Why no iPhone support for Firefox mobile beta?
Mozilla just released the beta test version of Fennec, its mobile Firefox browser. The beta version is still slow and has a ways to go before it can compete with Apple's iPhone-ized Safari browser, but these are forgivable shortcomings, given its beta status.
No, the real problem with Fennec is that it's available only for one platform: Nokia's N810 Internet Tablet. Who cares about that device?
Seriously, while the rest of the world is experimenting first on the iPhone, why is Mozilla futzing around with a niche platform like Nokia's N810? I don't know a single person who has one, developer or otherwise. Even if Mozilla makes Fennec sing, who is going to care?
More to the point, who is going to help make it sing? Mozilla's desktop Firefox browser has been impressive in its innovations, in part because it marshalls a massive community that enables Mozilla to take advantage of resources otherwise beyond its small staff.
I solicited comment on the choice of platform but have yet to hear back from Mozilla on the matter.
Yes, as CNET reports, there are emulators for Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows to help developers get a head start on other platforms. But it's not the same. And, frankly, it's not really useful: Mozilla should be targeting the top platforms for its Fennec releases, not an obscure Internet tablet.
Early on, Fennec (nee "Minimo") was available only for Windows Mobile devices, which further rendered it irrelevant to the crowd most likely to help develop it.
Sure, Apple is unlikely to welcome a competitive browser to the iPhone, but Mozilla is used to swimming against the current. You don't achieve 20 percent market share on Microsoft's Windows fortress unless you know how to build and deliver compelling value.
Ben Feldman, a software developer, noted to me in a Tweet that
Mozilla already said there won't be iPhone or Android versions because of inability/restrictions on running code they need to use. If I remember correctly, it had to do with restrictions on run non-SDK code, and Android is all Java at the moment.
So maybe it's Apple that's to blame.
If so, Mozilla needs to up the public pressure on Apple to open up the iPhone to this sort of development. Firefox is the best browser for personal computers, even better than Apple's Safari. iPhone users shouldn't have to slum with Apple's iPhone-enabled version of Safari if (or when) Mozilla creates something better. Put the pressure on, Mozilla.
Follow me on Twitter at mjasay.
Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mjasay. 
I guess in time it will come but the mobile version of Safari is not that bad, unlike IE on Windows, so they would have to add features Apple do not have.
Then again this is CNET.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=why+no+firefox+mobile+on+iphone&l=1
The Cocoa Touch framework on the iPhone requires that you use Objective-C. What this basically means is that all of your UI code is written in Objective-C. But you can still include C and C++ code in your application. In fact, all of the lower-level "Core Foundation" APIs on the iPhone are C-based. This is the layer that sits beneath Cocoa Touch in the iPhone OS stack. The Quartz graphics API is also C-based.
While you do need to code in Objective-C for your UI code, a lot of your underlying code can be written in C or C++ if you chose to do so. Objective-C is a superset of C after all.
It's a popular misconception that Android is completely open - it isn't. You can't change anything at the OS level, can't, say, install a device driver, and are stuck in a Java jail. That's open?
At least on the iPhone, you have some language flexibility. Although you are in a jail, it's a machine-code jail. You aren't STUCK with Objective-C - you can use C, C++, or anything that can compile to machine code.
On the iPhone side, besides Apple's opposition, there's one other problem. (I'm unfamiliar with the details of Android, but I suspect it has the same problem). iPhone lacks the capability to register an app as a system-wide service. So, technically, yes, you could write a browser for the iPhone, whenever some other app launches "the browser" you'd get Safari. How useful is that?
Fennec targets the platforms that it does because they are the only ones open enough to support it properly. It's ironic that Windows Mobile is such a platform. (I'm certainly not advocating for Windows Mobile - I'm an iPhone developer...)
Also.. the iPhone platform is still in it's infancy.. and yet.. it's arguably more refined than any thing else out there... give it time. Apple is a little compulsive.. and it works for them.... so let them refine the littlest of details while slowly opening it up to the rest of us. OS 3.0 is a big step in that direction.
