7 ms·

I’m a big fan of Mozilla, and I’m really glad to see them focusing on Firefox instead of troubled projects like FirefoxOS. While they are not immune from poor

• glogla 8y ago
  FirefoxOS was out last hope for good and accessible mobile operating system - it was supposed to give people who can't afford iPhone something open, instead of evil data-slurp that is Android. Without it, billions of people in developing world are going to have every every second of their lives snooped by Google. It failed, but it was still a good idea.
  • rglullis 8y ago
    There is still hope. It didn't failed, just has morphed into KaiOS, which is primarily focused on the developing world.
    • Fnoord 8y ago
      KaiOS includes Google proprietary services. There's a few alternatives to the Android/iOS ecosystem, notably Librem 5, KDE Mobile, Ubuntu Touch, microG (e.g. with LineageOS), and last but not least Sailfish.
      • shandor 8y ago
        What about Tizen? Haven't been following it too closely, but isn't it a kind of descendant of the Meego platform in some sense?
        • Fnoord 8y ago
          There's WebOS and Tizen. I haven't used either, but heard Tizen's codebase is abysmal. WebOS is by LG, Tizen is by Samsung. MeeGo was a combination of Intel's Moblin and Nokia's Maemo. I'm not sure what became of Intel's efforts after MeeGo. Sailfish is the successor of Maemo/MeeGo whereas Mer is an open source mobile Linux OS which Sailfish uses as base. Both utilise libhybris [1] for Android compatibility layer. Backwards compatibility = important; no apps / ecosystem = no users, and that curve is very steep. Another interesting effort I saw the other day is actually from Google. An effort to easily build an app which is easily ported to Android and iOS. That might directly benefit Android and Google most, but indirectly it could benefit libhybris users. I'm unsure how good Sailfish 3's Android compatibility is these days. It used to be Android 4.4 compatibility for a long time. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybris_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybris_(software)
        • ppseafield 8y ago
          Tizen's license for its SDK is almost open source: you can't modify or distribute it. I have a Tizen smartwatch, and the app ecosystem is pretty poor. A while back Samsung released a Tizen phone to Indian (and Russian?) markets, but it wasn't much of a success.
      • cpeterso 8y ago
        Google is also a (recent) investor in KaiOS. https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/27/google-kaios/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/27/google-kaios/
        • Fnoord 8y ago
          "As part of the investment, KaiOS will be working on integrating Google services like search, maps, YouTube and its voice assistant into more KaiOS devices, after initially announcing Google apps for KaiOS-powered Nokia phones earlier this year." Google is everywhere. What if you don't want it on your KaiOS-powered Nokia phone and prefer open source alternatives? If I want Google, I'll get Android with OpenGapps. It has terrific support for Google's products.
          • jonny_eh 8y ago
            > What if you don't want it on your KaiOS-powered Nokia phone Buy a different phone?
  • kibwen 8y ago
    Agreed; even from the start I had a dim view of FirefoxOS's chances for success, but the sheer audacity of the move (in conjunction with the implicit acknowledgement of how important it is to have influence over the underlying platform, for the long-term sake of both Firefox specifically and the web in general) earned Mozilla a lot of goodwill from me. (The other audacious move from that period that won my goodwill was their investment in Rust/Servo, for which I initially had a similarly dim outlook and have been happily surprised at how they've far exceeded my expectations; goes to show that "audacious pie-in-the-sky idea" doesn't have to imply "tire-spinning boondoggle".)
    • feanaro 8y ago
      Rust and Servo are indeed impressive projects. Too bad Servo is jumping the shark by moving away from building a functional web engine to doing VR experiments. :(
      • kibwen 8y ago
        Servo's end goal remains to produce a browser engine, and the current focus is on high-throughput low-latency graphics performance, which happens to dovetail with Mozilla's WebVR R&D. Servo hasn't stopped focusing on producing components for integration with upstream Firefox, e.g. WebRender and Pathfinder, which are available in Firefox Nightly.
  • alexkavon 8y ago
    Let’s not forget the upcoming mobile Purism OS coming with the Librem 5.[0] I believe the development kit for apps is now available. [0] https://puri.sm/shop/librem-5/ https://puri.sm/shop/librem-5/
    • monetus 8y ago
      I'm very excited, but how usable do you think it will be early on? I know they are relying on the community to refine the software environment. Regardless, the hardware is what I really want. I have a feeling it will even end up with a removable battery and a headphone jack!
      • alexkavon 8y ago
        Yeah, software is always going to be a challenge early on (whether it’s Microsoft or Librem). However much of the web is available already. I think as long as devs are willing to throw their html 5 apps into something then it will be not too shabby.
    • guy98238710 8y ago
      Librem5 has iPhone class pricing. It's no alternative to FirefoxOS. I earn decently, have mid-range need for security, and I won't buy iPhone nor Librem5.
      • hegz 8y ago
        Its all open source so someone can get it running on a cheap android device if they want.
        • boomboomsubban 8y ago
          Cheap android devices don't have free software drivers, and I thought some connection between those drivers and Google is what holds back a free Android.
      • alexkavon 8y ago
  • cptskippy 8y ago
    I think a hard fork of Android might have been a better approach. The AOSP has a lot of good, it's just controlled by Google and is more of a source dumping ground and less of an open source project. They might have even been able to work with Amazon, who has a vested interest in Android a la FireOS, and possibly forced Google to make AOSP a truly open project.
