×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Command Lines and the Future of Firefox

CmdrTaco posted about 5 years ago | from the wouldn't-that-be-nice dept.

Mozilla 360

Barence writes "Mozilla has revealed how it plans to integrate plain text commands directly into future versions of Firefox. Dubbed Taskfox, the move sees Mozilla's Ubiquity project become part of the browser itself, allowing users to type commands directly into the address bar. You can, for example, type 'map cleveland street london' to bring up a Google Map of that location, or 'amazon-search the great gatsby' to find that book on Amazon, without visiting the website directly. 'The basic idea behind Taskfox is simple: take the time-saving ideas behind Ubiquity, and put them into Firefox,' the Taskfox wiki claims. 'That means allowing users to quickly access information and perform tasks that would normally take several steps to complete.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

360 comments

screenshots (3, Funny)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | about 5 years ago | (#27389151)

Wow, they have actual screenshots of the commandline interface. Who would have thought that was possible.

Re:screenshots (5, Informative)

MoonBuggy (611105) | about 5 years ago | (#27389379)

You joke, but the interface is all that's new here. You can already do what the summary suggests using bookmark keywords - it is a useful feature, actually. I don't know how well-know it is, but basically you make a bookmark with a keyword for the address bar and a wildcard in the URL.

For example, if you make a bookmark with the keyword 'map' and the address 'http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&q=%s' (note the '%s' wildcard) you can then type 'map cleveland street london' straight into the address bar just as the summary suggests. All that they seem to be suggesting is having it come up in a 'floating' context box like the AwesomeBar rather than actually open in the tab.

Re:screenshots (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389503)

Ubiquity is quite a bit more (e.g. 'translate this into Polish') than plain old bookmark keywords, but you are correct. The bookmark keywords do a LOT for me in Chrome. (e.g. 'wiki Being Human').

Re:screenshots (2, Informative)

mirshafie (1029876) | about 5 years ago | (#27389685)

Many browsers have keyword searches, and most of them handle these much more robustly than Firefox with their ridiculous "bookmark keywords" (argh). Check Konquerors search manager to see how it should be done :) However Ubiquity is much more than keyword search. An ubiquity script can take input from several variables, and in several steps.

Re:screenshots (1)

R.Mo_Robert (737913) | about 5 years ago | (#27389909)

Firefox has keyword searches, too, and they are easy to set up from the search engine manager. You don't need a bookmark keyword to do that.

That being said, bookmark keywords, while they can also be used as search keywords, are different and more powerful because you can use them for things that aren't really "searches," like Google Maps (Google doesn't have a Sherlock or OpenSearch plugin for maps; browers like Firefox, Safari, and IE 7/8 need this because that is what you need to add a search engine).

Re:screenshots (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389719)

Um, yubnub.org already does this... and plugs into FF as a search engine. I'd rather the address bar stayed as an address bar too.

Re:screenshots (5, Informative)

patro (104336) | about 5 years ago | (#27389723)

You joke, but the interface is all that's new here. You can already do what the summary suggests using bookmark keywords

Not exactly. With Ubquity you get instant feedback during typing, so you don't have to wait for the page to load with all the bells and whistles, you see only the relevant part of it.

So it's quicker and more convenient than keyword bookmarks.

Re:screenshots (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | about 5 years ago | (#27390023)

So it's going to be like Launchy [launchy.net] /QuickSilver [wikipedia.org] .

I already have some custom commands to search our internal LAN, our internal phone directory, google maps, etc.

I no longer use QS but just use Spotlight on my Mac. Both OSs have Ctrl-Space as the bind keys. Anytime I'm on a computer without them I feel lost like I don't know how to launch programs.

yeah (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389157)

first post!

Official bookmark shortcuts (4, Insightful)

Saul Bash (1437909) | about 5 years ago | (#27389159)

So, basically, a bunch of officially-included bookmark shortcuts.

Re:Official bookmark shortcuts (4, Informative)

inviolet (797804) | about 5 years ago | (#27389591)

So, basically, a bunch of officially-included bookmark shortcuts.

Opera has had this for ages. It is truly sweet to be able to type "g Argle Fargle" into the address-bar to do a google-search for "Argle Fargle" without ever touching my mouse. There is also 'z' for Amazon search, 'a' for Ask.com, 'b' for bittorrent, 'y' for Yahoo, etc. etc. And you can add your own.

