Mozilla To Bring Firefox Desktop Extension To Android Browser

Scott DeVaney, writing at Mozilla blog: In the coming months Mozilla will launch support for an open ecosystem of extensions on Firefox for Android on addons.mozilla.org (AMO). We'll announce a definite launch date in early September, but it's safe to expect a roll-out before the year's end. Here's everything developers need to know to get their Firefox desktop extensions ready for Android usage and discoverability on AMO.

For the past few years Firefox for Android officially supported a small subset of extensions while we focused our efforts on strengthening core Firefox for Android functionality and understanding the unique needs of mobile browser users. Today, Mozilla has built the infrastructure necessary to support an open extension ecosystem on Firefox for Android. We anticipate considerable user demand for more extensions on Firefox for Android, so why not start optimizing your desktop extension for mobile-use right away?

Re:Gay Bloatware

[narcc]

On the contrary, this is a very important development. Firefox is our last defense against a browser mono-culture far worse than the dark days of IE6. This gives them a much-needed edge on mobile.

I already use and recommend others use Firefox on Android. Not just because it's important to have healthy competition in the browser space, but because it supports uBlock Origin. That alone makes it an easy sell. This will open up a lot of doors.

I agree

[Anonymous Cward]

This may help turn the tide in favour of the competition, as Chrome is now the most feature-deficient browser across all mobile platforms and is soon to be crippling itself on desktop too. Safari on iOS, and now Firefox on Android will both have equal coverage between desktop and mobile for folks who want a crap-free and highly customisable web experience.

NoScript

[DrYak]

NoScript is among the small number of FF extensions already supported on Android.

It allows a much finer control over what JavaScript is allowed to run.
The setting was single global on/off for everything.
NoScript allows to disable by default, but then whitelist some domains on a case by case basis (only allow the strict minimum to make a website functional, while leaving the zillions of trackers disabled).

The main problem - that caused the setting being abandoned - is that more and more of the modern Web is

Re:

[brickhouse98]

Of course it's an AC spouting bullshit and hiding behind their prejudice.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

This is big news

[echo123]

This presents a prime argument for using, (FireFox and), Android. Not that I wasn't already using both, but things just got a lot better.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

I'm still evaluating extensions for Firefox. Some have a very big impact on battery life. I think that's why they have delayed it until now. It used to be worse but they have been improving it.

Finally

[eneville]

... some good news for 2023!

Mozilla could better have said:

[greytree]

"We're sorry, we're stupid and we should never have been fascist nannies in the first place, let alone let this shit go on for years and years.

We should not decide what our users run, that is their choice alone."

will be banned on the apple store!

[Joe_Dragon]

will be banned on the apple store!

Re:

[bill_mcgonigle]

Please explain your theory here.

Re:

[narcc]

Apple has been very hostile to anything that might let you bypass their app store, plugins included. Section 3.2.2 of the Apple Developer Program License Agreement over the years:

2009:

3.3.2 An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code by any means, including without limitation through the use of a plug-in architecture, calling other frameworks, other APIs or otherwise. No interpreted code may be downloaded or used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple's Documented APIs and built-in interpreter(s).

2010:

3.3.2 An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code by any means, including without limitation through the use of a plug-in architecture, calling other frameworks, other APIs or otherwise. Unless otherwise approved by Apple in writing, no interpreted code may be downloaded or used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple's Documented APIs and built-in interpreter(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, with Apple’s prior written consent, an Application may use embedded interpreted code in a limited way if such use is solely for providing minor features or functionality that are consistent with the intended and advertised purpose of the Application.

Things loosened up considerably in 2017, but were still draconian:

3.3.2 Except as set forth in the next paragraph, an Application may not download or install executable code. Interpreted code may be downloaded to an Application but only so long as such code: (a) does not change the primary purpose of the Application by providing features or functionality that are inconsistent with the intended and advertised purpose of the Application as submitted to the App Store, (b) does not create a store or storefront for other code or applications, and (c) does not bypass signing, sandbox, or other security features of the OS. An Application that is a programming environment intended for use in learning how to program may download and run executable code so long as the following requirements are met: (i) no more than 80 percent of the Application’s viewing area or screen may be taken over with executable code, except as otherwise permitted in the Documentation, (ii) the Application must present a reasonably conspicuous indicator to the user within the Application to indicate that the user is in a programming environment, (iii) the Application must not create a store or storefront for other code or applications, and (iv) the source code provided by the Application must be completely viewable and editable by the user (e.g., no pre-compiled libraries or frameworks may be included with the code downloaded).

This is why other browsers on iOS are just Safari with a different outfit.

That's brave.

[bill_mcgonigle]

Since noone else will do it I might just switch over to Firefox.

Not progress

[NotEmmanuelGoldstein]

... support for an open ecosystem of extensions ...

Originally, the download filename included a "-an" if it was compatibe with Android firefox. Then, after another API version, Mozilla stopped that and created a web-page that listed Android-only extensions.

Beta has been bliss

[EkriirkE]

I have been on FF Beta for android simply because it supports all my desktop add-ons (plugins). Your just needed to do this funky "custom add-on collection" procedurey but it works great*

* every couple days, every plugin(and desktop mode toggle) magically disables itself, but a quick kill-and-relaunch fixes it

good useless news

[groobly]

This is good news. Unfortunately, browsers on phones are basically useless, so this simply enhances the usefulness of the browser from completely useless, to mainly useless.

Finally!!

[Moochman]

I anticipate this will make my mobile Firefox usage significantly better. Adblockers alone...

Piece of Shite

[0xG]

I use FoA daily (indeed right now), and what we need is not more addons, but more functionality.

Start with managing bookmarks. They are so fucked up that i don't bother using them.

Next, howzabout cookie management? Per-site policies, anyone?

Next, why do the controls on the toolbar inexplicably disappear from time to time?

Next, could you move the tabs button further away from the elipsis menu button?

And speaking of Tabs, howzabout real tabs? Not all Android devices are phones, doncha know?

Has anyone else not