    • ocdtrekkie 8y ago
      I don't think Android is a good starting point for an operating system. And the big elephant in the room doesn't go away. If most Androids are Google Androids, and developers don't want to write their app three times, they're going to write it for iOS and Google Android, and not actually-open-Android. So either you aggressively do not maintain compatibility, to which developers still develop for Google's platform instead of yours, or you're stuck trying to maintain compatibility so devs release apps on your platform, which means you're still beholden to do whatever Google wants. You might as well start clean with an OS designed for the modern era, Android's over a decade old now, and it shows. You're stuck with the app gap either way.
      • ReverseCold 8y ago
        And it's getting better too, port Flutter and React """Native""" to your platform and there will already be developers who can make apps.
  • hardwaresofton 8y ago
    What annoyed me the most is that FirefoxOS failed because it was mismanaged and badly planned -- It was a a fantastic idea, and the concept worked -- people were buying the phone but they just picked the absolute wrong market to aim at. I think it was a huge mistake to abandon FFOS but not enough people felt that way. Compare how FFOS did to how Ubuntu Phone did which was essentially vaporware IIRC.
    • reitanqild 8y ago
      Upvoted. But... > I think it was a huge mistake to abandon FFOS but not enough people felt that way. Sometimes you need to pick your fights and when even MS decides they don't stand a chance I guess it is time to stop bleeding money and try another approach.
      • fabrice_d 8y ago
        Still they could have kept alive the low level underpinning (what is called the "gonk" port) to let a community project go on. Mozilla's leadership choose to not do so for reasons that were never substantiated by any data. Also, which other approach are you talking about?
        • reitanqild 8y ago
          > Also, which other approach are you talking about? Other approaches to furthering their mission: if getting their own phone to market is to expensive, regroup behind the main product(s) and use them to launch new approaches like we are seeing in the linked article.
      • hardwaresofton 8y ago
        Yeah but there's a fundamental difference -- FFOS is a non-profit. They have to make money, of course, to stay afloat, but making it seem like a binary decision between FFOS and Firefox is a mistake. I haven't looked at their books but surely there was enough money to fund FFOS if they just stopped their rapid expansion into every single emerging market they could find. Make 1 high quality, expensive headset, that nerds will buy (OnePlus did this), and keep working on the software. IMO There are more than enough nerds out there (myself included) who will fork out $400/500 for a FFOS phone with how much of a difference it was from other OSes.
  • jimmaswell 8y ago
    > Without it, billions of people in developing world are going to have every every second of their lives snooped by Google. Still sounds like a better deal for them than no smartphones at all. Do they even care about Google's data collection? I find it to be a perfectly fair tradeoff for cheaper smartphones and free services.
  • criddell 8y ago
    How was FirefoxOS better than AOSP?
  • openfuture 8y ago
    I think you are being a touch dramatic, I am perfectly happy with my google free lineageOS setup. Though I agree with what you are saying and the developing world is not really using LOS I still think there is more hope now than then.
    • some_account 8y ago
      I run the same thing and have zero complaints. The only app I've found that actually requires Google services to start is YouTube. A lot of other apps pops up a dialog saying they need Google services but then work perfectly without it. I'm not a android Dev but it's almost like that behavior is default even if the developer doesn't use any of Google services?
      • squarefoot 8y ago
        "The only app I've found that actually requires Google services to start is YouTube." Could the Hooktube Redirector work on mobile too? https://hooktube.com/ https://hooktube.com/ On the PC I use that FF extension which sends any Youtube request to Hooktube and works like a charm.
      • iliis 8y ago
        Did you try NewPipe? It works without the Google services and offers a few nifty features like background-play. https://f-droid.org/en/packages/org.schabi.newpipe/ https://f-droid.org/en/packages/org.schabi.newpipe/
        • LeftTurnSignal 8y ago
          NewPipe is amazing. It worked much better for me than the native player and I could download any videos at any time. Definitely a great application.
  • theravengod 8y ago
    How was FirefoxOS better than Android ?! Giving back control of the OS to carriers. Do you remember/know how hard it was for an indie dev. to publish an app that could be used by millions of people in the J2ME/BREW/RIM era ?
    • jonathanyc 8y ago
      That’s a horrible misunderstanding of FirefoxOS. FirefoxOS was built around what are now called PWAs.
  • sixothree 8y ago
    It still lives on. Sort of... https://www.kaiostech.com/ https://www.kaiostech.com/
• fantispug 8y ago
  It's good to see an article about Firefox enhancing privacy, rather than for backdoor installing plugins for Mr Robot, integrating closed source Pocket (the server is still closed source despite the Mozilla acquisition), or opting in sending browsing history to commercial companies like Cliqz without explicit user consent. Mozilla has done incredibly well to have Firefox survive at all against competition from Microsoft and Google, and has undoubtedly had to make some tradeoffs (such as DRM), but it's at its best when it sticks to its principles.
  • xfitm3 8y ago
    Pocket is working on open sourcing their product, including the backend. Give them some time.
• HIPisTheAnswer 8y ago
  Firefox is an OS
• deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
• remir 8y ago
  I still think Firefox should compete against ChromeOS because more and more of what we do with computers can be done in a browser. This is something Mozilla should think about. There's a market for something like Chrome OS (digital signage, library PCs, the elderly, schools, etc).