3 ms·

So, are there anyone that are working on developing FFOS further? If not, it's dead for all practical purposes. Just like WebOS is dead even though that was ope

by snom380 11y ago

So, are there anyone that are working on developing FFOS further? If not, it's dead for all practical purposes. Just like WebOS is dead even though that was open sourced as well. I'm not excited at all to see what they do with connected devices, because I expect them (and their partners) to have a go at it for a couple of years and then shut it down when the next shiny new market opportunity appears. I have no idea why Firefox would have an advantage in this space over Google/Android. I'd also trust them more, but I just don't see it.

hardwaresofton 11y ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but WebOS was open sourced after it started failing, and it was only parts of webos that were first "open sourced". I think the contexts are different, from day one b2g has been open source, and has had a contingent of supporters. Plus, WebOS never actually got as far as FirefoxOS did on physical devices -- FFOS is powering phones for people all across the world right now. From what I remember WebOS got mostly relegated ot tablets. I understand and share some of your frustration with their seemingly indecisiveness and willingess to drop certain projects to chase other ones. But can you blame them? They're trying to stay profitable. So I think they'd have a little bit of an advantage becuase they've essentially ported the web model to run on embedded devices, and I think that could make it easier for manufacturers to integrate. Instead of learning to make some special kind of android app (+ ide support of course), manufacturers only have to worry about making webpages, and using some `window.mozFridge.changeTemperature` API, rather than something heavier. My statement was more about trust than some implicit advantage in IoT (though I think the case could be made that they do have some advantages).
- richardboegli 11y ago
  WebOS had the AWESOME phone: Palm Pre I really wanted this phone, but I was skeptical as to whether it could make a big enough dent given Apple and Android. The card system that Google now uses IIRC was because one of the designers left WebOS and joined Google.

by snom380 11y ago

hardwaresofton 11y ago

Correct me if I'm wrong, but WebOS was open sourced after it started failing, and it was only parts of webos that were first "open sourced". I think the contexts are different, from day one b2g has been open source, and has had a contingent of supporters. Plus, WebOS never actually got as far as FirefoxOS did on physical devices -- FFOS is powering phones for people all across the world right now. From what I remember WebOS got mostly relegated ot tablets. I understand and share some of your frustration with their seemingly indecisiveness and willingess to drop certain projects to chase other ones. But can you blame them? They're trying to stay profitable. So I think they'd have a little bit of an advantage becuase they've essentially ported the web model to run on embedded devices, and I think that could make it easier for manufacturers to integrate. Instead of learning to make some special kind of android app (+ ide support of course), manufacturers only have to worry about making webpages, and using some `window.mozFridge.changeTemperature` API, rather than something heavier. My statement was more about trust than some implicit advantage in IoT (though I think the case could be made that they do have some advantages).

richardboegli 11y ago
WebOS had the AWESOME phone: Palm Pre I really wanted this phone, but I was skeptical as to whether it could make a big enough dent given Apple and Android. The card system that Google now uses IIRC was because one of the designers left WebOS and joined Google.