Mozilla Labs considers grafting IM onto Firefox

By Scott M. Fulton, III, BetaNews

August 7, 2008, 7:10 PM


Download Snowl 0.1 alpha from FileForum now.

When a company's lab typically comes forth with an idea for the general public, it already has a proposition in mind for why that idea is necessarily good. This morning, one of Mozilla Labs' latest ideas actually leaves that question open.

With Mozilla Labs in the news recently, even if it's for bold ideas that have yet to find their way to source code, the organization is taking advantage of this added attention to float an idea for a possible future Firefox permutation: What if instant messaging, RSS, and other concurrent textual feeds such as Twitter, were embedded in the Web browser in such a way that any kind of personal message could be made to appear through a single channel?

That general concept made a brief appearance in Adaptive Path's latest video for Mozilla Labs, which depicted a proof-of-concept browser called "Aurora." One of the key features of that concept was direct communication between two users facilitated through the browser, including voice and video, sharing the pointer remotely, and transferring data between local and remote data stores while maintaining context.

As more of a near-term concept, this morning Mozilla began floating a concept it's calling "Snowl" (short, judging from its logo, for "snow owl"), which would embed live textual communication into a more contemporary version of Firefox. Although RSS is nothing new to Firefox, with add-ins like Sage and Wizz having been available for years now, Snowl would not be a news reader. Instead, it would use RSS among other methods to gather short personal messages, then collect those messages into contexts that could be searchable later using a query line.

Mozilla isn't launching this project by saying it's a good idea just yet; it's actually asking the question on its own.

But as Snowl's lead architect Myk Melez wrote for Mozilla Labs' blog, Snowl was devised with a few central principles in mind, including this: "A search-based interface for message retrieval is more powerful and easier to use than one that makes you organize your messages first to find them later."

Instant messaging is among the many features Mozilla is considering adding to the Web browser directly; another is built-in multimedia codecs, which is one of the focuses of its latest Firefox 3.1 alpha. Last month, in an interview with BetaNews, two of Mozilla's senior engineers openly discussed how their labs are actively and simultaneously considering concepts that would build more new, rich functionality into the browser (Weave) and that would distribute Web functionality among multiple components, for a thinner, more terminal-like browser (Prism).

As long as Mozilla is comfortable with the idea of exploring two contradictory ideas simultaneously to see which one survives the test, would it be willing to consider a converse concept to Snowl, where messages are disseminated based on a system of templated rules that are optimized by the user either directly or through inferred interactions, as opposed to a continual search query model?

This is one question BetaNews put this morning to Myk Melez. "Yes, we're thrilled to consider alternate approaches to Snowl, including the one you raise," Melez responded. "We encourage folks to get involved with contributions to our existing experiments as well as new concepts, whether they be prototypes, mockups/sketches, or even just ideas."

With Aurora and Snowl, among other concepts being floated around, adding more functionality to the browser, is it Mozilla's belief that the browser must evolve into the operating system, or at least the operating environment -- to borrow the 1980s term for Windows -- in order to survive?

Melez' answer suggested our question may be behind the times in more ways than one: "For many of our users the browser is already their operating environment, since they use Web applications exclusively," he told us. "Nevertheless, our focus at Labs isn't on replicating the operating system, it's on exploring possible improvements to the browser and the Web platform to give users a better online experience. This may, but doesn't necessarily, include features of operating systems and other applications."

But it doesn't seem possible that Mozilla could explore both the Prism road and the Weave road at the same time, once it does approach the proverbial fork in the road. Does it have a plan in place for deciding which route to take?

"Not yet," said Melez. "We're still very much exploring all of the possibly future directions for the Web. Through broad participation of a global community, and open-minded exploration of seemingly contradictory approaches, we hope to more fully understand and surface new opportunities."

Add a Comment (47 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By Eeyan

edited Aug 8, 2008 - 7:37 PM

As an option it would be fine with me. But would need all the IM's (MSN, ICQ, AIM.....etc) to work.

Score: 0

By Prixsel

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 3:43 PM

More features instead of Addons is the safest way to go browsing, if you don't want functionality then go back to IE6 !

Well if its not easy enough and doesn't have customization to max as possible with good features then MSN messenger stays favorite.

I agree that then they should copy more and more things from Opera and give out mega,full,basic version of browser if they really wanna make it bloatware.

Score: 0

By shrap1315

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 2:52 PM

With every build FF is getting more and more bloated with "features" that should be add-ons.

I have been a die hard tester, supporter and user since the 0.3 build of Phoenix. If they continue down this path I will move on to another browser.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Aug 8, 2008 - 1:50 PM

FYI:

Firefox, through extensions, has plenty of IM functionality options.

Keyword: Options.

Firefox devs should be the *last* people attempting to *limit* those options by putting such functionality directly in the browser.

Score: 0

By Sven123456789

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 1:12 PM

Reminds me of the old Netscape versions that had aim installed with it. They really don't need to do this. Someone out there could always invent an add on with the various IM's. Like allot of users, i agree they should work on browser improvements itself. Instead of worrying about something like this.

