Slashdot Mirror


Firefox Home Coming To iPhone, Browser Next?

siliconbits writes "Mozilla has launched an iPhone app called Firefox Home that gives iPhone users instant access to their Firefox browsing history, bookmarks, and the set of tabs from their most recent browser session. What's more, it provides Firefox Awesome Bar capability that enables people to get to their favorite websites with minimal typing." With the Mozilla blog promising "There will be more to come," can the full browser be far behind?

41 of 170 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Surprising by delinear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It doesn't seem like much of an ifiltration if all it does (by the sound of it) is allow you to open your Firefox bookmarks, etc in the native iPhone browser and provide a search bar that does the same thing. Still nice to have the option to take your bookmarks across to the mobile device, though, and it might help win/retain a little FF mindshare but a far cry from the win that native FF on the iPhone would be.

  2. Re:Surprising by dzfoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's perfectly understandable. Most Apple-bashing zealots have assumed from the beginning that Apple is engaged in an all-out war against anybody and everybody, for some irrational control-freakery bout they have attained. So it may seem surprising when their entrenched, biased opinions are rattled by an otherwise business-savvy move that seems too rational.

            -dZ.

    --
    Carol vs. Ghost
    ...Can you save Christmas?
  3. You think that's surprising? by pizzach · · Score: 2, Informative

    Today on Mac Rumors they posted a story saying that Steve Ballmer will be at the next WWDC keynote with Jobs showing "The new version of Visual Studio will reportedly allow developers to write native applications for the iPhone, iPad and Mac OS."

    --
    Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
    1. Re:You think that's surprising? by Xest · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, unfortunately following through the links it seems to be entirely unfounded, and little more than a guess that Ballmer is going to turn up, followed by a guess it'll be about Visual Studio 2010.

      The wording also says "Chowdhry says the new version of VS will allow developers to write native applications for the iPhone, iPad and Mac OS.". Which we know is false because VS2010 is already out and has no such support, unless he's suggesting they'll follow it up with some downloadable addon.

      If Microsoft are turning up I'd wager it's more likely going to be about an Apple/Bing tie-in after Apple fell out with Google, or perhaps something about Microsoft's new web based version of Office being compatible with the iPad or something dull.

      It seems unlikely they'd invest time doing something in Visual Studio that would require a lot of work (new language support, new binary format support/emulator required, new compiler support etc.), and doesn't really benefit them or their customers whatsoever. I just don't really see what they'd gained by it, particularly at a time when Apple has been killing off 3rd party development environments, and is facing potential court cases over it to boot.

    2. Re:You think that's surprising? by Cyberax · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Technically, it's not that hard for MS to add this support. Objective-C/C++ is just a plain C with some preprocessor magic, and VS in its current iteration is quite extensible.

      Certainly, adding support for another language is possible as a simple add-on (for example, Nemerle language has one - http://rsdn.ru/article/nemerle/Nemerle.VsIntegration-en.xml ).

  4. Re:Desktop? by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is an extension you need called Firefox Sync. Just install it and it walks you through the sync process. IIRC you just need to set up an account with a password and choose what to sync. The data is encrypted by YOUR password which they don't know (so they can't peek at your data). Works with Firefox for desktop and Firefox Mobile. It was called Weave when it was in development.

    Keep an eye on labs.mozilla.org, cool stuff on there.

  5. Re:Desktop? by BZ · · Score: 4, Informative

    > Will it require something on my desktop that then sends all the information from my
    > browser to their servers?

    Yes (though note https://wiki.mozilla.org/Labs/Weave/Crypto for details; the only data the server sees is an encrypted blob).

    > Does firefox do that currently now?

    Only if you install the relevant extension. See https://mozillalabs.com/sync/

  6. More insightful than it sounds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Slashdotters have an odd tendency to view things in terms of black and white, good and Evil-with-a-capital-E. Most corporations fall solidly within the Evil category. Slashdot assumes that companies are in business to screw their competitors and customers as much as posible.

    The idea that companies are in business to do business doesn't register.

  7. Like.. web apps? by Henriok · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ah, so you mean like writing web apps? The plattform independent platform that is HTML5? The kind Apple thought apps was supposed to work for iPhone since day one, long before the AppStore was even invented? If you think that's a great way to go, just go ahead. It's been implemented in the iPhone the last three years. You don't need Mozilla for writing web apps. Safari is great for such things. It's a web browser you know, they run web apps.

