Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla Heading to Mobiles

mu22le writes "CNET News.com has an interview with Doug Turner, the project leader of Minimo, the version of Mozilla for small devices. The article (also commented upon at mozillazine) roams from the challenges a small devices browser presents to the competition with Opera for Mobile. Brace yourself for the forthcoming Minimo 0.3, due in January."

16 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. Eventual PPC port? by SIGALRM · · Score: 4, Interesting
    "We can be ported to many platforms that Opera can't," he said. "Mozilla has been developed to work on every flavor of Unix and every type of processor, chip or widget set."
    Exciting project. I hope they eventually port Minimo to the Pocket PC; I have an iPAQ 6315 PPC Phone Edition and happily abandoned Pocket IE in favor of the far superior Thunderhawk browser. However, Thunderhawk is subscription-based ($49.95/yr), so I'd be very interested in a Mozilla port for my PPC.
    --
    Sigs cause cancer.
    1. Re:Eventual PPC port? by Herr_Nightingale · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've been following the project for a while now, and Pocket PC is not even on the roadmap; Minimo is strictly *nix. Also, it requires a gigantic chunk of memory (min. 32MB) to run, and it's far from fast. There is absolutely no comparison to Opera. None.
      Mobile Opera is tiny (like 200k!!) and super-efficient, but only runs on smartphones right now.
      It looks like we have a chance of seeing Opera on the iPaq sooner than Minimo, even though Opera too doesn't care much for Pocket PC.

      In the meantime, try NetFront 3.1 - it's sweet. But it doesn't work on 2003SE in landscape mode.

  2. Palm in the future? by ISEENOEVIL · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Blazer, the browser that comes installed with the Treo 650 smartphones, is usable, but I have had some stability issues with it and there are a few quirks here and there. Having the option of a Mozilla based browser on something like the 650 would be a blessing, especially considering the costs of many Palm applications.

    This is my first Palm, and to get it to do the really interesting things you have to spend 29.95 on this application, 39.95 on that, etc. After spending as much money on a Smartphone, I am hesitant to shell out more money for expensive applications. Heck, I am unwillingly. (Lets not mention bluetooth accessories)

    The CNET interview makes it sound like the Minimo team knows how to make a worthwhile portable browser that I would immediately jump to. Shrinking the unimportant images, zooming in and out quickly on a page, and providing better support for Javascript and frames can only be steps in the right direction for small browsers.

    I didn't see Palm mentioned in the article, so its only a hope. If this wouldn't work on Palm based devices, I wonder if Palms latest linux initiative rumblings would eventually lead to compatibility down the road? Tabbed browsing on the crisp 650 display would be nice.

  3. I'd use it if... by teiresias · · Score: 4, Informative

    Now if I just use one of my micro mobile devices for browsing the web...

    My cellphone, my pda, hell probably my digital camera can probably get on the Internet. But if you think I'm browsing webpages on that kind of screen your nuts.

    My hats off Doug Turner and to the guys programming Minimo but I just don't browse the web on my micro devices. I use them for their other features.

    --
    -Teiresias
  4. Ummm... by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Informative

    32 to 64 megs is lightweight?
    Man that seems like a pretty heavy memory requirement.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:Ummm... by Rosonowski · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think that's more of a "total system memory" thing.

      PDAs tend to come in 16,32,64, and the occasional 128MB models.

      --
      01101001 01100001 01101101 01101110 01101111 01110100 01100001 01101100 01100001 01110111 01111001 01100101 01110010
  5. Minimo is fine and good, but how about "Tweety?" by Chillybott · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Or some other aptly named mini-version of Thunderbird for a handheld. I care much more about being able to synching my mail and calendar to my PDA via a bluetooth or wifi connection than I do about browsing the web. And enough with HotSynch already - now that these toys are wifi enabled, let's use regular file transfer methods and regular mail protocols to transfer this information - as if it were a hand sized laptop...

    --
    You gotta make something explode to really understand it...examine all those tiny particles while they're still on fire.
  6. banner ads by gad_zuki! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The biggest problem with using the sidekick on non-mobile pages is how much longer rendering/downloading takes for sites heavy with ads. The proxies should be filtering these out. Its not like anyone is losing money, as they're next to impossible to read on my tiny screen and if the mobile people think people are buying stuff from banners ads on mobile devices, then they're just fooling themselves.

  7. I thought Firefox was Streamlined by Photar · · Score: 3, Funny

    And here I thought that Firefox was the streamlined mini browser of choice.

    How long before all the geeks are using Minimo and proclaiming firefox as bloatware?

    --
    He who knows not and knows he knows not is a wise man. He who knows not and knows not he knows not is a fool.
  8. Re:How long before Opera starts enforcing patents? by kmmatthews · · Score: 4, Funny

    Allow me to be the first to say:
    You, sir, are an ass monkey.

    --
    feh. stuff.
  9. Re:a light browser by Apreche · · Score: 3, Insightful

    firefox takes 133 MB of RAM? What is wrong with your computer? On this windows machine here at school it takes 23MB. And it takes even less on my Linux boxen at home. You must have installed some pretty heavy extensions and startup up some pretty crazy plugins to get it to use that much RAM.

    --
    The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
  10. Minimo! by matt4077 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Stop humping the laser!

  11. It's a race to the bottom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, OSS is essentially a "race to the bottom" to see who can devalue the software market the most. Even a superior "non-free" (as in beer) version cannot survive since most people will choose the free version to save a few bucks. Others will simply pirate the non-free version since the free version has established (in their minds) that the cost for such type of software should be zero.

    After since these Mozilla folks can give it away for free, why shouldn't the Opera folks? It doesn't matter that the pay version may be better. It is simply a race to the bottom and frequently results in cheap "free" copies ruining the chance for quality comercial software.

  12. To summarize parent, by kmmatthews · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Ooooh, it doesn't work for me, I can't be bothered to read the fricking docs and figure out how to make it work, it's trash and you shouldn't use it.. "

    --
    feh. stuff.
  13. VGA PPCs by chman · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've got a Loox 720, which has a fabulous VGA screen. Except, it may as well not have one, because everything is just double the size for compatibility's sake. PocketIE just doubles the size of all graphics, making web browsing a real chore on non-mobile-optimised sites. There's a workaround, that involves using SEVGA or OzVGA to eliminate this pixel-doubling, but that breaks a lot of applications, and just looks ugly in others. Better support for VGA devices is crucial if whatever's left of the market is going to go anywhere, as the increased resolution adds so much functionality to these devices - web browsing, email, even Office functionality such as viewing spreadsheets becomes feasible. MS really dropped the ball here. Has anyone had any luck with other apps? I'm using PIE with MultiIE, which is a great addon, but it's annoying having to soft reset every time I want to do some web browsing.

    --
    This comment was formatted for readability, but I forgot the line break tags
  14. Re:Dandy, but... by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Either quit bitching or MAKE THE APP SUPPORT it.

    You presume that most people using Open Source application $X are also skilled enough programmers that they could implement any desired missing features themselves, given the inclination. That has the mark of a self-fulfilling prophecy to me -- if non-developers are made to feel unwelcome, then only developers will bother using Open Source projects.

    Those who can, do. Those who can't, ask those who can nicely to consider adding the features you want for you. If you can prove your idea is good, someone will be willing to help.