Score: 0

By deralaand

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 12:45 PM

so far...Snowl is an extension. I think it needs to remain that way.
Obviously very early beta and needs to support ability to open FEED results in new tabs very soon.

It didn't crash FF when installed or cause any other issues that I could see.

I am surprised to see that only 9 people have tried it and yet 30 of you have negative opinions...hmmm

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 1:46 PM

I am surprised to see that only 9 people have tried it and yet 30 of you have negative opinions...hmmm

*laughs*

That would only be correct if we we're *not* talking about firefox. (Hint: We are.)

I would hazard to guess that just about everyone in this topic uses Firefox to some degree, wouldn't you?

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 1:18 PM

Perhaps because
-we already have IM programs we use that we prefer.
-We don't want our favorite browser to get bloat or unnecessary code, that is why many of us went to FF in the first place.
-We see a lot more areas of priority for Mozilla than this direction.

All of this opinion can be given without trying the plug-in.

Score: 0

By glassdesigns

edited Aug 8, 2008 - 11:36 AM

The consensus seems to be, keep FF lean. Extra bloat should be user added. Mozilla should concentrate on making FF run as efficiently as possible. It should start up fast, use little memory and continue to let the user configure thru add ons what they think they need in a browser. I use FF because I can configure it my way. If you are going to bloat it up with a bunch of stuff I don't need, I will switch to the first browser that comes out that gets us back to basics. Mozilla, please don't destroy FF. Don't think someone won't design a FF Lite if you continue with bloating.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 11:54 AM

It *is* open source, so your prediction will very likely be a reality.

Just as Flock expanded on FF adding Social Networking features, someone, thankfully, will rip the IM/codec crap out of the code-base, effectively forking it yet again.

What really sucks is that this divides the amount of work that could be going into one really good browser into three browsers.

Ah....C'est la Vie

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 1:20 PM

"What really sucks is that this divides the amount of work that could be going into one really good browser into three browsers."
This is forking
it is common in the open source world,
and,
it is a good thing. It keeps developers either in check, or losing their userbase, and yes it splits development but the users eventually benefit by supporting the (in theory) better project.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 1:42 PM

This is forking
it is common in the open source world,


Aware of that, see posts of mine further down referencing that.

it is a good thing

Rather subjective, don't you think?

t keeps developers either in check, or losing their userbase,

Sounds like a bad thing to me...

but the users eventually benefit by supporting the (in theory) better project.

If I were under the impression that IM was a good thing to be in a browser and that there wasn't a fork already devoted to such functionality, I would whole-heatedly agree. As it stands, this would be a *much* better fit for Flock than it would for FF and splitting the current FF devs to work on such a project seems to be more duplication of effort than "creating a better product".

Score: 0

By jriley30114

posted Aug 10, 2008 - 8:51 PM

This reminds when Coca-Cola tried to introduce New Coke without success. Brand loyalty brings out a lot of emotions from people.

In the end people will want it or not - enough said.

Score: 0

By Aires

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 10:59 AM

I'll tell you what's a good idea that ICQ briefly introduced a few years agao - the ability to chat to the same people viewing the same page as you. For example, if while I was on this page right now I had this ICQ tool installed (I forget it's name now) and you had it installed and was viewing the page too, I could chat to you and any others who were viewing the page at the same time as me. Now _that_ WAS a really good handy tool - why ICQ stopped developing that mystifies me.

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 1:22 PM

Perhaps because it distracts from the main concept of IM too much: chatting with *anything* with your friends. People don't always chat about web pages browsing, or even want to engage in a conversation with a friend or stranger, beyond their control. Also brings up the typical tracking/privacy issues that come up when shared web viewing programs are introduced.

Score: 0

By shicaca

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 4:49 PM

Plus it's kind of creepy to be looking at porn and *da da incoming chat with seexyp****332*

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 11:52 AM

As humorous as that would be...

Score: 0

By Floodland

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 10:55 AM

Bad idea. Opera already did this five years ago and nobody used it.
There are still things to improve in the core. do not bloat the product. There are a good amount of IM clients already out, no need to integrate it to FF. As stated before, develop a plugin, extension, addon but not inside the core. Thank you!

Score: 0

By TarrantM

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 10:35 AM

Too late, meebo already takes care of IM inside a browser concept. I've been using it for ages now.

Hey Moz folks, talk about being late to the party.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 10:34 AM

...and the End of Firefox draws neigh.

Leave this type of BS to extensions and third-party FF implementations (eg: Flock).

Do not load FF with a bunch of bloated functionality *you* think we need. we like Firefox because we can configure it to be the way *we* want it.

If we want built-in IM, we'll download the extension.

Take that away, and you've got another IE. More functionality=more possibility of vulnerability.

You are going the wrong direction starting with FF 3.0. Do not continue this course.

You promised us a basic browser we could extend. We can add the functionality we want, and *only* the functionality we want. Break that promise and we will leave in droves.

That is a guarantee.

Score: 0

By Mystiqq

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 10:29 AM

As long as i dont have to run it, im fine with it. Ive got IM (Miranda) as a separate program and it will stay that way.

