5 ms·

A bad article. Mozilla relies on Yahoo's Search-Engine (Bing) cooperation (instead of Google) and probably with partnerships like Pocket (will be removed). Moz

by frik 11y ago

A bad article. Mozilla relies on Yahoo's Search-Engine (Bing) cooperation (instead of Google) and probably with partnerships like Pocket (will be removed). Mozilla's work on Firefox, Rust and Servo is great. Thunderbird and a real multi-process browser could get a bit more love. The later probably can only be achieved with a Servo based engine (probably not not with Gecko and its XCOM, XUL legacy code - the current multi process work uses just two processes (sandbox plugins) and doesn't scale - opening hundreds tabs won't spawn dozens of processes as we know from IE and Chrome (with all its downsides but even more upsides (stability, usability, UI latency)). Firefox with Firebug and all its plugins is the best web development browser, Chrome with its ever changing DevTools (UI changes) comes second (for me). Mozilla's browser is very important for the open Web.

tweakz 11y ago
"Pocket (will be removed)" Not according to Mozilla: http://venturebeat.com/2015/11/12/mozilla-has-no-plans-to-offer-firefox-without-pocket/ http://venturebeat.com/2015/11/12/mozilla-has-no-plans-to-of...
- frik 11y ago
  Wrong: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215694 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215694 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10631387 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10631387 pocket is moving out of the main tree back to being an add-on
  - throwaway2048 11y ago
    that doesn't mean its not being bundled by default
kibwen 11y ago
> probably with partnerships like Pocket Mozilla has repeatedly stated that they're not receiving any money from bundling Pocket, and I see no reason why they would lie about this considering that they're actively seeking to diversify revenue sources. And even if you think Mozilla is lying, there's no way that Pocket is putting up the hundreds of millions of dollars necessary to make their hypothethical contribution to Mozilla's coffers anything more than a rounding error.
- frik 11y ago
  I haven't read every news. I never mentioned that someone is lying!? Nor do I think that way. I just know it from Firefox, it appeared suddenly. And I had to search on Google how to get rid of this unwanted service and disable it on all family computers. I had to change settings in the hidden "about:config" - not even an UI setting was available. Why would they integrate a closed third party service to an open source browser is beyond me. It seems the responsible person had no idea what he decided and is out of touch with the product and its community.
  - kibwen 11y ago
    > I never mentioned that someone is lying!? Sorry, when I said "even if you think" I meant "you" in the generic third-person sense, not you specifically. :)
  - whyever 11y ago
    I never understood why they didn't just make it an add-on.
    - Excavator 11y ago
      Pocket¹, and also Hello are being migrated to extensions now. 1: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215694 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215694
- pdkl95 11y ago
  Pocket is making money with their database of what people read and when they read it. This isn't insignificant. Even if there isn't some sort of payola deal going on to feed that money back to Mozilla, this is clearly being done for profit. Maybe it's some sort of indirect benefit, maybe it's someone doing a favor for a friend. The alternative isn't any better: if there isn't any benefit for Mozilla, they are letting for-profit businesses insert themselves as a feature dependency.
  - Manishearth 11y ago
bad_user 11y ago
Mozilla did not make any money from the Pocket integration. Would you let it go already? Also the Developer Edition, which is the alpha channel, is multi-process as you'd expect it to be. But speaking of hundreds of tabs, try doing that in Chrome, do that in Firefox, and compare.
- frik 11y ago
  I use dozens to hundreds tabs in IE11 and Chrome, sure it may use 16 GB ram, but I have more than that. Firefox often removes the tabs from the memory, going back to the tab means reloading the page. I will check out the recent Alpha for sure, I have it installed.
  - bad_user 11y ago
    Maybe you have a system with a lot of memory, but for me Chrome gets to be unusable with many tabs open, whereas Firefox survives.
  - josteink 11y ago
    > I use dozens to hundreds tabs in IE11 and Chrome, sure it may use 16 GB ram Ah yes. The infamous "16GB ram in a laptop is not enough because I use a web-browser called Chrome"-syndrome. And then someone turns around and says Firefox has memory leaks. You'd think they were joking, but they're not.
  - whyever 11y ago
    Are you abusing tabs as bookmarks?
    - frik 11y ago
      Nope. But during research I open tabs an switch between them. And for every research topic I tend to use a seperate window.
- detaro 11y ago
  > But speaking of hundreds of tabs, try doing that in Chrome, do that in Firefox, and compare. At least in my experience, bad example. Chrome works with ~300 Tabs, Firefox freezes or crashes regularly with way less then that. And this machine only has 8 GB RAM. Let's hope the current changes in Firefox stabilize it.
dbaron 11y ago
Multi-process is happening just fine with Gecko, XPCOM, and XUL. It's the extension ecosystem (the do-whatever-with-the-internals nature of the extensions API, and getting all the extensions to upgrade) that's the obstacle. Nightly is currently multi-process (although not large numbers of processes, but there's a pref to flip); it just hasn't shipped in the release channel yet.
pjmlp 11y ago
> Firefox with Firebug and all its plugins is the best web development browser Sorry but no, unless it has catched up with Chrome Developer Tools (back into native since the last 3 years so I don't know the actual differences). EDIT: Made the content between parenthesis clearer.
- Ygg2 11y ago
  Interesting. Would you be offended if I asked you to tell me more about what you found better?
  - pjmlp 11y ago
    Not at all. As I mentioned, this goes back to approximately three years ago. The developer tools console could do: - completion while typing - display JavaScript data structures in more visual way - breakpoints on DOM changes, events and Ajax requests - profile network, memory and cpu usage - navigate cookies, indexdb and websql databases - reformat JavaScript code - CSS editor - work as IDE - debugger API to work together with IDEs like Netbeans - profile 2D and 3D performance Basically, even though I prefer native to web, while using Chrome Developer Tools I had the feeling I was kind of back to Smalltalk. Additionally their website was better than MDN in terms of information, specially thanks to the many sessions on Google conferences. https://developer.chrome.com/devtools https://developer.chrome.com/devtools That said, maybe Firefox is now on par.
    - Excavator 11y ago
      > - completion while typing It's there. > - display JavaScript data structures in more visual way Sort of? Is the existence of the 'inspect' function enough? > - breakpoints on DOM changes, events and Ajax requests I'm not sure about this. I mean, you can set the breakpoints in code per usual but I expect you mean setting them on the nodes themselves and perhaps global breakpoints in the net panel? > - profile network, memory and cpu usage This sort of profiling? https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Performance https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Performance https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Network_Monitor#Performance_analysis https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Network_Monit... > - navigate cookies, indexdb and websql databases https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Storage_Inspector https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Storage_Inspe... By the by, WebSQL isn't part of any standardization track and will not be implemented in Firefox as it stands, and neither will IE it looks like. > - reformat JavaScript code You mean "prettify source"? If so, yes. > - CSS editor There's the Style Editor, and the side pane of the Inspector. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Style_Editor https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Style_Editor https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Page_Inspector/How_to/Examine_and_edit_CSS https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Page_Inspecto... > - work as IDE I guess the Scratchpad is the closest thing to that. So technically, no. As a side note, there is the WebIDE for Firefox OS development. https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Tools/Scratchpad https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Tools/Scratchpad https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Tools/WebIDE https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Tools/WebIDE > - debugger API to work together with IDEs like Netbeans It's possible with the remote debugging protocol but the only implementation I know of is the proof of concept that Paul Rouget put together two years ago, although I don't think he released any code. http://paulrouget.com/e/devtoolsnext/ http://paulrouget.com/e/devtoolsnext/ > - profile 2D and 3D performance You mean FPS and such? If so see the profiling tools linked previously.

