Mozilla Launches Firefox For IOS 96
An anonymous reader writes: Mozilla today launched Firefox for iOS worldwide. You can download the new browser for iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch now directly from Apple's App Store (iOS 8.2 or later required). Until today, Firefox for iOS was available as a public preview, and only in New Zealand. Also at Ars Technica.
No mention of ad blocking support (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
DOA. I really can't stand Safari, but I loathe ads a lot more.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
FF on Android supports quite a few addons, including ABP.
Re: (Score:1)
Who modded this informative?
Adblock Plus for Android only works via Wi-Fi and requires proxy configurations to install. Instead, to get ad blocking on Android, we recommend installing Adblock Browser. If you still wish to install Adblock Plus for Android, ensure that app installation from Unknown sources is enabled. To enable, open Settings and tap Unknown sources.
https://adblockplus.org/androi... [adblockplus.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I've only seen it in the add-on listing, I've never actually used it. Why would they even list it for mobile (you set what mozilla clients you support in your extension information file) if it's this much of a pain to use?
There are a few other ad-blockers and privacy extensions available for FF mobile though, so even if ABP doesn't work there appear to be other options.
Re: (Score:1)
Which adblockers for FF mobile are there? Or for any browser?
Re: (Score:2)
You're free to download it and check yourself. FF extensions are set up so they can easily be multi-platform, so there's a variety of them available on mobile. Personally I don't use a mobile browser enough to have found the need to install one, I only have a few addons installed.
Re: (Score:1)
You are right and I am an idiot. Thanks for setting me straight.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not accusing you of being an idiot; I think you just assumed I knew what I was talking about - which I certainly do not :P
Re: (Score:1)
No, I am accusing myself and I am right. I thought I knew what I was talking about but didn't. Somehow I had gotten it into my head that the Android store crackdown on generic adblockers also affected browser add-ins. No idea how this happened, I should have noticed that I still don't see ads in FF on the tablet but do on the new phone, where I didn't check for ADB add-on based on this assumption, instead being very angry about the deteriorated experience.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, there was a crackdown on adblockers on Android? I didn't even know about this. As I mentioned I don't browse on my mobile so much I've ever felt the need to block advertisements -- but when you think about it Google makes a lot of money off Android specifically through advertisements and advertising related activities... so it would make sense they would have tried to ban them. Though the existence of that ABP browser on Android seems to indicate they've maybe given up on that?
Either way FF is my choi
Re: (Score:1)
On the crackdown - it's not very recent, I don't know how it is now: https://adblockplus.org/blog/a... [adblockplus.org].
I agree with all you said, and am somewhat in the same boat wrt to tracking on PC and phone, though I am still searching for the best balance for myself. Though to me Opera is still be best mobile browser - the main reason I use FF is tab syncing with the PC. The most glaring hole for me in FF is the absence of a top/bottom button when scrolling through a long page. Opera has a nice overlay button when you
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, see my other comment a short while ago. I am an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Programmable apps are OK for as long as they dont download code. Even scripting applications (I have one on the AppStore that even has an Obj-C bridge).
It's a bit of a non-sensical rule given the web's use of JavaScript. Previously, so long as your app used the system-provided JS engine in the various web views available to developers (such as the WebKit), your app was sufficiently protected (and so was the user) because Apple took the grunt of the sandbox protection.
According to the link in the original po
Re: (Score:2)
>it still includes features that Firefox users have come to expect,
The primary thing I expect from Netscape, err, Mozilla, err, Seamonkey, err, Firefox is to be able to block plinky-things.
*Everything* else is secondary.
hawk
Re: (Score:2)
It's because they are using WKWebView to render web content instead of the newer SafariViewController. SafariViewController requires iOS 9 and Firefox supports iOS 8.
Webkit rules (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Apple prevents them from using anything other than Webkit on iOS.
