Slashdot Mirror


The Future of Firefox is Chrome (theregister.co.uk)

An anonymous reader writes: Mozilla seems to think a new future for Firefox [lies in Chrome]. While they claim that it is only about new ways of browser design, it is also an open secret that they are running into more and more problems lately with web compatibility. [Senior VP Mark Mayo caused a storm by revealing that the Firefox team is working on a next-generation browser that will run on the same technology as Google's Chrome browser. The project, named Tofino, will not use Firefox's core technology, Gecko, but will instead plumb for Electron, which is built on the technology behind Google's rival Chrome browser, called Chromium.] The benefit of Chromium/Electron would be that it is a solution they could pull much faster forward than their own Servo plans [Servo being Mozilla's Rust-based web engine]. What the real outcome of all this will be, only Mozilla knows so far. But inside Mozilla there is much resistance against such plans... Interesting times are ahead.

18 of 243 comments (clear)

  1. Pure FUD and bad journalism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you actually read the "Project Tofino" page, all they're doing it using Electron to much around with user-interface experiments, not adopt anything Chrome-like: https://medium.com/project-tofino/

    Heck, even Positron is about REMOVING Chrome from Electron so they can use it for these kinds of experiments as well.

    Look, Slashdot, I know we're all supposed to hate Firefox and Mozilla, but can we at least submit useful information, and not obvious misinformation?

    1. Re:Pure FUD and bad journalism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wait a minute .... I thought we were supposed to hate microsoft, no apple, no google, no php, no ruby. Gosh I can't keep up with you kids with what to hate these days.

    2. Re:Pure FUD and bad journalism. by s.petry · · Score: 5, Funny

      Screw you and the bash shell you logged in with! Korn shell and VI 4EVAH!

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  2. They should go their own way by bugs2squash · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe it's not the quickest or safest plan, but they made their name as an independent browser and they should stand their ground and improve their technology to compete with chrome.

    For me chrome ushered in the next generation of javascript performance, that's what made it stand out for me. Firefox should find some other aspect of the web experience to make their own improvements to.

    If they succeed it will be good for all of us, it's not as if there aren't plenty of things that could be improved upon. If they play it safe they will not offer any new value and will fall into obscurity.

    --
    Nullius in verba
  3. Re:Woe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google is better at embrace-extend-extinguish than Microsoft ever was. Let's hope this idiotic idea falls through.

  4. bad for standardization... by godrik · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This looks like bad news.

    The good thing about firefox is that it pushed for standardization. If all becomes chromium, then Google essentially takes control of all the webbrowser aspects. When IE was the defacto standard, we took about 10 years to get out of that mess.

    1. Re:bad for standardization... by mykro76 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The difference there being that Chromium is FOSS. IE was not.

      To me the difference between Mozilla and Google today is their approach to privacy and user's data. Rendering is a "solved problem". If Mozilla are using Electron just for rendering, while still building a user experience that follows their core standards on privacy and data, I don't see a problem here.

  5. This is not good by ickleberry · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not looking forward to the Googification of almost everything. The internet will be a less free place when there is only one browser and one search engine (in practice), one video upload site, one mobile OS all produced by a company with a "do evil when the shareholders demand it" policy

  6. The /. community does not hate Mozilla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Look, Slashdot, I know we're all supposed to hate Firefox and Mozilla

    I don't get where this blatantly incorrect assumption comes from.

    We don't hate Mozilla or Firefox. Slashdot's community has long been one of the most important supporters of Mozilla and Firefox!

    Maybe you are just ignorant about the history of Mozilla and Firefox, and how it relates to Slashdot's community?

    In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Slashdot was the premiere technology news site. This is well before reddit, Hacker News, Stack Overflow and Twitter existed. Many in the computing and software fields read Slashdot daily, and many participated in the discussion. During this time Slashdot's community helped popularize and push for the adoption of open source software.

