9 ms·

Firefox OS 1.3

205 points by reirob 13y ago

Pacabel 13y ago
Is there anything particularly remarkable about this release? The release notes make it sound like it really offers nothing more than some bug fixes, and very minor new functionality.
- ChrisAntaki 13y ago
  The JavaScript improvements are exciting. New Array methods, plus a yield operator.
- fabrice_d 13y ago
  This page lists changes that are useful to apps developers, so mostly new features in the web runtime itself. New features in apps and some other big changes (like the use of async panning and zooming in the graphics stack) are not covered in this document. I guess we'll have more user-oriented release notes soon.
- soapdog 13y ago
  there were many improvements in performance.
cromwellian 13y ago
Did ES6 spec get approved, I thought it was still a draft spec? Why are ES6 features exposed by default and not behind a flag?
- Benvie 13y ago
  The ES6 spec draft is in its final stages of being revised. At this point there shouldn't be any substantial developer-facing changes except to a few final things that are being ironed out (mainly modules). The features that are being shipped in Firefox are ones that are stable in the draft spec and not expected to change. At the point of spec stability, these features need to be actually tested in broader distribution to help find any potential compatibility corner cases, similar to the issues found with Array.prototype.values [1]. [1] http://www.esdiscuss.org/topic/array-prototype-values-breaks-the-web http://www.esdiscuss.org/topic/array-prototype-values-breaks...
  - jgraham 13y ago
    Moreover, the model in which large, multifaceted standards go through a series of revisions, with vendors following in lockstep, releasing implementations of everything that has been decreed stable and nothing that has not, has never been the way the web worked, despite the fact that many standards organisations design their processes around it. In practice vendors implement small chunks of emerging ideas, with flags to prevent the ideas reaching the stable versions being a relatively novel addition to the process made possible by rapid release schedules. The ideas become stable, ready or not, when enough people are using them that it's no longer possible to remove or amend the implementation without breaking sites and thereby annoying your user base. I hear that the TC39 group that controls ECMAScript are planning to adjust to this reality by incrementally standardising features in the future so, perhaps, instead of "ES7" we will see specs for "ES foo", where "foo" is a specific feature. Ironically this is closer to the way that some non-web languages like Python (ignoring the 2/3 divide) work, with a series of enhancements that are adopted as they are ready, even though Python actually does have clear and meaningful versions.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  - cromwellian 13y ago
    I agree with it in principle, but this isn't the first time FF has dropped in Javascript features which are still not finalized. I just think that if other browser vendors are going to be raked over the coals for not rigidly adhering to standards processes and shipping non-approved features not behind flags, everyone should be held to the same standard, a consistent policy.
    - jgon 13y ago
      If the other vendors weren't, respectively, the largest, second largest, and third largest tech companies in the world, and amongst the most valuable companies in the world this comparison would make sense. If, of the other three browser makers, we weren't discussing a company that holds a near monopoly on desktop OS's, a company that holds a near monopoly on the high-end of computing, and the third which holds a near monopoly on internet services this comparison would again make sense. Should Mozilla have been more conservative in shipping features that are actually written up in a spec on their fledgling OS? Probably, playing strictly by the rules is generally a good thing. Is this comparable to a different vendor working to ship an enormous feature which didn't even have a spec, and which the person at the centre of the controversy asked other people to help write because they had been so busy? No, not at all. Size, influence, and power always make a difference. I have a hard time understanding how you wouldn't see this.
zurn 13y ago
It will be a sign of things to come to see how many releases are supported on the first-generation Firefox OS phone that I have (ZTE Open). This doesn't mention it, and a quick Googling doesn't show any positive signs... anyone know?
- makmanalp 13y ago
  Please let us know if it performs better too!
- reirob 13y ago
  I guess it will take some time for ZTE to provide 1.3 for their phones, because v1.3 is in pre-release stage for the moment. ZTE took quite some time to provide v1.1, but then 1.2 followed quite quickly [1]. https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/01/upgrading-your-zte-open-to-firefox-1-1-or-1-2-fastboot-enabled/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/01/upgrading-your-zte-open-to...
- zz1 13y ago
  I am quite sure that backwards compatibility won't be an issue. As you may know Firefox OS is aimed at low-end phones, so I don't think they plan on ending support for first generation phones… ever?. The only issue is the manufacturer, which has to take care for the Firmware updates for his own handsets. ZTE doesn't look very eager to give its users constant updates.
  - pjmlp 13y ago
    So no different from any other mobile OS OEMs.
- yetfeo 13y ago
  Trunk builds of Firefox OS (version 1.4ish) work fine on my ZTE Open. I doubt they'll see consumer release though. I hope they do but I'm not confident in carriers pushing it.
rubiquity 13y ago
"New Array methods have been implemented: Array.prototype.keys" Dafuq. Yes I'm aware how Arrays are just objects in JS but please stop bastardizing the Array data type even further. This is also part of ES6 so I don't blame Mozilla for implementing it.
- gkoberger 13y ago
  What do you mean by bastardizing? I'm not sure when I'd ever use Array.keys, but it seems like it could be potentially useful -- and more importantly, totally in the spirit of JavaScript.
  - cheald 13y ago
