5 ms·

Even though it's intended to be 'mid-tier' hardware, that screen is super disappointing in 2014 and, because of that, I'm out.

by gfosco 12y ago

rubiquity 12y ago
> and, because of that, I'm out. Sounds like someone has been watching a little bit too much Sharktank lately.
fidotron 12y ago
This is quite likely because at higher densities making effective use of the GPU becomes even more critical to get anything approaching decent performance.
pessimizer 12y ago
It's a developer phone, and at $170, virtually free.
- wnissen 12y ago
  The Moto E has an unlocked bootloader as well, and a 4.3-inch 960 x 540 IPS screen, for $130. The Moto G is $179 and has 720p. It seems like the only reason you'd buy one would be to develop.
  - pessimizer 12y ago
    >It seems like the only reason you'd buy one would be to develop. And there's something wrong with that on a OS reference phone manufactured for developers in far smaller quantities than a Moto E or a Moto G? The only reason I'm buying one is to develop. I'm happy that it will even make calls; I've spent money on hackable phone/OS pairs that couldn't.
  - asadotzler 12y ago
    The only reason you'd buy one is to have the Firefox OS reference device precisely so you can develop for or on Firefox OS. Yes. That is right. The Moto E makes compromises we couldn't because the Flame is a reference device and needs more complete hardware specs. The Moto E doesn't come with a front facing camera or auto-focus or flash on the rear camera, or NFC. Like any reference device, this is a compromise with the primary focus on completeness and appropriateness of the hardware platform, not top of the line specs.
    - cannam 12y ago
      This defensive it's-just-a-developer-phone angle seems to take it for granted that there are other FirefoxOS phones more suitable for "high-end" users who aren't looking for a developer device. Are there? (For my part I think this spec looks good, except that like most current smartphones it's physically rather big. I have a Keon, and I would have loved a device in the same enclosure but with better quality components. I found the OS itself very comfortable to use, it's "just" the hardware I've found problematic.)
      - asadotzler 12y ago
        It's not an angle. It's the explicit purpose of the phone. We designed it, every component, to be our reference phone. If you need something for some other purpose, if you've got some other angle, you could buy a Nexus 5 and put Firefox OS on there. That's a decent high end phone that I know several Firefox OS developers are using.
        cannam 12y ago
        Thanks for the reply and yes, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to imply that there was some kind of marketing trick going on. I just think the response here (treating this device as if it were a high-end consumer device) is somewhat understandable as well. For instance there was a thread here recently, "Best Firefox phone to get?" in which the top comment suggests waiting for the Flame: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7655450 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7655450 So there seems to be an unfulfilled want, even though I totally understand that fulfilling it is not what this device is supposed to be for.
        wnissen 12y ago
        Ah, thanks for the clarification. I was under the impression that the Flame was going to be more along the lines of the Nexus series. Those phones, going all the way back the Nexus One (even though it looked like a Palm Pilot glued to a trackball platform), were all intended as legitimate competitors in the the consumer space. I don't think anyone is criticizing the specs from a developer perspective, there are just a lot of people on HN who like to try out new OSes and hardware. Good luck with the phone and the OS.
- gfosco 12y ago
  As a developer, I want and can afford a nicer phone.
  - pessimizer 12y ago
    It's not a phone targeted to developers, it's a phone to develop on. Not a luxury item, but a tool. I don't know how to say it any clearer.

Even though it's intended to be 'mid-tier' hardware, that screen is super disappointing in 2014 and, because of that, I'm out.

by gfosco 12y ago

Even though it's intended to be 'mid-tier' hardware, that screen is super disappointing in 2014 and, because of that, I'm out.

rubiquity 12y ago

> and, because of that, I'm out. Sounds like someone has been watching a little bit too much Sharktank lately.

fidotron 12y ago

This is quite likely because at higher densities making effective use of the GPU becomes even more critical to get anything approaching decent performance.

pessimizer 12y ago

It's a developer phone, and at $170, virtually free.

wnissen 12y ago
The Moto E has an unlocked bootloader as well, and a 4.3-inch 960 x 540 IPS screen, for $130. The Moto G is $179 and has 720p. It seems like the only reason you'd buy one would be to develop.
- pessimizer 12y ago
  >It seems like the only reason you'd buy one would be to develop. And there's something wrong with that on a OS reference phone manufactured for developers in far smaller quantities than a Moto E or a Moto G? The only reason I'm buying one is to develop. I'm happy that it will even make calls; I've spent money on hackable phone/OS pairs that couldn't.
- asadotzler 12y ago
  The only reason you'd buy one is to have the Firefox OS reference device precisely so you can develop for or on Firefox OS. Yes. That is right. The Moto E makes compromises we couldn't because the Flame is a reference device and needs more complete hardware specs. The Moto E doesn't come with a front facing camera or auto-focus or flash on the rear camera, or NFC. Like any reference device, this is a compromise with the primary focus on completeness and appropriateness of the hardware platform, not top of the line specs.
  - cannam 12y ago
    This defensive it's-just-a-developer-phone angle seems to take it for granted that there are other FirefoxOS phones more suitable for "high-end" users who aren't looking for a developer device. Are there? (For my part I think this spec looks good, except that like most current smartphones it's physically rather big. I have a Keon, and I would have loved a device in the same enclosure but with better quality components. I found the OS itself very comfortable to use, it's "just" the hardware I've found problematic.)
    - asadotzler 12y ago
      It's not an angle. It's the explicit purpose of the phone. We designed it, every component, to be our reference phone. If you need something for some other purpose, if you've got some other angle, you could buy a Nexus 5 and put Firefox OS on there. That's a decent high end phone that I know several Firefox OS developers are using.
      - cannam 12y ago
        Thanks for the reply and yes, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to imply that there was some kind of marketing trick going on. I just think the response here (treating this device as if it were a high-end consumer device) is somewhat understandable as well. For instance there was a thread here recently, "Best Firefox phone to get?" in which the top comment suggests waiting for the Flame: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7655450 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7655450 So there seems to be an unfulfilled want, even though I totally understand that fulfilling it is not what this device is supposed to be for.
      - wnissen 12y ago
        Ah, thanks for the clarification. I was under the impression that the Flame was going to be more along the lines of the Nexus series. Those phones, going all the way back the Nexus One (even though it looked like a Palm Pilot glued to a trackball platform), were all intended as legitimate competitors in the the consumer space. I don't think anyone is criticizing the specs from a developer perspective, there are just a lot of people on HN who like to try out new OSes and hardware. Good luck with the phone and the OS.
gfosco 12y ago
As a developer, I want and can afford a nicer phone.
- pessimizer 12y ago
  It's not a phone targeted to developers, it's a phone to develop on. Not a luxury item, but a tool. I don't know how to say it any clearer.