Interview With Mozilla’s Chief Innovation Officer

Written by Richard MacManus 

In my recent visit to Silicon Valley, I got the chance to visit the Mozilla headquarters. Among others at the organization, I spoke to Chris Beard – Mozilla’s Chief Innovation Officer and the person overseeing its efforts to bring new concepts to the browser, a.k.a. Mozilla Labs. We discussed where Firefox is heading and how it compares to Google Chrome in particular. We also talked about Mozilla’s new mobile browser Fennec, the add-on platform, and how recent innovations by Mozilla – such as Weave and Ubiquity – fit into the big picture. In this post we’ll focus on the near future of Firefox.

valant

Firefox vs Chrome

Chris Beard and I first discussed what Mozilla is doing to keep Firefox, its flagship product, competitive in the latest generation of the ‘browser wars’. Google, whose headquarters are just up the road from Mozilla and who I also visited on the same day, upped the ante in the browser industry in September last year when it launched a brand new browser called Chrome. Not only that, but Google went out of its way to claim that Chrome represents the next generation of browsers, because (according to Google) it is much better than existing browsers at managing the increasingly sophisticated web apps we see on the Web nowadays.

Beard noticeably bristled at the suggestion that Chrome performs better with heavy duty web apps. He noted that Firefox is also working hard to make highly interactive web apps run smoothly. Regarding Google’s claim that Chrome’s isolated tab processes mean a more stable browser, Beard replied that Firefox too is very stable and that it doesn’t crash much these days. And to be fair, in this author’s experience the latest production versions of Firefox have indeed performed much better than they used to. I still get the odd browser crash though.

What’s the Vision for Firefox?

But arguments about browser stability aren’t going to differentiate the two browsers, Firefox and Chrome, in the eyes of the general public. So I asked Chris Beard to explain Mozilla’s vision for the future of Firefox. Beard replied that the vision for Firefox is to help users navigate and manage an increasingly complex world. Beard likened this concept to intelligent agents; and he also used the term ‘trusted assistant’. Beard told me that the browser will be "tied to services" – he mentioned the current activity happening in the Linked Data and Semantic Web communities.

Add-ons are a huge part of the current Firefox experience and Chris Beard said that some of those add-ons will become more integrated into the core browser. While that isn’t a new trend, I noted that it sounds similar to what Flock has done. Flock is a browser built on the Mozilla platform that integrated many social web elements into the browsing experience (Flickr, YouTube, etc). I suggested that Firefox may want to offer bundles of add-ons, so that users don’t have to go hunting around for various individual add-ons. Beard said that yes, this is in the works. He said that users will be able to create add-on "lists" and offer them as a single click to other users – much like Amazon’s wish lists. However he noted that there are usability issues to overcome, because some add-ons aren’t necessarily compatible with others. He said that currently Firefox has around 8000 add-ons and that we can expect this bundling feature to come out in the next couple of months.

As for other upcoming changes to Firefox, Beard told me that many aspects of the current Firefox experience could be in the cloud – for example bookmarks and the "Awesome Bar" (Mozilla’s term for its adaptive learning URL bar). Beard said that portability of the user experience is important in this era of the Web and so they’ll be looking to offer certain functionality and data in the cloud.

Another part of Mozilla’s strategy for Firefox going forward is to integrate aspects from some of its associated products, such as Ubiquity (an experimental Firefox add-on that gives your browser a context sensitive command-line – see ReadWriteWeb’s most recent write-up) and its sync product Weave (our write-up). Beard told me that all Mozilla products are designed to be extended, but this may include making them part of the core Firefox browser. Ubiquity, for example, may end up being baked into Firefox in the future.

In my next post, we’ll explore Mozilla’s strategy for Fennec (its new mobile browser) and we’ll look at recent developments in other Mozilla products such as Ubiquity and Weave.

 valant

The web has really changed the way we do things. Remember those paper timetables? No need for them anymore, we simply type in our destination on a box and get a step by step guide for what to do. Finding recipies? No need to look through books any more, just type in a few ingredients on your favourite food site. The examples are countless but there is no time for us to sit back and relax just yet. The web can be improved. We can get more people to publish their stuff online, we can get better tools for finding relevant info, and we can make the information accessible to more people. In this article I’m going to talk a little about each of those three points.

valant

We need more information

We need more information. People will argue and say “No, there’s enough junk online already” but I don’t care. More information is a good thing. The web is currently not a good representation of the world at large. The is a million technology weblogs and five about shoemaking. Another million sites about how it’s like to be a teenager today and another five about life as an 80 year old. You know what I’m getting at? We need a wider variety of people on the web, not only people that are just like us.

