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

Mozilla expands extension support for Firefox for Android

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 251 posts

Re: Mozilla expands extension support for Firefox for Android

#231

Post by dblohm7 »

Zak wrote: post #155
dblohm7 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not just slap a "here there be dragons" warning on untested extensions and let users have at it? We essentially had that as part of pre-release builds. Same with about:config. The argument we'd then hear from people is, "but I want the stable channel with the 'here be dragons'" stuff. The reality is, though, that the "here be dragons" stuff probably affects stability more than running beta does anyway; people w…

My follow-up question then is why treat mobile significantly differently from desktop? Stable desktop Firefox has about:config and access to horribly broken extensions. Perhaps some would argue that it should not.

It comes down to the high-level architecture of Gecko.

Gecko is not just a web engine; it is in many ways an entire application framework. Gecko inverts control such that it implements the entire main event loop of the application. Desktop Firefox is essentially one big privileged HTML+JS application that happens to embed a non-privileged browser iframe within it. about:config governs settings around everything in this framework.

Now let's look at Android: the modern architecture of Firefox for Android is that of a native Android app that embeds Gecko similarly to a WebView, albeit a much more powerful one (GeckoView)[1]. Many parts of GeckoView's implementation need to deal with reconciling the "Gecko as app framework that controls the universe" paradigm with the "Gecko as a lowly Android View rendering into a graphics surface" paradigm. about:config is still important, but it only affects the Gecko part, not the native app part.

For GeckoView to work correctly, many about:config settings must be set to very specific values -- the free-for-all that is about:config on desktop could actually break an instance of Firefox on Android. This is particularly fatal to an app when run on a non-rooted phone.

[1] https://geckoview.dev

Re: Mozilla expands extension support for Firefox for Android

#232

Post by dblohm7 »

account42 wrote: post #204
wolverine876 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wish there was some way to solve the "one jerk outweighs a thousand happy users" problem. We could downvote all that stuff to oblivion. Instead, comments like it are voted to the top comment on almost every page.

Or instead Mozilla could actually listen to user feedback. People don't "shit" on Firefox for no reason.

Yeah, but shitting on devs for stuff they have nothing to do with is just a lousy thing to do.

Re: Mozilla expands extension support for Firefox for Android

#233

Post by dblohm7 »

mod50ack wrote: post #214
gitaarik wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? You are saying that the `about:config` feature only exists in Firefox for historical and backward compatible reasons? And Firefox rather actually doesn't want to provide people the ability to easily override advanced configs? I think this feature is one of the things that sets Firefox apart from other browsers, that you have more control if you want it. And I am saddened it's also never been implementes in Fire…

Pre-rewrite FF for Android supported about:config. Actually, Fennec F-Droid and the Beta version of Firefox support it just fine, too. It exists in stable FF but is cordoned off for some reason.

> It exists in stable FF but is cordoned off for some reason.

See my comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38657971

Re: Mozilla expands extension support for Firefox for Android

#234

Post by dblohm7 »

gitaarik wrote: post #186
dblohm7 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's part of it, for sure... at the time I was still there, Gecko's extension process did not have the capability of recovering from termination. But that just meant that we couldn't run them in a child process, not that we couldn't run them at all. Of course, then you have security considerations, which no doubt could have factored into the product decision.

It's common practice these days in Android apps to request the user to turn allow the app to run on the background, opening the necessary Android settings page if you want to grant the app access to this. If an addon needs that feature, the app could request this for the addon at moment of installation.

I think you misunderstand what I'm saying. Modern browsers try to host their extensions in a special sandboxed subprocess. At the time I was there, the code in Gecko that hosts sandboxed child processes was completely unable to deal with that host process being terminated; ie Gecko could not recover from that. It has nothing to do with Android settings.