    --

    - Henrik

    - when the Shadows descend -
  8. Awesome Bar by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Informative
    Please, not more 'Awesome Bar' stuff, its the bane of my life. Heres my problem with the 'Awesome Bar':
    1. I start typing 'stackoverflow', with the intent of tabbing to 'stackoverflow.com'
    2. At 's' I get one URL suggested, but not the front page. I have visited this page once before in living memory. Its not in my bookmarks either.
    3. At 'st' I get another URL suggested, but not the front page. Again, I have visited this page only once before and its not in my bookmarks either.
    4. Repeat the last two steps until I get to 'stackoverf' when it finally suggests the front page of Stackoverflow.com to me

    And theres no way to turn it off. Fantastic. Highlighting the options in the url bar and hitting delete doesn't get rid of them either. Fantastic.

    1. Re:Awesome Bar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You just have to learn to train it. I removed my bookmarks toolbar shortly after the awesome bar came out.

      In your situation, type until you get stackoverflow.com, tab complete, hit enter. Do it a couple more times, s will tab complete to stackoverflow.

    2. Re:Awesome Bar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      And theres no way to turn it off. Fantastic

      about:config
      browser.urlbar.maxRichResults - value=0

      Highlighting the options in the url bar and hitting delete doesn't get rid of them either. Fantastic.

      Highlight and delete definitely removes entries from the Awesome Bar database, just confirmed in 3.5 and 3.6.

      Just blame the software for your inability to use it. Fantastic.

    3. Re:Awesome Bar by VGPowerlord · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I can't see why anyone would actually want to port the 'Awful Bar' to another device.

      No, seriously, I can't.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    4. Re:Awesome Bar by HockeyPuck · · Score: 2, Informative

      Add tags to your bookmarks, tags come up before cache hits.

    5. Re:Awesome Bar by owlnation · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Please, not more 'Awesome Bar' stuff, its the bane of my life."

      Couldn't agree more. Awesomebar is the single reason I have not, and will never, upgrade Firefox. I'm running the version previous to its addition, and am staying with it.

      Were it not for the plugins, Firefox would have been deleted off my system the moment they released the version with awesomebar. Once another browser develops a plugin system as good as that available for Firefox, it will most surely be gone.

      Awesomebar is symbolic for all that is wrong with Firefox. The fact that Mozilla seems to view it as a success, still touts it as a feature, just shows how totally out of touch they are with their userbase.

    6. Re:Awesome Bar by HockeyPuck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Here's a fix:

      Don't use it.

    7. Re:Awesome Bar by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Weird, I never had to "train" my bookmarks menu. This is considered "better" how exactly?

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    8. Re:Awesome Bar by Dog-Cow · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I like the Awesome Bar. I think it's much more likely that you're an anal-retentive asshole.

    9. Re:Awesome Bar by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2, Informative

      about:config browser.urlbar.maxRichResults - value=0

      Suggested every time I mention this - it does not turn off the 'Awesome Bar', it just cripples it in some ways. It does not accomplish what I want.

      Highlight and delete definitely removes entries from the Awesome Bar database, just confirmed in 3.5 and 3.6.

      Just blame the software for your inability to use it. Fantastic.

      Wow, I've been getting it so wrong all these .... wait one moment, still doesn't work. Just confirmed it.

      Do you really think I hadn't actually tried what I posted? Really? You really think there is *any* possibility of user error in 'highlight and delete'?

  9. Why not switch? by nightfire-unique · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I honestly don't mean this as a troll. I just don't understand something here.

    If application compatibility is an issue for you, why not ditch apple's proprietary device and buy one of the many Android devices? Or if you're a *nix user, an n900?

    I'm truly baffled by the iPhone's continued popularity amongst my fellow engineers.

    --
    A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    1. Re:Why not switch? by babyrat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Have you used an Incredible? I switched from a 3G and have not noticed any user experience deficiencies. In fact when it comes to things like sharing photos via email/mms/social networking sites, it is way ahead.

    2. Re:Why not switch? by nightfire-unique · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some of us want a phone that 'just works' and looks polished and well thought out. We don't buy it to hack it.

      You can say what you will about the iphone, but at least it does what it does well. Do I miss some features? Yes. Would I buy another one? Don't know, I may take a chance on an alternative, but at this point in time, using an iphone vs an android phone is a noticeable user experience difference. Android is less polished, more rough corners, less fluid, less thought out.

      It will catch up. But not yet.

      I hear this over and over again, but finally having used an iPhone a few weeks ago, I disagree. First, it's unstable. I personally witnessed two unexplained reboots and a hard lockup that required reflashing (over the course of one week of heavy usage). When I asked the owner what the deal was, he said: "Ah, it's been a while since I've reset." Say what?

