or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Mozilla Firefox not coming to iPhone, iPad until Apple relaxes iOS browser rules
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mozilla Firefox not coming to iPhone, iPad until Apple relaxes iOS browser rules - Page 2

post #41 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I wonder how long till Google pull the plug on Mozilla?

That would be a sad day, in my humble opinion.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #42 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

I really believe Apple has a pair of aces for search. They will bring it to google and I'm not talking about using Bing as the default search engine, even if that is enough to hurt google (and maybe even a nice deal with microsoft). Such hypocrisy, they are bad.

 

Have you seen the "Bing it On" commercials? 

 

If you go to BingItOn you are presented with a search bar and results of two search sites (bing and google) side by side. You vote on which results you like better. 

 

Now, most average people may not realize which one is google, but even knowing which one was, I voted honestly. Google won, sadly. Had the better top 3 results in 3 out of 5 searches (with the other two being a draw).

 

Though, to be honest, if I think more about it, I think they would have all been a draw

post #43 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post

That would be a sad day, in my humble opinion.

 

It's inevitable, Mozilla's days are numbered.

post #44 of 70
Aw, that would be good to have on both iPhone an iPad! Hopefully in time this will happen 1smile.gif
post #45 of 70

I have been using Safari in windows 7 for several years now.

post #46 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious View Post

The concern is that Webkit is coming close to having a monopoly in the browser market. It effectively already does in the mobile and tablet space.

 

When one rendering engine has a monopoly, that engine becomes the standard, complete with its bugs and foibles. That isn't good for an open, progressive internet. Webkit may have fewer bugs than IE6, but web standards are evolving all the time and the risk is that the Webkit way becomes the only way.

Wow, never thought I'd see the day when someone would complain about open source having a monopoly.  Actually there are lots of open source projects that have a monopoly on their particular corner of open source.  One of the biggest issues with Linux & why it still struggles to go anywhere is it is too fragmented and that has actually decreased stability not increased it.  

 

That aside WebKit didn't become big because people got locked into it, it's a great project & has revolutionized browsing on mobile devices, you only hate it because it was backed by Apple.  Maybe you can hate it a little less to learn it originated with KDesktop in the html rendering engine inside Konqueror.  Course I guess you might be a Gnome fan so maybe you're hatred runs deeper than Apple.

 

By the way, comparing to IE6, really?!  You're really going to compare a proprietary platform locked browser engine to WebKit?!

post #47 of 70

I am a FF fan but think this is childish! Release the browser and eventually Apple will ease the standard.

 

I am very happy with Safari and can also see why people will want choices, and I am sure it will come with time. Apple is and always has been skittish about letting 3rd party apps have control and this is why we typically get a really good UX. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious View Post

The concern is that Webkit is coming close to having a monopoly in the browser market. It effectively already does in the mobile and tablet space.

 

When one rendering engine has a monopoly, that engine becomes the standard, complete with its bugs and foibles. That isn't good for an open, progressive internet. Webkit may have fewer bugs than IE6, but web standards are evolving all the time and the risk is that the Webkit way becomes the only way.

 

As a developer, I am happy to see standards move towards a singular standard. It's bad enough with the webkit flavors, but to try and code for all the engines that, at will, follow HTML5 and CSS3 standards is a bother! 

post #48 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post

That would be a sad day, in my humble opinion.

 

Not going to happen as long as Firefox has the market share to matter (currently hovering around 20%).  If google pulls the plug, you dont think Microsoft wouldnt jump at any chance to push bing and try and screw google?

 

 

All these people who support webkit to the exclusion of all else have very little context.
 

It is very bad if webkit becomes the defacto standard.  Reasons:

1) Its bugs and quirks will become the norm

2) Web developers wont bother to code towards standards but towards webkit

3) Apple is not particularly to allow the web to compete with its native applications (no WebRTC because it competes with Facetime)

4) Webkit is not future proof

---> Modern rendering engines from Trident to Gecko to Webkit are NOT going to survive the transition to massively parallel

---> Sure webkit has mitigated this for now, but I doubt you would see much difference between using 64 cpu cores and 256 cpu cores.  How long will it take use to get there?  10 years?  20?  But fundamentally, separate processes are only a stopgap solution.

---> Mozilla is already building another engine (servo) for this exact purpose and you can bet that MS, Apple and Google are all doing the same exact thing.  These wont adhere to webkit quirks at all but will be build from the actual standards (which is far far easier) and will have quirks of their own.

---> In this future, all webkit centric sites will be worthless!  So its much better for all of us to consider the future and not take the lazy way out jumping on the webkit bandwagon.

post #49 of 70
Originally Posted by happymissle View Post

It is very bad if webkit becomes the defacto standard.  Reasons:

1) Its bugs and quirks will become the norm

 

No, it means they'll be fixed.


