5 ms·

There are plenty of js/html frameworks for mobile. That mission was (and is??) the _promise_ of webOS. So I don't see how you can say "even in the unlikely ev

There are plenty of js/html frameworks for mobile. That mission was (and is??) the _promise_ of webOS. So I don't see how you can say "even in the unlikely event that Firefox OS itself disappears in the process, if web-apps become mainstream it will have succeeded" since it's far from a controlled experiment. Mozilla always seems to have the same answer to "what if we just started from scratch": which is "let's do it". It's endearing I guess.

bergie 14y ago
One big difference here is that Firefox OS (just like PhoneGap/Cordova) is aiming at standardizing the APIs, not at just being another framework. That by itself will make the web richer regardless of how FFOS fares on the market.
- zokier 14y ago
  And what makes those "standards" different from "another framework"? A rubber stamp from W3C?
  - bergie 14y ago
    Yeah, and usually a compliance test suite. And nowadays browser vendors even seem to be quite active in implementing these things. See for instance http://blog.chromium.org/2013/02/hello-firefox-this-is-chrome-calling.html http://blog.chromium.org/2013/02/hello-firefox-this-is-chrom... and https://hacks.mozilla.org/2013/02/hello-chrome-its-firefox-calling/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2013/02/hello-chrome-its-firefox-c... In general, I'm curious about the hatred here on HN towards W3C. Sure, standards often move slowly, but it is still the best way to achieve interoperability.