Linux not a priority for FireFox development?

[nocturn]

I found this on Digg and couldn't believe it until I was it on the real FireFox pages:

http://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox3/Firefox_Requirements#Platform_Support

Linux is a priority 2 platform for them, even scoring lower then Windows 2000.

I nearly fell out of my chair, I thought we were a big FireFox partner, with most distro's using it as the default browser...

[lalakis85]

excuse me? Win and mac priority 1 and linux variants priority2? Is there something wrong with mozilla and linux?

[karellen]

it's their choice....perhaps they prefer being the second browser far away from internet exlorer on windows xp/vistas boxes (somewhere around 15-20% share) than the first in almost every linux distro. but that leaves me with a bitter taste....

[sloggerkhan]

DId you notice the had twice the memory requirement listed for mac and linux as for windows? What up w/that?

[use a name]

Of course it is and I don't care. Let them get more windows users to use firefox. Besides, that market is much larger. It has it's position in linux anyway.

[myxiplx]

Err... what's wrong with that? If they're going to get market share and get Firefox in the minds of the mass public, they absolutely have to focus on the MS and Mac platforms.

Linux being low priority doesn't mean they're not developing for linux, it means they know the vast majority of linux users:

a) Already know about and probably use firefox
b) Are running it on a platform that's secure enough that vulnerabilities are not as vital for patching as windows
c) Know more than enough about security anyway that they're unlikely to fall prey to vulnerabilities
d) Probably know enough to have downloaded plug ins for many new features anyway

To me it makes sense for them to focus on windows. So long as they don't ignore linux (and I see no signs of that!), then I'm 100% behind them if that's what they need to do to break MS' stranglehold on the browser market.

Myx

[Bloodfen Razormaw]

Nothing shocking here. Firefox has always been known to be even worse on Linux than it is on Windows (which is pretty bad in itself). If you really want the pain of using Firefox on your Linux machine, use Iceweasel. It includes mountains of Linux fixes that Mozilla refused to include in Firefox, e.g. an extension system that works correctly on a multiuser system.

[kragen]

yeah, this doesn't seem like much of a shock for me either, I mean only about 0.3% of computer users run Linux (last time I heard).

[karellen]

yeah, this doesn't seem like much of a shock for me either, I mean only about 0.3% of computer users run Linux (last time I heard).

not quite...I believe there are around 5% of the total mass of desktop users

[Tundro Walker]

I can understand the bitter taste, but Firefox was actually the "gateway drug" that eventually got me to try Linux. While using Windows, I got tired of IE crashing and such, so I tried Firefox. I liked it and, got interested in more open-source software, so I switched to OpenOffice. After a while, I started to question why I don't just use Linux instead of Windows, so I looked into it.

If it wasn't for Firefox's focus on the Windows market, I might still be locked into Windows and IE today. So, maybe that's their perspective? Get more folks to realize you don't have to do it all the MS way...and when more folks realize that, they'll start to think about changing other things, like their OS (and hopefully their underwear, too.)

[Oki]

BBC news said 6% desktops use Linux, and I have read 50% for the servers. But I do understand that they first off all try to make the best browser fort he wintendo platform, and they are doing a good job!

[curuxz]

yeah, this doesn't seem like much of a shock for me either, I mean only about 0.3% of computer users run Linux (last time I heard).

your not only wrong, as mentioned above its more like 5% but also following the common mistake of saying computer users, im a user of a computer server and something like 70% on servers are non-windows most being linux or unix. So in terms of computerised devices based on/running on linux the figure is more like 25-40% linux is a massive massive market not to mention a growth one.

That said i think firefox needs to focus on windows since its won the linux platform, windows is still an active battlefield. and with the pile of shite that is IE7 i hope they do give users of the windows something half useful to use!

I use swift fox and ice wezel both fun fine for me :)

[samjh]

It makes competitive sense.

Firefox is already the dominant browser for Linux. It was made from Mozilla, whose arch-enemy was and still is, Internet Explorer. Since IE runs on Windows, it's only natural that Firefox development focuses on Windows more than Linux or Mac.

[Surgeon General]

It makes competitive sense.

Firefox is already the dominant browser for Linux. It was made from Mozilla, whose arch-enemy was and still is, Internet Explorer. Since IE runs on Windows, it's only natural that Firefox development focuses on Windows more than Linux or Mac.

i second ya mate. ;-)

[ComplexNumber]

I found this on Digg and couldn't believe it until I was it on the real FireFox pages:

http://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox3/Firefox_Requirements#Platform_Support

Linux is a priority 2 platform for them, even scoring lower then Windows 2000.

I nearly fell out of my chair, I thought we were a big FireFox partner, with most distro's using it as the default browser...
i think they are just going be perceived market share.

[jacksaff]

I can understand the bitter taste, but Firefox was actually the "gateway drug" that eventually got me to try Linux. While using Windows, I got tired of IE crashing and such, so I tried Firefox. I liked it and, got interested in more open-source software, so I switched to OpenOffice. After a while, I started to question why I don't just use Linux instead of Windows, so I looked into it.