2) Web developers wont bother to code towards standards but towards webkit

 

Uh, coding for webkit IS coding for standards. There's no browser called "HTML5". And no browser supports everything from HTML5 or CSS3. But having ONE platform on which to develop allows both developers and browser creators the freedom and reason to add support for every facet of both.


3) Apple is not particularly to allow the web to compete with its native applications (no WebRTC because it competes with Facetime)

 

Is this a sentence?


4) Webkit is not future proof

 

Of course it is.


---> Modern rendering engines from Trident to Gecko to Webkit are NOT going to survive the transition to massively parallel

 

They already did, didn't they? WebKit2.


---> Sure webkit has mitigated this for now, but I doubt you would see much difference between using 64 cpu cores and 256 cpu cores.

 

This is true of any application on any computer for any reason. We're talking about the Internet. My G3 iMac could still easily render any website.


These wont adhere to webkit quirks at all but will be build from the actual standards (which is far far easier) and will have quirks of their own.

 

You don't seem to know anything about rendering engines, so maybe go read up on what a standard actually is?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #50 of 70
Firefox is a piece of junk anyway, so who really cares.
post #51 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

Wow, there's a lot of grouchy people in this thread. Lighten up, people. 1smile.gif

I don't see those comments as grouchy. People are just sick and tired of Mozilla trying to mandate someone else's OS for ONE application.

If Mozilla doesn't like it they just need to stuff it and shut up and quit acting like it's Apple's fault they're too dumb and lazy to use WebKit.
post #52 of 70

@Tallest Skil

 

Some good points and some ad hominem attacks...

 

Anyway, if you think Apple and Google are going to keep webkit together forever and ever.  You are probably mistaken.

post #53 of 70
Originally Posted by happymissle View Post
@Tallest Skil

 

Some good points and some ad hominem attacks...

 

Anyway, if you think Apple and Google are going to keep webkit together forever and ever.  You are probably mistaken.

 

So no rebuttals; got it. I know I'm not right about everything there, but if I'm wrong you would have at least put some effort into proving me so.

 

Also, nice strawman. Nowhere did I claim that.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #54 of 70
I agree with Firefox on this. IMHO there's no reason apple should lock out anything non-Webkit based, unless they are deliberately trying to get people to stay with Safari. (Or to kill FF on purpose, who they know doesn't use webkit.)

I mean seriously, if people want to use an app that renders in something other then webkit, why should apple stop them? It doesn't make any sense. If the app renders poorly and sucks, people will just not download it. There's no threat to safari. Unless apple wants to pretend webkit numbers are safari numbers?

And to not allow you to set a different default browser just smells of monopoly. What's next, no 3rd party browsers on the Mac?

Yes I know a lot of people don't want and/or hate firefox, but the point is to have choice, not artificial barriers.
Edited by enjourni - 3/11/13 at 11:10am
post #55 of 70
Originally Posted by enjourni View Post
I mean seriously, if people want to use an app that renders in something other then webkit, why should apple stop them?

 

It's their platform.


And to not allow you to set a different default browser just smells of monopoly. What's next, no 3rd party browsers on the Mac?

 

It smells of not knowing what a monopoly is, at least.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #56 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post

@nagromme In practice, they banned third party browsers, by making it impossible to make a complete browser. You can make something that looks, feels, sounds like a browser. It is not one.
Rest of your post is extremely interesting 1biggrin.gif


What i'm most concerned with is that Apple seems to be Internet-Explorer-Six-ing the iPhone, and since Apple has much better UI/design/usability capabilities than Microsoft ever had, nobody cares about the issue...

 

WebKit is open source, end of your complaint.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #57 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by happymissle View Post

 

Not going to happen as long as Firefox has the market share to matter (currently hovering around 20%).  If google pulls the plug, you dont think Microsoft wouldnt jump at any chance to push bing and try and screw google?

 

 

All these people who support webkit to the exclusion of all else have very little context.
 

It is very bad if webkit becomes the defacto standard.  Reasons:

1) Its bugs and quirks will become the norm

2) Web developers wont bother to code towards standards but towards webkit

3) Apple is not particularly to allow the web to compete with its native applications (no WebRTC because it competes with Facetime)

4) Webkit is not future proof

---> Modern rendering engines from Trident to Gecko to Webkit are NOT going to survive the transition to massively parallel

---> Sure webkit has mitigated this for now, but I doubt you would see much difference between using 64 cpu cores and 256 cpu cores.  How long will it take use to get there?  10 years?  20?  But fundamentally, separate processes are only a stopgap solution.

