual things and luckily could grab lots of attention – it has not been the single expensive advertisement page drawing that much attention but there had been lots of reports about collecting donations for a technically useless and expensive advertisement page.
I got the feeling the big FF-hype is over as growth of market-share stagnates and equally there are nearly no non-tech articles about FF any more, as it is much more business as usual and no longer spectacular to write about.
(2+3) To get the FF files and install them is pretty easy and there are few reasons for hesitation.
And if there are obstacles people don't know about them – FF is thought to be free of all evils (thinking of commercial interests) and FF promises to have some special benefits for the users: it is more fancy like IE6 (at least in the heads) and more safe. Additionally FF has extensions as the most dominant unique selling proposition (USP). It doesn't matter that extensions are not unique in FF at all, IE is pretty well capable of small add-ons and very big IE-shells. And Widgets of Opera9 are a good reply to extensions, too. Keep in mind USP is not about technical superiority but it is a marketing concept.
Meanwhile it seems to be difficult for FF to make more people to get the files and install them.
(4) To start using FF on current computers seems to be without difficulties or highlights worth mentioning. FF should mostly just work like expected or like IE does.
(5) Some FF user will stick to FF self-conscious because of special extensions or because they just like the non commercial feeling. Some will just continue to use FF because it is there and they are used to it. Some will go on to look for more fancy or capable browsers like Flock or IE7 (again it is not really important what is really more fancy or capable, it is just important what is considered to be).
It would be really interesting to compare actions and public awareness with the growth of market share in different countries. My descriptions should apply to USA and Germany. I don't have the time for more advanced research on this.
Lessons learned
The biggest reason to use a certain browser is because it is just there. Minor but relevant points are marketing USPs and a feeling to be special in a positive way. The hype and awareness in the press coverage has greatly helped to spread FF – IMHO a singular and not easy to reproduce special occurrence.
C) Starting Points to spread Opera
No need to speak about technical features or other superiority of any browser until here. Equally it is not about the name or the logo. I don't want to say that technical capability is not important. Especially if something doesn't work users will be forced to switch the browser, if there is a better capable alternative for the individual needs. And technical specials could make users stick with a browser. I think latter is a big strength of Opera to offer unobtrusive and often mostly invisible power to make (5) people keep using Opera.
But it is really difficult to get a lot of users to go all the steps (1) to (4). Not because people would not like or get along with Opera but mostly because they just don't know or don't care. I don't expect a helping hype for this and with Microsoft and Mozilla community there are capable and powerful competitors.
But there are some points that could be done more easily:
Find an USP for special needs or wishes
This is not about good slogans (my favourite still is Simply the Best Internet Experience). And it is not about lots of really useful features making your life easier or better (especially if there are more capable alternatives for the single features). With feature-bloated Opera living in internet is just a lot easier in a lot of small points. But thinking in marketing concepts we need something special, easy to understand and better than others: A unique selling proposition people want to have.
This could be something like "Opera has every internet capability all-in-one", but I assume this is hard to make people believe in. Well, people at Opera ASA have to think about something really big – not in technical terms but in the heads of the people.
- One idea I have is to give connectivity across all different devices running Opera and across online and offline usage (e.g. to transfer settings, bookmarks et al)
Another possible point of action is to address special interest groups. Have a small but outstanding USP for them.
- For people that like fancy and nice looking UIs there could be a selection of Opera skins at startup (I'm just working on a IE7 clone and experience the skinning power of Opera in aspects of design and functions).
- For web designers there could be special testing functions not available on other browsers e.g. one click opening the page in different sizes and with all available styles or in several validating services (I already started my article about strategic focus towards web designers, hopefully I'll finish it in some weeks – probably I should stop skinning and customizing as it is really time consuming).
- For the increasing number of bloggers it could be a USP to have something better than Flock. …
Have Opera installed by others
But in aspect of market share the probably easiest and most successful way to make people use Opera is to just have Opera installed (as default) on their computer system. IE is wide spread because of this on desktop systems. And Opera itself is really successful this way – with Opera Mini, Opera Mobile and Opera for devices.
