Sure, Firefox 4's new Chrome-like UI is nice, but the real story is under the hood
While it's impossible to sum up the thousands of enhancements and bug fixes both big and small, the Firefox 4 beta version brings the browser that much closer to taking over everything on the desktop. There are fewer reasons for anyone to interact with an extra plug-in or the operating system. Remember when people cared about whether a machine was Windows or Mac or a Commodore 64? Remember when software needed to be written in native code? Those days are fading away quickly as the browser is more able than ever before to deliver most of the content we might want.
You've no doubt heard about or even seen Firefox 4's new Chrome-like interface. More important are the many new features generally lumped together under the catchall standard HTML5, a specification that's still a draft but has become more of a rallying cry for AJAX, JavaScript, endless tags, and life beyond plug-ins. [ Also on InfoWorld: HTML5 will spawn richer, more sophisticated websites while also easing development. Read about the nine ways HTML5's impact will be felt in "How HTML5 will change the Web." Learn how to take advantage of HTML5 in "What to expect from HTML5." ]
Many of the enticing new features open up new opportunities for AJAX and JavaScript programmers to add more razzle-dazzle and catch up with Adobe Flash, Adobe AIR, Microsoft Silverlight, and other plug-ins. The CSS transitions, still "partially supported" in Firefox 4 Beta 1, give programmers the chance to set up one model for changing the CSS parameters without writing a separate JavaScript function to do it. The browser just fades and tweaks the CSS parameters over time.
There are plenty of other little parts of HTML5 that have been slowly arriving in previous versions of Firefox but are now being more fully integerated. MathML and SVG data are now a bit easier to mix right in with old-fashioned text. The Canvas and optional WebGL layers can create custom images at the browser without waiting for a server to deliver a GIF. A handful of new tags like and offer a more document-centric approach, so the browser can present information more like the data on the printed page. The tag can be matched with a tag and the browser will keep the two together and try to put the results near the tag.
These are just some of the options that programmers can use to add more zip to static text. Firefox 4 also adds an implementation of the Websockets API, a tool for enabling the browser and the server to pass data back and forth as needed, making it unnecessary for the browser to keep asking the server if there's anything new to report. If there's a need to store some of this data locally, the JavaScript programmer now gets access to indexed databases. They're not exactly flat files, but they're useful if you want to store and index name/value pairs data.
Converting this information to the HTML tags is becoming more fluid. The Mozilla release notes, for instance, brag that Firefox 4's parser is 20 percent faster at interpreting the innerHTML calls generated by dynamic JavaScript. The frames are supposedly going to be evaluated in a lazy manner so that the page resembles its final form a bit sooner. And now plug-ins are running in separate threads, offering so-called Crash Protection against glitches.
Some of this is clearly paying off. Firefox 4 Beta 1 scored 3,573 on the Peacekeeper benchmark, much better than 2,470, the score produced by Firefox 3.6.4 on the same machine. These values, though, still lag behind the competition. Other browsers, including Chrome, Opera, and Safari, score between 5,000 and 7,000. There is a similar gap in the JavaScript-centric SunSpider benchmarks: 970ms for Firefox 4 Beta 1 versus 750ms for Chrome.
Are these differences notable during normal browsing? Not really. I felt like the latency of the Internet was the real bottleneck, not whether some complicated JavaScript loop was finishing 10 percent faster; after all, I don't see many complicated loops on the Web pages I visit. Most JavaScript does little more than dutifully fetch information and render it. The amount of memory in the computer is probably a bigger killjoy than the measured speed. Version 4.0 is just a beta, of course, and the best JavaScript engine still isn't included yet. Mozilla's release notes say that a better JIT (Just In Time) compiler for JavaScript and layered rendering engine are "coming soon."
There are areas in which Firefox still leads. Firefox's collection of extensions and plug-ins is still broader and more developed than any other. Firefox 4 nurtures this advantage by making it possible to turn the different extensions on and off without restarting. Firefox is also taking the lead by implementing Google's WebM video standard, a wise decision given that Firefox is largely supported by ad revenue from the Google search box. Chrome's own support for WebM is found through the early release version, but that should change soon.
