Written by Alex Iskold and edited by Richard MacManus. Disclaimer: Alex's company AdaptiveBlue has a product called The blueorganizer, which is a Firefox extension.
In this post, we take a look at what the Firefox team is going to deliver in their
upcoming major release: Firefox 2.0. We ask the question: will it be enough to make
significant ground on IE?
In just a few years, Firefox has taken the previously dormant browsing market by storm and woken the slumbering giant Microsoft. The Mozilla browser now owns 12-14% of the browser market (the number varies depending on the source - see Wikipedia for more). The Firefox brand is also making an impact, thanks in part to the Spread Firefox campaign. For example, last year Firefox was voted the #7 global brand by brandchannel.com. But the question is still up in the air: will Firefox ever get close to Internet Explorer's market share?
Firefox share, Feb 04-July06; Source e-janco
A recent post about IE7 on TechCrunch generated a lot of comments complaining about the lack of innovation in the Microsoft product. The timeline between IE6 and IE7 has been unusually long by software standards, so it was reasonable to expect a decent amount of innovation. But despite major improvements and work towards standards support, IE7 looks like a Firefox wannabe.
So one would expect that Firefox has a chance to further cut down IE's lead in the browser market, by introducing further innovation and continuing to improve the browsing user experience. Let's look and see...
The first thing that stands out in the new Firefox is the more modern, snappier look and feel. Everything is more shinny, more playful and more clickable.
Tabbed browsing was a major browser innovation that Firefox popularized - and in version 2.0 there are further improvements to this. By default, the links now open in a new tab instead of a new window and each tab has its own close button. There is also a new handy way of switching between the tabs, via a pulldown list of all open tabs.
All these improvements are subtle, but good productivity boosters for the user.
Search is probably the most fundamental thing we do online and Firefox excels at integrating search engines in a very smart way. With this new release, Firefox adds the search completion mechanism, which works just like Google complete. As soon as the user starts typing, potential search phrases show up.
This feature has been also added to the Firefox search engine format, allowing each search engine to support it.
Perhaps the most interesting new thing in Firefox 2.0 is the integration of RSS Readers. Since its early days, Firefox has made a commitment to usability and ease of use, which implies integrating all things web right into the browser. Wiring search engines into the browser is one example. In Firefox 2.0 we now see similar integration done with RSS readers.
When a user navigates to a page which contains an RSS feed, the RSS icon in the URL bar lights up. If the user clicks the icon, she is given a choice to subscribe to the feed using either LiveBookmarks or one of the popular online readers like Google Reader. This is a nice and clean integration, but one can't help but wish to have an RSS Reader built right into the browser. Flock, for example, features one of the best RSS Readers and it makes a big difference for end user experience (note: Flock is a R/WW sponsor).
There are a number of software improvements in Firefox 2.0. Some of them are:
The Firefox 2.0 release notes have more details.
It might not seem like Firefox 2.0 has a lot of new features, but we think it is a solid release. The team's focus on performance, stability, usablity and security clearly results in a better, faster product - and users will be pleased with that.
However it is also clear that Firefox needs to do more innovation and web integration in order to gain bigger market share. In future we hope to see better bookmarks, better history, a built-in RSS Reader, more productivity features and more smart web integrations. Perhaps with advanced functionality like this, Firefox would make significant ground on IE. What do you think?
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2826
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
I think the most important enhancement would be speed optimizations but I don't believe it's significant enough, I'll definitely check out, what are your observations?
As for RSS reader implementation. I liked that feature. And I'm glad that it's not a very tight integration but open; because I wanna use my own web based RSS reader, I don't want to risk losing all my OPML data with hard drive crash (OK I know Google's backup solution to this, but it's still not acceptable for everyone) I can use extensions for special purposes.
Posted by: Emre Sokullu | October 17, 2006 9:47 PM
Emre,
Speed and memory leak seems to be fixed. But the time will be the final judge on this one :)
Personally, I'd like to see more tight integrations that will shave off clicks and save my time. But I can appreciate FF strategy to stay flexible.
Alex
Posted by: Alex Iskold | October 17, 2006 9:58 PM
Thanks for the kind words, Alex!
My favourite new feature might well be inline spell-check, because it ranks high on two of my criteria for "Firefoxy" features:
- it benefits a ton of people doing very diverse things on the web, and
- it has basically zero UI impact until it has something helpful to offer you, and even then it's not obtrusive
(You can configure Firefox to subscribe to your reader of choice when clicking The Orange Rune, sans confirmation or interposed dialog, if you so desire. I've got mine set that way now, and the rate at which I'm accumulating new and interesting feeds is starting to spook me a little.)
