5 ms·

Most of the bells and whistles aren't required for the product to be successful. Also this is version one. You're just bullying the new kid. One day he might

Most of the bells and whistles aren't required for the product to be successful. Also this is version one. You're just bullying the new kid. One day he might grow up to kick your ass.

shinratdr 13y ago
> Also this is version one. Windows Phone was version 7 and it didn't seem to make a difference. It's pretty safe to say that at this point, you need to make a splash or you're going to end up an afterthought. You can't just stumble in, you need to offer something compelling enough to convince others to get on board. Slow, evolutionary growth is fine for some things. It's not OK for a mobile OS launching in the year 2013. Call it bullying the new kid all you want to rally support, we're just being realistic. When the vast majority of mobile phone users really couldn't care less about how "open" their phone OS is, FFOS brings little to the table except catering to amateur developers. Considering what is holding back OSes like Windows Phone isn't lack of apps from amateur developers, quite the opposite. They have those, but lack the heavy hitters. I haven't heard "No thriving development environment for small developers" once when covering the downsides of Windows Phone. I have heard "No Instagram" about a thousand times. Maybe it's just me but I don't really remember an instance of any OS becoming popular by catering to small devs. It's a part, but it usually comes AFTER enticing users to come aboard. People didn't develop for iOS because Apple made it painfully easy for them, they developed for iPhone because millions of users bought them, said "Isn't this so cool, but I wonder if it could do <blank>?" and the rest is history. Likewise, developers weren't chomping at the bit to go messing about in Eclipse, but millions and tens of millions of Android phones ended up in users hands. Suddenly, there was a market and then the popular apps came.
- janjongboom 13y ago
  Contrary to Windows Phone, FxOS is not aiming to be competing against the high end Android or iOS devices. Nor will it be appealing to current consumers who have a smartphone in their pockets. It's targeting consumers that currently hold feature phones (mostly Nokia) that can either not afford a smartphone, or just a very low-end Android that performs terrible. FxOS is not here to be the ultimate OS for developers, but to bring a fully featured smartphone experience to Latin America, South East Asia, Balkans, etc.
  - harrytuttle 13y ago
    Windows phone pretty much competes against everything from feature phones to high end devices and the user experience is pretty much the same. The Lumias have damn good hardware as well. You can get a Lumia 520 in the UK for £79 and it gives a better experience than an android for twice the amount or any Asha feature phone.
    - sirkneeland 13y ago
      well, maybe not the Asha 501. It's like some baby N9.
  - shinratdr 13y ago
    I understand that, but I see Android improving or hardware becoming cheaper before FFOS catches on. It's a noble goal, but the app ecosystem is with Android. Windows didn't get better and Linux didn't move fast enough. Hardware just got cheaper and people went where everyone else went, and Windows is dominant. I foresee the same thing happening with FFOS and Android.
- harrytuttle 13y ago
  No, Windows Phone 7 is version 1 of Windows Phone. Windows CE 6 was the predecessor and it's nothing like Windows Phone. Completely separate products sharing only a kernel. And Windows Phone 8 doesn't even share the kernel. FFOS brings three things to the table that noone else has and they are: 1. Price. They are dirt cheap. Most people out there can't afford to throw out what $600-800 on a handset. The only thing that is keeping these phones afloat is the telco contract that is subsidising the handset cost. Apart from the US, the rest of the world is pretty much handset and/or phone i.e. you can choose. I ALWAYS buy non locked handsets in cash and use cheap contracts. This is almost standard in Europe and the East. The only way paid up handsets can go is down and that's going to simply fuck up the market for high end devices. Giffgaff in the UK is demonstrating that - people are paying virtually nothing and buying cheaper WinPhone (620 is cheap!!) and budget Android handsets these days. 2. HTML. Yes HTML+JavaScript. Every monkey can knock out apps for these, much like you could with MIDP2 / J2ME. You don't have to be an expert on reference counting in Objective-C (iOS), navigate thousands of pages of SDK documentation (Android/WinPhone) or have to own a Mac to push apps out (iOS). You also don't have to subscribe to some massive store model and subscription development model (WinPhone/iOS). Just a second hand laptop ($100-200) text editor ($0) and a cheap ($79) handset and you're throwing out apps. 3. Reuse. A lot of apps can easily be repurposed for this development model. They can also be upscaled to web sites as well. Hell, this is the scariest thing out there: cheap, easy with the potential to reuse stuff out there. These WILL be ubiquitous. As for: "no instagram". Instagram is a fad. It's not going to be around for years and years. If it pissed off tomorrow, noone would cry. Hell most people forget about it after a few days. As for the iPhone's "isn't it cool" comment, hell it's a piece of shit to develop for, especially when the SDK documentation and publishing platform buggers off for a month and they treat their paid up customers like crap... These will start at the bottom of the market (like Android) and will push upwards.
  - ulisesrmzroche 13y ago
    Dude, most people would cry if you took their Instagram from them, and they won't forget it about it tomorrow. You're shoving the realities of the market under the table as if they didn't matter. Go ask someone who pays for apps to tell you what Instagram is.
mwcampbell 13y ago
> You're just bullying the new kid. One day he might grow up to kick your ass. Skeptical questions on a discussion forum are not bullying. Moreover, it's hardly apt to suggest that the Firefox OS team, let alone Firefox OS itself, would retaliate. The fighting metaphor seems ill-considered and childish.
- harrytuttle 13y ago
  I think you are being an insufferable pedant here. I was preserving the context from the OP to outline the method of discussion which simply consists of: "compare x to y using box ticking and derision only" (rather than discussing the relative merits). The fighting metaphor is childish as was the OP's comment and arguably yours which serves only to outline your supposed moral superiority rather than add anything constructive to the topic.
  - mwcampbell 13y ago
    FWIW, I like what Mozilla is trying to do with Firefox OS, and I think you did a good job of describing the merits of this platform in one of your other comments. I even pre-ordered a Geeksphone Peak+ a few minutes ago. But I think the macho language of fighting (e.g. "kick your ass"), which glorifies retaliation over calm, logical discussion, needs to die, particularly on a forum like this.

