This seems to reinforce the mindset that the web should be experienced and built using different tools for users vs. developers, and aside from thinking that's fundamentally condescending, I don't see why new tools couldn't simply be extended from FF's 'web developer' menu into a different mode of operation or even extensions.<p>I think we're better off in a world where kids don't have to install ScaryFox on their tablets to start teaching themselves how to debug web applications, and deal with all of the various forms of other-ing that tend to alienate people away from starting to learn how to understand and help build the web.<p>I think it's actually quite important for Mozilla to assume that <i>of course</i> every user deserves <i>built-in</i> access to a high-quality suite of tools for debugging by default.
I think this is a logical development. Firefox gets more and more Developer tools by default, but most users will never touch them. So it sounds logical to exclude Developer tools from the default package and instead offer an Developer version of Firefox.<p>Firefox is my default browser for a long time (switched briefly to Opera, but when they came with the new Chromium-version I switched back because I didn't like it) and I'm very satisfied with it. The developer tools are getting better and better, and I almost never touch Firebug anymore. Also I like Firefoxs tools more than those of Chrome, but that is a question of taste.<p>I think there is one thing Firefox can really make better for developers and that is addon development. I personally never developed an addon but looked briefly into it and from what I heard was that in comparison to Chrome, developing for Firefox is difficult. I hope there will be progress on this level too.
So I'm actually a fan of leaving dev tools installed and available in a normal user's web browser; whether it's IE, Chrome, FireFox, or whatever.<p>If a user is reporting some bug or issue that's difficult to reproduce, I like being able to just hit F12 _on their computer_ and diagnose and debug. Sometimes I can guide the user, sometimes I do it remotely.<p>Having the ability to debug software like that is phenomenal.
Apparently, WebIDE is part of Firefox proper not just nightly. You'll have to toggle a pref in about:config (devtools.webide.enabled) to make it visible in the developer menu. It's pretty cool.
First of all this is analogous to the irritating tendency of car manufacturers to "tease" models ahead of time. This may cut it for the average consumer, but here you are targeting the developers, and a straightforward, honest approach to launch would be more effective, in my view. Developers are blasé to any of the mind-tricks which marketing will dream up.<p>Second, please do some moonshot stuff. Please just don't give me tweaks on javascript. Yes I know js is fine for the front end guys, but more and more, deep data guys like me are having to interact with this language which leaves a lot to be desired. While I appreciate the casual, almost refreshing functional aspects of js, the rest is clearly inferior to almost everything else (not least forcing multidimensionality into this hierarchical JSON strait jacket). Here's an idea: put python numpy native into the browser, and give us expressive power for things other than dom manipulation. Or put Haskell in there. Do something meaningful. I don't want a spit-and-polished js debugger.<p>Chance to shine here, Mozilla, to regain the long-lost initiative. No chrome-catchup again please.
As interesting as the concept is, I can't help but think it'll only make the already widening divide between "developers" and "ordinary users" even bigger... or maybe everyone will jump over to the "developer" version once they realise what they're missing, which would be the ideal situation.<p>No information there about what exactly it <i>is</i>, however. It could be not much more than regular Firefox with their WebIDE thing bundled and some UI changes.
I'm getting a bit weary of announcements that don't really announce whatever it is that they're announcing.<p>It's easier to wait until a de-hyped Wikipedia entry has been written, and just read that instead.
I would like a strict mode in js and rendering engine, which shows syntax error like a compiler instead of eating them and failing later at random places. Ffat fingers and typos take disproportionate time while development.
I'm still on the fence about having separate browsers for developers. It sounds nice as a concept but when I think about it more it seems like a disaster waiting to happen.<p>For instance, when I want to debug my website I go to the dev tools within the browser I'm viewing because I know that my users are viewing the same browser (typically). Having an entirely different developer browsers makes the debugging experience less realistic. It puts you in a position where you don't truly experience what the user does but what you feel more comfortable experiencing.
Well, I hope that the following two profiler bugs land before then:<p>Bug 1008435 - [e10s] Port the built-in Gecko profiler to e10s
<a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1008435" rel="nofollow">https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1008435</a><p>Bug 974832 - WebGL EXT_disjoint_timer_query may now be implemented
<a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=974832" rel="nofollow">https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=974832</a>
This appears to be a simple rebrand of Aurora with some extra features[1].<p>[1] - <a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076914" rel="nofollow">https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076914</a>
Is there a firefox plugin that lets me edit CSS in the developer tools AND lets me save the edits back to the actual CSS stylesheet on my machine? I'd love to see that functionality.