      Not all apps maintain their state (lack of multitasking aside). I left one application (think it was maps, but I forget) to get an address, and when I went back, I lost the buffer I had been typing in. Had to retype the entire thing. What is this, 2003?

      The entire thing seems designed around tethering to a computer with iTunes. I spent two weeks in the US recently without my laptop - n900 only. Anything that can be done on the device can be done without a PC... even flashing.

      Speaking of..flash... still no flash in the web browser! Feature? I guess. But one of the things it does well, apparently, is web browsing. After using my n900 for the past 4 months, Safari feels like a toy. Especially on that low-res screen.

      I don't know; I didn't see any polish that was significantly better than my friend's Nexus running 2.1. And frankly I find the Maemo UI much more usable.

      In my opinion, I think both devices have such a lead on the iPhone it's unlikely that it will ever catch up.

      --
      A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    3. Re:Why not switch? by tepples · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Speaking of..flash... still no flash in the web browser! Feature? I guess.

      What you recommend that the author of, say, Homestar Runner use instead of Flash?

  10. Re:application development layer by jmpeax · · Score: 3, Informative

    Opera Mini is different - pages are rendered (and JavaScript executed) on Opera's servers and sent back to the device for display. No rendering happens locally.

  11. Re:What would be very interesting... by B3ryllium · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Uhm, I think there may be a step or two about the approval process that you don't understand.

  12. Why the iPhone? by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Considering that the iPhone is limited to AT&T (the network I hate most) and is completely closed, why not Android? Android is open source and on many different networks.

    I wish I could get FireFox on my i776, it has perhaps the worst browser I've ever seen (OpenWave). Maybe they designed it to be bad, so it wouldn't be used much, since it's Boost Mobile and has unlimited everything for a $50/month flat fee with no contract.

    I'm getting tired of hearing about the iPhone. Come on, Mozilla, get with the program -- ANDROID!

    1. Re:Why the iPhone? by BHearsum · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because the full featured Firefox browser is coming to Android.

      http://blog.vlad1.com/2010/02/02/android-progress-more-pixels-edition/

  13. Why not just build web apps by ThrowAwaySociety · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It would be nice if we could run javascript/html5/css3 code on Apple products (plus minor extensions for accessing local stuff etc), via Mozilla. Then we could finally write useful platform-independent apps that also run on Apple products.

    Why not just build javascript + html5 + css3 web apps? You get full platform independence and no app store hassles.

    The iPhone supports HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. As for "local stuff," HTML 5 already has features that allows persistent local database storage. If your app need location awareness, the iPhone supports the W3C Geolocation API.

    You may not remember, but originally, Apple's official stance was that the only third-party iPhone apps would be web apps. Lots of people bitched and moaned about how Apple was not allowing developers onto its device, so Apple eventually caved and released its SDK. But there's no reason you can't still build web apps for the iPhone.

    1. Re:Why not just build web apps by marmoset · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Everything you mentioned can already be done in Mobile Safari, Check.in (from the Brightkite folks) is a web application that makes use of local HTML persistance, geolocation, and hides the browser controls. It looks and behaves exactly like a native iPhone app.

    2. Re:Why not just build web apps by jez9999 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why not just build javascript + html5 + css3 web apps? You get full platform independence and no app store hassles.

      If such apps started to get really popular, Apple would have to implement a mechanism to enable them to charge for access to them.

  14. Re:application development layer by dzfoo · · Score: 2, Informative

    Opera Mini does not render HTML nor processes JavaScript. This is done on Opera's servers, and streamed down to the client for display using the native framework.

            -dZ.

    --
    Carol vs. Ghost
    ...Can you save Christmas?
  15. What would make this news ... by Trufagus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is not news. Mozilla is free to put as many apps as they want on the iPhone so long as they follow Apple's rules. Unfortunately, Apple won't tell us what those rules are, but we have a pretty good idea that you can't say anything bad about Apple or powerful people, and you can't compete with any Apple technologies or strategic plans (e.g. what Google Voice did). So, it would be news if Mozilla puts Firefox on the iPhone without stripping out their HTML5 Ogg support since Apple has a financial interest in H264. If Mozilla gets Firefox on the iPhone by agreeing to tailor Firefox to Apple's wishes (e.g. strip out Ogg or anything else that Apple doesn't like) then that would be a total sellout on Mozilla's part.

    1. Re:What would make this news ... by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What I'm suggesting is that, if Apple changes course and allows Firefox on the iPhone...

