
WebSockets in Firefox - nreece
http://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/04/websockets-in-firefox/
======
joshsharp
Sensible response by Mozilla, but a shame that means we won't be seeing
websockets included in the near future.

~~~
Rauchg
I disagree. The argument is that it's under constant change and discussion.
This is true for every single part of the development stack. It's important to
just get it out there and iterate in response to what developers are _doing_
with WebSocket. The sample size to justify Content-Encoding: gzip, deflate in
that mailing list post is two, and is very unlikely to grow if Firefox doesn't
add support! We could discuss theoretical improvements to WebSocket for months
on a mailing list.

If you look at the initial discussions about the WebSocket protocol, much was
said about reconnection negotiation, queues/batches support, meta headers, et
cetera. Discussing a feature forever holds back progress. Firefox argues that
there's "a lot of ongoing discussion", but that's been the case since Day 1.

Firefox should do what Chrome 4 did, add it, then continue to improve it.
There's a very low chance that the developer API will change anyway.

~~~
jamii
I like the chrome approach of including experimental features in stable builds
but requiring a command line switch to turn them on. It makes it much easier
to try out new features without making people expect future compatibility.

------
zokier
This is one reason I'm not particularly fond of Mozilla. They care too much
about ideology, PR and all that stuff. They have had the code but won't
release it because it could make them look bad or annoy some web devs or
doesn't fit their ideology. Why can't they just release stuff and see how it
fares, and improve it based on public's response.

~~~
FooBarWidget
Not caring about ideology is what got us into the IE6 mess in the first place.

~~~
Shorel
I disagree.

Not caring about ideology over technology is what got us Chrome.

The Embrace, Extend, Extinguish destructive MS ideology is what got us into
the IE6 mess.

~~~
FooBarWidget
You know what got you Chrome? WebKit. WebKit started as KHTML which was
developed by an ideological group named KDE.

~~~
zokier
KDE, an ideological group? Really? I've found KDE people to be very pragmatic,
not ideological. KDE's history and their choice of Qt also supports that,
remember that FSF (there's an ideological group for ya) rejected KDE for some
time, and creted Gnome to compete with it purely for ideological reasons. KDE
in comparison was created because the founder felt the need for a good desktop
environment for unixy systems.

------
agentultra
Hopefully it becomes a widely adopted standard before we start inching
backwards towards the good ol' days when sites were optimized to the browser.

Web apps can be neat and useful, but do we really need a 250-300MB run-time
for a thin client?

Maybe I'm just getting old.

------
Kilimanjaro
Less talk, just ship it!