---> Mozilla is already building another engine (servo) for this exact purpose and you can bet that MS, Apple and Google are all doing the same exact thing.  These wont adhere to webkit quirks at all but will be build from the actual standards (which is far far easier) and will have quirks of their own.

---> In this future, all webkit centric sites will be worthless!  So its much better for all of us to consider the future and not take the lazy way out jumping on the webkit bandwagon.

 

Google will continue push their WebKit based  browser, Apple will push theirs and others who are free to use open source WebKit will push theirs.

 

Win, win, win, all around as contributions are shared.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #58 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by enjourni View Post

I mean seriously, if people want to use an app that renders in something other then webkit, why should apple stop them? 

 

Security issues for one.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #59 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by enjourni View Post

I agree with Firefox on this. IMHO there's no reason apple should lock out anything non-Webkit based, unless they are deliberately trying to get people to stay with Safari. (Or to kill FF on purpose, who they know doesn't use webkit.)

I mean seriously, if people want to use an app that renders in something other then webkit, why should apple stop them? It doesn't make any sense. If the app renders poorly and sucks, people will just not download it. There's no threat to safari. Unless apple wants to pretend webkit numbers are safari numbers?

And to not allow you to set a different default browser just smells of monopoly. What's next, no 3rd party browsers on the Mac?

Yes I know a lot of people don't want and/or hate firefox, but the point is to have choice, not artificial barriers.


1) Apple isn't locking out anything that isn't Safari. You know this because the Mac allows any browser you wish. You can also choose not to use an Apple product if you wish.

2) Apple isn't denying the creation or use of any other browser on iOS. There are many browsers in the App Store, including some that use server-side rendering. What they don't allow is for additional engines to be run on iOS, and for good reason.

3) Do you think Firefox OS will let you run WebKit and Trident-based browsers on their system?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #60 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by i-John View Post

Firefox is a piece of junk anyway, so who really cares.

 

It is, but I found one good use for it.  It plays nicer with the crappy WIFI authentication servers at the University I go to, compared to Opera and Chrome (on SUSE LInux).  On a stable, decent WIFI connection (basically any that doesn't belong to the University), Chrome is much better though. 

post #61 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

"until Apple relaxes iOS browser rules"

This isn't about rules, or Apple trying to "control" you... Apple could just BAN 3rd-party browsers if they wanted that. But there ARE 3rd party browsers, and some are good, regardless of some JavaScript benchmark number. (However: Apple SHOULD let you pick a default browser, I feel. And email. Maps too--although that gets more complex due to the range of OS-level requests that a map service may need to handle.)

What this is about is a legitimate security concern--one which is very old news and long ago laid to rest:
http://daringfireball.net/2011/03/nitro_ios_43
(Interesting that even Apple-focused sites that should know better are failing to note this bigger context, and are parroting the misleading statements of Mozilla. Not just AI.)

Nitro (or a similar just-in-time compiler) in third party apps would mean they could put data into RAM and make it executable--a HUGE malware vector and source of risk. Unsigned native code can now run. The only reason Apple allows this risk in Safari is because they can work to keep Safari free of security flaws that would allow exploits. Apple can't control that in other apps, so they're not opening the door to such problems.

That's the trade-off: speed vs. security. Apple has found a good compromise I think, but yes, JavaScript will run slower in third party apps--in other words, at the same perfectly acceptable speed Safari did before Nitro (only faster because today's hardware is faster). I've used Chrome and Mercury on iOS, and haven't felt they were slow.

If Firefox thinks that loaded half-truths will get Apple to abandon security just to help Firefox hit a better-sounding benchmark number for the 17 people who choose a browser that way, then they're deluded. Firefox will need to play WITHIN the rules if those rules have a good reason. This time, they do.

I hope Firefox changes their mind and proceeds on iOS. We don't really need a non-WebKit rendering engine: WebKit is excellent. We certainly don't need security holes that turn iOS into the nest of malware that Android is. But we COULD use some choice in browsers--the experience/UI/features that surround our browsing and manage our pages/tabs/bookmarks. Firefox COULD make a WebKit Firefox for iOS, and I'd welcome the option.

well said about the security issue. none of the Mozilla fans commenting dealt with your points at all.

 

users who want speed actually upgrade to 4G products. that makes a real difference. but they pick whatever browser that has the UI features they prefer, not the hottest specs.

 

mainly, what we are hearing are sour grapes and excuse making - because Firefox is falling back in popularity now after once looking like it was going to be #1. sore losers at Mozilla.