Re:Official bookmark shortcuts (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389829)

Every browser has had them for ages. I distinctly remember setting them up in IE back when I used it. Before I switched to Firefox. And by Firefox, I mean Phoenix 0.4.

Ubiquity is a bit fancier than that, allowing multiple arguments (including, say, the currently selected text) and returning just the answer to a query as opposed to a whole new browser window for a single dictionary definition.

Re:Official bookmark shortcuts (1)

juangiordana (1519287) | about 5 years ago | (#27390003)

Yeah, and you can even customize it to trigger custom searches by doing right click in a web form > Create search. p for the php manual, y for youtube, etc

Re:Official bookmark shortcuts (1)

Richard_at_work (517087) | about 5 years ago | (#27389605)

How is this different to keyword search bookmarks? I've been doing amazon searches from my Firefox url bar for several years now...

Re:Official bookmark shortcuts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389977)

Yeah, I've had one for PHP manual searches for at least half a decade.

Sounds like AwesomeBar 2.0 (1, Insightful)

denis-The-menace (471988) | about 5 years ago | (#27389165)

I hope it can be turned off.

Re:Sounds like AwesomeBar 2.0 (5, Insightful)

icannotthinkofaname (1480543) | about 5 years ago | (#27389393)

Because new == bad [tvtropes.org]

We know.

No, seriously, at least give it a chance to be useful. Your prejudgment seems unwarranted, unfounded, and unnecessary. I know I'll at least try it out before either ignoring it or destroying it.

Re:Sounds like AwesomeBar 2.0 (5, Funny)

The End Of Days (1243248) | about 5 years ago | (#27389661)

Any feature added to computers since 1978 is bad. Anything that allows normal humans who haven't dedicated their lives to understanding the machine to use a computer is evil. The interface was perfected when it was arcane and required years of study to use effectively. Everything since then is simply a conspiracy between Intel and Microsoft to make money.

Re:Sounds like AwesomeBar 2.0 (1)

Culture20 (968837) | about 5 years ago | (#27389769)

Every new feature added to an Operating System puts another hundred Computer Operators in the bread line.

Re:Sounds like AwesomeBar 2.0 (1)

robthebloke (1308483) | about 5 years ago | (#27389779)

oh come on now! The boingy boingy keyboard added to the spectrum in 1982 was not a bad feature. Even years after the machine died a death, mine still works fine as a coffee mat...

Already doing that (2, Insightful)

Captain Splendid (673276) | about 5 years ago | (#27389169)

With keyword search, there's dozens of websites I don't have to "visit" to use. This just seems like a more intelligent version.

First Command (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389179)

Where's my first post text command??!

Doesn't it do this? (4, Informative)

qoncept (599709) | about 5 years ago | (#27389181)

I've typed "imdb back to the future" in the address bar and had the page I wanted come up right away. Same with "wikipedia donkey punch". What's new?

Re:Doesn't it do this? (2, Informative)

Tom9729 (1134127) | about 5 years ago | (#27389377)

The difference is that right now it's probably relying on Google's "I'm feeling lucky" feature.

Re:Doesn't it do this? (1)

meeve (923391) | about 5 years ago | (#27389487)

Firefox's keyword feature takes a single parameter (denoted %s in the search url) and replaces it with everything but the first word of your query, so it won't use Google's I'm Feeling Lucky feature unless you enter something where the first word hasn't been defined as a search keyword.

Re:Doesn't it do this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389857)

And.... it works? I'm not sure what the problem is.

Re:Doesn't it do this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389953)

No, it works by recognizing imdb, and translating it to "http://www.imdb.com/find?q=%s;s=all", then substituting everything else in the line (escaping spaces and such) into %s.

Re:Doesn't it do this? (1)

mollog (841386) | about 5 years ago | (#27389465)

I've been doing this for a while now. I'm glad they're doing it, but I didn't think it was news.

The idea had occurred to me one day while I was working to pull up a map of something, I said to my wife, 'they should just make it so that you can say map boise, idaho'. Then I tried it out. D'oh! It already does that.

These are the sorts of innovations that will keep FOSS and alternative software ahead of Microsoft, despite Microsoft's claims that they innovate.

Re:Doesn't it do this? (4, Informative)

patro (104336) | about 5 years ago | (#27389791)

Same with "wikipedia donkey punch". What's new?

