5 ms·

> The OS they've created is flexible enough to go on a completely different device, where as I don't think android belongs many places outside of phones and tab

by epoch1970 11y ago

> The OS they've created is flexible enough to go on a completely different device, where as I don't think android belongs many places outside of phones and tablets. I'm confused by this claim. Doesn't Firefox OS use the Linux kernel, like Android does? Doesn't Firefox OS incorporate part of the Android HAL into Gonk? And how does Gecko really differ that much from Blink in this scenario? I find it strange to think that Android isn't suitable for this use, but somehow Firefox OS is, although they're so similar.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
digi_owl 11y ago
Actually FFOS uses everything Android that is below the Java VM. I think recently there was an apk released that allows you to try out the UI part of FFOS as an Android launcher.
- hardwaresofton 11y ago
  Yes: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/os/2.5/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/os/2.5/ 2.5 allows you to download an Android app and try out FirefoxOS
soapdog 11y ago
The main difference is that gecko with the web apis to access hardware features provide a very nimble layer that makes quite easy to develop apps with JS that previously could only be developer with Java or Obj-C/Swift. Its like phonegap without wrappers. Imagine if your web app could directly talk to hardware sensors, disk and phone features if the user gave it permission. The difference is that blink does not offer such APIs not this tight integration with the OS to the point where gecko is the OS. It used to be called "boot 2 gecko" for a reason
hardwaresofton 11y ago
You're right, it's a weak/bad point. What I wanted to convey was that with the flexibility in layout/design that HTML/CSS brings, along with the relative simplicity of the FFOS code base, I think it would be easier for someone writing custom UI to do it on FFOS (like a custom fridge UI) than it would be on Android. What I'm assuming is that whoever is writing something like a fridge UI might have a tendency to go outside what android allows you to do is going to want to go outside what Android lets you do in a view. But I dunno, a case could be made that they're just equivalent but different troubles. There's also the case of qualifying for gapps and what not, there are less strings attached to FFOS.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

digi_owl 11y ago

Actually FFOS uses everything Android that is below the Java VM. I think recently there was an apk released that allows you to try out the UI part of FFOS as an Android launcher.

hardwaresofton 11y ago
Yes: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/os/2.5/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/os/2.5/ 2.5 allows you to download an Android app and try out FirefoxOS

soapdog 11y ago

The main difference is that gecko with the web apis to access hardware features provide a very nimble layer that makes quite easy to develop apps with JS that previously could only be developer with Java or Obj-C/Swift. Its like phonegap without wrappers. Imagine if your web app could directly talk to hardware sensors, disk and phone features if the user gave it permission. The difference is that blink does not offer such APIs not this tight integration with the OS to the point where gecko is the OS. It used to be called "boot 2 gecko" for a reason

hardwaresofton 11y ago

You're right, it's a weak/bad point. What I wanted to convey was that with the flexibility in layout/design that HTML/CSS brings, along with the relative simplicity of the FFOS code base, I think it would be easier for someone writing custom UI to do it on FFOS (like a custom fridge UI) than it would be on Android. What I'm assuming is that whoever is writing something like a fridge UI might have a tendency to go outside what android allows you to do is going to want to go outside what Android lets you do in a view. But I dunno, a case could be made that they're just equivalent but different troubles. There's also the case of qualifying for gapps and what not, there are less strings attached to FFOS.