Mozilla Launches Browser Built For Developers 74
HughPickens.com writes "Mozilla announced that they are excited to unveil Firefox Developer Edition, the first browser created specifically for developers that integrates two powerful new features, Valence and WebIDE that improve workflow and help you debug other browsers and apps directly from within Firefox Developer Edition. Valence (previously called Firefox Tools Adapter) lets you develop and debug your app across multiple browsers and devices by connecting the Firefox dev tools to other major browser engines. WebIDE allows you to develop, deploy and debug Web apps directly in your browser, or on a Firefox OS device. "It lets you create a new Firefox OS app (which is just a web app) from a template, or open up the code of an existing app. From there you can edit the app's files. It's one click to run the app in a simulator and one more to debug it with the developer tools."
Firefox Developer Edition also includes all the tools experienced Web developers are familiar with including: Responsive Design Mod, Page Inspector, Web Console, JavaScript Debugger, Network Monitor, Style Editor, and Web Audio Editor. At launch, Mozilla is starting off with Chrome for Android and Safari for iOS. and the eventual goal is to support more browsers, depending on what developers tell Mozilla they want, but the primary focus is on the mobile Web. "One of the biggest pain points for developers is having to use numerous siloed development environments in order to create engaging content or for targeting different app stores. For these reasons, developers often end up having to bounce between different platforms and browsers, which decreases productivity and causes frustration," says the press release. "If you're a new Web developer, the streamlined workflow and the fact that everything is already set up and ready to go makes it easier to get started building sophisticated applications." Mozilla released a teaser trailer for the browser last week.
Firefox Developer Edition also includes all the tools experienced Web developers are familiar with including: Responsive Design Mod, Page Inspector, Web Console, JavaScript Debugger, Network Monitor, Style Editor, and Web Audio Editor. At launch, Mozilla is starting off with Chrome for Android and Safari for iOS. and the eventual goal is to support more browsers, depending on what developers tell Mozilla they want, but the primary focus is on the mobile Web. "One of the biggest pain points for developers is having to use numerous siloed development environments in order to create engaging content or for targeting different app stores. For these reasons, developers often end up having to bounce between different platforms and browsers, which decreases productivity and causes frustration," says the press release. "If you're a new Web developer, the streamlined workflow and the fact that everything is already set up and ready to go makes it easier to get started building sophisticated applications." Mozilla released a teaser trailer for the browser last week.
Re: (Score:3)
I thought so too, but it's not. They link the previous announcement in TFS; this is the actual release.
Re: (Score:1)
Just for the record, I just today quit FFOS development because of mnt's comment.
I joined just so I can see why you are all quitting..
Re: (Score:2)
If you think FFOS development is bad, I'd hate to see what you think about Android development!
Re: (Score:1)
If you think FFOS development is bad, I'd hate to see what you think about Android development!
Android development is why i quit my job and moved on to something more sane.
I like the idea.. (Score:1)
I just kinda wish it was Chrome that came out with it.. In general I just prefer the layout of their development tools. I'll definitely give this a try though.
Re: (Score:2)
This, except the part about giving it a try. Firebug revolutionized everything when it first came out, but it's failed to improve in the way Chrome Developer Tools ... and Firefox's own developer tools have remained far behind both the entire time.
After ignoring the web development community for so long, I have a hard time seeing myself ever going back to Firefox unless they get some *seriously* rave reviews.
Chrome for Android and Safari for iOS? (Score:4, Interesting)
So, they're running Android and iOS on your computer to run the same binaries as those platforms? If not, it's only emulation and when someone says they're emulating another browser the result is usually not worth it and nowhere close to the actual results on the other platforms.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course not. But, of course, you have to find something to hate on. Mozilla can do no right.
Which is a decent first step.
Yep, and only an idiot would rely on the results of emulation and not engage in on-target testing.
Re:Chrome for Android and Safari for iOS? (Score:5, Informative)
> So, they're running Android and iOS on your
> computer to run the same binaries as those
> platforms?
No. "They" are allowing you to connect your Android or iOS device to your computer (likely via USB), then debugging the on-device browser using the Firefox debugger running on your computer. That way you're debugging the thing you actually want to debug, but using the same developer tools you're using for your other debugging, and which therefore you're already familiar with.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
> So you still have to buy an iPhone, an iPad, an
> Android phone, and an Android tablet to test on them,
Sure. The point here is to allow you to use the devtools of your choice, not to create a test environment.
Re: (Score:2)
So you still have to buy an iPhone, an iPad, an Android phone, and an Android tablet to test on them...
1. If you're doing any serious development, you should have this already
2. If your'e not very serious, then the andriod or ipad you personally use will be fine. For iPhone/iPad/etc testing, there is already a requirement to have something running Mac OSX + it's dev tools, or to own an i*thing* = no change here.