With Ubiquity you have suggestions and instant preview, so if you type "wi donkey punch" you see other possible matches too (the film with the same name, etc.) with previews without having to go to the site.

Hasn't this been in there for ages? (5, Interesting)

Benjo (644811) | about 5 years ago | (#27389187)

Search keywords have been in firefox for ages. I.e. right clicking on a search box in an arbitrary web page and turning it into a address bar command. I've used it to do all the examples in the summary.

Re:Hasn't this been in there for ages? (1)

merrickm (1192625) | about 5 years ago | (#27389841)

It's more than just search keywords, though- you can use it for that, but you can also write whatever javascript you want to be triggered by a given command and its arguments.

So how long before... (3, Interesting)

laing (303349) | about 5 years ago | (#27389211)

How long will it be before they start selling "placement" services? Mozilla is non-profit but they could use the money to fund development.

Re:So how long before... (1)

Mr. 6502 (1504303) | about 5 years ago | (#27389319)

And Firefox is handled by Mozilla Corp, which is for-profit, so they have more flexibility for doing things alon these lines. They're still owned by Mozilla Org which is non-profit.

You can already do this (1)

SlashJoel (1145871) | about 5 years ago | (#27389219)

Right-click on a search box and choose "add a keyword for this search." I use wp for Wikipedia searches and az for amazon ones. Very convenient, but I'm not sure how this new command line function will be any different.

Already exists? (1)

Hebbinator (1001954) | about 5 years ago | (#27389221)

the Opera browser has had this for at least a couple versions already - if you enter ' g (search phrase here) ' it will google for you, e for ebay, etc etc.

This is old hat, no?

Re:Already exists? (2, Insightful)

Kamokazi (1080091) | about 5 years ago | (#27389937)

Well Firefox is doing it, therefore it is innovative and cool and must be newsworthy. No one cares about us Opera users. We're such a minority.

But this does appear to be more robust than that. I use the hell out of it in Opera. It's really nice that you can set up custom ones, too.

I think this is caused by Bran (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389223)

Italians invented Bran and Bran is evil and caused by Italians who are evil!

I would very much like... (4, Insightful)

Greg_D (138979) | about 5 years ago | (#27389251)

... for Mozilla to keep their filthy commands out of the address bar. They could easily add that to the search plugin bar without any problems. I had enough trouble last night when I was trying to troubleshoot a neighbor's internet connection issues and Firefox would repeatedly send the perfectly valid address (http://192.168.1.1) I was inputting off to a google search, which of course would return a blank page, since the ultimate trouble was the cable modem, not the router nor the connection to the router.

There needs to be a gigantic "FUCK YOU, LEAVE ME ALONE, LET ME SURF THE WEB AS THE FLYING SPAGHETTI WEASEL INTENDED" button in the settings.

Re:I would very much like... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389673)

That sounds like a lie. I just tried what you said in FF3 and there was no problem. ip address, with or without a preceding http:// takes me to wherever it points, no google search.

Are you sure you're qualified to handle one of these machines?

Re:I would very much like... (1)

brentonboy (1067468) | about 5 years ago | (#27389697)

There needs to be a gigantic "FUCK YOU, LEAVE ME ALONE, LET ME SURF THE WEB AS THE FLYING SPAGHETTI WEASEL INTENDED" button in the settings.

There is.

In about:config, change browser.urlbar.maxRichResults to -1

Re:I would very much like... (1)

Culture20 (968837) | about 5 years ago | (#27389929)

There needs to be a gigantic "FUCK YOU, LEAVE ME ALONE, LET ME SURF THE WEB AS THE FLYING SPAGHETTI WEASEL INTENDED" button in the settings.

There is.

In about:config, change browser.urlbar.maxRichResults to -1

No, that's the "FUCK YOU, LEAVE ME ALONE, LET ME SURF THE WEB AS firefox 3.0 pretends THE FLYING SPAGHETTI WEASEL INTENDED, but it still wastes CPU cycles trying to match cached pages (which really hurts on a single core, slower system), redirects to the wrong URLs and can't follow simple IP addresses" button. I've resorted to using konqueror for any simple web diagnoses, because firefox is starting to fall under its own weight.

Re:I would very much like... (2, Informative)

kestasjk (933987) | about 5 years ago | (#27389825)

For me if the address doesn't resolve I get a "Page Load Error".. It must be a problem on your end (and I don't see what it has to do with the address bar anyway).