If it wasn't for Firefox's focus on the Windows market, I might still be locked into Windows and IE today. So, maybe that's their perspective? Get more folks to realize you don't have to do it all the MS way...and when more folks realize that, they'll start to think about changing other things, like their OS (and hopefully their underwear, too.)

This was the same for me with the mozilla suite in the days before firefox. I have to say though, that I doubt the same thing would happen today. When I got interested the mozilla website was full of links to development oriented stuff such as nightly builds, roadmaps and the tree status pages, and that's where I found linux. Nowadays it's much harder to find anything other than what a basic internet user needs to know and I doubt many visitors to the ff website even know that it works on other platforms. I wouldn't mind betting that a much higher proportion of the old suite's users ran linux than firefox users do now, even though the absolute numbers have probably gone up. They don't seem to care about the hacking community as much as they used to either. The Mozilla Foundation has gotten altogether too slick for it's own good IMO.

[mips]

I really don't mind at all. I think they should focus on the biggest target market which is MS IE users. The more inroads they make there the better for us. It's a knock on effect.

[Tundro Walker]

...They don't seem to care about the hacking community as much as they used to either. The Mozilla Foundation has gotten altogether too slick for it's own good IMO.

Down with the Establishment!

(Just kidding...LOL!)

[Mateo]

It's shocking to you that Linux has fewer users?

[Mateo]

i can't believe someone would complain about this though, since linux support is very, very, very good. it's not like flash or acrobat where linux is always 2 or 3 versions behind.

[jiminycricket]

Well, you can't copy stuff from the clipboard after closing Firefox. That's a long-standing bug I don't see getting fixed anytime soon...

[Nils Olav]

The percentage of desktop users (people who often use a browser) who use linux is estimated to be between 0.3% and 3% (not 5%(which is still far in the minority(which would make this quite fair(considering it's cross platform(which means not only linux))))).

[FuturePilot]

Whoa!:-s I thought that Linux would have been the top one. Although I always wondered why Firefox seemed a little more stable on Windows. Not fair!:evil:

[Polygon]

Well, you can't copy stuff from the clipboard after closing Firefox. That's a long-standing bug I don't see getting fixed anytime soon...

thats not a bug, i dont think

are you referring to the feature where you copy some text from within firefox, and then close firefox, and find that you cant paste teh text that you copied?

that is not a bug, and its a security measure, and i think it goes for all programs.

[TravisNewman]

thats not a bug, i dont think

are you referring to the feature where you copy some text from within firefox, and then close firefox, and find that you cant paste teh text that you copied?

that is not a bug, and its a security measure, and i think it goes for all programs.
In Gnome, this is true. KDE has a clipboard caching system that will let you bypass this.

As far as the priority... last time I checked I THOUGHT Linux had a higher share of desktop usage than Macs. I could be wrong though. Anyone have any stats on that?

[jiminycricket]

ew that's an awful "bug is a feature!" then, for myself personally. I hate destructive operations. Anyways they seem to be in the bug trackers as confirmed.. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/+bug/90477 and https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=311340


I don't understand this from the bug report either; I thought this was a freedesktop standard? That's odd that Gnome doesn't implement it now.

gnome 2.12 has clipboard management so that if you copy something from an app,
then close the app, it'll still be in the clipboard for you to paste elsewhere.
although this works with plenty of other applications (gedit, evolution, etc),
it does not work with firefox. if you copy something from within firefox, then
close firefox and try to paste it somewhere else, the clipboard will be blank
and there'll be nothing to paste.

[wmcbrine]

The low priority for Linux is just one of many unfortunate steps the Mozilla Foundation... err, Corporation... has taken away from the Free Software ethos, including the addition of a EULA, and excessive trademark actions. But, as unhappy as I am with those things, it still seems to be the best we have.

[JT673]

Tch, with Mozilla on the Open Source team (and in Wormux!), Google, whose desktop apps don't work on Linux, is a bigger problem than them. Rest easy...Mozilla's fighting a battle with other competitors, so naturally they want to traget other audiences...

P.S. Google's still awesome because of the Summer of Code event.

[fca_neo]

Thats sad. I feel a little betrayed.

I first saw Firefox on Linux (at the time I used only window$) at University, that was before it was called firefox.
From that time I converted many people to Firefox (it wasn't really hard) and eventually, converted to linux myself (similar to a guy in a previous post).

But since I use Ubuntu (dec 2006, I'm still a n00b), I feel that Firefox is not as good as on windw$. But I think that, by now, the Linux community got used to this kind of treatment since almost every company develops for other platforms first. Nevertheless, firefox supports linux well enough.

Maybe we should put more attention into Konqueror (I confess, I use KDE) which is already pretty good, but needs some improvements.

Any suggestions about other good browsers besides konqueror and firefox flavours (i.e. iceweasel, swifterfox...)?

Carlitos

[nocturn]

OK guys, I can understand slightly that they make XP and Vista priority 1, BUT I cannot understand that w2000 is placed above Linux, I'm very sorry.

I wonder if we wouldn't be better of with a khtml based GTK browser in the long run, something that focusses on *nix first.