... and an essential Linux component has to be built from source.
Oh no! They're expecting developers (the target audience) to *gasp* build something from source!!!
Come on, there has to be more legitimate things to complain about!
Re: (Score:2)
If you're doing any serious development [vs.] If your'e not very serious
Then the question becomes one of making the transition from what you call "not very serious" to serious. Say a hobbyist web developer has developed a web application that he thinks will help him cross over from hobbyist to professional. Once he has something working on PC browsers and Android browser, where should he get funding to join the fruity ecosystem in order to test it on fruity machines before making it public? One could add "not yet tested on iPad; feedback is welcome" to the release notes, but th
Re: (Score:2)
... and an essential Linux component has to be built from source.
They're expecting developers (the target audience) to *gasp* build something from source!!!
Knowledge of web development tools doesn't imply knowledge of native application development tools, nor vice versa.
For most Windows users with knowledge of web development tools I'd generally agree but I'd have thought most Linux users (with knowledge of web development tools) would be fine doing a quick configure/make/make install.
Re: (Score:2)
Android makes their simulator (slow as it is) available for free, and it works on everything. iPhone wants you to buy a Mac so you can run XCode.
I'm not going to spend money to improve another company's ecosystem. I'll code to standards and test with WebKit. Beyond that, Apple can suck it.
Re: (Score:2)
So, they're running Android and iOS on your computer to run the same binaries as those platforms? If not, it's only emulation and when someone says they're emulating another browser the result is usually not worth it and nowhere close to the actual results on the other platforms.
I think it's more like remote viewing. You're running the real browser on a real device attached to your computer. The tools basically shove your code into that browser, capture the output, and then send the output back to your PC f
Re:Not going to happen (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, how dare an organization that is, essentially, politically minded in the first place take a principled stand for acceptance, respect, and equality instead of falling on Eich's sword for him.
Also:
Yeah, fuck them for even thinking about changing the status quo. People should just accept their lot in life, even if that means they get shit on for no good reason. Just so long as you don't have to care!
Yeah, a better organization would defend bigotry and turn a blind-eye towards abusive behavior. /s
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, fuck them for even thinking about changing the status quo
The media, the politics - the whole power-structure just loves these self-hating sick social justice warriors. They ARE the status quo.
Re: (Score:2)
Cue the "we're being oppressed!" Pac-Man pie-chart...
I love how people in the majority pretend that they're an oppressed minority to make themselves feel more important. Look, we get it. Despite having every advantage, you still can't compete with people who are significantly disadvantaged. That's got to make you feel terrible. I'm so sorry.
Re: (Score:2)
He has a right to his beliefs, same as everyone else. An organization like Mozilla should be especially careful not to take sides on politics. Now they can legitimately be seen as a social justice organization. They now have a record of using someone's personal information against them. Who knows what person will be their next target or whether or not they'll use their software products to snoop on whom they perceive to be the enemy. There were plenty of people on the left who didn't like what happened
Re: (Score:2)
An organization like Mozilla should be especially careful not to take sides on politics.
Even when one of the sides is obviously wrong? Good 'ol dose of false equivalence?
Ah, so now Mozilla is responsible for the actions of others? Or do you have evidence that Mozilla (the corporation) took action against Eich? As it stands, Eich chose to step down of his own volition and there's no evidence against it.
Re: (Score:2)
Even when one of the sides is obviously wrong?
That's your belief. It's not shared by everyone, or even the majority. In fact, most places that have voted have voted against your opinion. It's only some of the courts that are in your favor, and that kind of lawmaking from the courts should be abhorrent to all of us.
That's not even the point. It could have been any political issue. What was done by activists in getting him removed was completely inappropriate.
Eich didn't stand down on his own, he was forced to. We all know it. He didn't accept the
Re: (Score:2)
No, I care about free speech and people's right to privacy. I don't see that Mozilla did anything to keep Eich in place and they allowed things to get out of control to the point where he couldn't continue. He was under fire from people within the organization just as much as he was from the likes of OkStupid. There were people there that posted about it, that they were too scared to speak up within the organization because they didn't want to be next. Are you assuming they were all shameless opportunis
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to have a real conversation, stop posting as AC. It's rude.