    It seems like a poorly-chosen name. I like the idea of being able to get an indexes iterator, but I'd probably have named it `indexes()` rather than `keys()`, as the latter tends to be much more strongly associated with dictionaries.
- kybernetikos 13y ago
  Arrays in javascript are not what you might think. They are defined by the spec to be maps where certain keys (those that are string representations of Uint32 numbers) are treated differently, and a magic property length which is always one more than the largest such key. They are not necessarily dense - there can be gaps, and any kind of relationship to a contiguous block of memory is purely at the discretion of the implementation. I presume that your complaint is really about calling such a thing an array, because a 'keys' method is certainly not a further bastardization of what was already in the spec.
- Benvie 13y ago
  All iterable objects (Arrays, Strings, TypedArrays, Maps, and Sets) come with the same set of iterator-creating methods (keys, values, entries).
  - mnemonik 13y ago
    This is the most important point; it is totally consistent.
ghoul2 13y ago
Does anyone know which is the cheapest phone that can be hacked to run Firefox OS? As in, is there a port to any of the , for example, the chinese Mediatek SoC-based phones - some of those sell for less than $50, retail. Vast majority sell for less than ~$100. They usually come with Android ICS/JB, but if even one of them has been hacked to run FFOS, i'd sure like to give it a try.
- mcpherrinm 13y ago
  The ZTE Open is $70. There's an upcoming $25 phone too.
- leeoniya 13y ago
  conversely, are there any expensive phones that can run it yet? i would love to try it on my rooted HTC Jewel (Sprint EVO 4G LTE). currently running CyanogenMod nightlies.
  - reirob 13y ago
    Geeksphone just made the Revolution [1] that can run FFOS and/or Android. Also according to Mozilla there are several Nexus phones that can run FFOS [2] [1] http://shop.geeksphone.com/es/moviles/9-revolution.html http://shop.geeksphone.com/es/moviles/9-revolution.html [2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox_OS/Phones#Firefox_OS_phones_available https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox_OS/Phones#Firefo...
    - leeoniya 13y ago
      i guess i was more interested to know which phones has it been ported to. i understand that technically it can run on every phone that currently runs android since the linux layer is identical.
      - zz1 13y ago
        It doesn't: https://autonome.wordpress.com/2013/01/15/firefox-os-devices-and-dark-matter/ https://autonome.wordpress.com/2013/01/15/firefox-os-devices...
gojomo 13y ago
Is it possible to try out FirefoxOS as an app on another smartphone?
- zz1 13y ago
  No, it isn't. The closest thing to "Firefox OS but not just it" is the Geeksphone Revolution: a dual-boot, Intel powered, Smartphone: http://shop.geeksphone.com/en/phones/9-revolution.html http://shop.geeksphone.com/en/phones/9-revolution.html
- zymhan 13y ago
  Not that I'm aware of, but you can use Multirom on a Nexus 4 and dual-boot it extremely easily.
- frik 13y ago
  You can use the FirefoxOS Simulator: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Tools/Firefox_OS_Simulator https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Tools/Firefox_OS_Simul... (on PC)
- cpeterso 13y ago
  If you just want to see what it looks like, you can install the Firefox OS Simulator, an add-on for desktop Firefox: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Firefox_OS_Simulator https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Firefox_OS_Si...
nroose 13y ago
iOS, Android, Tizen, Ubuntu Touch, Firefox OS... Seems like perhaps a lot of people are trying to get VC funding on the back of iOS success, no?
- lillycat 13y ago
  I doubt VC will invest in a Foundation: there is no way to get their money back...
- pekk 13y ago
  A lot of people are trying to make something which gives more freedom to users than iOS.
  - Pacabel 13y ago
    This already exists, in the form of Android. Is it ideologically perfect? Maybe not, but it's more than good enough for most people. Android is widely adopted, it's available on many different devices, users can install their own apps from a variety of sources, and there's a fair amount of freedom for developers to choose how to implement and distribute their apps.
    - Argorak 13y ago
      2 is a low number for a global market.
- kryptiskt 13y ago
  Tizen is Samsung's baby, no VC funding. FirefoxOS, Mozilla's, no VC funding. Ubuntu, Canonical is funded by Shuttleworth. Android was a startup once upon a time before Google bought it, but that was before iOS was out. The only actual VC-funded entry is the one you omit, Jolla.
  - Zigurd 13y ago
    Jolla at one point claimed to have €200m in capital. This is probably some Nokia and some Finland government money. Crunchbase does not list VC investors, or any investors for that matter.
sleepyhead 13y ago
CardDav should be #1 priority. If I can't sync my contacts what use is a phone with FirefoxOS?
- duiker101 13y ago
  #1 https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia feel free to work on it. Any contribution will be appreciated. 2# this is not marketed as a substitute to iPhone or even Android. It's mean for people that can't afford high end phones. People that if the choice is a $25 phone without contacts sync or a $100 phone with sync they will take the former. 3# A lot of people are working hard on this project improving it every day. Dismissing it like that for a quite minor thing, yes minor, seems quite childish to me.
  - mkaziz 13y ago
    He's commenting on a feature he would want that's not there. IMO, that's feedback (if a little harshly worded), and should be taken as such.
    - Pacabel 13y ago
      It wasn't harshly worded at all. A phone is a communication device. Being able to quickly and easily add the contact details of other people is a very basic and critical feature to have in a phone these days. If such functionality is lacking, then the phone can indeed be considered useless.
  - Pacabel 13y ago
    When a potential user expresses a very legitimate desire for some missing functionality, it leaves a very bad impression when that user is then told to add the functionality himself or herself. It also doesn't help to refer to that very legitimate feature request as "childish", especially when it involves core functionality that's very critical to many users.
    - pjmlp 13y ago