[riven0]

This is another reason why I switched to Opera; not only is Firefox just too slow, but they don't seem that concerned with the Linux user base.
On the other hand, Opera not only is faster and more stable - at least for me - but they also take the time to package their downloads in .deb format. Mozilla just can't be bothered to take the time out to give Linux the attention it needs.

[GeneralZod]

No real surprise, and not something to be upset about - an earlier poster's "Firefox is a gateway drug" post was spot-on, I think.


OK guys, I can understand slightly that they make XP and Vista priority 1, BUT I cannot understand that w2000 is placed above Linux, I'm very sorry.

I wonder if we wouldn't be better of with a khtml based GTK browser in the long run, something that focusses on *nix first.

This would be cool: I'm one of the ones hoping that KDE will have time to switch from KHTML to WebKit for KDE4. It would be great to have a light, powerful, toolkit-neutral, shared HTML component between the two DEs :)

[Demz]

i always thought Mozilla only or mainly targeted Linux Distro's Not Windows so whats Mozilla up to? is Mozilla Kissing Microsofts ****

[darweth]

In Gnome, this is true. KDE has a clipboard caching system that will let you bypass this.

As far as the priority... last time I checked I THOUGHT Linux had a higher share of desktop usage than Macs. I could be wrong though. Anyone have any stats on that?

No idea. Certainly not in America. I wonder about this though... I am sure Linux usage is significantly higher in Europe, India, perhaps Brazil and maybe some other areas.

[karellen]

This is another reason why I switched to Opera; not only is Firefox just too slow, but they don't seem that concerned with the Linux user base.
On the other hand, Opera not only is faster and more stable - at least for me - but they also take the time to package their downloads in .deb format. Mozilla just can't be bothered to take the time out to give Linux the attention it needs.

so very true. it always annoyed me the fact that they just don't want to make a .deb/.rpm for ubuntu/opensuse/fedora etc..why a closed source application like opera can and mozilla cannot? :confused:

[tactus]

Most linux users probably update to the next Firefox release whenever it is showing up in their repositories, that is when the maintainers find it mature enough for their distribution. Secondly, the competition is much higher on Windows and Mac since they ship with their own browser solutions by default. On the bright side, Firefoxs marked share seems to be growing steadily in overall. The latest numbers says FF has grown from 19.4 % to 24.1 % from April 2006 to Mars 2007 in Europe. (More details here (http://digi.no/php/art.php?id=377435), if you read 'Scandinavian'.)

http://www.media.allerinternett.no/php/obj.phpi?o=2338267&w=450&h=&frame=0
(Todays marked share for FF)

[Extreme Coder]

The reason is that they think all of the Linux userbase has no other option, and ALL of them uses Firefox. Guess who is a fan of Opera and Konqueror? :P

[eternalsword]

I've always found firefox to run faster, use less memory and crash less frequently on linux (maybe that's because I run the official binaries as opposed to the ubuntu ones) as opposed to windows and the updates come out at relatively the same time so I don't see any reason for anyone to complain. Of course the focus is going to be on the dominant platforms, and yes Windows 2000 still beats out linux in terms of usage primarily because of corporate usage, in fact Windows 2000 beats out XP in corporate usage which is why Microsoft extended support for Win2000 through 2010. And firefox is an open source program, so if you don't like the direction they're going you could always fork it.

[insane_alien]

you know what, maybe its just because theres not as many problems running it on linux anyway and they only have real problems with the windows and mac platforms so they'll focus on those more than the minor problems that will come up with linux. there are many legitimate reasons for it(i hope)

[dspari1]

If you test other web browsers available on Linux, you'll see that Linux is second priority for FireFox.

Here's proof:

http://www.foxnews.com <---- checkout the videos
http://www.abcnews.com <---- checkout the videos

As you can see, the flash videos on the websites listed above does not work with the Linux version of FireFox; however, if you load up those sites up with Konqueror, the videos work perfectly. I don't know if it's me, but I've had more compatibility on more sites with Konqueror than FireFox.

I haven't tried Opera yet, so I'll hold judgment until I do.

[Nils Olav]

The reason is that they think all of the Linux userbase has no other option, and ALL of them uses Firefox...

I'm pretty sure it's reason is that there are more windows and mac users then linux users but the again your explanation does make someone look mean and nasty. I guess your explanation is more attractive.

[Bloodfen Razormaw]

This would be cool: I'm one of the ones hoping that KDE will have time to switch from KHTML to WebKit for KDE4. It would be great to have a light, powerful, toolkit-neutral, shared HTML component between the two DEs
Switch to webkit? KDE produces KHTML...Apple takes KHTML and strips it of significant levels of standards compliance and runs performance into the ground...and now KDE should switch to the botched fork? No thanks. Perhaps you misunderstood the Unity project. KDE currently has trouble using any work from Apple because KHTML is so much more advanced than Webkit. Webkit is lagging far behind KHTML's improvements and even removes many features where OS X can't support them (e.g. some CSS text styles are not supported by the OS X font rendering engine and are removed in Webkit). Unity is a project not to abandon the improvements in KHTML for the outdated Webkit, but rather to bring Webkit back up to spec so Apple can start doing work on Unity itself.