Slashdot Mirror
Why Mozilla Needs To Go Into Survival Mode
Crazzaper writes "I have been using Firefox for many years, and the war of the browsers has been around for longer than that. It just so happens that now we have a lot of options out there: IE, FF, Chrome, Opera, Safari, and others. People are always talking about how one browser is going to take down another, but maybe that's not the issue at all. It seems very possible that one browser, like Firefox, can be taken down by multiple browsers at once, whether or not there was any intention to compete specifically with Firefox. I hadn't seen it this way, but I do now."
What they need to do is remember why the project started and get back to that.
Themes in 3.6? WTF were they thinking?
Chrome and Safari both have excellent built in Web dev/javascript tools, I don't even miss Web Developer Toolbar.
So does this mean they have to stock up on rice and firearms and survival gear?
Unless, the extensions I use are ported to another browser, I couldn't change from Firefox.
One browser can be taken down by others? I thought they should have been competing on technical excellence instead of name recognition. Nobody was complaining when it was IE being taken down by Firefox! Falling into the trap that I like it so everyone should is just weakening yourself in the long-term. If something better than Firefox appears then the logical choice is bu-bye Firefox! But people are rarely logical and tend to just do what others are doing.
Shh.
They really just need to go on a diet.
Hey guys; remember how it was supposed to be a fast browser?
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
This will certainly interest you then: https://chrome.google.com/extensions
Here they start to appear for Chrome
What does Adblock give you that NoScript doesn't? "filter subscriptions"? Why should I have to worry about a blacklist when NoScript allows me to decide if my "web experience" is less than it should be and THEN unblock something?
Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
"Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
They should develop another browser, Firefaux, and make it appear to be the biggest threat in the browser wars. Firefox can then team up with Chrome and Opera to take down Firefaux, all the while distracting everyone from the need to take down Firefox instead. Just re-animate Firefaux as needed to keep up the distraction. No one will ever catch on to the connection between Firefox and Firefaux, and world domination will only be inevitable.
My webcomic
Survivor 10: Internet Edition. Web-browsers battle it our in the toughest of surfing environments: hundreds of tabs, incompatible add-ons, swamps of malware, installs on wristwatches! (Spoiler: In the finale, FireFox and IE team up (gasp!) in a last ditch effort to defeat young upstarts Safari and Chrome!)
You are looking at it from your perspective, but do the masses really care about these things? Firefox's position is actually pretty tenuous - it comes largely from geeks telling their friends to use it, but if the geeks get annoyed at Firefox (something that has already started) there could be a mass exodus. Also, Firefox depends largely on Google for its revenue; while Google has not indicated they will stop supporting firefox, they could end their relationship if Firefox becomes weak enough.
BTW, Chrome's adblocking is about as good as firefox's at this point.
to be.
Back in the early 1990s, it was seen as a threat by Microsoft to usurp the OS paradigm. They thought whoever controlled the browser market controlls the internet and what it can do -- the tail wagging the dog and it seemed like the future of computing was at stake. And for a while, it succeeded when IE took over and had ridiculously large marketshare.
But now that the ecosystem is more varied, the browser simply does not have this power. Until a browser become so dominant again that they can embrace, extend, extinguish standards, it really doesn't matter that much anymore. Now, the best browser is almost as impotent to change computing as the best picture viewing software (except for maybe data gathering and ad revenue) -- if everything is correctly specced JPGs, PNGs, etcetera -- the picture viewer doesn't matter that much and can be readily interchange with regards to personal preference.
Mobile phones is one exception but also because you can't swap out browsers/rendering engines.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Yes, Firefox has some issues. Yes, the Mozilla team needs to fix them. However, I think this article is being overly sensationalistic (surprise, surprise). In a wonderful bout of irony, the same forces that made long-standing IE users jump to FF are keeping them using FF. Some are averse to learning a new UI/control scheme, others needs certain extensions to remain productive. Then there are a few, like me, who don't see the performance/crashing issues that others report. I'm not saying that they don't exist, just that I haven't experienced them.