Opera Mini doesn't use WebKit, but Firefox does (Score:2)
Opera Mini does not use WebKit. Instead, it uses the equivalent of Remote Desktop to a rendering server. There are three ways that Mozilla could have used a rendering server instead of WebKit, but each has flaws.
Re:Webkit rules (Score:5, Informative)
It's not using WebKit on iOS because it doesn't want to use Gecko, it's because it can't use Gecko. You can't release a web browser with its own rendering engine on iOS, you have to use the built-in WebKit The Chrome app for iOS also does this. What you're getting with Chrome/Firefox for iOS is the synchronization with your bookmarks and whatever other niceties you get with different interface styles.
The one exception is the Opera browser on iOS, but it also doesn't use its own rendering engine on the phone. It renders the page on a server and then sends your phone an image of it. This is a workaround and it also makes browsing really fast but it has zero privacy or security. You probably wouldn't want to browse anything sensitive like your bank info since Opera would get to see it too. This is assuming that Opera Mini hasn't changed any, that is.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
I have an iPhone 6, my wife has a 6s. I hate browsing anything on the junk of a browser found in these supposed pinnacle-of-technology phones. If I have a few tabs open, switching between them reloads the content which wreaks havoc with AJAX websites (or at best I have to scroll and find my location again).
Really? You must have that special version of iOS. The one nobody else has.
I just checked on my iPhone 6 plus, and I was able to tap between several Safari Tabs, and had deliberately scrolled down into the Pages so that it would be easy to see a reload, and in each case, the switching-time was instantaneous, with absolutely NO reloading or re-rendering.
Oh, and iOS' multitasking has nothing to do with this. Stop trying to explain stuff you don't understand.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
It depends on RAM. iOS will pretty aggressively throw away tabs, and reload them when you switch back, if you're low on RAM. There are other possible implementations of this obviously, and Apple seem to have gone for the simplest. It can be pretty annoying, but Safari on the desktop will often reload pages when you use the back button, which is even worse.
Well, the OP stated this was on an iPhone 6 and 6s; so I assume they have as much RAM as I do with my 6 Plus. I guess, if he is one of those idiots who never "Polices" his open Applications to see if he is running 25 things at a time, then sure, Safari probably marks the memory for inactive Tabs as "unload-able" (sorry, not an iOS dev, don't know the actual term). That would explain it. And as everyone here knows, being in "swapfile" (memory-management) Hell will make ANY system make you want to scream.
An
Re: (Score:1)
But the browser does not correctly page out tab state so entered text and even the scroll position is not saved, it just does a dumb reload. This is something that could and should be improved so I don't see why you're so defensive about it.
Oh, so you've seen the Source code for Mobile Safari? You would have to have done that, since in iOS, each Application is responsible for managing its own memory.
Oh, and two other things: Why does the OP require YOU to fight his battles? And do you not recognize sarcasm when you see it?
And one final thing: I think you will find that I covered the "different use cases" when I suggested that he might be one of those people who just launches Application after Application, until their system grinds to a hal
Re: (Score:1)
Nope. If the application has been put in hibernation or has been affected by iOS's memory management strategies (which does happen when you use the multi-tasking features) then when you re-open it and switch to tabs they do indeed reload because it doesn't page the state of the tab to disk when it runs low on resources. Personally it doesn't bother me that much and I prefer to deal with that than the battery life issues that would exist otherwise but let's not pretend it doesn't happen just because it's on the smartphone OS you chose. It's just an OS, dont take its failings as a reflection on you personally.
Ok, you are changing the conditions of the test.
The OP said (or at least implied) that merely switching Tabs (not changing the State of the Application) was enough to cause a Reload of Tabs. He said NOTHING about "Hibernating", "Switching States", etc.
I would expect iOS to reclaim resources when needed, especially from a "Hibernating" App.
I'm not "pretending" about anything. I merely stated that I conducted an admittedly unscientific test, and did not observe the behavior. I wasn't TRYING to "beat" th
Re: (Score:2)
I really wonder how it is then, that I have an iPad Mini 2, and can run two synthesizer apps, a sequencer app, all in the background, listening to their output, while browsing in Safari and switching between two single-html-file webapps, and they work just fine. If you call that "pseudo"-multitasking, I'm OK. Whatever, it works for me.
