Shame on Mozilla

Well, it's come to this: Like one-time innovator AMD before it, Mozilla has no Act 2, and they're consigned to just copying features from their dominant competitor, a sad about-face for a company previously known for doing The Right Thing.

[W]ebslices [sic] and [A]ctivites [sic]
Just in case the power of the Firefox platform wasn't obvious already, check out the Web Slices work from Daniel Glazman and the Activities work Mike Kaply's doing.

Here's my problem with what these guys are doing (copying the Web Slices and Activities features from IE 8, and then acting like this is a strength of the Mozilla platform): This is what Linux does: Copy features (from Windows and the Mac, in that case) without adding additional value. Here's why this is a problem: If all you're doing is spending time copying what's already on the competition, then what you're not doing is spending time on differentiating yourself. In the case of Linux, backers of this OS should be spending time making Linux unique and valuable, not derivative and almost-as-good. People won't switch to similar, they'll switch to better. It has to be much better.

Back when IE lacked key functionality, Mozilla's Firefox delivered in droves: We got tabbed browsing, inline find, and other innovative features. That made Firefox unique and valuable. It got millions of people to switch, including me.

Copying features--as Microsoft did with IE 7, though to be fair, they did add some unique features too (Quick Tags, anyone? Yeah, this was copied on Firefox too)--is about preventing people from leaving, not about innovating and driving new users. And that's lame. Mozilla should be above this. I find it hard to believe that a feature like Activities--which was once called Smart Tags and was widely reviled as anti-privacy and dangerous when Microsoft first tried to implement this technology years ago--is so useful today that Mozilla just has to have it. In fact, I think these guys should spend maybe, oh I don't know, more than 3 days thinking about it before just delivering this feature. It's pathetic.

My point is simple. Innovation should be celebrated. It's what makes things like Firefox 1.0 and virtually every Apple product on earth so interesting. Copying is lame. (Zune, cough.) And while virtually everyone who rallies around Mozilla and Firefox has probably spent some time riffing on Microsoft's inability to innovate and it's all-too-willing ability to copy, they should be turning the same critical eye on the people who, right now, are just copying.

Shame on you.

