Mozilla has unveiled a new project from its Labs division called Jetpack that gives us a taste of how Firefox might begin extending web functionality in years to come. While the project is still quite early in development, it seems to be taking the form of a streamlined extension system, allowing web developers to introduce new features to the Firefox browser using web-based tools and requiring only a minimal amount of effort on the user’s part.
Firefox extensions have long been one of the best parts of the browser, allowing users to add and remove features to suit their needs. But while the user experience of installing these has been relatively straightforward, it still requires a browser reboot, which can be frustrating when you’re in the middle of something. With Jetpack, this isn’t an issue – you click install and you’re done, with the new widget or application installed a few seconds later.
Jetpack is being described as “an exploration in using Web technologies to enhance the browser (e.g. HTML, CSS and Javascript), with the goal of allowing anyone who can build a Web site to participate in making the Web a better place to work, communicate and play.” In other words, if you know how to develop for the web, you should be able to build a Jetpack app. Developers can write code using Mozilla’s web-based Bespin environment and the popular Firebug extension. For an idea of how easy it is to build these applications, check out the video below.
At this point there aren’t many demo apps available, but you can try them out for yourself by going to the Jetpack homepage and installing the Jetpack 0.1 extension (you’ll have to reboot your browser to get it working). From there you can find demos here and here, with available applications including a weather forecaster, Delicious Notifier, and an Ad blocker (there’s also an app that will mix up the images seen in your open browser tabs, if you’re looking for something truly useless).
Mozilla Labs Jetpack – Intro & Tutorial from Aza Raskin on Vimeo.
Because Jetpack is still in very early stages it’s tough to tell just how powerful it will eventually become, and if it could ever replace the current extension model. Looking beyond traditional extensions, the new project could potentially allow trusted websites to customize the browser experience on a site-by-site basis, which could prove quite useful (or annoying, depending how it works out).
Looks pretty sweet!!! Pretty cool, but there is only so much you can do with something “that simple.” But I guess we’ll just have to see what all of us can do.
I think this is a very interesting concept which will continue to keep Firefox ahead of the emerging pack that is working to slowly unseat Internet Exploder from the top of the browser mountain.
So, if I understand correctly, Jetpack is going to do everything that Greasemonkey already does? That doesn’t seam like a “next step” to me.
No, that’s not correct. Jetpack has access to the browser chrome – that is, the stuff surrounding the page you’re viewing – with simplifying APIs wrapping the more complex native APIs add-on developers usually deal with.
This is about more easily authoring Firefox add-ons, not just tweaking page content.
Oh great, so now websites can mess up my chrome. The old ‘vibrate’ trick, web 2.0 style.
Jetpack has a security model, just like extensions. Random websites are not going to be messing up your chrome, any more than random Firefox extensions get installed (something that doesn’t happen).
Today there are more than 7,000 add-ons available for Firefox. I expect that to really explode when Jetpack takes off.
looks stupid. ie is way better than the bloated pos firefox. twenty bucks says the elitist writers at techcrunch use firefox and dont care that its a resource hog, they need to have their stupid twitter add-ons that they think are so important.
ill take the accelerators, web slices, no menu bar, sleeker integration with windows, instant search, and no resources compared to the pos firefox.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!! You’re kidding right!!! Firefox is as big or little as you want it. Even my “bloated” Firefox runs waaaay faster that IE, and of course is exponentially more secure. Have fun with the spyware and spam
lol surfing in windows
Wow, talk about someone that has absolutely no idea what they are talking about…
What do you expect from post-Win3.1 progeny? lol
This seems really similar to Mozilla’s Ubiquity Project. Is this just a different interface to it?
Nope. Ubiquity is a tool that (in theory) will allow the web browsing experience to be more closely integrated with your everyday life. Ubiquity acts almost like a personal assistant. You can tell it to look up an address in a web page in Google maps, look up words, and much more. Ubiquity is also expendable allowing anyone to add additional functionality to it.
