Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla to Develop Mobile Firefox

Kelson writes "Mozilla has announced a new initiative to bring Mozilla to the mobile web, including a fully functional mobile version of Firefox (yes, with extensions). The focus will be part of Mozilla 2, the big revision coming after Gecko 1.9 and Firefox 3. Minimo, the previous attempt to port Mozilla to mobile platforms, is apparently dead, but 'has already provided us with valuable information about how Gecko operates in mobile environments, has helped us reduce footprint, and has given us a platform for initial experimentation in user experience.'"

11 of 152 comments (clear)

  1. it's a pattern of behaviour by User+956 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Mozilla has announced a new initiative to bring Mozilla to the mobile web, including a fully functional mobile version of Firefox (yes, with extensions).

    The thing I like about Firefox, is it's something people can really embrace, and extend.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
  2. reduced footprint? by moderatorrater · · Score: 5

    I wish they would carry those lessons over to firefox sometime soon.

  3. What is with the Mozilla naming conventions? by R2.0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is it really necessary to consult a chart to make sense of their products?

    "Mozilla 2, the big revision coming after Gecko 1.9 and Firefox 3."

    So 2 is after 1.9, but is also after 3. But it's Firefox 3. But the product named Mozilla, the suite, stopped at 1.7.X, and was replaced by Seamonkey 1.0, which is really Mozilla 1.8.

    Anybody?

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    1. Re:What is with the Mozilla naming conventions? by domatic · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Firefox 3" refers to an upcoming product release that will use the "Gecko 1.9" html/web renderer. "Mozilla 2" apparently refers to the APIs and release products based on them that will be what developers focus on once current developments (FF3 and Gecko 1.9) are finished.

    2. Re:What is with the Mozilla naming conventions? by savala · · Score: 5, Informative

      Mozilla 2 == Gecko 2. Mozilla is the catchall name for the platform, with a version number equal to that of the rendering engine.

      Individual products (such as Firefox, SeaMonkey, Camino, Thunderbird, etc, etc, etc) all have their own versioning scheme, as decided upon by their respective marketing people. This is the only number end-users should care about (for their own favorite product), but developers can always refer back to the gecko/mozilla version to know how these products relate to each other.

  4. Reduced footprint by jimktrains · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Perhapses that knowledge could allow them to reduce the footprint of the full sized version, maybe? Hopefully?

    --
    "You will do foolish things, but do them with enthusiasm." - S. G. Colette
  5. Already using Mozilla Browser on my N800 by c41rn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Check out MicroB, a mozilla-based browser for the Maemo platform on the N800. I prefer it to the default Opera-based browser that the N800 ships with. It's based on Gecko 1.9.

  6. Google Phone by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Funny

    This isn't surprising considering Google's recent purchase of Mozilla, and the search giant's new focus on mobile with their Google Phone.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  7. Re:By the time.... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Insightful
    FTFA:

    Getting a no-compromise web experience on devices requires significant memory (>=64MB) as well as significant CPU horsepower. High end devices today are just approaching these requirements and will be commonplace soon For example, the iPhone has 128MB of DRAM and somewhere between a 400 to 600 MHz processor. It is somewhere between 10x-100x slower on scripting benchmarks than a new MacBook Pro and somewhere between 3-5x slower than an old T40 laptop on the same wifi network. But rapid improvements in mobile processors will close this gap within a few years.

    I find this to be a rather shocking statement. The author is claiming that a handheld that meets the minimum requirements for a modern web browser on a desktop OS is not quite sufficient to run an embedded version? If that's really the consensus of the Mozilla developers, then my opinion is that they need to reevaluate how their approaching phone handsets. It is not a desktop platform, nor will you get the best experience by treating a handset as a desktop platform. As Apple and Opera have been showing with their embedded browsers, the interface should be designed around the phone rather than forcing the phone to be designed around the interface.
  8. Re:A new name? by butterwise · · Score: 5, Funny

    I prefer FoxBile.

    --
    If a baby duck is a "duckling," why would anyone want to eat "dumplings?"
  9. Reduced memory footprint?? by Em+Ellel · · Score: 4, Funny

    Firefox on mobile devices? Great, but where do I get 2GB of ram for my treo?

    --
    RelevantElephants: A Somatic WebComic...