Late or confused? (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | about 5 years ago | (#27389291)

Either this is an announcement of something they've already done - or they aren't aware of the capabilities of their own (existing) browser. Entering the two examples into the address bar of my installation of Firefox (v3.0.8) yields the desired results already.

In the beginning (5, Interesting)

sakdoctor (1087155) | about 5 years ago | (#27389297)

In the beginning operating systems only had command lines.
Then the GUI replaced the command line.
Then the browser replaced the operating system.
Then the browser got a command line.

Re:In the beginning (0, Troll)

awshidahak (1282256) | about 5 years ago | (#27390019)

Mozilla Firefox is behind the times. Opera has a GUI therefore making Firefox obsolete software that should only be installed on geeks computers and they should keep their dirty trash to themselves.

map cleveland street london (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389307)

I tried that and google maps brought up london street in cleveland. Needs work guys.

Emacs (4, Funny)

Aceticon (140883) | about 5 years ago | (#27389367)

Firefox is gonna be like the Emacs Operating System ... only bigger

Return of the command line (5, Insightful)

Roadmaster (96317) | about 5 years ago | (#27389371)

over the past 20 years I've been amazed at how the IT world first started scorning command lines (IE the rise of Mac, Windows and GUIs in general) only to come back to them (IE Mac OS X / spotlight / Quicksilver, Windows / launchy, smart address bars, and the increasing amount of people who started using Linux with Ubuntu and are nwo flocking to the command line).

This just proves what i'd known all along: command lines are more efficient, and although the learning curve might be a bit steeper, they just kick ass for things you have to do repeatedly. You of course learn the commands and then whiz by all those people whose motor skills barely allow them to use the mouse, yet they insist in their clickety-clickety ways.

Many operations are easier with a GUI but getting rid of the command line altogether (mac OS 1.x-9.x, I'm looking at you) is/was never a good idea.

Re:Return of the command line (1)

ClosedSource (238333) | about 5 years ago | (#27389717)

Yes, there's a lot of stuff in OS's that people don't use much. I remember when Unix didn't include any kind of non-command-line applications. Does the fact that they have more now prove that GUIs were better all along?

Re:Return of the command line (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389995)

Nothing you've "known all along" has been proven at all. Your way, which is superior for you, has not been demonstrably proven to be superior for everyone, no matter how many insults you fling at those who don't think your way.

Make it easy! (1)

indre1 (1422435) | about 5 years ago | (#27389407)

If they make it easily configurable, then I believe it will be as successful as the "smart" location bar - a bit strange at first, but after 2 days of use I can't image how FF2 was so popular without it.

Re:Make it easy! (1)

Half-pint HAL (718102) | about 5 years ago | (#27389633)

Nononononono. You don't want it to be configurable. Configurable == non-standard. Too much customisation means no-one ever learns the basics and ends up unable to use anyone else's computer!

Is this really needed? (1)

HockeyPuck (141947) | about 5 years ago | (#27389409)

So we already have keyword commands such that I can put "dir: " and have firefox search the corporate directory at my company. Want to search amazon? What about just typing "amazon.com " Google seems pretty good about finding it. The worst part about these "text commands" is having to remember all the commands that they're going to decide to implement.

Unless of course amazon decides to pay firefox for keyword usage...

But it already does this (2, Informative)

Tet (2721) | about 5 years ago | (#27389441)

Uhhh... how is this news? I've been doing that with Firefox for ages using bookmark keywords. So I have w foo to look up foo on Wikipedia and p foo to look for python documentation about foo for example. That could easily be expanded to do imdb searches, etc if I wanted to. It's reasonable to claim the interface for setting up these searches could be improved, but the functionality is already 99% there.

...Not again (0, Troll)

AnonGCB (1398517) | about 5 years ago | (#27389451)

A browser is copying an opera feature. What a shocker. And everyone will be like "ZOMG AWESOME!!!1" and nobody will give opera credit. For those of you who don't know what I'm talking about, opera can make custom search shortcuts out of any search bar. From what I read that's basically all it is with google maps and whatnot.

The article doesn't explain why this is necessary (4, Insightful)

Matt Perry (793115) | about 5 years ago | (#27389461)

type "map cleveland street london" to bring up a Google Map of that location, or "amazon-search the great gatsby" to find that book on Amazon

Users can already do that with the search text field. Example1 [google.com] . Example2 [google.com] . This new feature doesn't appear to bring any new value to the user over what is already provided.