Many people may come away from this beta feeling that Firefox is still catching up with the other browsers. The speed doesn't leapfrog the competition. The tabs are now arranged across the top of the window more like Chrome. Some of the buttons feel just like Opera's versions. It's clearly a competitive market these days, and the best innovations are quickly copied. The browser programmers are taking the best from each other, and this is competition at its finest.
Google's Chrome uses gimmicks to make it seem fast at startup, says designer
An interface designer interning at Mozilla has suggested that the company mimic gimmicks in Google's Chrome to make users think Firefox starts up faster. In an entry on his personal blog that was reposted to Mozilla's uber-blog, Planet Mozilla, John Wayne Hill, an Indiana University masters student interning this summer at the open-source company, spelled out changes that would give users the feeling that Firefox starts quicker. "Firefox is fast, no doubt about it. But for many people it feels pretty slow when starting up," said Hill, who is studying human-computer interaction and design. "Chrome, while only marginally faster than Firefox at starting, feels much faster. By analyzing videos of these start-up processes we can start to understand what makes Firefox feel slow." Along with Alex Faaborg, a Firefox principal designer, Hill put Firefox and Chrome through speed trials that showed Google's browser finished most start-up tasks milliseconds faster than Firefox, in some cases because the former skipped steps. Hill then compared how both browsers handled specific start-up tasks or informed users of start-up progress. For example, while Chrome simultaneously draws both the browser window and its "chrome," or interface, before rendering the opening Web site, Firefox does each of the three tasks separately and sequentially. "Chrome seems to do everything at once [which] allows Chrome to feel fast because once the window is [drawn], everything is pretty much ready to go," Hill said. Google's browser also uses a smaller page loading indicator -- the animated circle at the left side of each Chrome tab -- while Firefox splashes the word "Loading" across the entire tab. "This is visually 'bloated' and makes Firefox seem slower," Hill said. "Furthermore, because Chrome's loading icon animation goes 'around' faster, Firefox's loading icon takes more time (seemingly) to get 'around.'" Other pluses for Chrome include its practice of displaying the page title only when the site has been drawn, whereas Firefox fills in the title as a page renders. "This is a simple trick that allows Chrome to feel faster in that once the title is shown, the page is ready," Hill pointed out. "In Firefox, a page's title makes it seem like a page has loaded but in fact the page isn't ready to be interacted with quite yet and [so] the user has to 'wait longer.'" To better compete with Chrome on perceived startup speed, Hill recommended that Firefox copy some of Google's tricks, including drawing the browser window and chrome at the same time, not sequentially; reduce the "visual weight" of the page loading icon and animate it faster; and delay displaying the page's title until the site has loaded and can be used. He also suggested that Mozilla update Firefox when the user closes the browser, not when it's first opened, as is currently the case. "With just a few changes in the Firefox start-up process, we could greatly enhance the feeling of Firefox's speed," Hill argued. Mozilla has already devoted resources to reducing Firefox's actual startup time, as opposed to Hill's suggestions to give users the illusion of speed. The startup team publishes gains-losses metrics weekly on the Mozilla site, and blogs about its progress almost as frequently. Firefox has long been bashed as sluggish compared to Chrome and other rivals, with various benchmarks used to illustrate Firefox's lethargy. (In fact, the Mozilla-maintained "Are We Fast Yet" site that monitors the progress of its work on boosting Firefox's JavaScript speeds shows Chrome and Safari far faster.)
The next big computing platform won't be Apple's Mac OS, Google's Android, or Microsoft's Windows. It's already here--and it's the Web.
What will your Web browser look like in 2015? Five years doesn't always bring dramatic change to some technologies--today's desktop PC, for instance, isn't that different from its 2005 predecessor--but browsers are undergoing major changes that will alter our day-to-day computing lives.
