2 ms·

> Gecko is old All browser engines are old. WebKit's code begin in 1998, for example, and IE and Opera also have plenty of code from the 90's. They are all hu

by azakai 15y ago

> Gecko is old All browser engines are old. WebKit's code begin in 1998, for example, and IE and Opera also have plenty of code from the 90's. They are all huge C++ codebases too - there are big burdens for all current browsers that stem from the code's age and size. Gecko does have the additional task of keeping addons working (which WebKit doesn't), but on the other hand WebKit has the additional task of maintaining a stable embedding API (which Gecko doesn't). Perhaps IE and Opera don't have those burdens, they are closed source so we can't tell. > I don't envy the task of the Mozilla developers For the reasons mentioned above, you can say the same of all the other browser developers. Or, also for all OS developers, even a relatively recent OS like Linux is quite old and has all manner of baggage in terms of maintaining compatibility with legacy kernel modules and such. Big, long-term projects like Gecko, WebKit, Linux, Windows, etc. are hard!

kibwen 15y ago
You're right about WebKit's age (and even Trident is just as old as Gecko), although I wasn't aware of the complications of WebKit's embedding API. I wasn't trying to compare browser engines, but rather to drive home to the parent poster the very sentiment that you express in your final sentence (and set myself up for my own final sentence). As long as we are comparing browser engines, though, I'd like to stress the relative scarcity of resources available to the Firefox developers. Mozilla's recent windfall with respect to their arrangement with Google is great, but Mozilla's attention is focused on much more than Firefox nowadays--Boot2Gecko, BrowserID, and Rust/Servo being their most prominent diversions at the moment.
- azakai 15y ago
  I wouldn't say they are diversions, Firefox unsurprisingly gets the vast majority of focus and resources. Today - this wasn't true until recently - I think that Mozilla does have the resources to push additional projects than Firefox.
  - Zirro 15y ago
    "I think that Mozilla does have the resources to push additional projects than Firefox." I wish they would prioritise their UI before they do this, though. Mozilla has one of the most talented UI-teams in the browser landscape based on the mockups I've seen. Take http://blog.stephenhorlander.com http://blog.stephenhorlander.com for example. That looks absolutely amazing, yet I don't believe more than 20% will make it into the final product, since this has been the case before. If Mozilla is prioritizing other things as you mention in another post, it's time to flip those priorities around for a while until they've got what their mockups are showing. Down to the smallest detail.

by azakai 15y ago

kibwen 15y ago

You're right about WebKit's age (and even Trident is just as old as Gecko), although I wasn't aware of the complications of WebKit's embedding API. I wasn't trying to compare browser engines, but rather to drive home to the parent poster the very sentiment that you express in your final sentence (and set myself up for my own final sentence). As long as we are comparing browser engines, though, I'd like to stress the relative scarcity of resources available to the Firefox developers. Mozilla's recent windfall with respect to their arrangement with Google is great, but Mozilla's attention is focused on much more than Firefox nowadays--Boot2Gecko, BrowserID, and Rust/Servo being their most prominent diversions at the moment.

azakai 15y ago
I wouldn't say they are diversions, Firefox unsurprisingly gets the vast majority of focus and resources. Today - this wasn't true until recently - I think that Mozilla does have the resources to push additional projects than Firefox.
- Zirro 15y ago
  "I think that Mozilla does have the resources to push additional projects than Firefox." I wish they would prioritise their UI before they do this, though. Mozilla has one of the most talented UI-teams in the browser landscape based on the mockups I've seen. Take http://blog.stephenhorlander.com http://blog.stephenhorlander.com for example. That looks absolutely amazing, yet I don't believe more than 20% will make it into the final product, since this has been the case before. If Mozilla is prioritizing other things as you mention in another post, it's time to flip those priorities around for a while until they've got what their mockups are showing. Down to the smallest detail.