Most of the bells and whistles aren't required for the product to be successful. Also this is version one. You're just bullying the new kid. One day he might grow up to kick your ass.

shinratdr 13y ago

> Also this is version one. Windows Phone was version 7 and it didn't seem to make a difference. It's pretty safe to say that at this point, you need to make a splash or you're going to end up an afterthought. You can't just stumble in, you need to offer something compelling enough to convince others to get on board. Slow, evolutionary growth is fine for some things. It's not OK for a mobile OS launching in the year 2013. Call it bullying the new kid all you want to rally support, we're just being realistic. When the vast majority of mobile phone users really couldn't care less about how "open" their phone OS is, FFOS brings little to the table except catering to amateur developers. Considering what is holding back OSes like Windows Phone isn't lack of apps from amateur developers, quite the opposite. They have those, but lack the heavy hitters. I haven't heard "No thriving development environment for small developers" once when covering the downsides of Windows Phone. I have heard "No Instagram" about a thousand times. Maybe it's just me but I don't really remember an instance of any OS becoming popular by catering to small devs. It's a part, but it usually comes AFTER enticing users to come aboard. People didn't develop for iOS because Apple made it painfully easy for them, they developed for iPhone because millions of users bought them, said "Isn't this so cool, but I wonder if it could do <blank>?" and the rest is history. Likewise, developers weren't chomping at the bit to go messing about in Eclipse, but millions and tens of millions of Android phones ended up in users hands. Suddenly, there was a market and then the popular apps came.