Maybe Opera ASA should put a request to The Court of justice of the European Communities and to the US Department of Justice that argues it would be wise in aspects of competition to force system builders and computer stores to have multiple choices of browsers already installed next to IE. Firefox and Opera seem to be a natural choice for this today.
Another way is to bundle Desktop Opera with other products like internet access software from the internet providers or Google pack.
Other starting points are people that install software for people that don't know what to do (or are not allowed):
- computer administrators in companies
- computer service people
- computer literate friends installing software for other people
For example some community administrations (like Munich and Vienna) and companies switch to open source desktop environments, made up of Linux, OpenOffice, Firefox et al. Maybe they would like to have Opera?
Additional it would be of great value to get articles about Opera into non-tech magazines.
At the end a totally biased chart
…:wizard:
use it > > > like it > > > love it
>>>> IE users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FF users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Opera users
http://www.mozilla.org/support/firefox/faq#spell-abbreviateThe preferred abbreviation is “Fx” or “fx”.I dreamed of computer shops who preinstall Opera, and replace the IE icon on desktop. With skinning, and clever customing (including app icon), there is anecdotal evidence users tend to “love IE, especially this new version”. I wish to see Opera on city kiosks. I think kids would play widget games.But people use IE because ‘sites work’, and FX because ‘it is good’. Opera has ‘safe’, ‘fast’, ‘advanced user-experience’ to stand out. ‘Customise’ is too close to call between the latter two. ‘Potential’ is arbitrary, though as far as I see, the user community definitely gives Opera the edge.I think people don’t want ‘Fit to screen’ more than hotmail.com, ’embedded Bit torrent tracker’ more than latest hyped P2P client, ‘Voice’ more than familiar controls. People don’t really use ‘Zoom’. People don’t toggle graphics/style sheets from within the browser.Opera ends up with the bottom 1%, who care about bandwidth and actively use ‘Block content’ and load graphics on demand, who care about time and customize search engines shortcuts, who fast-forward results, who love the controlled experience of searching, reading, taking notes, emailing, chatting, newsfeeding (if that’s a word).Yeah, experience. Who wants it ?! I think new people, with all the good things that ‘new’ means. And I like that Opera is starting in schools, universities, real life.
In Russia (to my observation) the percentage of Opera users is much higher than the world average. I believe this is due to an unusual USP Opera has in Russia.In Russia, like probably in many less-developed countries, broadband, unlimited-traffic Internet access is rarely available (except, maybe, in Moscow). Most Internet users in Russia either have dial-up over a modem (slow, paid per time online) or a relatively expensive broadband connection paid per megabyte downloaded. Most users want to disable graphics on most ad-bloated and over-designed pages out there. Though all modern browsers allow to disable images, only Opera has this feature switchable by one button, and only Opera has the unique “show only cached images” mode which allows loading of useful images one by one while still not enabling all images on the page (or, worse, on all pages). There are extensions for both IE and FF to implement a similar mode, but Opera has it built-in.For many Russian Opera users I’ve talked to, this feature (combined with other traffic-friendly features like the instant Back and Forward buttons) is the main reason why they use Opera. This will become less important as broadband Internet access with unlimited traffic becomes more widespread in Russia, but I hope there will be a large enough Opera user base in Russia beyond the critical mass, so that it continues to attract new users. BTW, if Opera implements the same for Flash as it does for images, it’s going to boost Opera’s popularity in Russia even further.
Power users won’t stop using firefox, because Opera just doesn’t deliver the dynamic, be it in overall functionality or customization that the whole open source/xul/extensions thing made them accustomed to. Only the sky’s the limit with firefox in terms of what can be done. It’s not only the non commercial feeling, hype, or whatever that sells firefox, it’s also actual functionality.And on the other side there’s IE7, which, whatever it may be, is good enough to make the average user stick with it.But don’t get me wrong, i have nothing against Opera, i have it as my main browser since the 3.62 days and prefer it over Ie and Fx. But when i look at how things are, and are developing from the distance, i don’t see any light at the end of the tunnel.Opera is stuck in the middle. And who knows how to get out of that dilema.But hey, atleast they lead on mobiles and nintendo :).