205 points by reirob 13y ago

Is there anything particularly remarkable about this release? The release notes make it sound like it really offers nothing more than some bug fixes, and very minor new functionality.

ChrisAntaki 13y ago
The JavaScript improvements are exciting. New Array methods, plus a yield operator.
fabrice_d 13y ago
This page lists changes that are useful to apps developers, so mostly new features in the web runtime itself. New features in apps and some other big changes (like the use of async panning and zooming in the graphics stack) are not covered in this document. I guess we'll have more user-oriented release notes soon.
soapdog 13y ago
there were many improvements in performance.

cromwellian 13y ago

Did ES6 spec get approved, I thought it was still a draft spec? Why are ES6 features exposed by default and not behind a flag?

Benvie 13y ago
The ES6 spec draft is in its final stages of being revised. At this point there shouldn't be any substantial developer-facing changes except to a few final things that are being ironed out (mainly modules). The features that are being shipped in Firefox are ones that are stable in the draft spec and not expected to change. At the point of spec stability, these features need to be actually tested in broader distribution to help find any potential compatibility corner cases, similar to the issues found with Array.prototype.values [1]. [1] http://www.esdiscuss.org/topic/array-prototype-values-breaks-the-web http://www.esdiscuss.org/topic/array-prototype-values-breaks...
- jgraham 13y ago
  Moreover, the model in which large, multifaceted standards go through a series of revisions, with vendors following in lockstep, releasing implementations of everything that has been decreed stable and nothing that has not, has never been the way the web worked, despite the fact that many standards organisations design their processes around it. In practice vendors implement small chunks of emerging ideas, with flags to prevent the ideas reaching the stable versions being a relatively novel addition to the process made possible by rapid release schedules. The ideas become stable, ready or not, when enough people are using them that it's no longer possible to remove or amend the implementation without breaking sites and thereby annoying your user base. I hear that the TC39 group that controls ECMAScript are planning to adjust to this reality by incrementally standardising features in the future so, perhaps, instead of "ES7" we will see specs for "ES foo", where "foo" is a specific feature. Ironically this is closer to the way that some non-web languages like Python (ignoring the 2/3 divide) work, with a series of enhancements that are adopted as they are ready, even though Python actually does have clear and meaningful versions.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- cromwellian 13y ago
  I agree with it in principle, but this isn't the first time FF has dropped in Javascript features which are still not finalized. I just think that if other browser vendors are going to be raked over the coals for not rigidly adhering to standards processes and shipping non-approved features not behind flags, everyone should be held to the same standard, a consistent policy.
  - jgon 13y ago
    If the other vendors weren't, respectively, the largest, second largest, and third largest tech companies in the world, and amongst the most valuable companies in the world this comparison would make sense. If, of the other three browser makers, we weren't discussing a company that holds a near monopoly on desktop OS's, a company that holds a near monopoly on the high-end of computing, and the third which holds a near monopoly on internet services this comparison would again make sense. Should Mozilla have been more conservative in shipping features that are actually written up in a spec on their fledgling OS? Probably, playing strictly by the rules is generally a good thing. Is this comparable to a different vendor working to ship an enormous feature which didn't even have a spec, and which the person at the centre of the controversy asked other people to help write because they had been so busy? No, not at all. Size, influence, and power always make a difference. I have a hard time understanding how you wouldn't see this.