Mike
Posted by: shaver | October 17, 2006 10:40 PM
Just a point of clarification, FireFox didn't invent tabbed browsing (though perhaps they brought it to the masses). Opera had it long before FireFox... and it would seem they were not the originators of the idea either. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabbed_browsing
Nice article, though. Just thought I'd point that out before the Opera zealots jump all over it. ;)
Posted by: Josh | October 17, 2006 11:02 PM
Thanks Josh for pointing that out. Actually that was my fault the post implied Firefox invented tabbed browsing - wrong choice of words in my editing :-) I've replaced "introduced" with "popularized".
Posted by: Richard MacManus | October 18, 2006 12:00 AM
As you know, Firefox's roadmap has two development cycle in future. Even number versions such as 2.0 try to front-end functions, odd number versions do back-end functions. Firefox 3.0 will add more innovative functions to change back-end platform. Also most of functions are offered by various extensions. I don't want to add many things to default browser to be heavy. Extensions can be covered that.
Posted by: Channy | October 18, 2006 1:08 AM
Thanks Alex and Richard for a good review. I feel encouraged to upgrade my Firefox right away, even though I probably should wait to make sure the extensions that I use will work
Posted by: Jesper R√∏nn-Jensen | October 18, 2006 1:11 AM
I downloaded ff rc3 yesterday (for mac) and to me I noticed a dramatically quicker startup time that 1.5. FF hasn't had the history of the most mac friendly application, and there is no reason for it not to.
One gripe with the rss improvements, the idea I am a fan of, reminds me of the feedburner default styled feed where you can select the reader/service you want. But they closed the doors to online feed readers, such as Netvibes. Adding a reader from my computer is easy, but adding a web service support seems limited by default.
A few css3 features seem missing, a toss back between safari and ff it seems...maybe one day they'll complete the list.
Posted by: blinking8s | October 18, 2006 1:20 AM
It seems that this new version of FF has integrated a lot of the extensions I'm using, and that's good news !
I discored tabbed browsing with Netscape 9 on a Mac at work, and when FF appeared on PC, I jumped on it and now will never quit. Also because of the customization.
But I agree that the default browser must stay simple and fast.
One thing the team could add is the bookmark backup, as they have impleted the session restoring.
Posted by: Alecska | October 18, 2006 2:14 AM
"Perhaps with advanced functionality like this, Firefox would make significant ground on IE"
No matter what features FF 3 has it will always be behind IE because of their integration into Windows.
I would have liked to see in this review a look at how Mozilla plans to market FF 3.
My thought - Mozilla should work with computer manufactuers like Dell to have FF 3 pre installed on machines.
Posted by: Hashim | October 18, 2006 5:28 AM
Hashim, stay tuned because we have an interview coming up with a Mozilla VP - and I will ask him how they plan to market FF. Thks, Richard
Posted by: Richard MacManus | October 18, 2006 5:30 AM
What about support for existing extensions. I'm sure the developers of various extensions haven't come out with the FF2.0 compatible version.
Extensions are a good thing but here I am. I can't even think of using FF without the extensions I use and I know it will slow down my adoption of FF2.0. I haven't yet tested which of the extensions is failing but I'm sure some of them will fail like the last time.
Posted by: Neeraj Kumar | October 18, 2006 5:43 AM
Neeraj,
I can tell you about blueorganizer extension that we had. We did not need to do anything to make it compatible with 2.0, except change the maxVersion number. This is encouraging, since our extension is quite complex, and implies that upgrade should not take long for others.
Alex
Posted by: Alex Iskold | October 18, 2006 6:37 AM
Hashim is absolutely right - the new features of FF 2 or 3 only matter to those who are using it already. The real hurdle to expanding marketshare against IE is marketing it to the masses. Just about everyone I've talked to at my office hasn't even heard of FF. So many people don't even have a clue!
Posted by: Erik | October 18, 2006 6:45 AM
Re: #4: "Opera had it long before FireFox..."
But Firefox clearly had the advantage: it was the free browser of the two.
Posted by: Tamar Weinberg | October 18, 2006 7:13 AM
I've been using the RC3 Firefox for a couple of days and really enjoy the increase in speed!