by frik 11y ago

tweakz 11y ago

"Pocket (will be removed)" Not according to Mozilla: http://venturebeat.com/2015/11/12/mozilla-has-no-plans-to-offer-firefox-without-pocket/ http://venturebeat.com/2015/11/12/mozilla-has-no-plans-to-of...

frik 11y ago
Wrong: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215694 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215694 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10631387 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10631387 pocket is moving out of the main tree back to being an add-on
- throwaway2048 11y ago
  that doesn't mean its not being bundled by default

kibwen 11y ago

> probably with partnerships like Pocket Mozilla has repeatedly stated that they're not receiving any money from bundling Pocket, and I see no reason why they would lie about this considering that they're actively seeking to diversify revenue sources. And even if you think Mozilla is lying, there's no way that Pocket is putting up the hundreds of millions of dollars necessary to make their hypothethical contribution to Mozilla's coffers anything more than a rounding error.

frik 11y ago
I haven't read every news. I never mentioned that someone is lying!? Nor do I think that way. I just know it from Firefox, it appeared suddenly. And I had to search on Google how to get rid of this unwanted service and disable it on all family computers. I had to change settings in the hidden "about:config" - not even an UI setting was available. Why would they integrate a closed third party service to an open source browser is beyond me. It seems the responsible person had no idea what he decided and is out of touch with the product and its community.
- kibwen 11y ago
  > I never mentioned that someone is lying!? Sorry, when I said "even if you think" I meant "you" in the generic third-person sense, not you specifically. :)
- whyever 11y ago
  I never understood why they didn't just make it an add-on.
  - Excavator 11y ago
    Pocket¹, and also Hello are being migrated to extensions now. 1: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215694 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215694
pdkl95 11y ago
Pocket is making money with their database of what people read and when they read it. This isn't insignificant. Even if there isn't some sort of payola deal going on to feed that money back to Mozilla, this is clearly being done for profit. Maybe it's some sort of indirect benefit, maybe it's someone doing a favor for a friend. The alternative isn't any better: if there isn't any benefit for Mozilla, they are letting for-profit businesses insert themselves as a feature dependency.
- Manishearth 11y ago

bad_user 11y ago

Mozilla did not make any money from the Pocket integration. Would you let it go already? Also the Developer Edition, which is the alpha channel, is multi-process as you'd expect it to be. But speaking of hundreds of tabs, try doing that in Chrome, do that in Firefox, and compare.