Safari first to fall: http://arstechnica.com/security/news/2009/03/chrome-is-the-only-browser-left-standing-in-pwn2own-contest.ars
Though, to be fair, IE and Firefox did eventually fall as well, just not as easily. Chrome however appears to still be standing.
The only real blame you can put on Mozilla for this is that they labeled it Beta, when it's more of a proof of concept. That's why the supported platforms don't even matter. It's not supposed to reach mass market adoption yet, just to make sure that the code and UI concepts can be tested and are in shape to be ported quickly should an opportunity arise.
To Steve Jobs and Scott Forstall - don't even give him a bite.
I have an iPhone 3G because its still the best music player / phone. As smartphones go, its not the best. Has the easiest to use interface, but it isn't as capable as other phones nor is it as customizable or open.
October 16th, 2008 |
In a Silicon Republic interview with Christian Sejersen, mobile director of engineering on Mozilla confirms that there will be no Firefox Mobile for the Android or Mobile OSX platform.
Regarding the two platforms, about Android he said Mozilla is doing nothing right now or in the near future. As for the iPhone, it is a complete no for two reasons: firstly the fact that developers cannot create an application that replicates the functionality of a pre-existing Apple one, and secondly because Apple also does not allow apps that run any code in the background because of the way the licence terms are written.
Sejersen said that Mozilla is initially targeting the N810, which is Linux-based and has open access to APIs and the OS , but also has a large touch screen as its development platform. An alpha version expected sometime this week.
Further down the line, Firefox Mobile will be made available for both touch and non-touch versions of Windows Mobile. After that, Sejersen said that although Mozilla hasn?t made a commitment as of yet, the Symbian phone will most likely follow.
The beta version of Firefox Mobile will be released before the year is out and is expected to come out of beta testing some time in 2009.
In October 2007, Mike Schroepfer, Mozilla?s vice-president of engineering said that mobile devices had become a top priority for the organisation behind the popular open source browser, Firefox.
?What we have said before is that Firefox Mobile will be afforded the same first-class citizen status as the desktop version, and not one version behind like most other web browser developers do,? explained Sejersen.
How about having your open tabs synchronizing across desktop and mobile device over the air (and your cookies and passwords)?
How about being able to block ads? Pretty nice feature that - should speed up your browsing.
But i guess the mangy Safari browser, with its complete lack of features is all Apple fans need.
Open tabs synchronizing sounds stupid, so you're saying that I am sitting at my computer but browsing on my phone? Why would I do that?
Cookies and passwords over the air? I log into my bank, an encrypted string goes to my bank AND my computer? Using code that is fully available to everyone?
Yes blocking ads would be nice, however, most of what I read online is done through Google reader or the iGoogle page, which has no ads...
If the safari browser is mangy, let me know a device that has a better browser, and we can talk.
Oh and by the way, if you are going to say Opera, I will tell you to shut the f(*& up.
Are you a bit slow? Synchronizing tabs mean you can continue reading on your phone what you started reading on your desktop and vice versa. Those RDF glasses are making you blind to a very cool feature.
Having your cookies and passwords synchronized (securely, unlike Safari of course) means you can seamlessly move from one device to another.
With your complete lack of imagination its no wonder you think Safari is great.
And yes, because Opera Mobile lets me do on a smartphone everything that I can do on the desktop, including use flash, it is better, unlike the crippled iPhone, which does not even have cut and paste yet.
Also, no iPhone support? You say that like it's Mozilla's fault. Apple is the reason there will be no Fennec on the iPhone, not Mozilla.
- by berfarah March 22, 2009 9:34 AM PDT
- Why glorify the iPhone? The Blackberry, Symbian and WIndows Mobile platforms are in much higher use. Besides, the iPhone has a great browser already. Why would you need it on the iPhone?
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(31 Comments)