Re: (Score:1)
Which is why it's no use trying to find an alternative to the godawful Safari Mobile. Any other browser available in iOS will suck in the same way, just with some extra suckiness (like less interoperability with other apps) layered on top.
First off: Mods, why is this "Interesting"? It's just complaining.
Second: In what ways SPECIFICALLY is Safari Mobile "Godawful"? Mobile browsers are generally a little-less feature-laden than desktop browsers; but other than that, it seems to do its job fairly well. It took me a little while to get used to the Tab interface; but it certainly isn't "Godawful".
Re: (Score:2)
Safari on iOS is awful, it does exactly as the op said, reloads tabs every time you change. Complete utter crap browser.
If you didn't have your head up your ass you would notice.
Re: (Score:1)
Safari on iOS is awful, it does exactly as the op said, reloads tabs every time you change. Complete utter crap browser. If you didn't have your head up your ass you would notice.
And if you didn't have your head up your ass, you'd notice that I stated that I had just tested it.
I had three tabs open (actually many more, but I just tested with 3):
1. A Slashdot Comment Thread.
2. The Slashdot "Stories" Page.
3. A Walmart "product" page.
All three were scrolled-down to a random point, so it would be REALLY obvious if they reloaded.
I clicked back and forth between the three tabs, in no particular order, and each came to the foreground instantly, with NO (perceptible) Reload, and wit
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
My wife's older iPad 2 seems to be having lots of problems with the newer iOS versions in general so we've been thinking of upgrading, but without a guarantee of significantly fewer browser issues I'd seriously consider going with an Android tablet instead.
Have fun!
Re: (Score:1)
Agreed. The web browser in Android is much much better than the one in iOS.
Hmm. Funny then. Why does this review [russellbeattie.com] say differently?
Oh, I know. He must be an Apple shill.
Riiiiight.
You can run Chromium on GNU/Linux (Score:2)
Thank GOD Apple gives me the freedom to choose the browser I want to use and doesn't try to shove open source crap like Firefox down my throat like Linux does when you try to install it.
I'm not sure what you're talking about. You can replace Mozilla Firefox with Google's open-source Chromium browser on most GNU/Linux distributions. Chromium is Chrome minus the non-free parts (Adobe Flash Player for Pepper, video DRM, and a couple other minor pieces).
Too little, too late? (Score:2)
Firefox again flirts with dangerous 10% user share level
.
...Unless Mozilla can again retard Firefox's 12-month average rate of decline, the browser will fall under the 11% bar in December, and slip below 10% in April, joining Safari (with a 5% user share in October) and Opera (1.3%) in the single-digit club. If the trend continued even longer, Firefox on the desktop could drop under 9% as soon as August 2016.
Mozilla and Firefox face a tough future: The desktop browser continues to shed share -- often quickly, sometimes at a slower pace -- and the company's mobile projects, including Firefox on Android and Firefox OS, the lightweight operating system pitched to low-end smartphone makers, have not been able to make up the difference. ...
Re: (Score:3)
Too little, yes, but it's never too late to stop being a Chrome clone and go back to the roots of a reliable browser.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Mozilla Phoenix 0.5 was great. Firebird was pretty good too, as were the early versions of Firefox (maybe up to 1.5 or so).
Stability of FF is fine (Score:3)
When was Firefox or Mozilla or Netscape ever stable?
I use Firefox daily to this day and haven't experienced a meaningful stability problem on Windows or a Mac in probably 10 years. Not to say it doesn't have any issues but stability does not appear to be one of them. Maybe some versions on linux had problems but I haven't run into any myself. I honestly can't remember the last time I managed to crash Firefox. Certainly hasn't been within the last 5 years.