We’re talking user customisation. Open source and XUL and making extensions have 0.0001% to do with it. The limit is very close to earth, because the majority of users customise by selecting options (this includes installing skins/plugins/addons/panels/widgets), not by making things.I find the actual functionality available to me as user makes it impossible to return to Fx. Let alone IE.
Sure, the average Firefox user doesn’t make extensions… but a lot of them use extensions. And not just to add features that Opera already has.
Thanks for your interest and the comments.I have one request. Let’s stop the discussion about technical superiority, customizations, extensions and all this. Let’s think about 90% (or whatever) using IE and that they are using internet quite different. IMHO it is astonishing that Firefox could reach 10% (or whatever) market share at all. All us people participating in discussions about this topics have some kind of computer skills and care about browsing experience in some way. And this group of people is only a probably pretty small minority out of the 12% users of non IE browsers. Let’s think about browser users that are not involved in this discussions. To spread Opera is about making those uninvolved people use Opera. Even to make them use Firefox would be a progress for Opera.Tonight or tomorrow I’ll write a longer comment about this, thinking about Russian Opera users and giving kind of unbelievable (at least for power users) examples from my few observations with people using IE.
Alexey, thanks to your observations about Opera in Russia. I’d like to add and check some different ideas. Hypotheses:1) I’d assume that less available and much more expensive internet access will lead to a pretty much different user group. a) much less percent of total population do have internet accessb) most of the internet users are either business people or tech freaksIf this is true I would expect a lot more people (the tech freaks) that carefully select the software used and more to end up with a technological superior browser (for the special needs you wrote about).2) Another thing is old and slow hardware (I don’t know what the situation in Russia is in this point). Opera is said to perform much better on hardware with PentiumIII and below than IE6 and current Firefox and is much more capable of real world webpages than for example IE5, which often would be fast enough, too.3) Additionally I think there is a special cultural effect in Russia in relation to Microsoft. In USA the pure strength of a company like Microsoft is something positive and a lot of people therefor consciously like Microsoft (I read something about 50%). In Germany there is a clearly higher percentage of Microsoft critical people, because of the monopol, the evil marketing, the data privacy issues and especially just because of the pure strength of Microsoft.I’d expect in Russia the percentage of people that don’t like Microsoft to be even much higher. If users don’t like a software company (for political reasons) they will be much more likely to search active for alternatives.What are your impressions about this points?Furthermore I’d be really interested about the way Firefox was introduced in Russia, whether it had plublicity in non-tech media. And what’s the developement and current situation of Firefox’s market share?
Some of my experiences with users of IE:a computer illiteratebrowser Window too small to work (5×6 cm on 17″ TFT) = internet doesn’t work any more (address bar was not visible)a physician and special application programmerTells me the company is responsible for safety, IE is fast enough and good enough and somehow he had no interest at all in other browsers. His argument for IE7 was that it is really beautiful.a windows programmerafter opening link in new IE window ALT+TAB became automatic behaviour (no need to have a feature to open a link in background)Lot’s of users (esp. feedback to my webpages)Most people seem not to use the browser in fullscreen window, but much smaller.From article on selfhtml.org (THE German HTML, CSS etc guide) the used viewport (visible pixel of the webpage) is pretty seldom the possible maximum. Besides toolbars and sidebars a pretty big number of users seem to have their browser window not in fullscreen.
