28 ms·

So the OS was slow and difficult to use because of the silly idea of making an entire OS's user interface run in a browser engine (and to be honest, not even th

So the OS was slow and difficult to use because of the silly idea of making an entire OS's user interface run in a browser engine (and to be honest, not even the fastest browser engine out there), and then they put it on low end phones and it predictably failed. So they decide to "pivot" and put it on even lower power IoT devices. Come ON, Mozilla.

0xFFC 11y ago
It sounds like Oracle's netbook which was original chrome book in 96.Every body can now absorb pretty clearly the bandwidth and stability is not there.(even today.let alone 96). I think companies should understand if you don't have money for just spending on products like these.then don't start them.because it will make you look like idiot. Maybe 25 year from now you can run Gecko(what was their engines name?) On low powered chip.but today?no way.
fulafel 11y ago
FxOS 1.0 on ZTE Open was/is plenty fast despite the very low end hardware.
iSnow 11y ago
It boggles the mind. At the same time, their browser market share is eaten by Chrome now and probably MS Edge starting next year or so. But it typical enterprise lingo, they "pivot" a dead project into something that continues eating resources for nothing. Mozilla, get your act together, you are burning through a lot of good-will lately.
neikos 11y ago
Here comes the hope that they might focus on Rust for this. (And drop the idea of browser stuff)
- pcwalton 11y ago
  > (And drop the idea of browser stuff) "Dropping the idea of browser stuff" was never a goal of Rust.
tagawa 11y ago
I'd disagree about slow and difficult. On early devices, the Peak for example, it was slow but the more recent Flame with the latest FxOS is fine. Easy to use as well - it's been fine for our child's first phone - but too restrictive for a power user. The browser is ironically a prime example in that things are missing such as extension support, about: pages.
fabrice_d 11y ago
"they decide to put it on even lower power IoT devices" is your own interpretation, but absolutely not what we plan to do.

0xFFC 11y ago

It sounds like Oracle's netbook which was original chrome book in 96.Every body can now absorb pretty clearly the bandwidth and stability is not there.(even today.let alone 96). I think companies should understand if you don't have money for just spending on products like these.then don't start them.because it will make you look like idiot. Maybe 25 year from now you can run Gecko(what was their engines name?) On low powered chip.but today?no way.

fulafel 11y ago

FxOS 1.0 on ZTE Open was/is plenty fast despite the very low end hardware.

iSnow 11y ago

It boggles the mind. At the same time, their browser market share is eaten by Chrome now and probably MS Edge starting next year or so. But it typical enterprise lingo, they "pivot" a dead project into something that continues eating resources for nothing. Mozilla, get your act together, you are burning through a lot of good-will lately.

neikos 11y ago

Here comes the hope that they might focus on Rust for this. (And drop the idea of browser stuff)

pcwalton 11y ago
> (And drop the idea of browser stuff) "Dropping the idea of browser stuff" was never a goal of Rust.

tagawa 11y ago

I'd disagree about slow and difficult. On early devices, the Peak for example, it was slow but the more recent Flame with the latest FxOS is fine. Easy to use as well - it's been fine for our child's first phone - but too restrictive for a power user. The browser is ironically a prime example in that things are missing such as extension support, about: pages.

fabrice_d 11y ago

"they decide to put it on even lower power IoT devices" is your own interpretation, but absolutely not what we plan to do.