Re: (Score:1)
It's more than being a chrome clone. I've ditched Firefox on several systems and stopped installing it on client PCs in favor of chrome for a couple reasons. I even actively recommend people pass it by if they ask what browser to use.
First, it is easier to sync book marks and crap with their android phone and other computers and a lot of them are more accustom to the layout. The second is the crap where the new CEO Brendan Eich had to resign over a political contribution that should have been anonymous to t
Re: (Score:1)
So basically your reasons for not using Firefox aren't because Firefox is bad, but because if people are stuck in Google's ecosystem they might as well use Google's browser, and because you think that the Brendan Eich thing has any bearing on the quality of the browser itself.
Thanks, but after playing with the Android Firefox, I don't see any technical reason not to use it instead of Chrome if you just want to sync your data around, especially now that they have an iOS version too.
And whether Eich wanted to
Re: (Score:2)
Did you stop reading when you got to the point you knee jerked or something? I specifically stated "hird, Firefox has had some turd releases in which it ran like shit on older systems and hogged memory on newer ones".
It has absolutely no
Speak for yourself (Score:1, Funny)
I personally love the continuous subtraction of useful features that I get with firefox. Losing the ability to go back/forward, the ability to view page source, the ability to quickly and logically get to what I need through a meaningful user interface -- those upgrades were great, but what really made me a fan for life is when they removed the ability to stop a page from loading. Nothing puts a smile on my face more than waiting it out for a rogue webpage, watching my computer slow to a crawl, powerless to
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I forgot to tell you about my favorite feature, which is the inability to sort one's bookmarks alphabetically.
You are able to do this as well as the other stuff you said can't be done in firefox
Re: (Score:2)
I assume you are talking about using add-ons.
You go to bookmarks and hit the arrow under bookmark name to sort by name. No addon needed
Serves them right (Score:2)
In a desperate effort to follow the "trendy" herd they've made the browser much harder to use. eg: Bookmark folders - good luck trying to create them in the latest versions on OS/X.
We don't want trendy - we just want a browser thats simple and easy to use. Its the web page contents I'm interested in , the not browser developers showboating efforts.
Re: (Score:2)
In a desperate effort to follow the "trendy" herd they've made the browser much harder to use. eg: Bookmark folders - good luck trying to create them in the latest versions on OS/X.
Granted I haven't created a new one in years, but I tried Show All Bookmarks, Right-Click, New Folder.
I'll agree that it should probably be labelled as something like "Manage Bookmarks", and maybe not hidden in a context menu, but it wasn't that hard.
Re: (Score:2)
"Granted I haven't created a new one in years, but I tried Show All Bookmarks, Right-Click, New Folder."
I don't have the New Folder option.
Re: (Score:2)
Try right clicking on the folder tree on the left sidebar.
Re: (Score:1)
Oh geeze, I had to scroll down half the page PAST chrome and opera to find what I had searched for ...
Re: (Score:1)
What kind of moron thinks becoming a shitty copy-cat of something kicking your ass is a good idea.
I dunno. It seems like Windows has been doing that with OS X for years now.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing.
All iOS web browsers use the WebKit API and don't actually render themselves. Others cheat by rendering on remote servers and showing you the result only, but it's not allowed to contain its own rendering engine.
This is how Chrome on iPad operates - it's not Chrome at all.
Re: (Score:1)
Nothing.
All iOS web browsers use the WebKit API and don't actually render themselves. Others cheat by rendering on remote servers and showing you the result only, but it's not allowed to contain its own rendering engine.
This is how Chrome on iPad operates - it's not Chrome at all.
Well, you're sort of right. But there have been exceptions to the Rule. In 2010, not only did Apple allow Opera to offer a NON-WebKit iOS Browser (Opera Mini, which later switched to WebKit), although it used Remote Rendering to circumvent the WebKit requirement, but more importantly, in 2014, Apple Released the WkWebView API for iOS 8 [dailytech.com], which brought the Apple's Nitro Javascript Engine to third-party Browser Development for iOS.
