Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Leaves Out Linux For Initial Web App Support
darthcamaro writes "Guess What? Linux is not a primary platform for Mozilla. For Mozilla's upcoming Web Apps marketplace, Linux support is not part of the initial release. Some Mozilla developers simply are shrugging this off as Windows and Mac dominate the Mozilla user landscape today."
Unlike with Internet Explorer, if the Linux community feels strongly about this, they could always do their own fork. So stop bitching and start coding.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
What's a "web app marketplace" and why would I need one anyway? There's plenty of useful software available to me in the repositories. There are plenty of websites I can browse with a regular browser. There are plenty of extensions I can use to customize my browsing experience.
Seriously, what does a "web app marketplace" have to offer that isn't already done better through one of the above resources?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Linux abandoned
For more lucrative bet
As classic straight razor
For lame new Gilette
Burma Shave
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
And the marketplace works. Not that I or anyone in the known universe uses it. But at least it works.
I thought that Web App = platform independence? If it's not not then what's the point of developing Web Apps?
Chrome works better anyways, most guys I know that use linux are using Chrome and it's app store.
Mozilla has become a also ran lately, they need to get their focus back if they want to get back in the race.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
JS execution in Chrom(e/ium) is unrivalled. I have it on my Mint install at work just for accessing our JS-heavy KB/ticketing system.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
"...shrugging this off as Windows and Mac dominate the Mozilla user landscape today."
And that is a big part of why Windows and Mac continue to dominate the landscape. The Linux versions of many apps tend to be second rate. Then the developers look at it and say "see, nobody really wanted it on that platform anyway."
That's a pretty sad statement for an open project to make.
Alex, I'll take keybindings not used by Emacs for $400....
I still have a hard time stomaching Chrome. Even looking past the fact that they don't have NoScripts, I'm very reluctant to turn yet another part of my life over to a huge corporation with a checked past when it comes to privacy issues. Mozilla may be largely in Google's pocket too, but at least they maintain some semblance of independence. I trust them a lot more than Google itself.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
Try ScriptNo for Chrome/Chromium. Not quite as comprehensive as NoScript, but has a better user interface, IMHO.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/oiigbmnaadbkfbmpbfijlflahbdbdgdf
Terrible move on mozilla's side, even if most of their end-users are mac/windows based clients a good part of us web developers use linux. I least I know I ain't developing a thing for the store as long as there is no linux support, not because I don't want to but because debugging would be too hard over a virtual machine or whatever.
The whole point of web apps is to tie you to an online service, make your data less secure, and lose your privacy so that you become a marketing unit on their business plan.
And the 2nd point of web apps, or perhaps not a point but an effect nevertheless, is to try to make you forget what decent Human Interfaces on native apps used to look like, so that you don't mind using an in-browser GUI that is more primitive and less responsive than anything we had in the 80's, and badly designed to boot because webbies have no clue about HI ergonomics.
You should try Comodo Dragon or Srware Iron. Both have 0 privacy problems and are direct forks of Chromium.
Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
A lot of the people who contribute to Mozilla do so because of their their belief in libre software in which they found through the Linux. Linux isn't just enother platform, it is much more valuable to the Mozilla, their foolish if they can't see that.
I sort of understand why Mozilla have done this - they're only talking about the "App marketplace" not development of the browser itself - they are trying to raise funds for Firefox development by selling apps. (I assume).
That's how I understand it, then again I stopped using Firefox last year and switched to Chromium - the open-source version of Chrome - they are also forks of Chromium designed to remove all sorts of tracking code too.
Most people I know have switched away from Firefox and are using Chrome or Chromium instead.
The best thing about Chrome/Chromium is they are part of the "webkit family" which means wider support and consistent HTML5 adherence.
Firefox is feeling a bit dated anyway - All I can say is "Good Luck with that" Mozilla!
It would be interesting to see what % of Mozilla code is developed on each platform.
Select the file to install with your mouse, doubleclick. Works in pretty much any desktop distribution. Also, if you want it to work in any distribution, make an archive with static-linked compiled files. Skype has done that, so can you.
Seriously, RTFM: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=744193
Seriously, what the fuck is going on here? The comment about supported platform is from more than a month ago, the rest of the responses are about resolving it.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Isn't it a shame however that because more and more people get more and more powerful machines, that the developers code more sloppily because "the machines can take it"?
This is the sig that says NI (again)
Firefox runs like crap on my 16KB calculator. Can't even get internet access!
I hear ya... I resisted the switch from Firefox to Chrome for a long time. I love Mozilla. They singlehandedly saved the friggin' web and are one of the few organizations who consistently at least tries to hold true to their ideals of a free, open, user-focused web. But at some point I just could no longer live with the dog that Firefox had become.
Who would've thought that the company who let their browser stagnate & become bloated in the absence of real competition would be Mozilla. It looks like they're on the right path to steer Firefox back into its leadership position and I hope they succeed & I can switch back. But until then Chrome is faster, lighter, more versatile, runs everywhere I want it to & has all the features I need.
Firefox isn't the best browser to develop with anyway. I use SVG and it doesn't support the whole spec.
I still use it as a browser, but it's not part of my dev ide. I use Chrome.