Score: 0

By sturgess

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 9:08 AM

Any news yet on IE beta 2 ? It's August, and we were promised a beta 2 this month. Jolly exciting, this could be the one especially with the new security stuff they've added. Not that Firefox or Opera are much safer these days, with Opera only having 6 users and Firefox only being used in Germany, we need IE to be the best of the best for the rest of the world.

Score: 0

By preinterpost

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 8:37 AM

Sounds like it's end of the road for FF unless they build all this stuff with open interfaces (like the IE7 search box). Just after becoming actually usable with v3... *sigh*

Score: 0

By Aires

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 4:10 AM

"When a company's lab typically comes forth with an idea for the general public, it already has a proposition in mind for why that idea is necessarily good. This morning, one of Mozilla Labs' latest ideas actually leaves that question open."

Wtf? Oh right, it's only Scott.

Score: 0

By cbsim

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 2:14 AM

Built-in multimedia codecs is a good idea.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 10:36 AM

Why on earth would I want a codec built-in that I *never* use?

Include a page in "Preferences" allowing you to download and install support for the codecs you want or...*gasp* leave it as is, allowing us to download them as needed...if *we* choose to.

Score: 0

By mdotwills

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 4:02 AM

or not.

Score: 0

By Joco

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 2:09 AM

I use the browser and IM quite often. But I don't want to see a browser mixed with the IM screen. This is insane! Likewise, when I open calc, or open a chewingum pack, I don't want to see the browser in it.

A Firefox IM is welcome, but as a separate program.

Score: 0

By spyboy

posted Aug 7, 2008 - 10:31 PM

Why don't these companies use the windowing environment for what's it's for: 1 app per window, and the ability to cut/paste or drag/drop into other windows.

Instead of trying to do everything in one window, they should write their code to accept standards so that other apps can interface with each other.

Score: 0

By mdotwills

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 4:03 AM

agreed, interfacing is definitely the key here

Score: 0

By jriley30114

posted Aug 10, 2008 - 9:04 PM

This is what I want to desperately see.

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Aug 7, 2008 - 10:21 PM

Firefox is looking to bloat and step away from its core goal.

It can find that its userbase forks, just like a linux distribution, in an instant.

If FF makes an IM, but another dev group looks to make its browser leaner and better in pure html and standard websites, I will bail...

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Aug 8, 2008 - 10:42 AM

Ditto.

As will droves of others.

Score: 0

By Banquo

posted Aug 7, 2008 - 10:45 PM

I agree, it's going to turn out just like Nero. Every time a great program comes along, they just can't leave it alone. Keep adding more and more and more...

Score: 0

By improvelence

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 9:35 AM

You know you can choose to just install nero burning rom...I hope for firefox'x sake they gives us the ability to also install just the browser or else FF is dead.

Score: 0

By Banquo

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 7:16 PM

True but that doesn't stop garbage like Nero Scout from being installed.

Score: 0

By Scary Guy

posted Aug 7, 2008 - 10:11 PM

Make it an add on, not a part of the core. It has too much crap as it is. Hell even history and bookmarks should be add ins IMO. I just want to type an address and get the page.

Score: 0

By Aires

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 6:54 AM

I agree. An IM addon would be fine.

Score: 0

By Andrei

posted Aug 7, 2008 - 9:31 PM

And while many people use IM, not ALL of us actually do. ALL of us use the browser to browse. I could care less for an IM in my browser.

Stop the madness!

Score: 0

By AntiochMedia

posted Aug 7, 2008 - 8:52 PM

Seamonkey supports IRC still, right?
Flock is Firefox + Social, right?
What's the point?

Why not integrate e-mail into Firefox too? Of yeah, that was Mozila/Seamonkey.

I don't understand these 'ideas'.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Aug 8, 2008 - 10:43 AM

Seriously, aside from the fact that Flock is not a Mozilla project, it is definitely more up it's alley than FF.

Leave such things to Flock. FF should remain spartan.

Score: 0

By Sabz

posted Aug 7, 2008 - 8:35 PM

just another Netscape Like Browser if this happens,

Score: 0

By LRN

posted Aug 7, 2008 - 8:17 PM

I would prefer better integration between browser and other applications (including the IM).

Score: 0

By jamie198402

posted Aug 7, 2008 - 8:04 PM

if Mozilla wants to add IM make a 3rd program like on the theme of the current - Email and Newsgroups and web browser which is universal to the common networks and call something like Mozilla LiveMessagefox LOL

Score: 0

By mmoak

posted Aug 7, 2008 - 8:01 PM

I could be wrong here, but didn't Netscape have AIM embedded in it after AOL aquired them? I'm thinking this has been done before.

Score: 0

By DudeBoyz

posted Aug 7, 2008 - 7:30 PM

I would prefer the browser stay very lean and that any such products would be of the Add-On variety so users can choose if they wish to have those features or not.

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted Aug 7, 2008 - 8:32 PM

For once, you and I agree, actually this is twice today. This should be a separate program or an optional addon for firefox. Do not make it mandatory.

Firefox had its issues with memory usage and adding this will just extend those which have just been cleaned up with FF3.

Please mozilla, hear our call!

Score: 0