Additionally, FF has been approved for use in many businesses, as well as the DoD/DHS to run on their networks. Chrome, AFAIK, hasn't.
With these forces slowing down non-Firefox adoption, the Mozilla team has bought themselves some crucial time in the quest to right some of their browser's weaknesses. Hopefully they'll be able to meet that challenge, and, from reading the various blogs published to Planet Mozilla, I'm fairly confident that they will.
Its all fun and games until someone loses an eye... then its just fun.
I can't manage it in a corporate/enterprise environment. Push out updates? Not as a limited user. Push out configuration? Not simply. Push out plugins, or plugin updates? Not simple.
That, more than anything else, will keep firefox out of the enterprise/corporate markets. If that even matters to them, seeing how this is still an issue.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Personally I telnet to port 80. By whistling down my phone line really precisely. Using only zeroes, no ones.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
They are actually working on a mind controlled version of Firefox. Unfortunately it only works if you think in Russian.
Veramocor
The thing that concerns me the most is the issue with HTML5 video codecs. Microsoft, Google and Apple all want Flash to die. Apple's latest licensing change with iPhone OS 4.0 is a full-out declaration of war against Adobe.
HTML5, SVG, hyper-optimized Javascript and the embedded video tag will make Flash redundant. If Firefox cannot stay on the bleeding edge of these advancements then it does not stand a chance.
So I suggest less bells and whistles (skinning / themes, for example), and more concentration on HTML5 - especially the video codec licensing / patent issue.
Better known as 318230.
Mozilla/FF should focus on making it the best place to develop plugins and making the browser fast and stable. I don't care about anything else really.
Me and my colleague were using the spreadsheet app on google docs last night whilst on the phone. I made a remark that we should probably be using chrome instead of firefox due to the faster javascript. He decides to go with it then suddenly says to me "In the time it takes firefox to load, I've installed chrome, launched it and I'm back on google docs."
Firefox needs to get it's act together to keep up basically.
I hope Mozilla gets a clue about their video tag implementation while they still have a chance. It is quite obvious that sites want HTML5 but they also want to stream h264. If Mozilla doesn't provide a way to do this, the browser is going to get sidelined.
Chrome is the future because what could go wrong with giving one company complete domination of the Internet?
I don't have anything against Google, but the thought of them having the browser market share that IE currently has scares me. It is not unreasonable to think that it might happen. Google is already the overwhelmingly dominant search engine. They have been fairly successful at most of the things they have worked at.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Both Plug-ins are useful, Firebug can be quite cumbersome to load, even GMail detects it and give you a warning.
Please dont describe obscure brands like Firefox without providing an introduction.
For those of you that haven't heard, please see more at http://en.wikipedia.com/wiki/Firefox
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
Urgh. Can they not at least categorize their add-ons? Like, maybe, this?
Earlier today, I'd been surfing $otherTechSite in Chrome. The header loaded, but the content of the site wouldn't. Chrome indicated it was waiting on ad.doubleclick.net ...back to Firefox!
Perhaps you're so inured to the garish, Blade Runner-esque adspace that you don't need NoScript, but I enjoy not letting javascript execute as a matter of course.
Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
"Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
Google has the same search revenue agreement with Opera. What makes you think that perceived weakness would have anything to do with Google's continued support? If they're still getting hits and by extension ad revenue from Firefox users, why wouldn't they continue the agreement?
When people gush about Firefox extensions they gush about PARTICULAR extensions. They just don't mindlessly drone on about the feature in general. They tend to specifically cite what it is that they personally get out of the extensions that are available and what needs to be on competing browser.
All you've told me is that IE has some similar extension feature.
I have no clue whether or not any of those extensions are someone I would actually want to use.
Although IE just has a long history of being a malware magnet. Even if you compare pristine versions of browsers, IE sucks.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.