3 ms·

Isn't this a Firefox/Mozilla fault as well ? Afaik there is really no API or support for embedding Gecko & anyone who tries to do that, is on their own, having

Isn't this a Firefox/Mozilla fault as well ? Afaik there is really no API or support for embedding Gecko & anyone who tries to do that, is on their own, having to periodically rebase large patch sets for embedding.

alganet 2y ago
Possibly. I guess XUL was that API, but XUL is no more. It helps if your company uses the embedded stuff in other products. Like Microsoft used the Trident engine from IE6 all over Windows components. In that way, allocating resources for developing an embeddable engine is justifiable. Can Mozilla do that? I don'know. Google can (and does it! why wouldn't they?).
- notpushkin 2y ago
  There is GeckoView on Android: https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ On desktop, it used to be available as an ActiveX component and a GTK widget, at least: https://www-archive.mozilla.org/projects/embedding/embeddingoverview https://www-archive.mozilla.org/projects/embedding/embedding... Wine still uses WineGecko as a replacement for IE engine – might also be worth looking into.
  - iggldiggl 2y ago
    > There is GeckoView on Android: https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ But sadly on Android the alternative is simply using a Chrome/Blink-powered webview, which is capable enough for most people and importantly comes at a zero APK size hit. So you need to have pretty special needs before including a complete custom browser engine inside your app becomes an attractive proposition. (Whereas on Windows for example for a very long time the only OS-provided browser engine was IE, so if you needed more advanced web features, you couldn't avoid shipping your own browser engine in your application anyway.)
    - notpushkin 2y ago
      Hmm, you’re right, I think GeckoView is “marketed” specifically for making browsers: > However, Android’s WebView is not really intended for building browsers, and hence, many advanced Web APIs are disabled. Furthermore, it is also a moving target: different phones might have different versions of WebView, all of which your app has to support. It might still be an okay choice for an application shell sometimes (e.g. if you use a web API that is not supported by WebView and no polyfill is readily available for Cordova/Capacitor).

alganet 2y ago

Possibly. I guess XUL was that API, but XUL is no more. It helps if your company uses the embedded stuff in other products. Like Microsoft used the Trident engine from IE6 all over Windows components. In that way, allocating resources for developing an embeddable engine is justifiable. Can Mozilla do that? I don'know. Google can (and does it! why wouldn't they?).

notpushkin 2y ago
There is GeckoView on Android: https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ On desktop, it used to be available as an ActiveX component and a GTK widget, at least: https://www-archive.mozilla.org/projects/embedding/embeddingoverview https://www-archive.mozilla.org/projects/embedding/embedding... Wine still uses WineGecko as a replacement for IE engine – might also be worth looking into.
- iggldiggl 2y ago
  > There is GeckoView on Android: https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ https://mozilla.github.io/geckoview/ But sadly on Android the alternative is simply using a Chrome/Blink-powered webview, which is capable enough for most people and importantly comes at a zero APK size hit. So you need to have pretty special needs before including a complete custom browser engine inside your app becomes an attractive proposition. (Whereas on Windows for example for a very long time the only OS-provided browser engine was IE, so if you needed more advanced web features, you couldn't avoid shipping your own browser engine in your application anyway.)
  - notpushkin 2y ago
    Hmm, you’re right, I think GeckoView is “marketed” specifically for making browsers: > However, Android’s WebView is not really intended for building browsers, and hence, many advanced Web APIs are disabled. Furthermore, it is also a moving target: different phones might have different versions of WebView, all of which your app has to support. It might still be an okay choice for an application shell sometimes (e.g. if you use a web API that is not supported by WebView and no polyfill is readily available for Cordova/Capacitor).