> 1) I’d assume that less available and much more expensive internet access will lead> to a pretty much different user group.> a) much less percent of total population do have internet access> b) most of the internet users are either business people or tech freaks> If this is true I would expect a lot more people (the tech freaks) that carefully> select the software used and more to end up with a technological superior browser> (for the special needs you wrote about).Many people in Russia (even computer illiterate users) have internet access only at work. Many employers set restictive limits on the download traffic for each employee per month because otherwise the employees tend to use the bandwidth for their personal purposes, using both the work time and the traffic for which the employer pays. A figure of “maximum 100 Mb per month” is rather typical, and it becomes important that Opera can fit more browsing in those 100 Mb.I guess that your point “a” is true, but I can’t agree with point “b”. However, I believe that Opera users (not the internet users in general) in Russia are mostly technically skilled — at least skilled enough to understand the concept of “alternative browser” and download and install one.> 2) Another thing is old and slow hardware (I don’t know what the situation in Russia> is in this point).I can’t say that most of the hardware here is old. Russian users are even more likely to have modern and fast hardware than Europeans, especially in offices.> 3) Additionally I think there is a special cultural effect in Russia in relation to> Microsoft. In USA the pure strength of a company like Microsoft is something> positive and a lot of people therefor consciously like Microsoft (I read something> about 50%). In Germany there is a clearly higher percentage of Microsoft critical> people, because of the monopol, the evil marketing, the data privacy issues and> especially just because of the pure strength of Microsoft.> I’d expect in Russia the percentage of people that don’t like Microsoft to be even> much higher. If users don’t like a software company (for political reasons) they> will be much more likely to search active for alternatives.Yes, this might be the case. Another thing is that software piracy is still general practice in Russia. Most copies of Windows installed in Russia are illegal, especially in SOHO. This makes getting support and automatic updates harder, so people have less reasons to use IE. Many people prefer small and simple applications which:1. Ideally, don’t require installation at all — just copy them over and run.2. Don’t require administrative privileges to install.3. Don’t have complex auto-update facilities — maybe just check for new versions once in a while.4. Have a self-contained distribution which doesn’t attempt to download something from the Internet when the installation runs (like e.g. IE installer does).> Furthermore I’d be really interested about the way Firefox was introduced in Russia,> whether it had plublicity in non-tech media. And what’s the developement and current> situation of Firefox’s market share?Opera has been around here in Russia for much longer than Firefox. From my observation, Opera is more popular than Firefox here. Yet Firefox is more popular among people who prefer free software (free in the FSF sense) for ideological reasons.I haven’t seen any non-tech media coverage about either Opera or Firefox.
Thank you again Alexey for your detailed explanations,finally I could refine my own (pre)conception about Opera in Russia :cool:Christian
FF is open source and mainly created by volunteersThat is not true. There are ~40 people who make their living by programming firefox. Google pays for people that are sent via the inbuild search capacities to a google search.If you look at the amount of total firefox downloads against the numbers of the downloads of the extension you see that the majority of Firefox users don’t use extension, so I don’t think that this USP realy sells Firefox.
Originally posted by Brutha: FF is open source and mainly created by volunteers
That is not true. There are ~40 people who make their living by programming firefox. Google pays for people that are sent via the inbuild search capacities to a google search.
If you look at the amount of total firefox downloads against the numbers of the downloads of the extension you see that the majority of Firefox users don’t use extension, so I don’t think that this USP realy sells Firefox.I can totally agree on your points, nontheless the outcome is like I said. It is the public awareness that FF/Fx is open source, developed by volunteers and has extensions. This are reasons for spreading word about Firefox, more users downloading/using it and in the end generating a bigger market share. Just keep in mind: this is not about some real reasons, similar to the discussion of technical superiority.To be more detailed:FF/Fx surely is open sourcemost of the developers are volunteers but of course the payed employees have a major part in the developmentGoogle payed for every download of FF/Fx (if I remember correctly it was 1 Euro or Dollar, I don’t know whether this still happens) and they pay money for every time (the built in) Google search is used – quite like in Opera. Mozilla Foundation didn’t even know what to do with this money, I suppose they meanwhile found a solution for this problem.not a lot of the people that know about FF/Fx know about this pointsit is not needed that everybody uses extensions to have extensions to be something to speak about or to make (only) some of the users of extensions become real fans of FF/Fx. Word-of-mouth is working better with extensions.
this is an interesting read….. It takes a trial to love sex. same goes for Opera….