Pocket lands as Firefox's second System Add-on
Mozilla plans to release the built-in Pocket integration of Firefox as a system add-on with Firefox 46.
The organization made the decision to remove the native integration of certain features of the web browser as part of its "Go Faster" initiative to re-release these features as system add-ons.
It hopes that the move will improve development, testing and deployment of these features as they can be updated just like regular add-ons this way which means that Mozilla does not need to publish an update for the whole browser if it wants to update one of the features that it turned into system add-ons.
A basic example where this can be beneficial is the deployment of bug or security updates for these components. Mozilla had to build and distribute a new version of Firefox previously in those cases whereas it can simply push out an update for the component under the new system speeding things up along the way.
The native integration of Pocket in Firefox was controversial in nature even if you consider that Firefox users were able to disable the feature completely in the browser so that it would not use any resources.
At least some users of the browser believed that Mozilla wasted development time on the integration that the organization could have spend elsewhere. Mozilla claimed that it was not benefiting monetarily from the integration of Pocket in Firefox but stated months later that it had a revenue share agreement with Pocket.
It is unclear how many Firefox users are making use of Pocket as statistics have not been released by Mozilla or Pocket. Even if you consider a high usage count of 1% or even 5% of all Firefox users, it would mean that Mozilla integrated a feature in Firefox that 99% or 95% of all users don't use.
Pocket System Add-on
Users of Firefox Nightly, the cutting edge development channel, may have noticed already that Pocket has been released as a system add-on.
While there is no direct indication of that in Firefox's interface (you do find it listed as a browser extension on about:support but that's it), a quick check of the program folder of the browser, and there the browser/features folder reveals that this is indeed the case.
It is the second system add-on that Mozilla released for the browser. The first, Firefox Hello, or Loop, was released as a system add-on back in December 2015.
Side note: The size of the Look system add-on more than doubled in a month's time. It was released with a size of 1211 KB back in December 2015, and has a size of 2987 KB now in early January.
System add-ons are not listed in Firefox's add-manager yet. Mozilla may add them there to provide users with an option to disable them. It is certain however that a remove option won't be made available.
The organization plans to release Pocket as a system add-on with the stable release of Firefox 46 which will be out April 19, 2016. (via Sören Hentzschel)
I for one appreciate that Sören Hentzschel comments here, he adds valuable explanation on Mozilla and Firefox topics. There is no justification for all these aggressive comments against him. Don’t let the haters get to you Sören!
As for Pocket: I still use the old add-on because it has a quick and compact dropdown list of all saved items with a quick filter box. At first release the built in Pocket tool didn’t have that. Has the new Pocket system add-on such a compact drodown list? I use Pocket because it is the best way I’ve found to quickly save bookmarks from Chrome in Android (which I prefer over Android Firefox) for later reading in desktop Firefox. I don’t use the Pocket app in Android other than to add urls from Chrome to the list.
Thanks. :)
> As for Pocket: I still use the old add-on because it has a quick and compact dropdown list of all saved items with a quick filter box. At first release the built in Pocket tool didn’t have that. Has the new Pocket system add-on such a compact drodown list?
No, nothing has changed since the first Firefox release with Pocket integration. The implementation as system add-on doesn’t bring new features. Maybe in the future but I don’t know of any plans.
“No, nothing has changed since the first Firefox release with Pocket integration.”
Ok I see. The Pocket integration was weird in the sense that it managed to displease both those who didn’t want Pocket at all (even though they could without much work disable and hide it) but also quite a few of us who were already using the Pocket add-on a lot, because the integration removed the quick drop down list I mentioned. I now see that the add-on version even appears to be removed from https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/ . It looks like some people are instead installing third party hosted copies of the last .xpi , like here
https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/3ackbm/pocket_306_download_for_those_who_want_the/ .
Lestat, it’s a topic about XUL. I don’t see what XUL has to do with the topic of this article. But it’s out of the question that it’s not possible to use Servo AND XUL in the future so Mozillas *has* to replace XUL in the long term. It’s not possible to switch away from XUL in a few months so Mozilla had to do an early announcement. And by the way, Mozilla promotes a open web. XUL is no web standard, it’s a Mozilla standard. Mozilla is not Apple so Mozilla should use web technology and not invest too much in own standards with no value for the open web. In the early days of Firefox XUL was needed but today there is much more possible with web technology. And if XUL is better for some things Mozilla should improve the web technology so that XUL can be replaced without disadvantages. But XUL can’t be the future.