    In fact, it's very likely that the Slashdot community's efforts to help promote open source software is at least partially responsible for why the technology that eventually resulted in Firefox was open sourced in the first place!

    And once the Mozilla project got started, it was the Slashdot community that supported it. Then when Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox came into the picture, the Slashdot community was among the earliest adopters, supporters and promoters.

    Yeah, that's right. It was the Slashdot community who is mainly responsible for Firefox becoming what it became. It wasn't Digg, or Reddit, or HN, or SO, or Twitter. It was Slashdot's community!

    Firefox, and by extension Mozilla, probably wouldn't even exist today if it weren't for Slashdot's community giving it so much early support.

    It was thanks to Slashdotters installing Firefox on the systems of normal people that it went from 0% of the market up to around 35% at its peak.

    Then Mozilla decided to shit all over us, despite our many years of support. They fucked up Firefox's versioning scheme, breaking many extensions for a long time. They started trashing the UI, eventually destroying it outright with Australis. They removed useful functionality we wanted. Long-standing performance issues went ignored. Then they started inserting shit we didn't want, including Pocket, Hello, and even advertisement!

    The advertisements (deceptively referred to as "sponsored tiles" by some) were the last straw for many people. With ad blocking extensions being among the most popular extensions for Firefox, how the fuck could Mozilla possibly think that inserting ads into the browser itself would be a good idea?!

    It didn't help that we saw so much other bullshit come out of Mozilla. There was the whole Eich debacle, which was shameful. Nobody should lose their job, voluntarily or not, just because of their views on marriage! Then there were the failed projects, such as Firefox OS. Everybody with any kind of a brain saw that Firefox OS was a fucking idiotic idea from the very beginning. How the fuck did Mozilla ever hope to compete with Android and iOS, never mind the many other mobile OSes, by providing software as truly sub-par as Firefox OS?!

    Now we see Mozilla squandering more resources on dumb projects like Rust and Servo. Servo is, in my opinion, fucking atrocious. Try it for yourself. Really! See how goddamn awful it is. I tried it recently and I couldn't believe how bad it was. It makes Firefox look like a damn fine browser in comparison, that's how bad Servo is. Rust is just a hype-ridden joke in my experience.

    Despite Mozilla treating us so badly, and despite the many mistakes that have been made, many of us here actually want them to succeed! Before making themselves irrelevant by driving away so many of Firefox's users, Mozilla played an important role in the development of open web technology and standards.

    So when you accuse us of "hating" Mozilla and Firefox you're absolutely wrong. Slashdot's community is responsible for Firefox becoming popular, and for giving Mozilla the traction it needed to get massive funding from Google and Yahoo.

    Yes, many of us are angry with what has happened to Mozill

    1. Re:The /. community does not hate Mozilla. by jmv · · Score: 5, Informative

      Now we see Mozilla squandering more resources on dumb projects like Rust and Servo. Servo is, in my opinion, fucking atrocious. Try it for yourself. Really! See how goddamn awful it is. I tried it recently and I couldn't believe how bad it was. It makes Firefox look like a damn fine browser in comparison, that's how bad Servo is. Rust is just a hype-ridden joke in my experience.

      (disclaimer: I work for Mozilla, but on codecs, not browsers)
      At this point, Servo is merely a proof-of-concept to experiment with new ways of doing rendering. The reason it sucks for you is that it's far from being feature-complete, and that's not even the point (yet). The point is to see if it's possible to write an engine that's both faster (because it runs in parallel) and safer (because of Rust) than current technology. Given the small team, the focus was on implementing things that were expected to be hard first (to show they were still possible), not implementing all the features. I've not been following the project too closely, but for the features it supports, it's already much faster than other browsers. And this is done by a rather tiny team (compared to Gecko). Turning it into a feature-complete would take a *lot* of people. I don't know if/when/how that decision will be made.

