Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Aug 2012 00:20 UTC, submitted by Markus Su
Mozilla & Gecko clones Mozilla's Dave Mason, when asked by derStandard.at what the most scary part of Firefox' roadmap is: "It has to be Firefox OS which is a huge step for Mozilla. It is exciting and scary at the same time. This is the first time we had to partner with some other companies to get to the end results so that's a hard transition for us." I commend Mozilla for attempting this. I've been trying out Firefox on my Nexus 7 today, and it's really, really good (save for the interface, which needs some serious Holo love). If this is an indication for what Firefox OS is going to be like - good on 'm.
Thread beginning with comment 530929
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
renox
Member since:
2005-07-06

Given that they didn't even manage to rework Firefox's architecture to allow a process per website (a la Chrome), I would trust a Firefox OS as much as Windows95 i.e. not at all.

Reply Score: 4

Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

Judging by the description, they do use seperate processes:

The b2g process may spawn a number of low-rights "content processes". These are where web applications and other web content are loaded. These process communicate with the main Gecko server process through IPDL, a message-passing system.

https://wiki.mozilla.org/B2G/Architecture

Basically, what Chrome does.

There are many reasons why Mozilla didn't change their architecture. The most important one is obviously compatibility with existing code. With B2G they didn't have that limitation.

Edited 2012-08-13 13:22 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

Radio Member since:
2009-06-20

Oh, please. Why do you think nobody did it before Chrome? That solution is not better than the other: there are tradeoffs. One-process-per-tab is using a lot of ressources and makes it more difficult for add-ons to modify a webpage (e.g. Adblock in firefox blocks ads before they begin to download whereas Adblock in Chrome only hides/discharges them after they load).

Why do you want Firefox to look more like Chrome (which, alas, is the trend)? Use Chrome.

Reply Parent Score: 4

renox Member since:
2005-07-06

One-process-per-tab is using a lot of ressources
Chrome has a setting to use one process for everything, so in low memory condition you can use this if you want.

and makes it more difficult for add-ons to modify a webpage (e.g. Adblock in firefox blocks ads before they begin to download whereas Adblock in Chrome only hides/discharges them after they load).
There should be two kind of add-ons, in-process flexible but unsafe and out-of-process: safer but less flexible.

Why do you want Firefox to look more like Chrome (which, alas, is the trend)? Use Chrome.
I do, but I like Firefox too, I'd like it even better if they fixed the browser.

Reply Parent Score: 4

_xmv Member since:
2008-12-09

That's a different matter. Firefox OS != Firefox.
You actually NEED one process per application.

That's what provides protected memory.

Unless you think Win3.11 and 95 are better than WinXP and above, for example.

Reply Parent Score: 3