And exactly why is it not possible to create something unique and keep on using this? Why is it necessary to remove own strengths? Just because that could be seen as anti-competitive?
For the record, Google and Apple have been exactly that since quite some long time. You know, to gain an advantage you have to use sometimes elbows or make use of something which the competition does not have. The only REAL way would be to implement something like Vivaldi does, today my browser of choice. You can have all the features Mozilla has removed since years. Advanced UI customization, status bar, moving bars – But Mozilla is not interested in implementing this again. They talk about some additional API to make some special feature set again available, but that is only a fracture of the possibilities browser.html related technology has to offer.
What Mozilla is offering in Firefox of the future, is a crippled variant of what for example Vivaldi is offering.
Because if you talk about API you are talking about only offering that much customization features as YOU decide what YOU think that is enough for users. This is against the almost limitless possibilities available right now with XUL.
Do you really thing that is only the way of thinking for a so called “Mozilla representative”?
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?p=14461613#p14461613 – Just read this, and you understand who controlls Mozilla these days.
Pocket is spyware, it is known. It is only in Firefox because Read it Later Inc. (Pocket developers) has paid Mozilla to integrate it. There is nothing wrong about providing a Pocket-Add-On(!!!) on Mozilla AMO for people who want to use it. However, it is just a punch in the face to force this spyware on all users instead.
Firefox – the most private browser! *cough* *cough*
I deactivated it using Classic Theme Restorer, though.
@Sören Hentzschel: As expected you are eager to defend this spyware in Firefox which only a tiny fraction of the users is in need of. You are just a ridiculous fanboy who doesn’t give a shit about the free web. How come you are a Mozilla representative?
“Pocket is spyware”. Source? If you don’t have, stop commenting stupy thing.
Hmmm, Harushi, I may not be able to prove it is spyware, but posit Mozilla being given an incentive to include it. If there is no return for the Pocket people then why would they offer money?
Before calling people “stupy,” (I assume you meant “stupid,”) try to think things through.
Source? No problem:
https://dustri.org/b/firefox-youre-supposed-to-be-in-my-pocket-not-the-other-way-around.html
There it says, regarding Pocket:
– Read it Later, Inc. is collecting a lot of intimate information and is tracking you.
– When you share something through Pocket with a friend, the emails contains spying material using malware-like techniques to track your friends.
– They are sharing those information with trusted third parties (Could be anyone they are doing business with.).
So this is spyware.
PS: Before you are accusing me of writing nonsense, please do some research on your own.
Perhaps no spyware, but another falling down on their knees by the side of Mozilla for simple users, and in the process to make the weight of the code base equal, more power user features are getting ripped out.
> @Sören Hentzschel: As expected you are eager to defend this spyware in Firefox which only a tiny fraction of the users is in need of. You are just a ridiculous fanboy who doesn’t give a shit about the free web. How come you are a Mozilla representative?
Oh, Appster, you should read the comments of other people. I said in my comment NOTHING about Pocket. And if you don’t know what “Mozilla representative” means stop talking about it. Go to the Reps website and READ what it means. You have no idea what that means.
@Martin Brinkmann: The comment of Appster offends me and it’s a lie. As a web developer who’s spending a lot of spare time to volunteer for the Mozilla and open web community it’s a insolence to say I would “give a shit about the free web”, the opposite is true and I don’t want to read lies about me. I would like to see Appster’s lie and offense removed. For the record: it’s not the first time, Appster uses every opportunity to offend people with other opinions. That’s why he is blocked on my website.
And Appster continues his offenses. I won’t repeat what I already said, you are still wrong with your points. You have no right to write lies about me. The web is no legal vacuum. I hope you know that.
> You HAVE to care to talk about me, there is no other option.
No. I don’t have to care. I know that you have very strong ties with Mozilla, though I am not interested how you established those or what exactly your goal is when you defend them all the time. Really, it doesn’t matter.
> I support Firefox users and develop add-ons. Furthermore I have a blog about Mozilla topics. Yes, I do useful Mozilla related things in my spare time. Not less and not more.
Your support activities and your add-ons are not my concern, nor am I interested in your blog. You will block other opinions there anyway. You are attending meetings where Mozilla officials are present, though. How would you call that? Again, I don’t care about the details of those “community meetings”. You are anything but independent. Feel free to prove otherwise.
> This sentence does not make a lot of sense. And everybody who knows me knows that I am no “fanboy”. But it’s not your first lie about me, it’s boring.
