With the announcement made by Steve Jobs and the rest of the Apple crew it seems that the entire web was hyped or anti-hyped about the device. Of course it wasn't a surprise anymore that it would be a tablet. But the price and features make it a worthy opponent to the current Netbook market.

Starting at $499 for the 16 GB WiFi version up to $829 for the 32 GB WiFi+3G version, Apple wants to pretty much cover anyone. Whether teen, tween, or any other generation, the device may apply to you. For each their own, and such is the iPad, a general purpose device that Apple hopes to fill the gap between iPhone (smartphone) and Mac (notebook).

Looking at the device imminently reminds you of an iPhone or iPod touch XL, but the heavily customized iPhone OS, say iPad OS, in conjunction with the release of iWorks and iBooks makes it a new experience. Simply put, you might actually be able to use the iPad to write long e-mails, extensive browsing and reading eBooks. However being an almost a future device from either Mass Effect or Star Trek there is so much more potential. My guess is that the iPad will certainly sell well, but besides our simple needs as consumers it will also extend itself as a tool for medical care.

Imagine a doctor next to your bed reading your status chart (which shows a lot more info than a sheet), and updating it on the fly, administered in the medical care cloud. Before you know it everything will be dealt with and hopefully you can be treated, or going home soon with much less hassle. Or in the education you could see school kids not dragging heavy bags, but just an iPad with their school books in eBook (ePub) format. And of course their assignments are typed in, papers are send per e-mail and history lessons with text, video and interactive elements will never be the same.

The way we consider computers will never be the same. Let's face it. We are the technical people, sometimes referred to as nerds or geeks, or just enthusiasts. Let's not put labels on groups of people though. But what I'm getting at is that a large portion of people does not want to be bother by the computer, but wants to use it. A closed environment like the iPad is exactly what they want. No hassle, just go surf, read e-mail, or play a game. No weird errors, no difficult installs or uninstalls, no viruses, no other web browser but Safari.

Wait, hmm let me explain. I love Safari, I especially adore its engine WebKit, a love apparently shared by Google as well, hence the inclusion in Chrome. And with such a cutting edge web browser being even more widespread available, we as web standards supports cannot but be happy. But I believe that a free product, such as Safari, should be allowed to have competition on the App Store. Currently players like Opera, Mozilla and Google cannot participate because it duplicates function as a competitive product. Of course Apple does not want direct competition of it's iTunes, App Store or iBooks Library. After all that's where the money truly is. But a web browser with richer or innovative features is not something you should block.

Hopefully Apple will reconsider some App Store restrictions as they have with VoIP. As the iPad with WiFi+3G has no "phone" application (nor SMS), VoIP is a valuable alternative to have voice conversations. Similarly having the option of other web browsers on App Store should enrich the user experience.

Anyway, I'll definitely buy it. I really believe this is the device we've been waiting for to accompany the computer (PC or Mac). Over the years we'll see much heavier interaction between our computer and tablet. If you were working on a paper and want to continue re-reading what you've written you just drag it out of your screen to your tabled, and walk away with your coffee and tablet to sit outside. The Apple A4 SoC is already very powerful but new CPU/GPU evolutions is certainly taking place there with giant leaps. And once the LCD is replaced by some kind of Pixel Qi inspired technology (with superb colors, and refresh rate) you'll by all means have forgotten why this was even discussed at all. As long as Apple keeps the device open for alternatives, I have no problem seeing them as one of the major players.

Google may be the biggest competitor to Microsoft on a whole scale of non traditional ways, but one thing is definitely true, they are pushing new technologies where they can.

Where Apple dominated the new wave of touch-screen mobile devices, Android is opening up the market by exposing a similar OS albeit with multi-tasking and customization. In the same approach not pleased with the slow development of Firefox (hey where is that new update approach coming from Mozilla, and why?) they introduced a new way of browsing the web with the fastest JS performance and multi-processes.

Today is the day that they push technology in another way, though with a sharp edge to it. We already know that HTML 5 comes with the video-tag and that there have been arguments about whether support for the different encoders should be part of the specification. Currently encoders don't play a role, and Google opted for the most superior encoder out there, but with a cost.

H.264 is the new standard to be used for Google's latest HTML 5 experiment for YouTube, but the thing is only Chrome (Frame) and Safari support it. H.264 requires that you pay a certain sum, and although Mozilla must have the money (from the Google search deal), they do not support it, heck they only support the open-source OGG format.

Anyway, if you have Chrome (Frame) or Safari, you can now enjoy the HTML 5 video-tag without the need for Flash, and with perhaps better quality at the new YouTube page. You can opt-in here if you have a supported browser.

Apple is shrouded with mystery so the new maintenance release of Safari comes out of the nothingness. Suffice to say that it is a recommended update for all Safari users, either on Mac or Windows.

