Mozilla Tests Integrated Desktop Browser

HelloDotJPEG writes "Mozilla Labs, the organisation's experimental arm, has launched Prism for interested Windows users to try out. Prism is a piece of software which integrates web applications such as Gmail or Google Reader into the desktop. The program enables you to run multiple such sites as though they were local applications, each in their own dedicated browser window. The product isn't entirely new, but is an officially adopted and rebranded update to the Site-Specific Browser project WebRunner (not to be confused with XULRunner upon which it is built). From the site: 'Web developers don't have to target it separately, because any application that can run in a modern standards-compliant web browser can run in Prism. Prism is built on Firefox, so it supports rich internet technologies like HTML, JavaScript, CSS, and and runs on Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux. And while Prism focuses on how web apps can integrate into the desktop experience, we're also working to increase the capabilities of those apps by adding functionality to the Web itself, such as providing support for offline data storage and access to 3D graphics hardware.'"

Comments

Neat idea

[ThirdPrize]

Dunno if i would ever use it. However if you were rolling out Googles web apps in an office enviroment then it might make life easier for the users. More of a desktop paradigm then a bunch of URLs.

Another active desktop?

[MichaelSmith]

I think it was almost ten years ago when Microsoft came out with active desktop and Netscape countered with something which was really a browser window taking up the whole screen and called a desktop.

I never saw either being used. Is this the same thing?

XSS more of a concern than virus

[Nicolas MONNET]

I don't care much about viruses, running Linux and all ... however XSS (cross-site scripting) is more of a concern. And site-specific browsers could be a good way to limit their reach, if they keep one set of cookies each.

Re:Woohoo!

[ztransform]

But my question is: will I have to shut down all my prism applications if I want to restart the browser engine? Or will all prism apps run as a separate instance..

Re:Wow, people are sick

[Aladrin]

You contradicted yourself a bit, but I think I understand. The techie users don't like web-based apps, but the non-techie users and the techie admins DO like them. And that's the answer.

Personally, even though I'm techie, I'm sick of running servers at my house. I'd much rather let Google run my mail, calendar, etc, and have a webhost for my site. I'm happy to pay a company for VOIP instead of running asterisk, and I don't have to worry about major downtime if my 'server' dies. It costs more, but the time I don't have to spend upgrading and maintaining hardware is worth it. I get to have fun at home, and all the essentials are 'off-site'.

In fact, one of the things I've been wishing lately was that I could get Firefox to run in 2 separate processes, since it tends to crash (lots of flash-based sites) and take down my work as well as my play stuff I'm doing. If this will keep them separate (on linux!) then I'm happy. Also, I've had times when I needed to use a proxy in 1 browser and not use a proxy in the other, and firefox doesn't like to do that even if you tunnel one from another computer. My current solution is to use Opera for 1, but that means I can't use a lot of my extras, like better-gmail and noscript.

Personally, I hope this works well. I don't think it's a revolution, but rather a nice feature.

Re:Woohoo!

[griffjon]

This is indeed a great start; I'd also like to see Moz replicate (and take over) the embedded browser controls that many other Windows apps lean on IE's crutch for (Google Earth, Winamp, etc.)

Re:Wow, people are sick

[Aladrin]

Yes, but if 1 crashes, do they all crash? That's the main issue.

Firefox appears to only let you use 1 profile at a time.

Re:And the point of this is.....?

[rbanffy]

I use to teach my students JavaScript and DOM, then let them build a, say, calculator.

They loved to develop client-side stuff and made some very impressive things in a couple weeks.

Then I would present them the wonderful world of forms and XMLHttpRequest stuff.

If you don't insist on using XML, it's even fun to do.

Google killing Thunderbird?

[David Jao]

I saw this point raised on LWN recently, and it seems relevant to bring it up here. Any observer who connects the dots will realize that Mozilla is killing off their Thunderbird email client, intentionally, and is doing so at the behest of Google.

Let's look at the facts. Mozilla is a highly profitable organization. You would think that Mozilla could afford to spend at least a little money on hiring Thunderbird developers. Yet in reality Mozilla has done the opposite: they have completely abandoned Thunderbird.

Why? Because of money.

The vast majority of Mozilla's income comes from Google. One of Google's main products is Gmail. Thunderbird competes with Gmail. So it makes sense that Google wants Thunderbird dead. Of course, they're not going to announce their intentions in a press release, but in reality that's exactly what's going on. Announcements like this one only make their plan more obvious than before.

This kind of anti-competitive behavior is exactly why most Slashdot readers hate Microsoft. Why is Google getting a free pass here?

Doesn't work so well on the typical website.

[Aladrin]

I just tried it. (On gaiaonline.com, if you must know.) Horrid. Why?

Websites are designed to be used in a browser. Removing all the controls and stuff makes them hard to navigate, and the lack of tabs is quite a pain as well. I've seen that it has settings to add the navigation/etc back in, but then... Isn't it back to just being a browser? The biggest problem with this is that sites aren't designed for it.

In fact, I just tried it in GMail (on our domain) as well, and other than the fact that it's in a seperate process from firefox and they shouldn't crash each other, it's crap. If you click any of the links at the top, they open in browser. (I assume this will still be the case if you can 'installed' the 'app' for those as well.) None of the firefox extensions are available. Speed (of course) isn't improved.

And the worst part? Making it happen for a new site means creating a file, zipping it, and launching it separately. I could write a script that will quickly do that for me from a URL, but I shouldn't have to.

Unless I'm extensively working with a site that tends to crash the browser, I doubt I'll get much use out of this.

Re:iPod like comments

[Frosty Piss]

But nowadays people are using less and less local applications and more and more web applications ...

I don't think this is supported by fact. Maybe Webie Speak PR, but not reality.