Of course you are a fanboy, that can easily be inferred from your statements. For further proof read my comment above. Accusing me of lying is offensive, fanboy.
> Nonsense. 1. I don’t have “duties” 2. Reps is a program for volunteers. 3. I am Alumni since Jan 1. Again: Check your “facts” and stop telling lies about me!
1. Even a volunteer has to do some work, so you have some duties if you want to keep your position. Stop writing nonsense. 2. I know. That doesn’t mean that you aren’t a fanboy nor does it mean that you don’t have strong ties with Mozilla because of that. 3. Not important. Your contact with Mozilla won’t break because of this.
If you accusing me of lying prove me wrong with facts. Nevertheless, stop being offensive. That is not a good representation of Mozilla.
> Read my comments, my comments don’t need an explanation.
Yes, they do. Please provide some source, too.
> No, you don’t know anything about me, almost all what you say is wrong and everyone can check that your’re talking nonsense!
> There are so many lies, so I stopped reading your comment.
I know something about you which drives you mad I would imagine. If everyone can check that I am “writing nonsense” why don’t you provide people with a source they can look into? It doesn’t exist, right?
I think you have read my post as whole and knew that you don’t have arguments to counter me. Again, if you are accusing me of lying provide some evidence. Your move to distract people by accusing me of lying is ridiculous and extremely obvious.
Appster, lets get back to the topic at hand. I’ll delete any further comment that is not on-topic (by all users, not only by you).
> I don’t care about the details of your activities.
You HAVE to care to talk about me, there is no other option.
> You have very strong ties with Mozilla
I support Firefox users and develop add-ons. Furthermore I have a blog about Mozilla topics. Yes, I do useful Mozilla related things in my spare time. Not less and not more.
> You may not get paid by them – fanboys usually don’t get paid.
This sentence does not make a lot of sense. And everybody who knows me knows that I am no “fanboy”. But it’s not your first lie about me, it’s boring.
> As a Mozilla representative your duties also include:
Nonsense. 1. I don’t have “duties” 2. Reps is a program for volunteers. 3. I am Alumni since Jan 1. Again: Check your “facts” and stop telling lies about me!
> and YOU want to tell me that you aren’t heavily involved with Mozilla? Seriously?
Read my comments, my comments don’t need an explanation.
> I know what I know and you know it too, Sören.
No, you don’t know anything about me, almost all what you say is wrong and everyone can check that your’re talking nonsense!
There are so many lies, so I stopped reading your comment.
> You do not care for customization. You do not have the tiniest bit of an idea what customization is Sören! What you care for are for minor menu changing functions, but that can be hardly called customization.
Stop talking about me! I am the only one who can know whether I care for customization or not. Who are you? God? I don’t think so. Your opinion is not better than my opinion. Again, only for you:
“Firefox is more customizable than before *for me* and if you don’t need the new customization features but the old features than Firefox is less customizable *for you*. It’s not possible to speak for all users. Features were removed and other features were added”. You should learn to respect other people’s opinion.
> You are no geek or power users, you are only an advanced user who wants to change not visible aspects of the browser. Therefor you show the same way arrogance for advanced features like simple users show. What for a bad attitude!
Okay, you’re right, it’s “arrogance” to have another opinion than you. ;-)
@Sören:
I don’t care about the details of your activities. You have very strong ties with Mozilla, which is the only thing I noticed. You may not get paid by them – fanboys usually don’t get paid. As a Mozilla representative your duties also include:
– represent Mozilla in their country/region
– promote the Mozilla Project and our mission
source: https://reps.mozilla.org/about/
And YOU want to tell me that you aren’t heavily involved with Mozilla? Seriously? Again: I don’t care how you call it exactly, as I don’t want to argue over terms. I know what I know and you know it too, Sören.
Pocket is no spyware? That is a lie. Read my source below, of course it is spyware. As a fanboy and Mozilla representative you can’t admit that of course. You like the term “lie” more than “defense”? Good. I will put it that way in the future.
Firefox having a closed-source component included is totally against Mozilla’s mission. A black box is not what you would normally expect from an Open Source browser. Mozilla has lost its way long ago, though you are ignorant towards that. This is enough reason to call you a fanboy, really. Your excuse regarding Flash and Silverlight is ridiculous. Of course I can use those with Firefox. However, they are not included by default. Now Firefox includes proprietary crap, which is the point I made. You don’t get it, Mozilla representative Sören.