Use SeaMonkey! I've made the switch recently, after being a die-hard Firefox user since the beginning. I couldn't be happier. The interface is old-school, and it functions well enough for the simple work for which I use a browser. Just try the darned thing - you'll be very happy you did. If you're the kind of person (like me) that was seething with every release of new "features" in Firefox (awesomebar, et al.), give SeaMonkey a try.
It makes me very sad to say it, but I've moved on from Firefox, (and I don't like to touch Chrome or IE), but then again - the world seems to have moved-on from the ideal of clean code and efficient applications, as much as it has moved on from that old idea of language evolving logically from etymologically sound roots.
There's no stopping the tide, but there are indeed viable options. I highly recommend reading Paul Venezia's post about quarantining services to specific browsers. It's not hard to do. Use Chrome for watching crud on Youtube or using any Google services, (and nothing else!), and block it on your usual browser with NoScript, etc. Use a different one for Facebook (if you use that gawdawful service), and block the scripts on your usual browser. It's a simple solution, but it probably helps mitigate tracking a tiny bit.
Can anyone provide any good reasons to not use SeaMonkey?
Isn't it a shame however that because more and more people get more and more powerful machines, that the developers code more sloppily because "the machines can take it"?
If you want to run software from 20 years ago, go ahead. What you call "sloppy" I call "defense in depth". For example, chrome spawns a process for the renderer in each tab, so that a buffer overflow in webkit doesn't allow malware to do anything to your file system. It uses more RAM. This is a good tradeoff, because RAM is dirt cheep and cleaning up malware is expensive. Don't like it? Buy a VAX.
>>>This is slashdot, how do you have only 512MB?!?!?!
This is slashdot, you're a well paid developer. How do you have less than 100K in the bank?
Touche'
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Hi Everyone, Linux support for web apps is actively being worked on. Our contributor (Marco) is driving the implementation of it here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=744193 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=744190 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=745018 If you would like to help out, then feel free to drop a comment in those bugs!
Yes and No, but first and foremost it was a trademark issue with regard to use of the graphics: The immediate problem caused by the new policy was Debian's inability to use the official Firefox logo due to its proprietary license failing to comply with the Debian Free Software Guidelines.
The wiki also states: Additionally, as Debian releases are frozen on a long-term basis, software in the frozen stable releases needs to be patched for any newly-discovered security issue. Under the revised guidelines, in order to use the Firefox name, approval from the Mozilla Corporation would have been required for all security patches, but the Debian project felt it could not put its security in the hands of an external corporation in that manner.[15]
Note that the fact that Debian renamed it does not constitute proof of validity of Mozilla's claims that people can't apply patches from Mozilla's codebase and still call it Firefox. That claim never got tested, since they already changed the name anyway.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Runs pretty nicely in Linux. It's a good deal faster than FF anyway.
How is it with Flash compared to FF? I'm using FF right now, and the Linux box is mostly used for radio and TV streams, most of which use flash. Which stopped working Sunday when I updated to 12.04...
Free Martian Whores!
Linux is the premeire open source desktop. Mozilla is the premiere open source web browser. Many OSS people use both and have supported both. This kinda of decision is a slap in the face to the years of time invested on both sides. Indeed Mozilla has become more like a company than an open source project.
Maybe he doesn't need more than 512 or doesn't want it for some reason. Perspective matters a lot. Hell, It reminds me of this this epeen measuring conversation I heard on the bus on campus. "I can't wait to get my new computer." "How much memory did you get?" "Umm... I think 256MB." "256MB!? WTF dude. I mean seriously, what kind is it? A Pentium 3 you dug out of the garbage?" "ARM." "Wha?" "It's a Raspberry Pi." "So cool. I want one of those!"
So please tell me, how does one generically "install" an application on "Linux"?
Well, first the user has typically "subscribed" to an "app store" called a software repository, this is typically already done for them at OS install, but you're free to add other "app stores" if you're an "advanced" user (read: average Linux user).
Then the user searches for an app, and is presented results from EVERY app store they've registered (or "advanced mode": select only specific app stores to search in). The chose app is then automatically downloaded, configured and installed from the "App Store". On Ubuntu: Applications > Ubuntu Software Center. Via terminal (debian): sudo apt-get install $APP_NAME
Then the App is installed... You can even "que up" a bunch of things to install then walk away, come back and they're installed. The process is the same on Fedora/Red Hat (yum instead of apt-get) and even the source code based distributions do things this way, with the added step that the source code compiles itself after download and before installation. Some "app stores" (repositories) can be downloaded as a complete set of disks so you can install them offline. Individual applications in a "package" can also be transfelred via disk, email, flash drive, etc and double clicked to install. A program called "Alien" helps install apps that are in different package formats than your own.
Let me reiterate, for the typical application installation: You search your app store and click "install".
o_O
Now if you have developed a platform independent system like Java or a Web Browser, then creating an "App Repository" typically follows the same model, as evidenced by Mozilla's very own plug-in repository.
Let's s/application/plug-in/ and s/Linux/Firefox, then see if your question isn't down right obvious:
So, how do you install a plug-in on "FireFox"
...and also, Firefox hasn't been a primary choice for most Linuxers for a long, long time, considering the abysmal performance.