The most important changes are the security fixes within this release affecting both Mac and Windows platforms (some are shared, some are unique). According to Apple's change log this release comes with three major improvements: improved JavaScript performance (always welcome!), improved full history search performance (when having a big history) and stability improvements for search plug-ins.

The release will appear for Mac and Windows users in the Software Update (but can also be manually triggered in the Apple menu, or by launching it manually from the Windows start menu). The full download is also available from Apple's web site.

Since the early days Opera Software has been renowned for their web browser, their support for (open) web standards, and their strictness in following it. But besides supporting the web they are known as innovators, at a level where other companies, including the oh so beloved Apple, look at for the next step in their own web browsers.

But recently it seems that a lot of (casual) people regard Opera Software entirely differently. While ignoring history and Opera's innovations, people seem to see Opera as a sore loser, who has failed where Firefox succeeded, and is on the verge of extinction. People especially see the recent case by the European Commission, to bring equilibrium in the browser market, as Opera Software's doing. But nothing is that simple...

Let's start with the European Commission case (which currently only applies to EU citizens). Originally Opera Software asked the EC to take a look into the case where Microsoft bundles Internet Explorer with Windows, and causes unfair competition. This applies only to Windows, because Microsoft controls a monopoly (which is specified in the EU rules) and therefor also has a strong grip on the web (which they first failed to pick up in the early days).

Long ago when Netscape was still a good company, everything changed, Microsoft began bundling IE with Windows (especially using OEM releases) and slowly but surely gained enough momentum (in combination with Netscape's failing in bringing the rewrite on time) to capture the market. After that innovation stalled, IE broke the web with flawed standards support. While Netscape survived in the shape of Mozilla, it was a time when Opera was one of the few survivors that kept working on web standards and innovation. Well, we know how it goes after that, Mozilla Suite didn't get a lot of people, but with hard good work Firefox came to be, and at the right time with the insecureness awareness of Windows and IE they created enough momentum to become popular. Of course there must have been some jealousy at Opera Software on how Firefox was embraced and gained popularity. But there has never been hate up in the north, and truth to be told, Opera did gain a lot of users as well, as people got aware, awakened if you'd like. Even Opera learned from Firefox, as it became free when enough revenue was gained from other sources, such as Google and Yahoo! searches. Currently Opera Software is financially strong, and has a strong hand in the mobile (Windows, Symbian, Java) market, as well as devices (Wii, DS, Zii). Like any healthy company Opera Software wants more, more market share, more money, etc. But unlike other companies, they still value their own vision, of keeping the web open, on any device, for any one out there.

But back to the EC case against Microsoft. After it was decided that Microsoft needed to create a Windows XP N Edition, without the Windows Media Player, the legal munchos at Opera Software saw fit to ask, I said ask not force, the EC to look into the browser market. As it nearly seems an identical case the EC was quick to pick up, as this time there are several companies still at stake here. Note that from this point on Opera Software hasn't done anything, the EC was asked to investigate and have found out that Microsoft indeed has been misusing their position for their web browser. Any decision by the EC is done without Opera, Mozilla, Apple, Google or Microsoft. All the companies are free to give their comments, advice and support for the case. So has Opera Software done for the last months, they've suggested a ballot screen and apparently EC (and several allies) finds in interesting as well. You'll have to understand that things like this are more or less organic developments, as you've probably read Microsoft has turned around and worked on documents for the ballot screen with their proposal of rules for inclusion and display. It's up to the EC to approve or disapprove, and the folks at Opera/Mozilla have spoken aloud on the web what they thought of it. So as you can see, Opera cannot force the EC, as they work independently, any justice or injustice directed at Microsoft comes from the EC directly.

However it doesn't help that several people at Opera Software have said things that were either, ripped from context, or simple reversed questions. A lot of what has been said were advice or (wild) ideas, and yes they sounded bad, like whining as some have said. No, I don't agree that Opera should be in Windows Update, I would go for a global unified update system that all apps, whether browser or not can plug into, such as the update feature in Linux (though apt, yum, etc.) or App Store (iPhone/iPod touch). Whether then to dismiss or argue any of the comments from some Opera folks you should ask yourself, am I too emotional, could they simply be wrong this time? EC case or not, use Opera, or any other browser because you like it, it's features, the looks. Remember that everybody is human, and no doubt some people say stuff with emotion or get wrongly quoted (for sensational purposes). Take some distance, and be "nuchter" about it (yeah look that word up... hint, it's dutch).