I don’t give a shit about what you prefer, Sören. Sorry. Cutting options like Tabs-On-Bottom, Add-On-Bar and movable Back-Forward-Buttons, movable Reload etc. away is just terrible. The power users are pissed about that. The new menu is OK, but why were the old options removed? If you support this move you obviously don’t care about customization, my dear Mozilla representative.You don’t even have an excuse apart from “I didn’t like it before” which is interesting, as you are the master of excuses, Sören.
You are a user as well as a fanboy. Or let’s put it that way: You are a user who turned into a fanboy long ago. A normal user uses the product and is pretty pissed when his workflow is destroyed or bad changes are made. That is not the case with the fanboy as the fanboy is ignorant towards the product’s shortcomings, which is the case with you. Ergo: It’s pretty obvious that you are fanboy. That is also supported by your emotional reaction.
I offended you? I don’t think so. Why shouldn’t I call a fanboy by his true name? Go away and cry.
Wrong. The new menu system falls indeed under customization. But a very basic one, that is just a more complex button movement system like it already has existed for moving buttons in the general UI, both in Australis and older versions of the browser.
In fact that is only a replacement for the old Firefox menu button/the menu bar. Touch screen optimized, and a part of Mozilla’s “let’s make it all mobile optimized” grand scheme. But yes, that has hardly anything to do with something like complex customization.
You do not care for customization. You do not have the tiniest bit of an idea what customization is Sören! What you care for are for minor menu changing functions, but that can be hardly called customization.
You are no geek or power users, you are only an advanced user who wants to change not visible aspects of the browser. Therefor you show the same way arrogance for advanced features like simple users show. What for a bad attitude!
> Let’s just compare the feature sets of Firefox 22, Opera 12, Vivaldi or Otter Browser without any add-on in use with Firefox of today or Opera of today also with no add-on in use, and then let us repeat arguing which browsers are more customizable and feature rich!
It does not make sense for me to do this comparison. For example Opera 12, the old Presto engine is unusable for a lot of modern websites so it doesn’t matter for me how customizable Opera 12 is because I can’t use Opera 12. The other thing is that all the users are so different. I don’t need an add-on bar, so I am not interested in the fact whether Firefox has an add-on bar or not. But I customized my Firefox menu and I know that it’s possible since Firefox 29 and that it was not possible in older versions of Firefox. So Firefox is more customizable than before *for me* and if you don’t need the new customization features but the old features than Firefox is less customizable *for you*. It’s not possible to speak for all users. Features were removed and other features were added.
But really, I am not very interested in discussions about Australis in a topic about Pocket, it’s one year too late. At least.
> You are also present at some of their meetings
No. I am present at *community meetings*, I play an important role for the german speaking *volunteer community*, not for Mozilla as an organisation or for Mozilla as developer of Firefox. I help other people in my spare time if they have problems. Stop writing nonsense about me! You have no idea what I do so you can’t speak about me. Get your facts straight!
> you are defending the Pocket integration, though Pocket is closed source and spyware
I count zero (!) comments from me defending the Pocket integration. I don’t use Pocket so your statement does not make any sense. And by the way, Pocket is no spyware. In the comment section of other articles I *explained* why Pocket was integrated. Explain and defend are two totally different things.
> you are defending DRM being enabled in Firefox
Firefox was ALWAYS able to play DRM content. Do you know Adobe Flash or Microsoft Silverlight? And yes, I think it’s important, that Firefox can play content from Netflix, Amazon, Maxdome, Sky and so on. Millions of people use streaming services. There is NOTHING wrong to support the idea that Firefox can do what every other browser is able to do. If you have another opinion, fine, but your opinion is your opinion and other people’s opinion is other people’s opinion.
> you are defending Australis, which has cut a great deal of customization abilities away, with very few added
conclusion: You don’t care about customization
I “defend” Australis because I like the new design and I don’t like the old design. I don’t need an add-on bar and I like the new menu. I care a lot about customization and *for me* Firefox is BETTER customizable than before. You have to live with this fact. Your opinion is NOT my opinion. There are a lot of Firefox users and a lot of opinions.
> you are defending Mozilla’s actions even though Firefox’ market share is constantly dropping
conclusion: You are a fanboy.
What a bullshit, it does not make any sense. Again. I am a USER. There is NO reason why *I* should care about the market share of Firefox. I don’t use Firefox because of the market share. If every user would be a fanboy just because he or she uses the best browser for him or for her, *every* user of Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Edge and so on would be an fanboy.