Discuss this Article 38

clindhartsen
on Mar 10, 2008
Well, even though development on the next version is well on it's way, shouldn't Mozilla still be focusing on just improving the baseline product anyway? I honestly was surprised the other day to find it sucking down nearly 200 MB of ram when I had it opened for a few hours and used multiple tabs. It's ridiculous! Anyway, the question in Mozilla becomes what will be that next big browsing innovation, and how much more work is there on Firefox for that matter? We're heading towards Beta 5 for heavens sake!
Flenser
on Mar 10, 2008
Firstly, this is being done by individuals in the community off their own bat, not by any decision of the Mozilla corporation. And it's not like this is being added to the core browser, it's being implemented in extensions, which is what Asa's post was about. That extension writing is so easy for Firefox that it doesn't matter if Microsoft adds new features like this, they don't have to play catchup because they can implement them overnight. Talk about missing the point. And, it's Microsoft that's playing catchup. In his first post about Activities Mike Kaply's said: "After looking at Microsoft Activities in IE8 and noticing that they look suspiciously like my ideas around actions in Operator, I decided to implement them in Firefox." Individuals in the Firefox community have been experimenting with these kinds of features for some time now and in a public forum. Microsoft have implemented something that is more limited than what Mike is working on, without consulting anyone and in a totally self serving manner. So some minor functionality got added to IE that supposedly has put Firefox behind in that one area and you're berating Mozilla for playing catchup? You aren't seriously saying that this feature shouldn't be implemented in Firefox? That Mozilla should let Microsoft take the lead in any area without responding? What choice do they have? Should they not add support for webslices? You'd be the first to berate them if they didn't. Would leaving their users without access to functionality that will be available in hundreds of websites be "doing The Right Thing"? Or is it just the fact that they've allowed Microsoft to take a small lead that annoys you? There's smart people at Microsoft, did anyone seriously think they couldn't come up with new and interesting features? Although arguably it's not a new idea and chances are this will be implemented in an extension and Firefox will have the first non-beta implementation. And as Daniel Glazman has said "I think my implem[sic] is going to beat IE8's." They're not just playing catchup they're improving on what Microsoft have done. So who's really playing catchup?
rseiler
on Mar 10, 2008
What Flenser said. And the other obvious point: Your love for early FF, by your no-copying-allowed logic, is also flawed, since Mozilla didn't innovate those features either (tabs, inline find, and probably anything else you can name). You know who did.
daProject
on Mar 10, 2008
Lets not also forget that Web Slices in IE8 bears more than a passing resemblance to Web Clips in Safari/Leopard. Though I do agree in principle though that Mozilla are fairly starved of innovation IMO.
pfenixfire1
on Mar 10, 2008
Im going to have to agree with what Flenser said. Also, Mozilla has been working with microformats way before IE 8 beta. They started playing with the idea in 2006 as seen in the following post by their UI designer, Mike Faaborg, in his post at: http://blog.mozilla.com/faaborg/2006/12/11/microformats-part-0-introduction then in February He released some mock ups of how it would look and act in his post at: http://blog.mozilla.com/faaborg/2007/02/04/microformats-part-4-the-user-... Whats that 'Map with google maps'? Looks suspiciously like activity works, but before IE8 beta came out. Either Mozilla has a crystal ball, or else Microsoft has been taking a page out of Mozilla's book
lotsamystuff
on Mar 10, 2008
"...Microsoft's inability to innovate and it's [sic] all-too-willing ability to copy" Sorry. Couldn't help myself. Good points, all. Wow, I'm agreeing with Paul. Must be time for my medication.
anonymous
on Mar 10, 2008
It's only Monday and I have a head-full of thoughts to dump on my blog so I can start my few remaining
bluvg
on Mar 10, 2008
What's so wrong with this? To me, this drives adoption of these features by developers. I see your point about innovation, but I think it's sort of a non sequitur--does innovating mean they must adopt a "not invented here" attitude? Does it preclude them from innovating elsewhere in their browser? Maybe the relative lack of innovation in the FF camp is cyclical. I'd like to see them focus on some basics--browser stability, speed, resource utilization, etc.--and it seems they are. Sometimes revisiting the basics comes at the expense of greater innovation. What I'd really like to see from them is to integrate with the indexing engine in Vista/OS X, such that any page you visit is indexed and can be revisited by a local search.
Dude1313
on Mar 10, 2008
You mean like MS copying tabs 7 years after the fact that every browser on the face of the planet had them? If so, then yes Mozilla is copying MS...
lilserenity
on Mar 10, 2008
Operator the Firefox extension has been offering this capability for some time (activities that is) as microformats begin to emerge. So whilst IE8 will probably bring this to the mainstream, if anything Firefox has had this capability for some time, even if it didn't come as part of the browser. I agree that Mozilla does need to seriously come up with some more fresh ideas though, they'll need to. Nothing however distracts from the sheer lack of innovation and laurel resting that IE 6 caused. Like NN4, I will not be sorry to see IE6's stats languishing in the doldrums. Nobody's perfect here but at least the market is buoyant enough to support more than one web browser healthily. Even Safari has half decent representation on the web these days. Let's hope innovation continues, from all sides. Meanwhile, I'll continue with Operator and look at IE8's Activities too or rather the concept of the semantic web which has been a hot topic of discussion in web circles for the past couple of years.