    2. Re:The /. community does not hate Mozilla. by narcc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A long time ago, Slashdot was very popular and influential. I'll even give Slashdot credit for the early success of Google.

      How popular? A link from the Slashdot homepage could bring down a webserver. A DDoS attack we called a 'Slashdotting' (alt. 'Slashdot effect') as the fraction of users that did read the articles flooded the site. On 9/11, while every news site was drowning, Slashdot was still accessible. They were well prepared for massive traffic. It spawned countless imitators, but few managed to grow in Slashdot's shadow.

      Today, of course, Slashdot has a much smaller audience and virtually no influence. It's easy to think things were always this way, just a tiny relic of the past catering to a few curmudgeons who don't understand Reddit.

      It's fallen pretty hard. Remember the "Slashdot effect"? It's no longer a thing. I had a personal project hit Hack-a-day, Reddit, and Slashdot all within a month. I got a massive boost of traffic. Though, at it's peek, the traffic from Slashdot that month was well-under the traffic I still get from Reddit when someone links to it in a comment. It was even under the traffic I got from a tiny one-word link buried in a long blog post on textfiles.com! I get more traffic from the post on Hack-a-day monthly (over 2 years later) than I got from the article on the front page of Slashdot.

      So, yeah, I can see why you'd think that Slashdot couldn't possibly have influenced or shaped the web in any meaningful way today. That would be impossible. But at one point, they were a real powerhouse that could make or break a project like that.

    3. Re:The /. community does not hate Mozilla. by jmv · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Clearly Rust isn't giving them a big boost in productivity, because Servo is making so little progress.

      So Gecko is the result of thousands of man-years in development. On the other hand, servo probably had a few dozens of man-years of development time. How does that lead to the conclusion that Rust sucks exactly? I'm not qualified to say how successful Servo really is, but it was never expected to produce a direct Gecko replacement with 1/100 of the resources. Keep in mind that the stack of W3C specs browsers have to implement is *huge*.

    4. Re:The /. community does not hate Mozilla. by jmv · · Score: 4, Informative
  7. This is bad for accessibility by mfearby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Firefox is the best browser to use for screen reader compatibility, and if it uses the same engine as Chrome, then there goes vision impaired users' sanity. Chrome - as much as I like it myself - is nowhere near as good as Firefox in this area. If Electron/Chromium get their engine up to scratch to match Firefox, then it won't be a problem (I find Firefox slow as a web developer anyway, though Firebug beats Chrome's developer tools, hands down).

  8. No more bug fixes in Mozilla then by Theovon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Whenever I would report bugs with Firefox, devs would take them seriously and even fix them. Sometimes they took years, but even so, they didn’t try to tell me I was an idiot or anything like that.

    Whenever I have reported Chrome bugs, I would get a relatively hostile response, with devs telling me that I was wrong, even when I could make a solid usability engineering argument or there were incompatibilities or crashes or whatever.

    If Mozilla stops being in control of their browser development, it’s going to seriously suck a lot worse because the Google engineers who work on Chrome that I have dealt with are self-absorbed assholes.

  9. Re:The Other Alternative is not good, either by hjf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But firefox usage isn't going down for technical reasons. It's simply going down because Google shoves chrome down your throat on every fucking web impression. No one has that kind of advertising money... except google, who controls the advertising media.

  10. Privacy, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Personally, I'm fully committed to Firefox because it's the only option for someone who cares about privacy. How many other browsers are open source AND have the suite of privacy addons available for Firefox AND are developed by a company that pushes hard for more privacy? You're not going to get this stuff with Chromium.

  11. Re:SJWs really hollowed the place out. by narcc · · Score: 3, Informative

    And now their next endeavor is to basically reskin Chrome and call it Firefox.

    This is informative? It's about as incorrect as it could possibly get. It's pointed out in the article and in early posts in this thread. I can see how you'd get that impression from the flamebait title and summary, but restating prominent misinformation sure as hell isn't informative!