5 ms·

Thank you for stating this. What people forget is that the early Android Browser was really, really bad. Chrome helped considerably, but it wasn't released unti

by Touche 9y ago

Thank you for stating this. What people forget is that the early Android Browser was really, really bad. Chrome helped considerably, but it wasn't released until several years into Android. Also remember that Chrome was not preinstalled when it came out; you had to download it. Firefox had an opportunity to become what Chrome for Android eventually became; the better 3rd party browser. But they made 2 critical mistakes (as an outside observer): 1. They didn't take mobile (and specifically Android) very seriously at first. Fennec felt like a side-project at best. 2. XUL didn't work very well on Android, and it took them a long time to make the switch to native. I believe things could have turned out very differently had they done the right thing from the beginning.

digi_owl 9y ago
The built in WebKit engine was perhaps a bit out there, but besides Mozilla there was also Opera who had been doing mobile browsing for quite some time (Opera Mobile originated on Windows PocketPC).
- nickpsecurity 9y ago
  You beat me to it. Opera was a good example that they could've cut OEM deals as a mobile browser.
  - jjgod 9y ago
    Yup, but the surge of iOS and Android quickly brought that to an end, there is almost no OEM deals at mobile. (Still exists at TV/Set-top boxes, but those are not nearly as popular.)
anth1988 9y ago
They still would have been kiled when google started bundling Chrome. Especially with how aggressive google is in pushing it (i.e. the "chrome or safari" box in gmail that keeps coming back even though I check always safari).
lucideer 9y ago
I'm sorry but I couldn't disagree more with this comment. I don't have stats on Firefox or Chrome (or even the native browser) usage to hand, but I really think these are largely irrelevant. 1) Most people experience most of the "web" on their phones via a non-browser. This may be by clicking on a shared link within the FB/Twitter/WhatEver app and seeing it inside an integrated WebView, or it may simply be viewing content normally available via the web through the lens of an app presenting the "same" content "natively". Either way, the point here is that browsers have had less of a role. 2) For a comparatively new OS (Android is ~10 years old, modern Desktop OSes being 30+) people browsing the web directly are going to stick to the default. They're going to downloads apps for things their phone doesn't already do; for webpages, it already has an app for that. Android Browser is the "Blue e" here. The above may not be the case for the typical HN crowd, but it's quite naïve to think the majority want and act the same as we. I am hopeful that this trend is changing - that slowly dedicated mobile web browsers are becoming a more viable option - but certainly this was not the case when Fennec was launched. The best we could hope for was for Chrome/Safari to gain ground over "apps". Mozilla's offerings never stood any real chance of being super successful in this early climate and tbh FirefoxOS, ill fated as it was, was probably the least worst chance they had to do so.
- toyg 9y ago
  > FirefoxOS, ill fated as it was, was probably the least worst chance they had to do so. They should have pursued commercial strategies like becoming the default browser for Samsung and others. That would have got them around the "default" problem. Sell the "differentiation", build a kick-ass browser for Android; that would have given them a chance. They didn't even try it.
  - smcnally 9y ago
    It's resource-intensive and not generally straightforward to cut deals with Samsung. They have many hardware/software combos to support. They have their defaults to promote. And they often have money being thrown at them by other large players.
    - 9y ago
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

by Touche 9y ago

digi_owl 9y ago

The built in WebKit engine was perhaps a bit out there, but besides Mozilla there was also Opera who had been doing mobile browsing for quite some time (Opera Mobile originated on Windows PocketPC).

nickpsecurity 9y ago
You beat me to it. Opera was a good example that they could've cut OEM deals as a mobile browser.
- jjgod 9y ago
  Yup, but the surge of iOS and Android quickly brought that to an end, there is almost no OEM deals at mobile. (Still exists at TV/Set-top boxes, but those are not nearly as popular.)

anth1988 9y ago

They still would have been kiled when google started bundling Chrome. Especially with how aggressive google is in pushing it (i.e. the "chrome or safari" box in gmail that keeps coming back even though I check always safari).

lucideer 9y ago

I'm sorry but I couldn't disagree more with this comment. I don't have stats on Firefox or Chrome (or even the native browser) usage to hand, but I really think these are largely irrelevant. 1) Most people experience most of the "web" on their phones via a non-browser. This may be by clicking on a shared link within the FB/Twitter/WhatEver app and seeing it inside an integrated WebView, or it may simply be viewing content normally available via the web through the lens of an app presenting the "same" content "natively". Either way, the point here is that browsers have had less of a role. 2) For a comparatively new OS (Android is ~10 years old, modern Desktop OSes being 30+) people browsing the web directly are going to stick to the default. They're going to downloads apps for things their phone doesn't already do; for webpages, it already has an app for that. Android Browser is the "Blue e" here. The above may not be the case for the typical HN crowd, but it's quite naïve to think the majority want and act the same as we. I am hopeful that this trend is changing - that slowly dedicated mobile web browsers are becoming a more viable option - but certainly this was not the case when Fennec was launched. The best we could hope for was for Chrome/Safari to gain ground over "apps". Mozilla's offerings never stood any real chance of being super successful in this early climate and tbh FirefoxOS, ill fated as it was, was probably the least worst chance they had to do so.

toyg 9y ago
> FirefoxOS, ill fated as it was, was probably the least worst chance they had to do so. They should have pursued commercial strategies like becoming the default browser for Samsung and others. That would have got them around the "default" problem. Sell the "differentiation", build a kick-ass browser for Android; that would have given them a chance. They didn't even try it.
- smcnally 9y ago
  It's resource-intensive and not generally straightforward to cut deals with Samsung. They have many hardware/software combos to support. They have their defaults to promote. And they often have money being thrown at them by other large players.
  - 9y ago

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]