Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 296 posts

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#21

Post by radarsat1 »

sharpneli wrote: post #19
radarsat1 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it technically enforced though, I am curious. I mean, if I wrote an application that downloaded text files and rendered the text to the screen, I am sure that would be possible. If I wanted to add images to draw next to the text I am sure it is feasible. So how can one technically prohibit doing that? Implementation-wise, how is a web browser really that different from e.g. a video game? Or is it only policy-e…

One cannot have writeable executable memory on iOS (apple can, we cannot). Thus one cannot make a JIT compiler for js and thus pages are slow. Game engines such as Unity use il2cpp to go from the C# stuff into C++ that can be statically compiled as running the C# as bytecode would be too slow without a jitter.

Ah, so it is all about the javascript engine? Ok I can see how that might put up some major technical barriers, but still it should be technically feasible to have the firefox rendering engine make use of the iOS javascript engine, no? Maybe it's not worth the effort of course. I am just trying to get a feel for what the barriers are.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#22

Post by reubenmorais »

radarsat1 wrote: post #18
johnsea wrote: post #7

The article once more reiterates the fact that Apple doesn't allow other browser engines. You cannot even fight, there is no future ;-) on iOS.

How is it technically enforced though, I am curious. I mean, if I wrote an application that downloaded text files and rendered the text to the screen, I am sure that would be possible. If I wanted to add images to draw next to the text I am sure it is feasible. So how can one technically prohibit doing that? Implementation-wise, how is a web browser really that different from e.g. a video game? Or is it only policy-e…

I don't know the details first hand, so take this with a grain of salt, but this is what I remember from talking to engineers who explored this possibility over the years:

You can't ship a native JIT (execute native code from the heap), I think it's enforced automatically by the App Store. So shipping your own JavaScript engine is out.

You can't download and interpret third-party code, I think this is enforced by human reviews, so shipping your own Web rendering stack is out.

You can use your own network stack with WebKit on top, which would let you offer some value to users like more advanced ad/tracker blocking.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#23

Post by just_observing »

rpastuszak wrote: post #17
phatfish wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they get shouted down whenever they try to monetise independently, can't have it both ways. Either more users start donating $5-10 a month (seems worth it to me given the time I spend with their product) or they take the Google money and deal with the conflict of interest best they can. A Shuttelworth style billionaire benefactor would work as well, but I doubt one will come from the tech community as Firefox is…

This. Bear in mind that Mozilla is experimenting with different monetisation models, be it subs, donations, relying on Google for search as well as partnerships with companies such as Scroll (publisher content monetisation platforms). Also, if you follow the discourse on anything published by Mozilla in the past 2-3 years—there's been a shift when it comes to how they speak about Googe. It's a marketing move, of cour…

The Guardian has gone downhill in the last few years, just like the rest of UK mainstream news reporting. They have rolled over to do whatever the Government wants not reporting - take Assange for example.

Their coverage is practically non-existent.

I used to buy The Guardian every day, then I subscribed digitally. And then when their reporting slid downhill, I stopped subscribing. I still read it - but block their data scraping scripts and all ads. They are not worth supporting IMO.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#24

Post by edpichler »

Mozilla really has a big challenge. It is hard to compete with such powerful companies, creating a sustainable business with their mission without succumbing to ads or stopping to protect user privacy. It looks like an unfair game.

I like the Brave business model. I wish to have the same with Firefox.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#25

Post by JustSomeNobody »

capableweb wrote: post #20
radarsat1 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it technically enforced though, I am curious. I mean, if I wrote an application that downloaded text files and rendered the text to the screen, I am sure that would be possible. If I wanted to add images to draw next to the text I am sure it is feasible. So how can one technically prohibit doing that? Implementation-wise, how is a web browser really that different from e.g. a video game? Or is it only policy-e…

My guess would be that it's policy-enforced and what Apple really has problems with is not browsers as a concept (dynamically loading and rendering data) but rather the execution engine that websites usually use (JavaScript) and seeing that as a too-large-to-review area where they want to avoid having vulnerabilities in applications published on App Store. Or it's a anti-competitive move disguised as a "avoid vulnera…

interesting. But I can’t help but think by that logic Facebook should be too large to review.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#26

Post by fwn »

ppfrc wrote: post #11
idoubtit wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of the non-research grants were in 2006-2013. Has Mozilla stopped this policy of semi-random funding of external projects? Some of these grants surprised me. For example, $270,000 for the translation and accessibility of the USA presidential election of 2012.