frik 11y ago
I use dozens to hundreds tabs in IE11 and Chrome, sure it may use 16 GB ram, but I have more than that. Firefox often removes the tabs from the memory, going back to the tab means reloading the page. I will check out the recent Alpha for sure, I have it installed.
- bad_user 11y ago
  Maybe you have a system with a lot of memory, but for me Chrome gets to be unusable with many tabs open, whereas Firefox survives.
- josteink 11y ago
  > I use dozens to hundreds tabs in IE11 and Chrome, sure it may use 16 GB ram Ah yes. The infamous "16GB ram in a laptop is not enough because I use a web-browser called Chrome"-syndrome. And then someone turns around and says Firefox has memory leaks. You'd think they were joking, but they're not.
- whyever 11y ago
  Are you abusing tabs as bookmarks?
  - frik 11y ago
    Nope. But during research I open tabs an switch between them. And for every research topic I tend to use a seperate window.
detaro 11y ago
> But speaking of hundreds of tabs, try doing that in Chrome, do that in Firefox, and compare. At least in my experience, bad example. Chrome works with ~300 Tabs, Firefox freezes or crashes regularly with way less then that. And this machine only has 8 GB RAM. Let's hope the current changes in Firefox stabilize it.

dbaron 11y ago

Multi-process is happening just fine with Gecko, XPCOM, and XUL. It's the extension ecosystem (the do-whatever-with-the-internals nature of the extensions API, and getting all the extensions to upgrade) that's the obstacle. Nightly is currently multi-process (although not large numbers of processes, but there's a pref to flip); it just hasn't shipped in the release channel yet.

pjmlp 11y ago

> Firefox with Firebug and all its plugins is the best web development browser Sorry but no, unless it has catched up with Chrome Developer Tools (back into native since the last 3 years so I don't know the actual differences). EDIT: Made the content between parenthesis clearer.

Ygg2 11y ago
Interesting. Would you be offended if I asked you to tell me more about what you found better?
- pjmlp 11y ago
  Not at all. As I mentioned, this goes back to approximately three years ago. The developer tools console could do: - completion while typing - display JavaScript data structures in more visual way - breakpoints on DOM changes, events and Ajax requests - profile network, memory and cpu usage - navigate cookies, indexdb and websql databases - reformat JavaScript code - CSS editor - work as IDE - debugger API to work together with IDEs like Netbeans - profile 2D and 3D performance Basically, even though I prefer native to web, while using Chrome Developer Tools I had the feeling I was kind of back to Smalltalk. Additionally their website was better than MDN in terms of information, specially thanks to the many sessions on Google conferences. https://developer.chrome.com/devtools https://developer.chrome.com/devtools That said, maybe Firefox is now on par.
  - Excavator 11y ago
    > - completion while typing It's there. > - display JavaScript data structures in more visual way Sort of? Is the existence of the 'inspect' function enough? > - breakpoints on DOM changes, events and Ajax requests I'm not sure about this. I mean, you can set the breakpoints in code per usual but I expect you mean setting them on the nodes themselves and perhaps global breakpoints in the net panel? > - profile network, memory and cpu usage This sort of profiling? https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Performance https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Performance https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Network_Monitor#Performance_analysis https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Network_Monit... > - navigate cookies, indexdb and websql databases https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Storage_Inspector https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Storage_Inspe... By the by, WebSQL isn't part of any standardization track and will not be implemented in Firefox as it stands, and neither will IE it looks like. > - reformat JavaScript code You mean "prettify source"? If so, yes. > - CSS editor There's the Style Editor, and the side pane of the Inspector. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Style_Editor https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Style_Editor https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Page_Inspector/How_to/Examine_and_edit_CSS https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Page_Inspecto... > - work as IDE I guess the Scratchpad is the closest thing to that. So technically, no. As a side note, there is the WebIDE for Firefox OS development. https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Tools/Scratchpad https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Tools/Scratchpad https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Tools/WebIDE https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Tools/WebIDE > - debugger API to work together with IDEs like Netbeans It's possible with the remote debugging protocol but the only implementation I know of is the proof of concept that Paul Rouget put together two years ago, although I don't think he released any code. http://paulrouget.com/e/devtoolsnext/ http://paulrouget.com/e/devtoolsnext/ > - profile 2D and 3D performance You mean FPS and such? If so see the profiling tools linked previously.