Re: Mozilla expands extension support for Firefox for Android

#235

Post by pcwalton »

SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #207
pcwalton wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that Google has some secret underhanded deal with Mozilla to sabotage Firefox comes up here repeatedly and makes no sense. If Google wanted to prevent ad blocking on Android it would be much simpler to just ban ad blockers from the Play Store outright. There is a much simpler potential explanation for such a product management decision. Suppose Mozilla determines that 90% (made-up number) of users want addon…

> The idea that Google has some secret underhanded deal with Mozilla to sabotage Firefox comes up here repeatedly and makes no sense. That idea is supported by recent disclosures revealing that Google paid or attempted to pay Activision, Aniplex, Bandai Namco, Bethesda, Blizzard, Com2uS, EA, King, Mixl, Niantic, NCSoft, NetMarble, NetEase, Nexon, Nintendo, Pearl Abyss, The Pokemon Company, Riot, Square Enix, Supercel…

From a skim, "Project Hug" seems like it was a deal to keep games in the Play Store. That is a far cry from some kind of weird deal to sabotage a competitor's product.

Re: Mozilla expands extension support for Firefox for Android

#236

Post by pseudalopex »

account42 wrote: post #205
asadotzler wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're just making shit up. I was with the Mozilla project for 25 years, with Netscape and then the Mozilla companies for 23 years. I was involved in reviews of the very first Google and Mozilla contract in the fall of 2004. Google has no say in the Mozilla product experience. None. There are some things Mozilla is disallowed from doing to Google Search results that Firefox displays, but that's basically it. That you…

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... Wether there is a formalized contract or not Mozilla makes choicses in the interest of Google over (especially power) users all the time. And in general its absurd to think that taking money (not to mention almost your entire funding) from someone isn't going to make you biased towards that person. As has been pointed out many times in discussions about this, you don'…

> Wether there is a formalized contract or not Mozilla makes choicses in the interest of Google over (especially power) users all the time.

What choices did they make in Google's interest?

Re: Mozilla expands extension support for Firefox for Android

#237

Post by st3fan »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #164
st3fan wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I managed the team that did a lot of the integration of web extension support in Fenix, the new Firefox for Android. We were all on the brink of burnout. There was too much work. Unrealistic deadlines. And high expectations. So we decided to only support a limited set of APIs tuned for the most popular web extension. Which were basically all ad blockers if I remember correctly. Proud of the team to have finally gotte…

It sounds like they intentionally under-provisioned you all to draw it out, which isn't surprising given their biggest source of funding is Google, and the last thing Google wants is ad/tracker blocking, privacy extensions, and, well, a major reason for people to set their default browser to 'not chrome'. Lord knows there's enough money floating around that place. What a shame - but thank you. Hopefully plugins come…

Nope you are making up stories.

Re: Mozilla expands extension support for Firefox for Android

#238

Post by rightbyte »

figmert wrote: post #213
rightbyte wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That could be a power struggle. I.e. some Google loyal PM sabotaged the extension feature, but quoting the poster above, the devs worked around it by doing a partial implementation to support adblockers, foiling the plan :)

Not everything is a conspiracy

Sure. Obviously I don't know why.

Re: Mozilla expands extension support for Firefox for Android

#239

Post by anticensor »

SSLy wrote: post #111
saagarjha wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would currently be against the App Store guidelines, which do not permit the use of a third party browser engine. Also, Firefox has ProMotion support.

Luckily that provision is going to be illegal under DMA within half a year.

Real Firefox has already been ported to iPhone, just not available in the App Store due to Apple's rules.

Re: Mozilla expands extension support for Firefox for Android

#240

Post by sedatk »

bad_user wrote: post #182
sedatk wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article may be trash as you said, but Firefox doesn't disclose how much they spend on developing Firefox web browser. Everything is lumped under "software development", and that's only half of their annual budget, Firefox certainly doesn't get the most of the budget. If they spend most of that $200 million on Firefox annually and we have abhorrent text rendering on canvas elements for YEARS, something's seriously…

How much are Google or Apple spending on developing Chrome and Safari? And note that they also develop the operating systems (Android, ChromeOS, iOS, macOS), so have an integration advantage from it.

> How much are Google or Apple spending on developing Chrome and Safari?

They spend enough? Mozilla obviously doesn't.

Post reply on HN