Jetpack, on the other hand, is similar to Ubiquity in the sense that it uses modern web 2.0 technologies for add-on development. However, it doesn’t just extend one particular aspect of the browser. In the future (again, theoretically) Jetpack will make it must easier and faster for developers to design Firefox extensions just like the ones you use everyday.
Anyone know how this integrates with Ubiquity, the labs project for a next-generation URL bar? Ubiquity also allows developers to write Javascript-based add-ons; it would be nice if the APIs were the same.
Hi chaps,
I work at Mozilla Labs and I am obviously pretty excited about Jetpack.
@Mike Cerm: It is not just Greasemonkey. You have access to the chrome of the browser hence being able to add status bars and the like.
@Vineet: Nice observation. On the surface they are quite different. Ubiquity is a command line for the Web. Jetpack gives you a simple web-like API to extend the browser beyond commands. Yet, they share some of the same technology under the hood and are very much sisters.
It is definitely early stage, but that is how we like it. Much better to get the ideas out into the open community ASAP and then we can riff on them together. For me, the ability to extend my browser inline (notice: no reload!) is pretty compelling.
Cheers,
Dion Almaer
Sounds good.
They have a great opportunity to turn the browser into an app platform that can work on devices and computers without requiring a real OS (see CrunchPad).
We’ll always need an OS to provide the interface between the hardware and the apps. But I can see that the browser will end up being THE application framework that everything else sits in.
ROFL
It’s a bookmarklet that only works in one browser then?
Where’s the money in devloping Add Ons ?? please explain someone.
LOL. Make a useful add-on that would provide VALUE and connect people with your service and charge people for the service. That’s where the money is.
irony.
the reasons people quote when asked why they think a web apps is the way to go are “it doesn’t require installing anything” and “you can access it from anywhere”.
right.
so after a while they realize that actually they need a slightly more personalized control over their experience. perhaps even something stateful which runs locally and actually remembers things. maybe. so they come up with the idea of plugins. and now this.
let me ask you – what’s the difference between installing a plugin/javascript and installing an .exe?
1. both require installation (i.e. security implications)
2. both are bound to a single browser on a single machine (hence cannot access them from anywhere. or you can but it sucks. see *** )
the differences are:
desktop-apps are fast
desktop-apps are really flexible
desktop-apps can have really GREAT UI
desktop-apps work when you’re not connected
desktop-apps can hold tons of data
desktop-apps run on operating systems which are mature
so remind me – why do I need more browser plugins? last I checked we had operating systems, we had a way to create applications for them, and that was was better.
***
yes you can sync plugins across browsers – but these sync technologies assume certain things about your plugins. E.g. that they are few and very light (i.e. don’t carry a whole lot of data with them). So the same technology could be applied to desktop apps which perform the equivalent functionality.
assapin, the answer is very simple: this crowd you are talking to KNOWS NOTHING about desktop software and the overall picture of things.
Now they are reinventing something slightly resembling the *.msi technology and NameSpaces on top of what they’ve borrowed (for free, as a donation) from Netscape.
Did you notice how Google people just DON’T KNOW WHAT TO DO with the Add-ons in Chrome? They ran across this boulder and will keep climbing it FOREVER, because it’s the MAIN problem of browser and it’s security system (and the security system of OS as a whole)… Let them stew for a while, we’ll see.
Way to go, people! Good luck.
I like my browser my way. Giving sites options outside the page area seams like dark road.
Well it looks a bit like Google’s implementation of extensions in Chrome. But Jetpack feels more complete.
Hmm…I had my account deleted for a “video promoting a product or service” by Vimeo last year.
But they allow Mozilla to post whatever they want? So is it more, “you’re not allowed to post videos about products or services, unless it’s a product or service the Vimeo Staff likes?”
Note to Mozilla: removing ads from websites at the user level is immoral and undermines the content producers.