daveinla
on Mar 10, 2008
I have to say I'm pretty impressed with the latest betas of firefox. I'm now running daily about 4-5 windows in Firefox b5, including one that runs continuously a Java app, and FF rarely goes beyond 100MB memory use. FF2 in the same conditions would easily reach 300MB ! All this while being more snappy than FF2. As bluvg, said it, the focus for this major overhaul of FF was more under the hood, and the team focused on rewriting a much cleaner, nimbler gecko engine and better memory management for coming version. And I have to say they delivered so far. Every softs goes through development cycle, sometimes adding more features, sometime optimizing the existing foundation. I think the Moz dev team will have a clean foundation to build upon for the next years or so. And finally I'm tired of these he copied me, I did it first childish gimmicks. Apple did it for Leopard, now everybody is pointing fingers or taking credits for features that should be widely adopted. Big deal, if something worthy is invented by someone, I expect to see it appear in all the competing products, as long as there is no Patent protecting it. That's the whole point of competition, pushing teams to innovate, thus raising the bar every time for similar products. That's why we were happy to see FF pass the 10% mark, that forced MS to innovate again, which in turn will force FF to innovate again, that's sane competition.
matt.brown
on Mar 10, 2008
I don't quite get the not-so-pithy comment on the Zune, but whatever. As for Firefox, they haven't done much of anything since 1.0. And Firefox 3.0 is so dreadfully hideous that I would not run it unless if offered something that is totally unique and useful, which it does not. Mozilla is definitely going the way of LInux.
DRWAM
on Mar 10, 2008
I don't understand that the same version of Flash works perfectly on all of my IE 6 and 7 versions but craps out on the latest FF versions. My kids go to Noggin.com to play games and can only use IE reliably. If I start up FF for them, frequently one will cry because the audio is out on a Flash game. This never happens to us with IE 6 or 7. Why? However, I must admit that I prefer FF over Safari on my Mac.
clindhartsen
on Mar 10, 2008
DRWAM: Off topic, but since you appear to be in part a Mac user, any reason you don't use Camino? It's always baffled me, but eh, this is talking from an outsider. Also, it seems like some of the newer versions of Flash work worse than the old ones in Firefox on Vista, so you might not be alone there. Anyhow, I think the general point is that this was an independent act and should be considered that, something I missed in my initial post. Still, overall, the FF 3 upgrade seems like nothing amazing though, with the look of the program being thrown ever deeper into the can with no actual feature improvement likely, but still, memory leak fixes would be nice.
DRWAM
on Mar 10, 2008
I never tried Camino, since FF worked fine, and I never cared for Safari since day one, and it's at 3.04 now. I used Netscape for years, starting at version 3 I guess, and FF has more of it's look. Old habits I guess.
drylight
on Mar 10, 2008
No more shameful than the Windows Mobile team posting some blog comment about how their next version would support iPhone like gestures. Did you mention that? No, I guess not. No more shameful than the enormous amounts of things Vista, XP, Windows 95, Windows 3.1 copied from Mac OSes. Mention that? No. This is after all a Microsoft fanboy site.
Waethorn
on Mar 10, 2008
"their next version would support iPhone like gestures." if you were really fair, you'd correctly state that those were HTC Touch gestures, which were introduced almost a month prior to the iPhone, sorry to say. "This is after all a Microsoft fanboy site." ....and you come here, why??? ooooh that's riiiiight! you're just a pathetic troll, wasting bandwidth looking for a reason to puke up another rant.
drylight
on Mar 10, 2008
"if you were really fair, you'd correctly state that those were HTC Touch gestures, which were introduced almost a month prior to the iPhone, sorry to say" Oh please. That's pathetic. A shitty (stupid) big-ass coffee table that they "demo" a month before? Still nothing from the big-ass coffee table. The iPhone's a real product, in people's hands that totally turning the mobile phone industry on its head. Something that Microsoft could have never done. Their hopeless mobile OS has done nothing all these years. Apple comes along then BOOM! The MS boys are now busily copying it, that's for sure. As for such touch functionality, it was neither Apple nor Microsoft who came up with this. Go get a clue. '....and you come here, why??? ooooh that's riiiiight! you're just a pathetic troll, wasting bandwidth looking for a reason to puke up another rant.' Because you Microsoft fanboys obviously live in a world of make believe. It's astonishing the stuff that's fabricated to justify your wasted time on an inferior technology.
bluvg
on Mar 10, 2008
drylight... tell us your true feelings. :P In all fairness, if Microsoft had released the iPhone (undoubtedly through HTC or elsewhere) as it was when Apple released it, they'd never have been forgiven for all the glaring errors/shortcomings in the first edition, it would not be seen as "innovative" at all (I can just hear it--"visual voicemail? Right--we've had that via our [insert brand] PBX for how many years now? Meh."), and it would not have received very much attention outside of the Engadget types. The iPhone is sexy, but not *that* sexy. The point is that there is a big perception difference because of the label, the same kind of difference that drives a person to buy the more expensive brand X over brand Y, even though both products are identical, made on the same factory line and then rebadged.
lilserenity
on Mar 10, 2008