As to innovation to gain marketshare over IE, I think that's not the issue. Opera and Firefox have consistently been superior to IE in innovation, yet Microsoft retains overall marketshare...and they always will, so long as they control the dominant operating system, and, as a U.S. federal judge's ruling states, abused their monopoly to the detriment of others. Firefox needs to be the faster, more secure browser it is. It doesn't need to have a gazillion features and suffer from big time bloat.
Posted by: Joe | October 18, 2006 7:24 AM
Firefox needs to be preinstalled and sitting on desktops for most users to use it... I can not expect general population to go about downloading a better browser. Most people just use whats on their PCs. Mozilla needs to cut deals with dell/hp/lenovo and other big manufacturers.
Posted by: Manish | October 18, 2006 7:27 AM
So, is Flock-on-FF2 coming soon?
Posted by: uzair | October 18, 2006 7:30 AM
Manish - good point, probably not simple, but would help. In terms of wide adoption it is classic crossing the chasm curve, just need to walk it.
In terms of innovation, I think it is critical to continue to innovate to keep the early adopter crowd happy. Otherwise there is opportunity for things like Flock.
Alex
Posted by: Alex Iskold | October 18, 2006 7:47 AM
Looks like Opera.
Posted by: atrus123 | October 18, 2006 8:04 AM
It's a really good improvement over 1.5. Good job to them!
Posted by: mark | October 18, 2006 8:34 AM
I am not so into the hype of the new firefox.
i enjoy flock for the momment
Posted by: Marvin | October 18, 2006 9:19 AM
Hi there,
I'm going to try FF 2.0 and I'll be happy if it just stops crashing like 1.5.0.7 does !!!! :-(
Posted by: Ken Pasco | October 18, 2006 9:25 AM
The tabbed browsing in 2.0 is a step backward from what the plugin, Tab Mix Plus, added. The plugin isn't working with 2.0 yet, but I am hoping it fixes that Firefox 2.0 messed up. The left and right scroll of tabs is terrible. Tab Mix Plus would put tabs into multiple rows, which keeps all tabs in view.
The latest build isn't as stable as before either ... I've seen memory leaks and crashes more frequently. While the RSS upgrades are definately nice, I thought it could have gone further with a build in reader as mentioned in the article. The search icon and green arrow in the toolbar is really fracking annoying ... whoever put those in should be dragged out and flogged.
Overall, it's a good upgrade, but more deserving of Firefox 1.6 than 2.0 - there's nothing really special in this upgrade to deserve a new major version number.
Posted by: Mr Zebra | October 18, 2006 9:30 AM
I'm going to try it to. I hope that it is better than the old one.
Posted by: Keith Knutsson | October 18, 2006 12:43 PM
Keith,
Please take time to come back and share with us what you thought, it is always great to get perspective from people who are giving it a second try.
Alex
Posted by: Alex Iskold | October 18, 2006 12:58 PM
Firefox 2.0 RC 3 is blazing fast without the need for Firetune or Fasterfox.
Posted by: alibaba | October 18, 2006 2:18 PM
uzair: Flock 1.0, which is in active development right now, is built on Firefox 2.0
Posted by: Will Pate | October 18, 2006 2:26 PM
Sorry but going back and forward in pages is still very slow compared to Opera
Posted by: Petr Pan | October 18, 2006 4:08 PM
Ever since Firefox 2 was in beta version, I have been using it all the while. Recent release of RC 3 version has confirmed its latest intent to take more share away from IE.
Posted by: Keith | October 18, 2006 4:16 PM
IMO Firefox will becom more popular day by day if it continually keeps inovating new things by keeping the user as the primary focus.Compared to MS latest release FF has really shown greater improvment.Hope they keep doing th at.
Posted by: managed dedicated server | October 19, 2006 7:40 AM
IMO Firefox will become more popular day by day if it continually keeps innovating new things by keeping the user as the primary focus. Compared to MS latest release of IE7 FF has really shown tremendous improvement. Hope they keep doing that in future as well.
Posted by: managed dedicated server | October 19, 2006 7:42 AM
Josh -- to follow that... I believe Netscape 6 actually had tabs before Firefox, though Opera may have implemented them first. Firefox gets credit for popularizing them, but they actually inherited them from the Netscape codebase.
Posted by: Chris Messina | October 19, 2006 11:30 AM
Very good article, good review and I agreed with your recommendations for new features. I hope that Firefox pays attention to your recommendations - the built-in rss reader especially. Right now I use Feedreader 3, which works decently, but I wish it was part of my browser - or at least support Firefox-like extensions.