zurn 13y ago

It will be a sign of things to come to see how many releases are supported on the first-generation Firefox OS phone that I have (ZTE Open). This doesn't mention it, and a quick Googling doesn't show any positive signs... anyone know?

makmanalp 13y ago
Please let us know if it performs better too!
reirob 13y ago
I guess it will take some time for ZTE to provide 1.3 for their phones, because v1.3 is in pre-release stage for the moment. ZTE took quite some time to provide v1.1, but then 1.2 followed quite quickly [1]. https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/01/upgrading-your-zte-open-to-firefox-1-1-or-1-2-fastboot-enabled/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/01/upgrading-your-zte-open-to...
zz1 13y ago
I am quite sure that backwards compatibility won't be an issue. As you may know Firefox OS is aimed at low-end phones, so I don't think they plan on ending support for first generation phones… ever?. The only issue is the manufacturer, which has to take care for the Firmware updates for his own handsets. ZTE doesn't look very eager to give its users constant updates.
- pjmlp 13y ago
  So no different from any other mobile OS OEMs.
yetfeo 13y ago
Trunk builds of Firefox OS (version 1.4ish) work fine on my ZTE Open. I doubt they'll see consumer release though. I hope they do but I'm not confident in carriers pushing it.

rubiquity 13y ago

"New Array methods have been implemented: Array.prototype.keys" Dafuq. Yes I'm aware how Arrays are just objects in JS but please stop bastardizing the Array data type even further. This is also part of ES6 so I don't blame Mozilla for implementing it.

gkoberger 13y ago
What do you mean by bastardizing? I'm not sure when I'd ever use Array.keys, but it seems like it could be potentially useful -- and more importantly, totally in the spirit of JavaScript.
- cheald 13y ago
  It seems like a poorly-chosen name. I like the idea of being able to get an indexes iterator, but I'd probably have named it `indexes()` rather than `keys()`, as the latter tends to be much more strongly associated with dictionaries.
kybernetikos 13y ago
Arrays in javascript are not what you might think. They are defined by the spec to be maps where certain keys (those that are string representations of Uint32 numbers) are treated differently, and a magic property length which is always one more than the largest such key. They are not necessarily dense - there can be gaps, and any kind of relationship to a contiguous block of memory is purely at the discretion of the implementation. I presume that your complaint is really about calling such a thing an array, because a 'keys' method is certainly not a further bastardization of what was already in the spec.
Benvie 13y ago
All iterable objects (Arrays, Strings, TypedArrays, Maps, and Sets) come with the same set of iterator-creating methods (keys, values, entries).
- mnemonik 13y ago
  This is the most important point; it is totally consistent.

ghoul2 13y ago

Does anyone know which is the cheapest phone that can be hacked to run Firefox OS? As in, is there a port to any of the , for example, the chinese Mediatek SoC-based phones - some of those sell for less than $50, retail. Vast majority sell for less than ~$100. They usually come with Android ICS/JB, but if even one of them has been hacked to run FFOS, i'd sure like to give it a try.