> I should call on Mr. Brinkmann to block YOU instead. However, I am not as unfair as you are. Deal with it.
You offended me and you offended me not for the first time. That’s a fact.
Let’s just compare the feature sets of Firefox 22, Opera 12, Vivaldi or Otter Browser without any add-on in use with Firefox of today or Opera of today also with no add-on in use, and then let us repeat arguing which browsers are more customizable and feature rich!
I know exactly what Mozilla representative means as I have noticed the Reps before. This is why I know that you are no big deal to Mozilla, though you have very strong ties with them. You are also present at some of their meetings.
And before you want to silence me once again by trying to hustle Mr. Brinkmann into blocking me for offending you (Is that irony?), let’s do a fact-check:
– you are defending the Pocket integration, though Pocket is closed source and spyware
– you are defending DRM being enabled in Firefox
conclusion: You give a shit about the free web.
– you are defending Australis, which has cut a great deal of customization abilities away, with very few added
conclusion: You don’t care about customization.
– you are defending Mozilla’s actions even though Firefox’ market share is constantly dropping
conclusion: You are a fanboy.
I should call on Mr. Brinkmann to block YOU instead. However, I am not as unfair as you are. Deal with it.
Australis is shameful enough, but what Mozilla is doing now, goes even way beyond that.
What you or other simple users call today “customization” is in no way real customization.
What Mozilla was removing have been complex customization features, power users are using. What Mozilla was adding have been features which are not able to totally change the look of the browser, more minor stuff, so that it is more accessible for simple users or more attractive to simple or less demanding users.
This happens because Mozilla does not want to be a niche browser anymore and instead a mainstream browser. Everything they added and what they so much advertised has nothing to do with real features which geeks are preferring.
> And you are not doing it in any way better
Maybe you should read the comments again.
> Supporting only features for simple users and supporting removing customization away from the core product
How was customization removed by adding a Pocket integration? Your comparison doesn’t make sense. You can’t compare totally different things. If you want to talk about Australis than talk about Australis in topics about Australis but it’s no argument for *everything* in every discussion. But by the way, even with Australis other customization features were added. For example: it was not possible to customize the main menu, it’s possible since Australis. I know a lot of people customizing the main menu. So “removing customization away from the core product” is simply wrong.
You are rather easily offended as it seems. And you are not doing it in any way better. Supporting only features for simple users and supporting removing customization away from the core product and spitting hate against power users. Same like Mozilla spits hate against power users and humiliating them with taking everything away they love and only supporting simple users these days.
No, you are not the tiniest bit higher moral instance.
Typos in the sentence “The size of the Look system add-on more than doubled in size in a month’s time.”
That they should have done too with advanced customization instead of removing that kind of features from the core feature-set and throwing it towards add-on developers.
That way it would not have been such a big humiliation of power users. And Mozilla would still be able to support both simple and advanced users at the same time.
On balance this is a positive development. If the bloatware is separate from the core of the system, it should be possible to remove (not just disable) it without adversely affecting the system – particularly as Firefox’s open source code can be studied by third parties to figure out which parts do what. I suspect some clever people will publish a method for removing the bloatware in the not-too-distant future.
Of course 99% of Firefox users won’t benefit from this – that’s the real problem – but at least some of us will.
> Even if you consider a high usage count of 1% or even 5% of all Firefox users, it would mean that Mozilla integrated a feature in Firefox that 99% or 95% of all users don’t use.
Most of the features of every browser are only used by a small portion of the total userbase. Browsers like Firefox and Chrome have so many users, there are a lot of features needed to make all these users happy. There are only very few features which are useful for the majority of the users. It is in the nature of browsers. ;-)
– Sponsored comment by Pocket.
You are annoying man, please stop justifying this ridiculous bloatware..
Did you read my comment? It’s clear that you did’nt read my comment. Nothing in my comment is about Pocket so your comment does not make any sense. My comment is a comment about features (!) (not only Pocket, almost every feature) in all (!) browsers.
So you are the guy who should stop something. Stop to offend other people without reason.
By the way: it’s no bloatware just because you don’t need it. You can’t speak for all the people who use Pocket. And by the way 2: I don’t use Pocket so your comment does make even less sense.
Sure that is true, but I think Pocket is a special case as it was available as an extension already, and is a third-party service :)
>size of 1211 KB back in December 2015, and has a size of 2987 KB now in early January.
Can you check it’s compressed? (deflate vs store)
I cannot right now but I guess they are still working on it to get it ready for stable release.