Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Firefox Mobile Reaches 1.0

Posted by timothy on from the how's-it-handle-baroque-javascript dept.

Majix writes "Firefox Mobile, the mobile browser developed by Mozilla based on the same engine as in the recently released Firefox 3.6, has finally hit version 1.0. The first device to be officially supported is the Nokia N900. With a long list of features, Firefox Mobile looks to be the most complete mobile browser to date. Highlights include the familiar Awesome Bar, Weave Sync for sharing your browser state between your PC and mobile, and of course tabbed browsing and Firefox add-ons. With the Nokia 900 and Firefox Mobile 1.0, even Flash content including the normal YouTube site is working, showing that a mobile browser does not have to equal a compromised Internet experience."

10 of 198 comments (clear)

  1. One device? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They released version 1.0 and that's all they support? A whole one device?

    More development needed methinks.

    1. Re:One device? by quenda · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, it is worse. They support the one and only mobile phone which does not need it.
      The N900 already has an excellent mozilla-based web browser in MicroB. Fennec is very slow in comparison, and unlike to get much acceptance in it's current form.
      (what the n900 needs is a half-decent maps program, or a better mail client, or jave-ME, ... not another browser.)

  2. ??? Ok then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Firefox Mobile looks to be the most complete mobile browser to date."

    Perhaps if you ignore Opera, Safari and Netfront.. Otherwise, from what I have seen, it mostly sucks pretty bad...

  3. Symbian by heffrey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why select a minority platform with no devices? Surely someone sane would develop for S60 and perhaps iPhone first (perhaps because Safari probably quite entrenched with iPhone users).

    1. Re:Symbian by barzok · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Doesn't Apple still prohibit 3rd-party web browsers on iPhone because they would directly compete with software offered by Apple?

    2. Re:Symbian by ducomputergeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It would never be allowed on the iPhone. Apple prohibits any apps that complete with their offerings. So no browsers other than Safari. That being said, why didn't they target blackberry first?

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  4. Re:How about the iPad? by Lifyre · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And he answered the GGP's question.

    --
    I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
  5. Re:How about the iPad? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not so much the OS as the app store. Apple won't allow apps that can run code, or apps that duplicate existing functionality. A browser does both. Porting it to run on the iPhone wouldn't be too hard, but then only people using jailbroken phones could use it.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  6. You fail... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Um, you're confusing Opera Mini with Opera Mobile, which is a full browser.

  7. Re:Highlights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The awesome bar is not awesome. It's shit.

    But those who like it will never agree with those who don't. The biggest problem was that such a major change to the browser was forced on all users - support for FF2 was dropped when 3 came out (or shortly afterwards). There are some workarounds and an extension that tries to bring back the sensible functionality, but it's still not the same.

    The awful bar should have been an extension. Even if Mozilla felt it had to be with the browser, if it were an extension it could be removed properly.

    I think NoScript is pretty awesome (well, I don't - I am just using the same stupid word you did. NS is a good idea, and massively increases security, and reduces annoyances). Should NoScript type functionality should be built into the browser? How would you like it if there was a major change in functionality when you already know how to use a tool, a tool that worked fine in the first place?

    I really wish there were a fork of FF that trimmed it back down to being close to its original aim: to be a sleek, fast, browser with an extension system to add functionality.....

    The awesome bar is so bad that I still haven't upgraded any installs of FF to v3 (and distros that come with FF3 have had it replaced with 2). I have even been using Seamonkey, as that hasn't been ruined to chase the clueless IE users. Yes, that is why FF is being dumbed down, to pander to fuckwits who don't know (and are so anti-intellectual that they refuse to read documentation) that the browser already had searchable bookmarks, and searchable history.

    It is funny how people justify the awful bar being good for everyone, because of their specific need. I'm sure all users need the awful bar in case they need to access the same server, but on a different port. It saves them a few key strokes, and for the hunter-peckers this is good.