 

but i see no issue with Apple locking its own apps as the defaults. iOS obviously does not have a monopoly - if it did, that would be different. people who don't want those defaults have plenty of Android products to pick from instead, even if BB and WP die. that "walled garden" Apple ecosystem IS the core idea of iOS. if you don't realize that is what you are buying into, you are simply "not clear on the concept." you must know Apple won't ever change. techies want to tinker with everything, so are carping constantly about Apple's lockdown, but consumers want it to Just Work.

post #62 of 70
I think Apple should be less strict with third-party browsers as users have preferences and want more compatible options for browsers. I personally like Firefox as a browser as well as an add-on builder which I would like to have on my iPad. I have found Firefox to be a great browser with its additional tools since I started developing FireFox Add-ons with the Add-on Builder and SDK. It is a great work for developers and people venturing into creating their own add-ons.

http://groupdocs.com/blog/tech-blog/archive/2013/02/01/developing-firefox-add-ons-with-the-add-on-builder-and-sdk.html
post #63 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by enjourni View Post

I agree with Firefox on this. IMHO there's no reason apple should lock out anything non-Webkit based, unless they are deliberately trying to get people to stay with Safari. (Or to kill FF on purpose, who they know doesn't use webkit.)

I mean seriously, if people want to use an app that renders in something other then webkit, why should apple stop them? It doesn't make any sense. If the app renders poorly and sucks, people will just not download it. There's no threat to safari. Unless apple wants to pretend webkit numbers are safari numbers?

And to not allow you to set a different default browser just smells of monopoly. What's next, no 3rd party browsers on the Mac?

Yes I know a lot of people don't want and/or hate firefox, but the point is to have choice, not artificial barriers.

Your post could have come from Jerry Fletcher.

As others have said, this is not the same as IE. This is not a monopoly. I don't hear anyone complaining of a lack of browser choice on all those Samsung feature flip phones. Firefox, are you listening? I demand Firefox on my Samsung Gusto 2!!!! If Apple doesn't want it, we'll take it! Break the monopoly!!!
post #64 of 70

Dear Firefox,

 

 

Ok.

 

Thanks,

 

IPhone Users

post #65 of 70
post #66 of 70

I don't care. I only use Safari on my Mac, iPad, and iPhone.

 

Tried some other browsers and went right back to Safari.

post #67 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technarchy View Post

I don't care. I only use Safari on my Mac, iPad, and iPhone.

Tried some other browsers and went right back to Safari.

Safari 6 is much better than any alternative currently available for the Mac.

I couldn't say the same for previous versions, but 6 really got it right.
post #68 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dookie Howsre View Post


I don't see those comments as grouchy. People are just sick and tired of Mozilla trying to mandate someone else's OS for ONE application.

If Mozilla doesn't like it they just need to stuff it and shut up and quit acting like it's Apple's fault they're too dumb and lazy to use WebKit.

I missed the stupidity of that comment. 

 

You do realize that what is "dumb and lazy" is precisely to "use Webkit"?

The guys at Mozilla have their own rendering engine, which is far from easy to achieve, given the fact that multi-billion Microsoft never really succeeded, or that Apple had to "borrow" KDE's engine for Webkit.

 

So maybe, put your foot in your mouth?

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #69 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnash View Post

Dear Firefox,

 

 

Ok.

 

Thanks,

 

IPhone Users

Dear johnnash, thank you for speaking for me. That was generous of you to try to avoid me the effort. 

Please make sure you understand my wishes properly next time though.

 

Ok. 

Thanks, 

another iPhone User who doesn't agree with you.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #70 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


1) Apple isn't locking out anything that isn't Safari. You know this because the Mac allows any browser you wish. You can also choose not to use an Apple product if you wish.

2) Apple isn't denying the creation or use of any other browser on iOS. There are many browsers in the App Store, including some that use server-side rendering. What they don't allow is for additional engines to be run on iOS, and for good reason.

3) Do you think Firefox OS will let you run WebKit and Trident-based browsers on their system?

1) Starting last OS, you need to know how to ctr+click to install "any browser you wish". That rules my family out. The point of choice seems to escape Apple fanboys, and this is seriously scary. Though it does feel like all Microsoft fanboys bought-in Apple fanboyism these days.

 

2)The whole point of a browser with the same engine, to be honest, escapes me. What I've seen is "browsers" that actually display information "browsed" on a server (Opera, if I'm not mistaken?), and a series of sub-Safaris that "offer" a different, and sub-optimal, browsing UI. What I want, obviously, from another browser, is to be another browser, not the same browser with a theme/skin applied.

 

3) Yes.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Mozilla Firefox not coming to iPhone, iPad until Apple relaxes iOS browser rules
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Mozilla Firefox not coming to iPhone, iPad until Apple relaxes iOS browser rules