So, these days, third-party Browsers on iOS actually have a fighting chance t
Re: (Score:2)
A browser for iOS must use Apple's WebKit. The only exception being if you use a remote server like Opera Mini does.
Mozilla cannot create a version of Firefox that uses Gecko
Opera cannot create a version of Opera that uses Presto (granted that engine is deprecated)
Google cannot create a version of Chrome that uses Blink
Microsoft cannot create a version of Edge that uses EdgeHTML (nor of Internet Explorer that uses Trident)
If your browser's performance advantage is through its
Privacy Invasive (Score:1)
Talks to 178.162.219.0/24 over 443
Talks to app.adjust.com over 443
Adjust = "adjust is a business intelligence platform for mobile app marketers, combining attribution for advertising sources with advanced analytics and store statistics."
Why? (Score:2)
The only purpose I could see for wanting FF on iOS that has to use WebKit and doesn't support native content blockers would be syncing bookmarks. You can sync bookmarks from FF or Chrome for Windows by using Apple's iCloud extension for Chrome and FF.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-... [mozilla.org]
https://chrome.google.com/webs... [google.com]
My bookmarks are synced between FF and Chrome for Windows, Safari for iOS and Chrome for iOS.
Re: (Score:3)
"Awesome - ok... Does it allow addons?" A: No
"Does it block ads?" A: No
"Does it sync?" A: Well, kind of - if you use iCloud.
"I don't want a Safari clone with a Firefox branded UI. Shoot..."
I'll try it, but it sounds like it'll be in vain. I've used Mozilla and then Firefox since the dark Netscape 4.x days... and even knowing this was the likely end result, this is still probably the most disappointed I've been about Firefox during that decades-long run. I do not want to switch to "Google Owns You" Chrome, a
Syncing bookmarks works (Score:3)
"Does it sync?" A: Well, kind of - if you use iCloud.
Actually I just used the built in Sync for firefox and it did sync my bookmarks. Otherwise I'm not really sure what the point of it is and I use Firefox as my primary browser. (Chrome is buggy, IE is Windows Only and Safari is Mac only) I'm pretty much exactly who would think about using it and I don't see much point.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually syncing your bookmarks is pretty much the whole point.
Re: (Score:2)
"Awesome - ok... Does it allow addons?" A: No
"Does it block ads?" A: No
"Does it sync?" A: Well, kind of - if you use iCloud.
"I don't want a Safari clone with a Firefox branded UI. Shoot..."
I'll try it, but it sounds like it'll be in vain.
At least you haven't already decided that it sucks...
Re: (Score:3)
We commonly get stuff in Australia or New Zealand first when companies try to test new things in western markets to see what the response is like.
Not just talking about apps, restaurants and other companies do it often.
idk why they mentioned it in the summary though *shrug*.
No ad blocking, so ... (Score:2)
Delete app ... back to Safari
Kinda useless right now (Score:2)
So I installed this iOS app, logged into sync, and nothing happens. It says "Last sync: just now" (without delay, which raises doubt) but there are no bookmarks, history, or anything else to prove it synced. Well shit.
Yay, Apple (Score:1)
Why I will try it (Score:2)
For me, using iOS and waiting for Firefox on iOS was a conscious choice, and I will try to explain why I disagree with the majority here that the synching feature is unimportant because FF on iOS is using Gecko:
- On iOS > 8 Apple is encrypting the important files with the user password, so that they can not circumvent the encryption. So I can be shure that when entering a fife eyes state without a resetted device I will only be sent home when asked for my password for my switched of iPhone, not having th
Re: Why I will try it (Score:2)
First sentence is wrong, I meant "not using gecko".
Does it have text reflow? (Score:2)
As far as I'm concerned, high quality text reflow is the only essential feature in a mobile web browser. Unfortunately, that means Opera is currently my only choice. I remember a development version of Firefox had a shitty version of text reflow, but the feature was removed, presumably because if you're not gonna do it right, just don't do it.