I'd really like to see Mozilla spend one release where they stop working on new features and focus solely on fixing bugs. The results of such an effort would be more valuable to the end user.

Re:The article doesn't explain why this is necessa (1)

D Ninja (825055) | about 5 years ago | (#27389915)

I'd really like to see Mozilla spend one release where they stop working on new features and focus solely on fixing bugs. The results of such an effort would be more valuable to the end user.

You're absolutely correct. But, while it is a whole lot more valuable to the end user, it's a whole lot less interesting to the developers.

You call this cmdline (1)

gzipped_tar (1151931) | about 5 years ago | (#27389499)

Looks like glorified Awesome Bar for me. Wake me up when they come up with a real CLI. Something like for i in seq(0, tabcount() - 1); do print(tabs[i], "~/mozilla/webpage%d.pdf" % i, Printer0); done

What's next, an email client and html editor? (4, Insightful)

schwit1 (797399) | about 5 years ago | (#27389505)

Firefox should be focused on 3 things: speed, security and standards. Everything else should be user-controlled with add-ons.
.

If I wanted bloat I would use IE.

Re:What's next, an email client and html editor? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389759)

god forbid we have some innovation in how the users interacts with the content.

Re:What's next, an email client and html editor? (1)

avenema (1201077) | about 5 years ago | (#27389927)

Firefox should be focused on 3 things: speed, security and standards. Everything else should be user-controlled with add-ons.

Add-ons have more overhead than integrated features. They *are* focusing on speed.

Re:What's next, an email client and html editor? (1)

owlnation (858981) | about 5 years ago | (#27390047)

Firefox should be focused on 3 things: speed, security and standards. Everything else should be user-controlled with add-ons.

Absolutely 100% agree! I cannot understand what Mozilla are thinking. This should surely be an add-on, so should the awful bar, so should many other things currently slowing down Fx. If I wanted a service like this -- I'd just go to Ask.com. It's so 1997.

Bottom line is this... Chrome and IE8 are already beating Fx on many things. The only advantage to Fx is some add-ons. However, as I understand it, Flashblock and adblock are planned for Chrome. When they actually happen, goodbye Firefox.

If Firefox 4.0 isn't leaner, slimmer and multi-threaded with better memory managment -- assuming that's even possible with the state of Fx code -- then Firefox will quickly go the way of Netscape. It won't be the only memory problem they have -- people will have trouble remembering there ever was a Firefox.

They've gone from first place to last in a few short years. Sad. And totally avoidable.

Oh happy day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389509)

embedding a virus into your system folder has never been so easy!

Do it right (3, Funny)

hwyhobo (1420503) | about 5 years ago | (#27389561)

It would be nice, but not as "let me guess half way what you want as you type in the address bar" kind of thing. Much of that is there already. If you want to add a real command line, then create an add-on with multi-line commands, some logic built-in, perhaps piping. In other words, do a "bashy" thing.

While we're at it, why not allow execution of scripts written in this new language? Now, that would be cool.

Keyword search is better (1)

CopyMouse (1235878) | about 5 years ago | (#27389577)

I've gotten used to typing "arr heroes" in the address bar to use my Pirate Bay quick search...

Lynx (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389601)

Will I be able to run Lynx in it?

sudo rm -rf / (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389619)

Oops, I deleted the Internet. Sorry.

Hey, how about.. (1)

grasshoppa (657393) | about 5 years ago | (#27389627)

How about abstracting the profile from the program itself? Maybe make it a separate module which can then be pluggable. So then, if I want to run firefox in a corporate environment via GPO, I can use a module which allows me to do that.

And let's bin the entire concept of multiple profiles per account while we're at it.

Firefox Redux? (4, Insightful)

Millennium (2451) | about 5 years ago | (#27389643)

When Firefox was created, it was a spinoff of the Mozilla project for people who wanted 'just a browser' with extensions to fill in the rest.

Part of me wonders if it's time to do that again: spin something new off of the Firefox project for people who want 'just a browser' with extensions to fill in the rest. Firefox has done a lot of good, just like Mozilla before it, but it seems to me like it's starting to suffer from the same bloat-over-standards problem that made the original project necessary in the first place.