Good intentions, but content and video leaves much to be desired.<p>The idea is awesome tho, using lots of different tools which doesn't communicate/integrate with each other is a huge blow to productivity.
This is the first time I've ever found a roadblock when looking at the inner workings of FF/Mozilla - <a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1054353" rel="nofollow">https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1054353</a><p>Even their etherpads/sprint sheets/team chat logs are public. Not necessarily saying the bug SHOULD be public, just thought it was intriguing. Makes me wonder what other - if any - bugs are private (excluding security ones of course).
I can see where a dedicated browser for development could be a little more helpful during the 80% phase of development. My main concern however is that some of that remaining 20% is cross-platform stuff that you can't get right in a single browser.<p>Unless they incorporate tiled views from different rendering engines. That would be awesome.
I remember people arguing in a thread a while ago about the financial longevity and user-base sustenance of FireFox. Many were arguing that FireFox needed something fresh and different and also needed to identify their target audience.<p>When Mozilla releases this, which is at least remotely intriguing, many are quick to find small deleterious criticisms.<p>The fact of the matter is that they are not removing the earlier dev-tools and nobody is forcing anybody to migrate to it. They are just trying to make another tool to help people. Honestly, if you put these arguments in any other context, either software or real life, they sound absolutely ridiculous.
This is marketing at its best. Create a browser that developers like to use so they can build Mozilla compatible products for consumers. Then more the consumers will adopt this browser as their default browser.
The ultimate feature for hackers is how hackable something is. That means it is easier to develop the version for hackers first, and then package a specific version for end-users. Therefore, if they do develop a hackable browser and allow everybody to innovate on it, they may well be in their way to create the next best browser.<p>This paradox is similar to creating a new microcomputer only for hackers (Apple I/II) which in turns allows them to develop cool stuff on it (Visicalc) which in turn makes it the standard for all users.
I like the idea of a full browser for developers, but at the some time I fear the granularity of browsers differences increases also.
Currently developers cannot stay focused on new features of web App itself but they need to check the compliant with all browsers
IMHO that's is one of the major issues why the web technology is going slow especially in the mobile environment.
I wonder if they'll remove (or at least most of it) developer tools from the main browser and try to get developers to use this version. Common criticism of Firefox these days is it feels (and in most cases is) slower and more bloated than Chrome. This move could help Mozilla make FF faster, no?
It really would be a godsend if editing your CSS in the browser could make changes to the underlying files (probably SASS these days). Difficult but would shave so much time off the make a few changes and rewrite them in an editor process that so many of us follow these days.
Considering all the "helpful" features in chrome that get in the way of development (copying the url prepends "<a href="http://"" rel="nofollow">http://"</a>, even for IPs, for example), this is an important change.
I don't like google because of privacy concerns but chrome developer tools is a bit ahead of firefox DT. I hope this new one will give me a good reasons to switch from chrome to firefox
One part of the Firefox dev tools I find useful in every-day browsing is the ability to delete a DIV (or similar) element whenever something causes a bad layout or otherwise gets in the way.
If you use a module loader that uses eval to load modules, those modules will not be shown in the Debugger's Sources in Firefox. It works fine in Chrome. This is absolutely killer for me, I can't use Firefox for development until it is fixed.
This is like a landing page for a startup - or idea. They first test the assumption that developers need/want this. If they are proven right, they will build it. In the next seven days. ;-)
Meanwhile Chromium is a perfect hybrid offering the best of both worlds and doesn't need _another_ browser 'dedicated to developers'. Mozilla is more than ever feeling the slippery slope of market share under its shoes and this feels like yet another attempt to recapture a market (web developers) which was once theirs.
<i>At Mozilla we know that developers are the cornerstone of the Web, that’s why we actively push standards and continue to build great tools to make it easier for you to create awesome Web content and apps.</i><p>Like canning WebSQL for spurious reasons and forcing people to use a half-baked spec like IndexedDB instead? As much as I applaud most of what Mozilla has done to further the interests of the open web it's hard to forget how profoundly they sabotaged the development of the browser as an application platform with this particular piece of political NIH grandstanding.