Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla The Internet IBM

IBM Donates Code to Firefox 355

OS24Ever writes "Internetnews.com is reporting that IBM has donated new DHTML code to the Mozilla foundation specifically targeted as accessability and rich interactive applications (RIA). These new features are expected to be in the next major update of Firefox (v1.5). Is this the first OSS application to get RIA/DHTML support for accessability? I would think this could open some doors for Firefox to replace IE in many Windows environments."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IBM Donates Code to Firefox

Comments Filter:
  • To IBM (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Hey_bob ( 6104 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @04:40PM (#13324693) Homepage
    Thanks for supporting Open Source, and thanks for supporting Firefox.

    -Random Person.
  • Not unless (Score:2, Insightful)

    by dook43 ( 660162 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @04:42PM (#13324721)
    the DOM magically becomes the same as MSIE's.

    Not unless XML Islands are suddenly implemented.

  • by mboverload ( 657893 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @04:46PM (#13324780) Journal
    Name a feature IE has out of the box that firefox doesn't.
  • extensions (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 15, 2005 @04:47PM (#13324784)
    Many internal parts of Mozilla/Firefox, and most "XUL" applications that depend on mozilla, use DHTML for very basic interface actions. This may not actually be a good design decision, but it's a design decision they already made and it's too late to go back on it. If the DHTML code is improving then this will make the whole thing overall tighter and will be all in all an action against bloat.
  • IBM == Good code. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by vidarlo ( 134906 ) <vidarlo@bitsex.net> on Monday August 15, 2005 @04:48PM (#13324799) Homepage
    Usually IBM has got good code, so there is hope that this will make a better browser. Certainly, it will be a great merit for firefox. Branding IBM code is a quality sign in my eyes, and might lead to wider acceptance of Firefox, as IBM seems to have noticed the browser.
  • Dumb & Dumber (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 15, 2005 @04:49PM (#13324816)
    I would think this could open some doors for Firefox to replace IE in many Windows environments.

    Why on Earth would you think that? Have you heard anyone shouting for RIA support. I'd never even heard of RIA, prior to this article and I definitely haven't missed it.

    MS IE maintains it's stonghold because most websites are built for it specifically. Additionally, many many applications are build for IE exclusively.

    Firefox is not being held back by the lack of RIA. It is being held back by the sheer dominance of IE and that dominance continues to grow. While the community pats themselves on the back and congratulates themselves about 80 million downloads, they turn a blind eye to the fact that there have been 10 releases so there are actually only 10 million copies of Firefox in use. the other 70 million have been overwritten by newer releases.

  • by Helios1182 ( 629010 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @04:50PM (#13324831)
    Well, IBM uses a lot of OSS software on their servers and various other solutions. Most of the code is GPL'd, so the have to return the source. So IBM gets to use a lot of free stuff, make it better, gives back to the community, and still makes their share holders happy. It seems to be exactl what Slashdot wants.
  • by Jerf ( 17166 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @04:52PM (#13324855) Journal
    Does anyone have a version of this article that isn't a vague promise that several buzzwords now have more to do with each other than ever?

    I would expect this code actually does something, but the article is so vague I'm not really sure what. What's an example of something that does not work now that will work after this code is integrated and released?

    (Preferably from someone who actually knows; I could make stuff up based on the article too, like this: "Before, if you set the ALT attribute on a dynamically-generated IMG tag, the screen-readers couldn't pick it up. Now they can." But I'm not sure if that's what they mean; that's just my plausible interpretation of the buzzword soup that I'm not very confident in, as I would have thought that works fine now....)
  • This is great (Score:2, Insightful)

    by veganopolis ( 630667 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @04:53PM (#13324878)
    AJAX has opened many doors for me, and this addition will help me rule the world. To all those who oppose.... hmmmm well....

    but seriously, keep buying IBM and support OSS.
  • Re:Maybe. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Iriel ( 810009 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @04:53PM (#13324880) Homepage
    Chronology could make the link you provide somewhat invalid. That story mentions that market share slipped last month, yet I don't recall it saying where the figures are right now. But that's probably going to become irrelevant.

    Even if the user-base hit a plateau already and everyone that wants Firefox, has it, this is article talks about providing accesability to a whole new audience. Being the first in the field does give one an advantage when the two biggest competitors are commercial (Opera) and slower than waiting for a new IE (uh...IE).

    I know there are others, but when these are the three biggest players, Firefox stands to gain a good deal of respect in the accesability crowd if they pull this off with IBM.

    By all means, it won't topple IE, but providing a good set of features to those with disabilities could actually see Firefox instituted in more public terminal situations like schools, libraries and such.

    Besides, OSS tends to be pretty stubborn in the fact that the developers usually stop for nothing short of complete bankruptcy ;) I don't think Firefox developers are going to let a one month slip get to them.
  • by Iriel ( 810009 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @05:01PM (#13324979) Homepage
    Look at the fact that IBM is one of the biggest vendors of Linux computers/servers in the world, if not the largest outright. If Linux runs on OSS primarily, then IBM has everything to gain by freely giving code to a project that can help improve the quality of the OS they ship their next systems with.

    Even if it's only one program out of a hundred, IBM has nothing to lose by helping the projects that help their systems.
  • by First Person ( 51018 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @05:02PM (#13324982)

    I'm curious on what possible motives IBM would have for doing this. I mean, they're a business, there to make money and all. How does this help them in the short or long run?