janjongboom 13y ago
Contrary to Windows Phone, FxOS is not aiming to be competing against the high end Android or iOS devices. Nor will it be appealing to current consumers who have a smartphone in their pockets. It's targeting consumers that currently hold feature phones (mostly Nokia) that can either not afford a smartphone, or just a very low-end Android that performs terrible. FxOS is not here to be the ultimate OS for developers, but to bring a fully featured smartphone experience to Latin America, South East Asia, Balkans, etc.
- harrytuttle 13y ago
  Windows phone pretty much competes against everything from feature phones to high end devices and the user experience is pretty much the same. The Lumias have damn good hardware as well. You can get a Lumia 520 in the UK for £79 and it gives a better experience than an android for twice the amount or any Asha feature phone.
  - sirkneeland 13y ago
    well, maybe not the Asha 501. It's like some baby N9.
- shinratdr 13y ago
  I understand that, but I see Android improving or hardware becoming cheaper before FFOS catches on. It's a noble goal, but the app ecosystem is with Android. Windows didn't get better and Linux didn't move fast enough. Hardware just got cheaper and people went where everyone else went, and Windows is dominant. I foresee the same thing happening with FFOS and Android.
harrytuttle 13y ago
No, Windows Phone 7 is version 1 of Windows Phone. Windows CE 6 was the predecessor and it's nothing like Windows Phone. Completely separate products sharing only a kernel. And Windows Phone 8 doesn't even share the kernel. FFOS brings three things to the table that noone else has and they are: 1. Price. They are dirt cheap. Most people out there can't afford to throw out what $600-800 on a handset. The only thing that is keeping these phones afloat is the telco contract that is subsidising the handset cost. Apart from the US, the rest of the world is pretty much handset and/or phone i.e. you can choose. I ALWAYS buy non locked handsets in cash and use cheap contracts. This is almost standard in Europe and the East. The only way paid up handsets can go is down and that's going to simply fuck up the market for high end devices. Giffgaff in the UK is demonstrating that - people are paying virtually nothing and buying cheaper WinPhone (620 is cheap!!) and budget Android handsets these days. 2. HTML. Yes HTML+JavaScript. Every monkey can knock out apps for these, much like you could with MIDP2 / J2ME. You don't have to be an expert on reference counting in Objective-C (iOS), navigate thousands of pages of SDK documentation (Android/WinPhone) or have to own a Mac to push apps out (iOS). You also don't have to subscribe to some massive store model and subscription development model (WinPhone/iOS). Just a second hand laptop ($100-200) text editor ($0) and a cheap ($79) handset and you're throwing out apps. 3. Reuse. A lot of apps can easily be repurposed for this development model. They can also be upscaled to web sites as well. Hell, this is the scariest thing out there: cheap, easy with the potential to reuse stuff out there. These WILL be ubiquitous. As for: "no instagram". Instagram is a fad. It's not going to be around for years and years. If it pissed off tomorrow, noone would cry. Hell most people forget about it after a few days. As for the iPhone's "isn't it cool" comment, hell it's a piece of shit to develop for, especially when the SDK documentation and publishing platform buggers off for a month and they treat their paid up customers like crap... These will start at the bottom of the market (like Android) and will push upwards.
- ulisesrmzroche 13y ago
  Dude, most people would cry if you took their Instagram from them, and they won't forget it about it tomorrow. You're shoving the realities of the market under the table as if they didn't matter. Go ask someone who pays for apps to tell you what Instagram is.

mwcampbell 13y ago

> You're just bullying the new kid. One day he might grow up to kick your ass. Skeptical questions on a discussion forum are not bullying. Moreover, it's hardly apt to suggest that the Firefox OS team, let alone Firefox OS itself, would retaliate. The fighting metaphor seems ill-considered and childish.

harrytuttle 13y ago
I think you are being an insufferable pedant here. I was preserving the context from the OP to outline the method of discussion which simply consists of: "compare x to y using box ticking and derision only" (rather than discussing the relative merits). The fighting metaphor is childish as was the OP's comment and arguably yours which serves only to outline your supposed moral superiority rather than add anything constructive to the topic.
- mwcampbell 13y ago
  FWIW, I like what Mozilla is trying to do with Firefox OS, and I think you did a good job of describing the merits of this platform in one of your other comments. I even pre-ordered a Geeksphone Peak+ a few minutes ago. But I think the macho language of fighting (e.g. "kick your ass"), which glorifies retaliation over calm, logical discussion, needs to die, particularly on a forum like this.