Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

No Firefox For iOS, Says Mozilla's Product Head

Posted by timothy on from the once-bitten dept.

hypnosec writes "Jay Sullivan, Mozilla's VP of Product, has revealed that the non-for-profit organization is not going to build an iOS version of its Firefox web browser as long as Apple doesn't mend its unfriendly ways towards third party browsers. Speaking at SXSW in a mobile browser wars panel Sullivan said that Mozilla is neither building nor planning to build a Firefox version for Apple's iOS. Mozilla pulled Firefox Home from the App Store back in September 2012 following Apple's not so accommodating attitude."

8 of 318 comments (clear)

  1. Dear EU by lesincompetent · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not just microsoft that engages in anti-competitive behaviour.

    1. Re:Dear EU by tehniobium · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the EU force Apple to have a browser ballot on iOS, I do believe Steve Jobs will be turning ever so violently in his grave :D

      On a more serious note: couldn't the fact that Apple forces all apps to be purchased through their own app store just as well be seen as anti-competitive?

      --
      No kitty, this is my pot pie!
    2. Re:Dear EU by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As far as I understood it, the very unfortunate VLC situation came about when a purist developer of VLC demanded that Apple would release VLC without DRM on IOS. But all apps on IOS use DRM, it is quite naive to assume that they would make an exception.

      So what? He wrote the code, he released it for use under certain terms and conditions and those conditions were being violated. He wanted Apple to stop and Apple stopped, was he unhappy with that outcome? Did he expect something else? Of course it was annoying for everybody else but if people could just ignore the license when it was incompatible or inconvenient the GPL would have died out long ago.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:Dear EU by interval1066 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      . As far as I understood it, the very unfortunate VLC situation came about when a purist developer of VLC demanded that Apple would release VLC without DRM...

      That one prefers to respect users & developers alike makes him a "purist"? I'm feeling better about my 20 year descision to avoid Apple products more and more.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    4. Re:Dear EU by beelsebob · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, it requires all browsers to be a thin wrapper around safari's engine which is WebKit. So it very much is WebKit that's required – specifically the WebKit shipped on the device.

    5. Re: Dear EU by OldSpiceAP · · Score: 5, Informative

      You can craft the interface however you want however by matter of policy, apple restricts 3rd party browsers to using UIWebView component to render HTML which is the internal WebKit rendering engine. Gecko is not allowed on iOS. This means the JavaScript engine as well. In fact the newer JavaScript engine used by safari is also not accessible. UIWebView only exposes a slower older js engine. This means outside of the interface itself, all browsers by default will have inferior performance to Safari. It is simply a restriction imposed by Apple. One can argue about whether this is good policy or if they have good reasons or not, this is completely fair. But it is a matter of simple fact that you cannot use any other rendering engine.

  2. OK then... by sootman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... will they allow other browsers on their new mobile OS?

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  3. Re:Good riddance to an anti-consumer product by neiras · · Score: 5, Informative

    I can feed trolls with the best of 'em. Burn, karma, burn!

    The fact that the rendering engine would be Gecko on their PC and WebKit on their iPhone just doesn't fucking matter.

    Apple limits third party IOS developers to UIWebview, while Safari gets to use the Nitro JIT javascript engine. It's an automatic performance disadvantage for any aftermarket browser. That fucking matters.

    It really shows that Mozilla's focus is on themselves and software developers, not on the consumer end user, who has been running Firefox on their PC for years now and Safari on their iPhone for years now and just wants a Firefox interface and bookmark syncing on their iPhone.

    No, it shows that Mozilla is smart enough to recognize and avoid pitched battles with Apple. Why fight to have a weird mutant version of their flagship project on a closed device, damaging their brand with artificially limited performance and a rendering engine that doesn't act like Firefox?

    If that is Mozilla's focus, then they don't belong on iOS and good riddance.

    Mozilla's focus is on opening up the web. You're right - they don't "belong" on closed, controlled iOS. They will, however, try to encourage Apple to let them in.

    On iOS, the end user is at the top of the hierarchy, and software developers and content producers all work for the user. The user already has an HTML5 renderer in their iPhone, they already have a TCP/IP stack. You do not need to replace them to build a browser, and in fact, it is much better security that you can't replace them. That is what is best for the consumer: a secure renderer that is highly-optimized specifically for their device.

    Who decides what's in your interest? If it's Apple, then Apple is at the top of the hierarchy, not users as you say.

    As a user myself, I value the ability to use Firefox over Chrome on my Android device. With Android, I can decide what's in my interests. The defaults work for "most consumers", and for everyone else there is a measure of freedom.

    There are plenty of reasons that software monocultures are bad, and Google is your friend there.

    There are hundreds of 3rd party browsers on iOS, many with very innovative features. Like Skyfire, which converts Flash Video to ISO standard video on a server and essentially enables you to run Flash on iPhone or iPad. There are browsers that are exploring lots of gestures, or deep social integration.

    Cute little user-interface experiments are one thing, but that's all niche-market small time stuff. Deep social integration and gestures? Tee hee. Calling a UIWebview wrapper a browser is kind of endearing.

    Mozilla is missing out on all of that because they are pouty, entitled developers who want their feet rubbed and cheeks kissed before they deign to bless us with their bloated, mangled code.

    You realize that Firefox is the best browser on the memory usage front, and near tops in performance right? If your gut feeling about Mozilla is based on a 2006-era opinion, you might want to look at what they've done lately.

    And of course, Mozilla knows better than Apple what Apple users want. As if.

    Most users want options and the ability to use their devices as they see fit. Mozilla has only ever supported users' rights. Apple can't say that.

    And finally, Mozilla's hypocrisy: note that the one and only HTML renderer on Firefox OS is Gecko. And Firefox OS has zero 3rd party browsers as of right now.

    Hey now, third party browsers can just wrap Gecko (actually, it's more like just opening an IFRAME, since the UI is all HTML.) In your world, using the system renderer is a good thing, right? What are you complaining about? /s

    In all seriousness though, it could be done with some work. I