How can a discussion about Mozilla, Internet Explorer and web development on the browser side and client side soon decend into yet another tiresome, repetitive and heard the same damn arguments bicker-fest that I have heard for 20 odd years between Mac and Windows users except with adjusted comparisions?! I am sick to the back bone of how somehow this soon gets twisted into that old argument, particularly on this site. What does iPhone gestures have anything to do with IE8 activities and web-slices? Ok, faint line of similarity in that there's a blog post about 'copying', but really no need for another squabble. People do copy other people's ideas when they see something they like, if I see someone doing something on a website; I won't sit here and ignore it, I'll emulate it in my own form. Whoever 'copies' who really is a moot point to squabble over in a playground (unless it's downright plagiarism but remember in the UK we don't have software patents like in the US) when it often comes down to emulation, the sincerest form of flattery... (A Windows, Mac and Linux user/owner)
Flenser
on Mar 10, 2008
I've just read the following MS blog post http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/03/06/ie8-and-ip-licensing.aspx Here are what I think are the pertinent points: "We’re licensing our copyright in the OpenService Format Specification under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike License." "We’re setting a new precedent with the WebSlice Format Specification by dedicating our copyright in it to the public domain using the Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication, the first time we’ve used a public domain dedication in connection with one of our specs. " So the WebSlice specification is in the public domain, the *freaking* public domain. Paul, how can you object to other browsers implementing it? I'll reiterate again that these specifications are for content that will be appearing on websites. This isn't a purely client side feature; it's something that's going to be in the cloud. As such it would be "shameful" if other browsers didn't implement it, given the nature in which the specifications have been made available. There's still the issue of Mozilla "copying" but right at the start of that blog post there's this: "We recognize that the technology behind Activities and Webslice relies on innovations that have come out of the community" So even Microsoft aren't claiming that this originated with them. And as I've said before, Mozilla is already experimenting with this and Operator ( https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4106 ) when it's functionality makes it into Firefox will have a much wider scope than Activities, and all the "additional value" that Paul is looking for. I've also just remembered that Firefox has had Microsummaries ( http://wiki.mozilla.org/Microsummaries ) for a while now. It doesn't do everything that WebSlices does, but Mozilla definitely got there first, although without wide browser support Microsummaries haven't really taken off. So this is typical Microsoft embrace and extend, although given the licensing it's a much softer/cuddlier version of it. I think this comment by Mike Beltzner: http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/2008/03/ie8_feature_lis.html... is what Paul is really concerned about and that comment shows that the folks in the Mozilla community are thinking about it. (Mike's previous comment there is also worth reading.) Paul, called this one wrong, probably through ignorance, hopefully not knowingly though malice or self aggrandisement, but wrong never the less.
drylight
on Mar 11, 2008
What are the odds that Paul will post about this? http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1256 Once Evil, always Evil. Shame Microsoft. Shame.
Dipsh t Admin
on Mar 11, 2008
"A sh!tty (stupid) big-ass coffee table that they "demo" a month before?" What? He mentioned the HTC Touch, not Surface. Two totally different products. Get your fanboy pandering right. And as pointed out before, Surface is not meant for the home user at this time. I think some major casino has signed up to deploy a Surface solution. That's the market for the Surface. And drylight, is Paul supposed to mention everything in a single blog post? No. However, you feel compelled to bring up totally unrelated topics. Everyone should check out his comments that he has made since he signed up. All the same drivel.
Dude1313
on Mar 11, 2008
Keep waiting Drylight.... For all the Paul's blustering he is ANYTHING but objective. While I can abide some of his views, the one that is glaring is that he takes Apple and Microsoft to task EQUALLY. While no Rob Enderle (who is a total, irrelevant tool, regardless of what he is reviewing...) Paul is no better then Scoble. A step above, but clearly realizing where their bread and butter is coming from. I can at least tolerate Paul when put in context from which he reviews from: He reviews MS technology, is friends with MS and its workers... thus is views of anything non-MS are colored by that fact, despite protestations to the contrary. Fine criticize where criticism is due... But don't claim to hold everyone to the same standard when clearly you do not there Paul. Next Up: Waethorn said: "their next version would support iPhone like gestures." if you were really fair, you'd correctly state that those were HTC Touch gestures, which were introduced almost a month prior to the iPhone, sorry to say. You sir are the definition of a homer. A homer is one who thinks the home team can do no wrong. Clearly when this phrase was coined it had you in mind. Do we even have to go into the production cycles or who did what first?
Dude1313
on Mar 11, 2008
Dipsh t Admin Hard to take your comments (however well thought out they may be) with an avatar like that...
DRWAM
on Mar 11, 2008
As long as some of you mentioned it, I saw a big touch screen on CNN on ANDERSON COOPER 360°. Was it surface? It sure did look like the surface demo. I would rather have a fanily room coffee table that was a media center, picture and video storage and creator, internet and TV center, and X10 home automation control, than a new Mercedes. That would be sweet. It runs anything. X10 can even run the HVAC and security system as well as an irrigation system. That would be awsome.