      Then they will have completely changed their business strategy and depending upon what the new strategy is, could do anything.

      they will require that Mozilla remove support for Ogg Video (particularly now that Ogg video is being supported by Google). Hopefully I'm wrong.

      I know that's what you're saying, but I don't see that it makes a lick of sense. Why would that be in Apple's best interests?

      I doubt anyone is making much off of H264 right now, but if you want to get some idea of how much could be made from H264 once its position is secure take a look at MP3 - Thomson is making a ton off of that and I think that video has much greater potential.

      Yeah, except Apple doesn't own MPEG-LA, they own a couple of patents in the pool meaning they stand to make little or nothing, especially compared to the profit they make by selling more hardware.

      I think that Apple's hostility to Ogg would be just as much from Google involvement with Ogg as from any ability to make money from H264.

      What hostility? Apple doesn't block Ogg using programs on the iPhone. They let you use Ogg codecs on Macs. My Safari browser open Oggs via video tags just fine, because it uses any codecs you install on the machine, including Ogg. They just didn't want it as the standard in HTML5 video for the same reason Google did not, they handle a lot of video and performance means money to them. Getting good battery performance on iPods, iPhones, etc. when it is not supported by existing hardware would be a nightmare for Apple. Added bandwidth costs for YouTube would likewise be a problem for Google. It's not that either has a grudge against Ogg, they just didn't want it to be the one and only standard in HTML for business reasons. You'll note Google isn't offering an Ogg version of YouTube.

      In any event, the ideal would be for Apple to explain the rules for what they block and what they don't and enforce them consistently.

      They can't catch all violations because they don't have the manpower, but almost every instance of an app being not accepted is a case of it not being within the published rules. Now here on Slashdot it is clear lot of people never bothered to read those rules and never bother to RTFAs that explain such when it happens in the news.

      For now, it appears that they reserve the right to block anything that is not in their financial and strategic interest.

      They certainly can, it's their application service. I find it a bit restrictive so I don't own an iPhone or use their app store. I don't see why this is a problem.

  16. No by netsharc · · Score: 2, Informative

    From their Wiki:

    Does this mean Firefox will be available on the iPhone?
    No. We do not have plans to ship the full Firefox browser for the iPhone. Due to constraints with the OS environment and distribution, we cannot provide users the full Firefox browsing experience on the iPhone. For details, see Mobile/Platforms.

    Reading is so passé, why have YouTube if you have to read? 3-step instruction? Don't read, listen to some nerd with dweeby voice ramble about it for 10 minutes on YouTube!

    --
    What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
  17. Re:What would be very interesting... by Goaway · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why exactly would Mozilla be interested in helping a commercial company push their proprietary technology?

  18. Re:What would be very interesting... by rednip · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...get Apple moving with Flash after everyone sees how wonderful it is.

    Not everyone agrees that ending Flash's iron grip on video on the web would be a bad thing. Locked systems like Flash are good (sometimes) for fast adaption periods, but often fail to progress technologically long term; while becoming a cost prohibitive hindrance in a growingly commodified market.

    maybe. I'm rooting for Apple on this one, but in corporate power plays, consumer benefit is usually only a low occurring side effect.

    --
    The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
  19. Even x86 is proprietary technology by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How is making a bookmark sync tool available for iPhone any more "helping a commercial company push their proprietary technology" than making binaries available for x86 CPUs? Both ARM and x86 CPUs use proprietary technology subject to patent, trade secret, and either mask work right or HDL copyright, and you'd have to switch to something like the MIPS-compatible CPU written in VHDL to get away from this.

    1. Re:Even x86 is proprietary technology by Goaway · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Please at least make the effort to read the post I am replying to, OK?

  20. It better stop hogging memory first... by pbhogan · · Score: 2, Informative

    If they intend to bring FireFox to the iPhone, they've got to get a handle on it's memory gobbling first. It has gotten better over the last while, but leave FF open for any length of time and you suddenly have several hundred megabytes of RAM chewed up, especially on OS X where it stays resident even if you close all tabs.

  21. Re:application development layer by Gilmoure · · Score: 3, Funny

    But what if you have no network connection and can't get to Opera's server? How you gonna' surf the web then?

    That's what I thought.

    --
    I drank what? -- Socrates
  22. Re:A Firefox Browser on My iPhone Would Be AWESOME by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why is the parent flamebait? It's a serious concern. It's silly that my iPhone's browser displays more adverts than my desktop copy of Safari, and the phone's screen is smaller and is often browsing via 3G, so is even more annoying for downloading content that I do not want. At least the flash ads are a non issue.