mcpherrinm 13y ago
The ZTE Open is $70. There's an upcoming $25 phone too.
leeoniya 13y ago
conversely, are there any expensive phones that can run it yet? i would love to try it on my rooted HTC Jewel (Sprint EVO 4G LTE). currently running CyanogenMod nightlies.
- reirob 13y ago
  Geeksphone just made the Revolution [1] that can run FFOS and/or Android. Also according to Mozilla there are several Nexus phones that can run FFOS [2] [1] http://shop.geeksphone.com/es/moviles/9-revolution.html http://shop.geeksphone.com/es/moviles/9-revolution.html [2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox_OS/Phones#Firefox_OS_phones_available https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox_OS/Phones#Firefo...
  - leeoniya 13y ago
    i guess i was more interested to know which phones has it been ported to. i understand that technically it can run on every phone that currently runs android since the linux layer is identical.
    - zz1 13y ago
      It doesn't: https://autonome.wordpress.com/2013/01/15/firefox-os-devices-and-dark-matter/ https://autonome.wordpress.com/2013/01/15/firefox-os-devices...

gojomo 13y ago

Is it possible to try out FirefoxOS as an app on another smartphone?

zz1 13y ago
No, it isn't. The closest thing to "Firefox OS but not just it" is the Geeksphone Revolution: a dual-boot, Intel powered, Smartphone: http://shop.geeksphone.com/en/phones/9-revolution.html http://shop.geeksphone.com/en/phones/9-revolution.html
zymhan 13y ago
Not that I'm aware of, but you can use Multirom on a Nexus 4 and dual-boot it extremely easily.
frik 13y ago
You can use the FirefoxOS Simulator: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Tools/Firefox_OS_Simulator https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Tools/Firefox_OS_Simul... (on PC)
cpeterso 13y ago
If you just want to see what it looks like, you can install the Firefox OS Simulator, an add-on for desktop Firefox: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Firefox_OS_Simulator https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Firefox_OS_Si...

nroose 13y ago

iOS, Android, Tizen, Ubuntu Touch, Firefox OS... Seems like perhaps a lot of people are trying to get VC funding on the back of iOS success, no?

lillycat 13y ago
I doubt VC will invest in a Foundation: there is no way to get their money back...
pekk 13y ago
A lot of people are trying to make something which gives more freedom to users than iOS.
- Pacabel 13y ago
  This already exists, in the form of Android. Is it ideologically perfect? Maybe not, but it's more than good enough for most people. Android is widely adopted, it's available on many different devices, users can install their own apps from a variety of sources, and there's a fair amount of freedom for developers to choose how to implement and distribute their apps.
  - Argorak 13y ago
    2 is a low number for a global market.
kryptiskt 13y ago
Tizen is Samsung's baby, no VC funding. FirefoxOS, Mozilla's, no VC funding. Ubuntu, Canonical is funded by Shuttleworth. Android was a startup once upon a time before Google bought it, but that was before iOS was out. The only actual VC-funded entry is the one you omit, Jolla.
- Zigurd 13y ago
  Jolla at one point claimed to have €200m in capital. This is probably some Nokia and some Finland government money. Crunchbase does not list VC investors, or any investors for that matter.

sleepyhead 13y ago

CardDav should be #1 priority. If I can't sync my contacts what use is a phone with FirefoxOS?

duiker101 13y ago
#1 https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia https://github.com/mozilla-b2g/gaia feel free to work on it. Any contribution will be appreciated. 2# this is not marketed as a substitute to iPhone or even Android. It's mean for people that can't afford high end phones. People that if the choice is a $25 phone without contacts sync or a $100 phone with sync they will take the former. 3# A lot of people are working hard on this project improving it every day. Dismissing it like that for a quite minor thing, yes minor, seems quite childish to me.
- mkaziz 13y ago
  He's commenting on a feature he would want that's not there. IMO, that's feedback (if a little harshly worded), and should be taken as such.
  - Pacabel 13y ago
    It wasn't harshly worded at all. A phone is a communication device. Being able to quickly and easily add the contact details of other people is a very basic and critical feature to have in a phone these days. If such functionality is lacking, then the phone can indeed be considered useless.
- Pacabel 13y ago
  When a potential user expresses a very legitimate desire for some missing functionality, it leaves a very bad impression when that user is then told to add the functionality himself or herself. It also doesn't help to refer to that very legitimate feature request as "childish", especially when it involves core functionality that's very critical to many users.
  - pjmlp 13y ago