Looking at Opera 10 there are of course things missing and we all, yeah me too I confess, say bad stuff about it. It's not because the entire thing is bad or evil, but because we know, we feel that something could become so much more. Imagine Opera 11, with the super fast JavaScript engine (equal to Chrome), ICC profile version 4 support, Vegas for 3D acceleration, private browsing mode, etc. We know it's unrealistic to have it all in one go, however we also all know that it should be there to finish of the competition. But the truth is, it's not possible, not without a healthy balance between work force and financial results. Opera 10 comes already with so much more. First of all the folks listened to us by bringing spell check (with dictionary download), major improvements to the mail client (really there isn't much else out there that's free and good), auto-update, a brand new look, and much, much more.

Opera Software is still the same as we know it, innovation and fighting for an open web (heck why do you think they don't sue people with random patents). Remember this first and foremost, distance yourself from the EC case, and remain "nuchter" while seeking out the "why" someone says something, and remember that everybody makes mistakes.

The dashing folks at Apple have released a new maintenance release of the popular browser Safari, which currently holds a respectful third position.

According to Apple's changelog in the Software Update application, Safari 4.0.3 comes with improvements to stability, compatibility and security including: stability improvements for webpages that use the HTML 5 video tag, fixes an issue that prevented some users from logging into iWork.com, and fixes an issue that could cause web content to be displayed in greyscale instead of color.

As expected this release is a recommended update for everyone using Safari, both on Mac and Windows. You can trigger it by launching Software Update manually or by downloading the entire installation file. Hopefully it won't be too long before we can get our hands on Safari for Snow Leopard, which is 64 bit and may perform up to 50% faster with JavaScript using Nitro.

Known for their benchmarks tools, Futuremark has released their first application to measure browser speed (on any platform). Futuremark hopes to provide the one true tool, while we've been toying with browser specific benchmarks, such as SunSpider.

The Peacekeeper benchmarking suite is now freely available as an online application. And, by use of a query parameter can be run in multiple browsers, without losing individual results. The tests done by Peacekeeper measure your browser's performance by testing its JavaScript functionality. The chosen functionality should be representative for popular sites, such as YouTube, GMail, Facebook, etc.

Running the benchmark on my own machine:

• 4425 .:. Safari 4.0.2
• 2595 .:. Chrome 3.0.197
• 1998 .:. Firefox 3.5.2
• 1414 .:. Opera 10 Build 6604

iMac with Mac OS X 10.5.8, 3.06 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo (6 MB, 1.07 GHz FSB), 4 GB 800 MHz DDR2 SDRAM

As you can see, Nitro (Safari 4) wins as expected (it's after all Apple's turf), and V8 (Chrome) still needs some work, but clearly beats the rest already. For Firefox and Opera there is still some work to be done, while Firefox 3.6 will bring some extra speed, it won't be too big to close in on Chrome and Safari. Opera is working diligently on their new engine, but won't be part of Opera 10, so we'll have to wait until we'll see some real numbers.

So what kind of scores did you get? And do benchmarks make you switch browsers?

Update: The new Safari 4.0.3 now clocks at 4507 points on my iMac. Woohoo!

Update 2: The new Opera 10 Beta 3 (6613) clocks at 1550 points. Nice!

The Kronos Group has announced the formation of the WebGL webgroup, which should bring 3D graphics to the web. Using JavaScript bindings with OpenGL, it should bring 3D support without the need for any browser plug-ins.

The Kronos Group is known for their work on OpenGL 3, as well as the mobile OpenGL ES standards and the recent OpenCL standard. Previously the Kronos Group announced with Mozilla a joined effort to bring a 3D standard to the web, and now they've announced their final plans. Following Mozilla's prototype they plan to make a JavaScript binding between the browser and OpenGL ES 2.0. Third parties can work on APIs on top of this, to offer richer experiences (as OpenGL is the most abstract form).

Since the announcements other browser companies joined in, including Opera Software and Google. You might think why Google, as they already work on O3D. But O3D is a plug-in (which may be bundled with Chrome), and requires a separate installation, hampering easy adoption. However O3D also offers better 3D performance, which will unlikely be matched by WebGL. Henceforth Google will support WebGL, while work continues on O3D, which may offer more and better opportunities for faster and much richer 3D content (Runescape and Quake Live in O3D?).

No word yet on support from Apple (who participates in the Kronos Group) or Microsoft (another member), hopefully we'll see some announcement soon and prevent this upcoming standard from being yet another failed 3D standard.

Reuters reports that Microsoft is trying to solve two EU cases at the same time by letting users choose their browser, rather than IE or no browser at all.

The solution is one of we've discussed before, using a dialog at the first boot of Windows to let the user choose their default installed browser. If this will be part of Windows 7 it could be seen as a big victory for Opera (and those in favor, such as Mozilla and Google).

Of course the details are still a bit sketchy: will it be included in Windows 7, which browsers will be offered as a choice, will Microsoft actually (properly) educate about what the choices mean (or let browser vendors speak for themselves)?