Not only will Web browsers become commonplace in cars, but they'll also incorporate voice recognition, text-to-speech, and touchless gesture controls for applications where keypads, touchpads, and even touchscreens can be either inconvenient (smartphones) or downright dangerous (when driving). Browsers will stream Internet radio to our cars, and perhaps even adopt a 3D-style interface--only without the clunky glasses.
"You're going to see tremendous innovation in the browser space in the coming years," says Linus Upson, Google's vice president of engineering. "We really want the Web as a platform to get to the point where you can do anything on the Web that you can do on Windows, the Mac, or the iPhone."
Google envisions a future where the browser runs all of your applications--including eye-grabbing 3D games, seamless language translations, and even grammar corrections. Though some of these features exist in rudimentary form today, they'll be far more capable within five years.
As today's tech-lab projects turn mainstream, the browser will take on a new look and feel. AMD's Fusion Media Explorer, a 3D browser designed to showcase the multimedia capabilities of the chipmaker's processors, features drag-and-drop uploading to Facebook and other social networks, and even has a rotating 3D interface for browsing media files. An Israel-based startup called EyeSight Mobile Technologies is developing touchless gesture controls for Android phones: Swipe your hand over a front-facing camera, for instance, and you can navigate your photo gallery. Meanwhile, Google is building voice recognition and text-to-speech functionality for browsers. And then there is Opera Software's free Opera browser which has pioneered voice and mouse-gesture browsing. No wonder that major automakers, including Audi, BMW, Ford, General Motors, and Mercedes, are experimenting with ways to add browsers to cars and trucks. (For more, see "Car Tech: Coolest New Systems on Four Wheels.")
The next big computing platform won't be a version of Apple's Mac OS, Google's Android, or Microsoft's Windows. It's already here--and it's the Web. And the drive to offer the most compelling window to the Web possible, via the browser, is intense.
Web Everywhere
The browser is spreading beyond the PC and smartphone to new types of gadgetry, including TV set-top boxes and printers. This is a trend that will accelerate in the coming years. Nascent examples include Google TV, the search giant's new platform designed to bring Web content to your living-room television; the HP Photosmart Premium TouchSmart Web all-in-one printer, a color inkjet with a 4.33-inch, color LCD that provides access to Web-based applications; and, of course, a soon-to-arrive crop of tablet devices following in the wake of the new (and already popular) Apple iPad.
Meanwhile, newer, faster wireless data services--including 4G technologies such as LTE and WiMax, as well as the increasingly ubiquitous Wi-Fi--will help the browser extend its reach into even more business and consumer devices. Who knows--perhaps even the Internet-enabled refrigerator, an idea that seemed ludicrous when LG Appliances introduced it in 2003, may make a comeback. In fact, LG hasn't given up on the concept. Its latest wired fridge has an LCD with a built-in browser and an on-screen keyboard.
For many of these devices, the browser doesn't deliver simple Web pages. Instead it acts as an application platform, an entertainment hub, and a gateway to user files that are securely stored online. One soon-to-ship example is Google Chrome OS, a browser-based operating system slated to debut on netbooks and tablets later this year. With Chrome OS, the browser isn't merely an avenue to the Internet; rather, it's the command center for all user activity, most of which is Web-based. (Chrome OS has Linux underpinnings, and rumors have suggested that it may still provide access to "legacy PC programs"--but even then only through a Web-savvy remote-desktop-like feature.)
So how might we interact with Web-enabled devices within a few years? Web design firm Adaptive Path, a leader in user-interface development, created a conceptual interface for Firefox maker Mozilla in 2008. Called Aurora, the concept features a Web-centric world where all data and applications reside within the framework of the browser. In a demonstration video, a man named Tim uses gestures to interact with Aurora on a large wall screen. The display includes a camera that reads and interprets Tim's hand and arm movements. Personal workspaces, similar to bookmarks, appear as large thumbnails; Tim organizes his desktop by "grabbing" workspace objects (without actually touching the display) and "pushing" them to where they belong on the screen.
Though Aurora may never become an end-user interface, it does offer an intriguing glimpse of a browser-based future that today's tech-industry players--via standards groups like the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)--are working hard to create.