Another thing to remember is that text only is one facet of information. With today’s bandwidth available we can look at live video from all over the world. We can listen to live radio and music just as easy as we read the web. We then have a look at availability. I’d say that at most one out of 1000 people publishing on the web is using something else than text (This site is no exception). I know that there are people out there that have a video camera, that have a microphone, and know how to put it up on the web. But they don’t.

This lack of variety in information is a real problem. It builds barriers towards people we just don’t know anything about and it fools us surfers to believe the world is smaller than it seems. “No, there can’t be any problems with the Chinese government, we would have heard about it!” or what about “Christianity must be the biggest religion, just look at what people are writing most about”.

There are ways the tackle this problem and the concept of blogging is one of them. It makes it easy to almost anyone, anywhere to just start writing in a few minutes. You can be anonymous, you don’t have to tell the truth, there’s no age check and it doesn’t cost you money. This opens up to real diversity on the web. The technology exists, what we need to do is get people online and make them use it. So tell your friends to pick something they love or hate and blog about it. We need more information.

We need relevant information

The next step, after we have gotten a larger and more diversified web, is to start filtering it. I’m not talking censoring here, I mean filtering in the sense to “filter what you want”. This can be tied to a certain task you want to accomplish or it can be a strong interest of yours that you want to follow. It doesn’t matter which, what matters is that there are ways to easily find relevant information.

There are many ways of determining relevancy on the web and the one most successful is linking. Links are like recommendations; anyone that links to a site is telling their readers a certain site is recommended. It’s relevant for the subject at hand and it contains good information. If you are just looking for random information about something looking at a few links might be enough. For example, if Roger Johansson links to something web related I can be pretty sure it’s good.

For more task oriented queries we need something else. If someone is looking for a plane ticket they will probably not know who the authority in that area is. Google is the search engine that has had the greatest success with solving this problem and the solution is simple. Gather the recommendations for as many sites as possible and reply to queries with what most people recommend. Just think about it, if 100 people recommend FlyPlane and 1000 people AirFlight, who would you go for?

In reality it isn’t that simple, but in essence that’s how search engines work. Something that is important to note is that the system encourages people to write good content. Why is that? Simply because good content gets linked to, and more links means it’s probably more relevant. This way Google and all the others are actively encouraging people to improve the web. Good, isn’t it?

Making information accessible

So, we have lots of information from all over the world and we have the tools to find the most relevant info at any point. The last step is actually delivering the information to our users. This is where web standards come to play.

In the early nineties browser makers raced to get the coolest new features included in their browsers. The result was things like blinking text, different methods of representing “layers” and scrolling text. Web developers had a hard time keeping up with browser differences and often you had to construct two or more separate pages to send people to depending on what browser they used.

The W3C acknowledged this and presented a solution. Instead of browsers trying to find the coolest additions, let a standards organization handle the new additions. Let hundreds of people sit together and discuss new ideas long before they are implemented. When everyone has had a chance to say their meaning and problems has been eliminated you release a document presenting the new features together with implementation details. Now the browser makers can race over who supports the most recommended standards instead, and webmasters can just pick a set of standards that is well supported. One way of doing things instead of many incompatible ones.

Right now, the current recommendation is to use the strict versions of HTML of XHTML for structure, CSS for design and Javascript for behaviour. Using those standards means that your site is accessible by more than just the few browsers you have tested with. Both people and automated crawlers that that are after just your content can easily skip your design. People with old browsers will still be able to view your content, even though they don’t see the design the still get the content.

If you adopt the recommendations I mentioned above you have gotten quite far, but there is more. Accessibility is an area in web development that has gotten far too little exposure. It’s focused on making it easier to people with various disabilities, varying from broken arms and color blindness to dyslexia. Previously people cared about old browsers, it’s time for a shift towards caring about people instead. Read up on accessibility, Mark Pilgrim’s Dive into Accessibilty is a good start.

valant