    This is a maneuver against Microsoft. IE gives Microsoft considerable influence over application creation and hosting tools. By keeping the browser independent, IBM can push Web Sphere and other tools more effectively. The Fortune 500 is the target, fortunately, we can all benefit from their contribution.

    As you've guessed, IBM's promotion of open source is not altruistic.

  • Re:Maybe. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lpangelrob ( 714473 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @05:02PM (#13324992)
    Did you specifically avoid reading the summary?

    ...specifically targeted as accessability and rich interactive applications (RIA)

    You know, code that will help make Flash and its lookalikes accessible to people who maybe can't see or hear?

    That's most likely what the poster of the story intended when he/she speaked of being able to "replace IE in many Windows environments."

  • by vidarlo ( 134906 ) <vidarlo@bitsex.net> on Monday August 15, 2005 @05:03PM (#13324997) Homepage
    I'm curious on what possible motives IBM would have for doing this. I mean, they're a business, there to make money and all. How does this help them in the short or long run?

    A universal client for their dhtml applications? That is my guess

    Firefox works on many OSes, which is their strength. As more and mroe is moving to the web platform, IBM sees this as a easy way to strengthen their position in the web-app market.

  • Re:Not unless (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MemeRot ( 80975 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @05:03PM (#13325001) Homepage Journal
    XML data islands were really a pretty cool technology. Much more straightforward than writing Javascript to do XMLHttp requests to the server for the XML and then parsing it into HTML. Clean, simple, and unfortunately proprietary.
  • Wild Guess (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bsd4me ( 759597 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @05:10PM (#13325084)

    It may help them sell more servers and services?

    Wild guess, but custom web-based apps are pretty popular in mega-corps. Mega-corps have to support a wide variety of users, including those with accessibility needs. Making Firefox more accessible in DHTML areas means they could potentially sell more servers and services to better support the needs of mega-corps.

    ?

  • Re:Dumb & Dumber (Score:3, Insightful)

    by sapgau ( 413511 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @05:12PM (#13325104) Journal
    With proper planning you can make your website work with IE, Firefox, et.al.

    Obviously this requires not to rely on ActiveX and make more use of compliant DHTML/CSS. Is not pretty but if it's done once it can be replicated with less effort.

    Benefits: you make access to your website a non-issue and end up with a better designed system.

    Web designers take shortcuts/are lazy and that's why they stick with IE. But that will come to bite them in the A$$ with the next release of IE.

    /my $0.02

    //Hate the new RIA label of what used to be DHTML/CSS
  • Major update? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Mozk ( 844858 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @06:03PM (#13325578)
    1.5 is not a major update. 1.5 is a minor update. 2.0 would be a major update. It goes major.minor.
  • by appleloaf ( 902184 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @06:05PM (#13325598)
    Glow and shadow, et c, are implemented through CSS not javascript.
  • One hell of a move (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tolkienfan ( 892463 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @06:05PM (#13325602) Journal
    This chess match has just taken a surprising turn!

    The code checks one box that IE doesn't have checked - Accessibilty for rich internet apps.

    This is a carefully designed move to further boost Firefox. It's an excellent reason to give for switching, especially at government facilities.

  • Re:I doubt it (Score:2, Insightful)

    by jonadab ( 583620 ) on Monday August 15, 2005 @06:18PM (#13325688) Homepage Journal
    > it has to be miles betters than IE

    How about if, after using a modern browser for a few days, the very thought of using IE makes a user's skin crawl and they have to suppress the urge to go take a shower? Oh, wait, that was four years ago, practically forever in internet time, and ad interim IE is the only major browser that has not improved its interface at all.

    > and it has to be brought to the attention of
    > the public at large

    I'm pretty sure that has happened now. My dad, who only knows the difference between the web and email if you explain it three times slowly, approached *me* to ask if he could get "Mozilla Foxfire". He heard about it on a discussion forum dedicated to his hobby (which is not technical in nature and mostly popular with retired people), heard a description of tabbed browsing, and wanted it. He also wanted to download some smileys. This is *not* the esoteric stuff of the techno-elite geek only.

    My sister, an elementary school teacher, said that the computers in the schools were "unusable" for the internet, because they use IE. (It was mostly the constant popups she was talking about; they way she described it, I assume they had accumulated some adware that made matters worse than the sites they were visiting intended -- but she didn't know that; she just knew she had to close six windows every time she clicked anything.)

    Yes, there are still a lot of people using IE, but what they need more than anything at this point is for a geek with some spare time to service their computers for them: run a spyware check, install Firefox, clean the 8+ obsolete IM clients they don't use anymore out of the Run registry keys, uninstall all the old versions of AOL and the Earthlink Toolbar they haven't used in a couple of years, and, you know, just generally fix the computer up so it works better. Do it for your non-techie friends when you get a chance. They'll thank you. And if there's a Firefox icon on the desktop where the e used to be, they'll use Firefox -- and they'll like it.
  • Re:Sounds like . . (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Phroggy ( 441 ) * <slashdot3.phroggy@com> on Tuesday August 16, 2005 @12:10AM (#13327778) Homepage
    Surely you're not suggesting that Opera is a worse name for a web browser than Firefox?
  • Re:Maybe. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by stoborrobots ( 577882 ) on Tuesday August 16, 2005 @03:27AM (#13328460)
    I have no problem with putting a 'Designed for Firefox.' button on my sites...

    These are better... Really. [anybrowser.org]

This file will self-destruct in five minutes.

Working...