Posted by: David Mackey | October 20, 2006 8:35 PM
i want to see consistent behavior on different platforms. i work on windows and mac at work and windows and linux at home. having the option of enabling windows style behaviors on a mac (ctrl+enter for .com URL completes, ctrl+home/end to jump to the top and bottom of the page) would make my mozilla experience better. keeping the behavior optional would not force mac or unix users to sadpt windows UI shortcuts.
Posted by: chris | October 24, 2006 10:22 AM
Hhhm.. funny nobody mentions how firefox copied the "custom search" creation feature too.
Posted by: Wr | October 24, 2006 10:26 AM
Looking forward it, but seriously... you want Market Share(TM), make it easier for Windows sysadmins to install across their thousands of PCs.
I would LOVE to install it across the hundred or so PCs I admin at work, but without GPO support for configuration and MSI for automated GPO installs, the boss won't let it through.
By comparison, I expect the IE7 rollout will be automagical with the click of a button in WSUS. Thats where Firefox is going to lose out.
Posted by: Ben | October 24, 2006 10:27 AM
Sorry, the only problem with IE usability was the lack of tags. It got fixed.
There is NO compelling reason to use Firefox anymore. IE7 is good enough and everything will be optimized for it.
Posted by: Daniel | October 24, 2006 11:43 AM
Fire fox is already popular enough, the problem is getting people to try it out. People get IE automatically why would they try anything else out? They are blind and ignorant. People didn't help things by suggesting Opera which was ad driven back in the day. There's some great options out there but by giving people three choices (opera, Avast, and firefox comes to mind) people then get confused. If you really want to break the Microsoft monopoly, push Firefox (they have the biggest lead if nothing else).
At my work place btw, they are testing Firefox 2.0. But Firefox is mandatory! IE is only allowed on the network (well you can go out, but most people realize the greatness of Firefox)
Posted by: Kinglink | October 24, 2006 12:28 PM
Firefox 2.0 is far too buggy. Hopefully all the nuances will be fixed soon, I really regret this upgrade.
Posted by: Shagg E | October 27, 2006 6:37 AM
First let me applaud the article's author(s) for dually noting when their bias might apply (i.e. the references to flock) as so many sites on the net no longer do that. I agree that flock is a very nice browser, and often find myself using it too, though right now I'm using the 2.0 of firefox. Also, someone should mention Songbird, which is similar to flock (in fact they say "songbird and flock are birds of a feather" on both pages as they share a common dev team) and songbird is a "web player" which does for online media (music, mainly) what flock does for RSS capabilities. Both flock and songbird are based on firefox (the Gecko rendering engine and the XUL user interface systems, mainly).
With this said, I'm not going to read all the comments here (I have 20 tabs open and need to close a few!) but after reading the first few I thought I might advise some of you who have long loading times to check out "Firefox Preloader" (you can google for it or look it up on sourceforge) which is a nice windows application that more or less loads a copy of firefox in the background (optionally at startup) and keeps it hidden until you launch it. I've found that with the preloader my loading time for firefox is twice as fast as IE, and that's saying that IE loads in under 1.6 seconds. If the load time is your only issue, give the firefox preloader a shot.
Posted by: Tack Furlo | October 31, 2006 4:59 PM
FF2 is a welcome introduction, and i agree the UI in FF2 is clean and intuitive and simple.
They have reduced the clutter, its a well cleaned up UI.
Additionally, i find the inline spelll checker a brilliant and very effective introduction... they have done well there.
downside:
Mac support is still not great.... and it crashes sometimes...
Its also not the faster browser in the world, today that is still Safari.
So all in all i think its good... but they need to sort out the plumbing in FF 3.0 i will use Safari until it improves.
Posted by: Suresh Kumar | November 9, 2006 11:57 AM
FF2 is a welcome introduction, and i agree the UI in FF2 is clean and intuitive and simple.
They have reduced the clutter, its a well cleaned up UI.
Additionally, i find the inline spelll checker a brilliant and very effective introduction... they have done well there.
downside:
Mac support is still not great.... and it crashes sometimes...
Its also not the faster browser in the world, today that is still Safari.
So all in all i think its good... but they need to sort out the plumbing in FF 3.0 i will use Safari until it improves.
Posted by: Suresh Kumar | November 9, 2006 11:58 AM
i'm a big ff fan, but am waiting for all the bugs to be shaken out and the extension compatibility to be resolved before switching over. sometimes, it just doesn't pay to be the 'first on the block' to have the 'new, shiny thingy'...
Posted by: ben | November 13, 2006 10:03 PM