Just imagine not being from the US, donating to Mozilla so they improve Firefox, and they instead spend the money on translating the USA presidential election.

Right now my parent is getting downvoted but I think that there's a great truth in this comment:

A lack of focus generally hurts an organizations legitimacy in the eyes of it's donors.

Increasing the quality of a countries national elections isn't a goal I'd immediately assume to be part of Mozillas mission, so I'd be disappointed about such a project.

They could go the more transparent route and create a second organization for funding things their management likes.

... but I assume that such an organization would probably have some funding problems.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#27

Post by simion314 »

scarface74 wrote: post #15
simion314 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't need JS to get 2% more faster, the limits of those speed improvements were reached, web assembly combined with a compiled language could offer more speed. I would like to see Firefox move faster in implementing good web APIs, like the lazy loading of images, push for HTML and CSS improvements(like let me customize the numeric text input arrows with css instead of forcing me to use a JS library) . Maybe the R…

Wasn’t Netscape the case study of why you shouldn’t do a full rewrite?

AFAIK Firefox is not doing a full rewrite but incremental refactoring then attempting to swap components.

The unfortunate truth is that writing a browser is almost impossible because of the complexity, IMO we need a new version of the web that breaks compatibility, make everything strict(no longer ignore errors and guess a fix for them) no more 12 ways to center an element , for the legacy web we can use the existing engines

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#28

Post by sharpneli »

radarsat1 wrote: post #21
sharpneli wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One cannot have writeable executable memory on iOS (apple can, we cannot). Thus one cannot make a JIT compiler for js and thus pages are slow. Game engines such as Unity use il2cpp to go from the C# stuff into C++ that can be statically compiled as running the C# as bytecode would be too slow without a jitter.

Ah, so it is all about the javascript engine? Ok I can see how that might put up some major technical barriers, but still it should be technically feasible to have the firefox rendering engine make use of the iOS javascript engine, no? Maybe it's not worth the effort of course. I am just trying to get a feel for what the barriers are.

Not via public apis. So cannot be placed into app store.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#29

Post by dageshi »

just_observing wrote: post #23
rpastuszak wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. Bear in mind that Mozilla is experimenting with different monetisation models, be it subs, donations, relying on Google for search as well as partnerships with companies such as Scroll (publisher content monetisation platforms). Also, if you follow the discourse on anything published by Mozilla in the past 2-3 years—there's been a shift when it comes to how they speak about Googe. It's a marketing move, of cour…

The Guardian has gone downhill in the last few years, just like the rest of UK mainstream news reporting. They have rolled over to do whatever the Government wants not reporting - take Assange for example. Their coverage is practically non-existent. I used to buy The Guardian every day, then I subscribed digitally. And then when their reporting slid downhill, I stopped subscribing. I still read it - but block their d…

The more likely explanation is that people got tired of Assange's story and so the articles didn't get the clicks to justify covering them any more. The Guardian can get more clicks with a steady drip of vegan opinion pieces, stories laughing at Tories and the dreadfulness of brexit so that's what they'll do.

Same as the Telegraph will feed its readers "the glory of Boris", "forwards unto brexit" and "Good lord look what Corbyn said today, he's a dreadful little man isn't he?"

News organisations are slaves to their audiences and will just produce what their audiences want.

Re: Firefox’s Fight for the Future of the Web

#30

Post by vbezhenar »

radarsat1 wrote: post #21
sharpneli wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One cannot have writeable executable memory on iOS (apple can, we cannot). Thus one cannot make a JIT compiler for js and thus pages are slow. Game engines such as Unity use il2cpp to go from the C# stuff into C++ that can be statically compiled as running the C# as bytecode would be too slow without a jitter.

Ah, so it is all about the javascript engine? Ok I can see how that might put up some major technical barriers, but still it should be technically feasible to have the firefox rendering engine make use of the iOS javascript engine, no? Maybe it's not worth the effort of course. I am just trying to get a feel for what the barriers are.

I think that iOS JS engine is tied to WebView and it would be hard to re-use it with other rendering engine.
Post reply on HN