They should have stood up for their CEO and their organization. It's painfully obvious that being seen as a social justice organization is not good for them. They have alienated a good number of people. Attacks like this do not serve to protect a free and open Internet. Mozilla should have explained this in plain terms. You can disagree with the man's opinion in his role as an individual, but it should not spill over into his workp
Designers again (Score:2)
Instead of developers fixing websocket traceability [mozilla.org], they focus on making a new theme. Firefox has clearly too much designers. It's enough that every two or three versions the color of the developer console changes (and its design), and now an extra browser? I hope they don't transport the developer features into that browser, leaving firefox as a "customer only" product. When I was at places where I couldn't install software (libraries etc) I have been always happy to debug websites with the standard brows
Re:another pointless UI facelift (Score:2)
Actually, they hid Aurora and went back to one of the older square layouts!
I had to use Classic Theme Restorer to add back a couple of minor buttons and colors though.
please remove al the developer crap from the reg.. (Score:1)
Now the Firefox team can remove all the developer crap from the regular browser.
Is amazing how most of the browsers, in order to pander to developers, became bloated with developer cruft. Do not get me wrong, getting developers to use your browser as primary is important. Nonetheless, this could have been done using the add-on/plug-in interfaces using an official set of add-ons/plug-ins, instead of bloating the browser.
Here I hope that the offering of a specific browser for developers means that the consume
Self-XSS blocking is only the beginning (Score:5, Insightful)
Now the Firefox team can remove all the developer crap from the regular browser.
Removing even the most basic JavaScript console from the standard browser would be a bad idea. It'd encourage some developers of prominent web sites to block users of the developer browser as a "security" measure. Facebook and Netflix, for instance, already block use of the JavaScript console [ycombinator.com] out of "self-XSS" worries; removing even "view source" would make it even worse.
Re:Self-XSS blocking is only the beginning (Score:4, Insightful)
RMS predicted this in The Right to Read [gnu.org].
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Please don't. Even non-developers are increasingly using the basic devtools to manage the modern web (defeating right-clicks, removing elements that get in the way, etc). And far more practically, the dev tools let devs diagnose bugs with users as they happen, without having to frustrate them with lots of extra steps that might lose their session entirely. At this point it would be like removing images from the browser core just because blind people have no need for them.
Don't remove "view page source" (Score:1)
Developers aren't marked from birth. The WWW took off because non-developers copied the html of various pages and made their own pages. Eventually some of them became developers. It's important to maintain at least some of these on-ramps.
I'm no web dev but I often view the page source (e.g. so I can download a video instead of viewing it in my browser) or use "inspect element" (e.g. to get rid of some bar at the top or bottom taking up too much screen or being too distracting).
Re: (Score:2)
Collaborative whiteboard (Score:2)
If the site needs Turing complete code, run it server side.
Under your proposal, how would a collaborative whiteboard work? Would users have to reload the page in order to see others' changes, and then click-click-click, reloading the whole thing every time as a submission to a server-side image map, in order to add lines to the whiteboard? Or ought the whiteboard to be released as a native application? That would exclude users of OS X, GNU/Linux, Android, iOS, Windows Phone, because these systems can't run a Windows .exe.
Re: (Score:2)
Native apps are easier to reject than web apps (Score:3)
Native applications of course.
A halfway decent programmer would make your "whiteboard" cross platform.
Use of native applications leads to three roadblocks, and I'd be interested in how you would recommend to solve each:
But will they remove the child safety features? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Really? You're complaining about child-safety features and you're still not advanced enough to use addons or just go into about:config and change settings like full-screen-api.approval-required to false?
Then what browser are you using that DOESN'T artificially kneecap or coddle you? Chrome won't even allow me to install third-party addons anymore.
Would be nice if it supported GWT plugin (Score:2)
We still use a Firefox 24 install for debugging GWT.
http://www.gwtproject.org/miss... [gwtproject.org]
It's not really anything new (Score:2)
Everything else seems to be just the same that it used to be, the only improvement is the ability to run it side by side with another Firefox profile but if you used work with Aurora like I did, all this means that you must go back to the beta channel to keep an usable Firefox with a normal UI (after applying the Classic Theme Restorer)
Their "mobile emulator" is quite simple, I don't understand why an
bad idea. (Score:2)
It's imperative that when I develop, that I'm developing and testing using the same browser an end user will have. Introducing differences where you have a developer and a non-developer browser is a bad idea.
Re: (Score:1)
You still testing on/using the device in question. This just lets you connect to the device and debug things from the desktop firefox instance beside you, while you test on the device. Which is a damn sight better than having to install a ton of custom tools or try to figure it all out on the device (which is often a phone or other small-screened device). It's basically a debugging IDE.
Re: (Score:2)
Developers (Score:1)
Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers.
Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition.
Bad GUI, No sync migration (Score:1)
Oh, and why is there no migration path between old sync and new sync? It's just a new authentication, everything under the hood is the same. If i run Pale Moon (old sync) and Firefox (new sync) i cannot have both of them, i'm forced to choose.