Maybe this is a cyclic thing; I don't know. Perhaps it's just plain going to be necessary to do this every few years: when a Mozilla browser gets too large, a lean child project emerges, eventually takes over, bloats up, and another lean child project emerges, and so the cycle continues.

what's new? (1)

dishie (1311743) | about 5 years ago | (#27389713)

Isn't the whole internet-thing a big command line-search? You send some (small) text string, and receive more useful text back. But why put it in firefox? It's already possible to to add a custom search, and a default one. Change the default one from google.com to firefox.org/search-cl and let the server guess you're real intension. But hey, doesn't google work that way already?

I was so excited, for like ten seconds (4, Interesting)

holophrastic (221104) | about 5 years ago | (#27389729)

I was excited, thinking that the command-line was back, and I could ditch this horrible mouse interface. But then I read that it's only for skipping common search interfaces. Big deal.

What I wanted, what I want, what wolud actually get me to switch from IE to FF, what I need is to be able to control the browser from a command-line interface. I want to type something like "add favourite 'my favourite recipes' in 'food links'" and "go back" and "favourite 'my favourite recipes'" and "new tab 'live.ca'" and "close all other tabs".

I don't care about search. There's already as many serach bars as I want, and smart address bars, and ISP searches. Already if I serached for "amazon magic beans" I'd get a listing with the expented book about jack from amazon. I don't need fancier searching. I don't have trouble searching. I have trouble with slow interfaces to vast feature sets within browsers.

"stop loading images"
"javascript off"
"deny cookies"
"accept cookies"
"read privacy policy"
"view certificate"
"disable flash"
"maximize"

Hell, what I want is the windows key to pull up a generalized command-line interface, either to the OS or to the current application. I'm sick of long drop-downs, fly-outs, ribbons, menus, and checkboxes. I can type faster than I can click -- and who's ever heard of clicking without looking?

Re:I was so excited, for like ten seconds (5, Interesting)

Chad Birch (1222564) | about 5 years ago | (#27389859)

Have a look at Vimperator [vimperator.org] . It's slow to get started (much like vim itself), but very efficient once you get it. Make sure you read the help/manual so you realize all the commands possible.

Re:I was so excited, for like ten seconds (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27390039)

What I wanted, what I want, what wolud actually get me to switch from IE to FF

You're still using Windows, and worse, IE?!

New here, geek card, gtfo, etc.

wow genius... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389781)

wow another feature ripped off from Opera.

Purpose? (1)

Reason58 (775044) | about 5 years ago | (#27389863)

Maybe I'm missing something, but you can already type 'map cleveland street london' or 'amazon-search the great gatsby' in the address bar and get the exact results you need. Is this inventing a solution to a problem that does not exist?

Mozilla apparently can't help it (1, Redundant)

0racle (667029) | about 5 years ago | (#27389895)

Apparently, Mozilla can't help but add feature after feature after feature to anything they create. Might as well just merge SeaMonkey, Firefox, Thunderbird and Sunbird back into one big, bloated app again.

This is not about command-lines (0)

MobyDisk (75490) | about 5 years ago | (#27389897)

It is about scope creep in the browser. They are re-implementing what Google, and other search engines, have done. This functionality belongs on a server somewhere, not in a browser.

It would have to be updated constantly based on what new information they want to make queryable. I don't want a Mozilla update every time somebody thinks it would be cool to add searches for bar codes or concert tickets or whatever.

Now, if the developers who are working on this want to make a cool thing like this, then they should go out on a venture and start a web site that does it. Maybe make a plug-in for various browsers. But search capabilities are NOT part of the browser, they are part of a search engine.

Is the problem that Firefox is just so good now that scope creep is the only way we can think of improving it? Maybe it is time to cool off for a while and just fix bugs. Not exciting, but this kind of creep is what leads to forks.

Just tried it..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27389957)

In the current version of firefox, I just copied and pasted "map cleveland street london" into the address bar. The first result from google that comes up is a google map of that specific address.

So, tell me again why we need ubiquity?

Location Bar Command Line (1)

hdon (1104251) | about 5 years ago | (#27390083)

I've had an inclination for some time to write up a specification for servers to set up command-line interfaces which you could use to access their site in a manner that is sort of like a mix of ReST and Bash. A naive design for such a system would be when you type a domain name into your browser bar, the browser fetches a CLI description in Javascript/AJAX or something.

Imagine tab-completing the titles/slugs of news stories! To me that's much more exciting than this new Firefox feature.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...