lilserenity
on Mar 11, 2008
Flenser, "Paul, called this one wrong, probably through ignorance, hopefully not knowingly though malice or self aggrandisement, but wrong never the less." No detriment meant to Paul or his blog but I think that's probably right. Virtually no one in my IT Department at work has heard of operator, or microformats in the web sense really so it's not common knowledge. Microsoft is indeed embracing and extending but I think that's a good thing, microformats are coming of age and it's great that IE8 will push these into the mainstream. What matters to me is the end user's experience, and they are going to benefit from this now that IE will bring it to the mainstream, even if the innovation originally came from Operator and some clever heads. A competitive web browser market is a great thing.
bloodsugarwilksm
on Mar 11, 2008
Paul - we all love you, but you've got this Mozilla thing all wrong. Flenser has made some very good points, mostly about how Mozilla has nothing to do with Web Slices and Activities in Firefox. Also, I've noticed that you don't like installing extensions in Firefox because you reinstall machines so much, and if that's true you should try Firefox Portable. Bottom line? IE is a basic web browser that's included in Windows and works fine for specific tasks, but Firefox still dominates IE in most areas.
Waethorn
on Mar 11, 2008
"Do we even have to go into the production cycles or who did what first?" Yup - Windows Mobile devices (read: Pocket PC's) had touch screens from the start (long before it was called "Windows Mobile") - AND they were already in wide production. Sorry, but the iPhone is the Newton 2.0 - another doomed failure. Even Palm is a failure now, what with much of the hardware design coming from previous Handspring employees, and Palm even recognizing that Windows Mobile is a superior OS to their own.
Dipsh t Admin
on Mar 11, 2008
Wae, you smoking that wacky tobacky? I don't think we can call the iPhone anywhere near a doomed failure. As long as Apple keeps on supporting it, they will continue to be another mobile OS choice. At the very least until Steve leaves. Although you are right about Palm, but that is pretty much common knowledge.
Dude1313
on Mar 12, 2008
Waethorn What color is the sky in your world? In one measure of popularity web usage... the iPhone came from no where to blow Windows Mobile out of the water in terms of web usage in what less then 1//2 a year. How do you explain such success when Windows Mobile (in its various incarnations) has been around for 10 years. Failure. The most successful selling phone thus far, making the Razr (the previous holder of such title) like laughable in terms of sales?
lotsamystuff
on Mar 12, 2008
"Waethorn" writes: "you're just a pathetic troll, wasting bandwidth looking for a reason to puke up another rant." Then, s/he puts up this: "Sorry, but the iPhone is the Newton 2.0 - another doomed failure. " Pot, meet kettle. I agree with Dipsh*t (wow, there I go again): "Wae, you smoking that wacky tobacky? I don't think we can call the iPhone anywhere near a doomed failure." Dip, you have to remember that Wae is the ultimate Microsoft Fanboi/girl, and never admits that s/he is wrong. From the beginning, s/he predicted the iPhone would be a huge failure, and cannot—and will not—wipe the egg of that smarmy face of his/hers.
bluvg
on Mar 12, 2008
"The most successful selling phone thus far, making the Razr (the previous holder of such title) like laughable in terms of sales?" That's also laughable. The iPhone is a long, long way from matching the Razr in number sold.
Waethorn
on Mar 12, 2008
"As long as Apple keeps on supporting it, they will continue to be another mobile OS choice." and the Newton lasted what? 5 years? each product release lasted about a year (most were less). hmm....a product whose revisions last a year or less from Apple....sound familiar? ;) http://tinyurl.com/2pbe6t
Dipsh t Admin
on Mar 12, 2008
@bluvg, you are right about the RAZR. They have sold over 100 million of those phones, which were even quite expensive when first launched. They have even sold around 50 million LG Chocolate variants as well, both more than handily beating the iPhone.
Waethorn
on Mar 12, 2008
"They have sold over 100 million of those phones, which were even quite expensive when first launched." I remember someone who gloated to me about buying one when they were a "hot item", and paid about $600 for it. Now the cell carriers are almost paying you to take them off their hands. Likewise, I remember someone that gloated about buying one of those walkie-talkie phones (a Telus "Mike" phone if you know them) that had one of those amber monochrome screens. It would burn your eyes to look at it like on of those ancient red LED displays you used to see on alarm clocks from the 80's. It was less than 4 years ago, he paid about $800 for it, and the network is now being shut down....thing weighed about a good pound and a half too - now it's worth its weight in dog-doody.
DRWAM
on Mar 12, 2008
It's always better to wait as prices drop. Not just the iPhone, but like Waethorn said, the RAZR. Verizon wanted $300 when they first arrived. They gave a $100 rebate and another $100 credit for 'New [phone] Every Two' [years]. They would not give my wife the credit as she was on my account, but only the account holder got it. It would have cost me $300 for two, after the rebate, but I went to ATT and got two for $80 each, the month that they arrived. They were down to a few bucks a few months later. Most people can wait, but that desire to have it now often prevails, draining their hard earned income. BTW, the ATT deal had more hours and rollover unused minutes, as well as super support [for me].
Dude1313
on Mar 14, 2008
Let me retract that a bit iPhone- 270,000 in 30 hours (last part of the quarter it launched, June 29-30) Razr taking ~3 months to reach the same level if memory serves.

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use