7 ms·

We Need to Break the Mobile Duopoly

88 points by r0h1n 12y ago

DiabloD3 12y ago
I'm not sure what the article is asking for exactly, we've had a third OS for quite some time. We had Blackberry, iOS, and Android; now we have legitimate Windows Phone adoption, iOS, and Android; and if one of those three should die, we have FirefoxOS to fill in the gap.
- V-2 12y ago
  It seems to be asking for the third OS to play any significant role, so as to exert competitive pressure on the Big Two. I also don't think that Windows Phone is giving them a run for they money just yet.
- reddotX 12y ago
  + Ubuntu phone, Jolla, Tizen
lovelearning 12y ago
Tizen, Firefox OS and Ubuntu are probably the candidates, but I think Tizen has a combination of things going for it: 1) It's not based on AOSP (unlike Firefox OS) 2) Supports both native and HTML5 apps (Firefox OS apps are limited to HTML5) 3) Backed by Samsung, still a powerful hardware player in most markets. Both Firefox OS and Ubuntu [have had/will have] a tough time getting device manufacturers to adopt their OS, but Tizen doesn't have that problem.
- emsy 12y ago
  There's also Salifish OS (https://sailfishos.org/ https://sailfishos.org/). AFAIK, it's open source except the UI. Personally, I'd love to see a true open source OS succeed, but I don't believe it will happen.
  - raphman_ 12y ago
    There is still a little bit more closed source than only the UI [1]. However, the folks at Jolla are quite committed to open-sourcing as much as possible. [1] http://jollafr.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/oss-vs-nonoss.png http://jollafr.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/oss-vs-nonoss.... [2] http://merproject.org/meetings/mer-meeting/2014/mer-meeting.2014-11-25-15.00.log.html#l-215 http://merproject.org/meetings/mer-meeting/2014/mer-meeting....
- rys 12y ago
  Just on point 3, it's not really a matter of getting device vendors to use it. I think it's pretty clear today that incumbent platforms live and die by the quality of their apps and the app delivery and discovery mechanisms. By extension that means the quality of the developer environment, APIs, device functionality you can use, and related tooling. Tizen is nothing without that. Samsung Mobile picking it up for 1, 10 or 100 handsets doesn't guarantee success.
  - lovelearning 12y ago
    It's true that sales volumes are not guaranteed, but what I meant was that because of Samsung, Tizen is in a position to atleast circumvent the chicken and egg problem that dogs any new mobile OS. Manufacturers hesitate to bring out devices with a new OS until there is enough developer and user mindshare, but developer and user mindshare grow only when there are enough competitive devices on the market. Right now, Firefox OS is found only on some low to mid range devices. Ubuntu OS did not even hit the crowdsourced funding target last time. Tizen is in a better position to circumvent this, if Samsung commits to Tizen (which I don't see them doing at the moment) and avoids making the same mistakes as Bada.
    - aceperry 12y ago
      The only Tizen phone out in the wild has had some bad reviews. I think Samsung is committed to Tizen for at least a couple more years, mainly as a foil to Google Android, as Samsung has stated repeatedly.
- pjmlp 12y ago
  Sorry but I don't buy into Tizen. They already did a full native API revamp a few times, with no upgrade path every time it was done. First they threw out the APIs they got from Meego and replaced with straight Bada C++, then they did a facelift, but kept the Bada feeling to the APIs[0], now C++ is out the door and one is supposed to use EFL with C. Also the documentation leaves a lot to wish for. [0] Similar to the Symbian C++ dialect, dual step initialization, handles, macros for exceptions
  - aceperry 12y ago
    Yeah, sounds bad. The constantly changing API is just too much to keep up with.
msturgill 12y ago
Windows Phone is not that bad. Google has done a good job trying to starve WP users of their services, but I think we can all survive without Hangouts (Telegram, etc) and Google Voice (who cares anymore) at this point.
- pjmlp 12y ago
  I got a 630 for the alternative number I use, and was quite impressed with it, specially in regards to the Android devices on the same price range.
- nailer 12y ago
  Gmail only has a very limited public API, which (according to Google) isn't enough to make a fully fledged email client. So non official Gmail apps futz it with IMAP, which doesn't logically map to search based email.
- jarcane 12y ago
  WinPhone8.x is a fantastic mobile OS. The interface is great. I've dealt with some bugs since switching to the developer preview, but that's to be expected, and my experience running production code was always rock solid. But the app situation is abominable, and getting worse. The Xbox program seems to have been all but abandoned. Microsoft seems to have largely given up even monitoring the app store; half the top/new games on the lists for the last several months have been blatantly pirated material, either blatant copies of whatever iOS/Android fad is running at the moment, or actual emulator ROMs of old console games running in a buggy, half-broken wrapper. They don't even have an actual category for reporting copyright infringement on the report form. They've also made some missteps on a fair few occasions regarding their own apps, especially with the move to 8.1; replacing or breaking the existing functionality like the Xbox Games portal and the Music app. On the technical side, there's also some issues regarding app support and limitations on both hardware and software. Manufacturers have to agree to very strict tech specifications in order to license WP, so very few other than Nokia have ever bothered to take them up on it. WP apps are heavily sandboxed and limited in a way reminiscent of pre-multitasking iOS, and the official line from MS seems to be that the only acceptable way to build WP apps is in C# with .NET on Visual Studio. Period. Very grudgingly, HTML5 apps are supported. Other options are possible, but largely only through workarounds, which often are grossly undocumented or hacky. Even MS' own other languages, like VB.net and F# are not officially supported, save as libraries in the latter case. (though again in the latter case, MS seems to not believe anyone should want to build full apps in pure F# at all.) The OS and the interface themselves are great, and some of those limitations are no doubt part of why by forcing a more predictable environment. But a lot of it just seems to be MS repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot, and I dread to think how much worse it would get if MS had any actual leverage on the market.
eloisant 12y ago
"For OEMs/handset makers, choice means the ability to do more with software" Well, that's what Google did with Android but the makers were so bad at it (making the Android worse, not updating...) that Google had to take back control by moving more and more elements to the Play services.
- tonyedgecombe 12y ago
  I think that was more about control than improving quality.
- andybak 12y ago
  I think Google had mixed motives - it wasn't just the quality thing, it was that some OEMs were obviously trying to make a platform play of their own. However the fact that quality was also an issue put me in the very weird position of applauding the increased centralization of Android. I'm hoping Cyanagenmod can somehow square the circle here.
nateguchi 12y ago
It's a shame Blackberry's new OS didn't take off...
- aceperry 12y ago
  Really. I liked the hardware and BB10 very much. They had lots of unique and innovative features which would've made Blackberrys a viable 3rd OS.
  - dublinben 12y ago
    The Blackberry Classic would have been an excellent phone five years ago. Unfortunately, they've been playing catch up to Apple and Android OEMs for almost a decade.
pjmlp 12y ago
We already have a 3rd mobile OS, it is called Windows Phone and is doing quite well (actually more than iOS) in a few European countries.
- jarcane 12y ago
  Pretty much only Finland, really, and that's because of the local Nokia brand loyalty and aggressive local pricing. With MS axing the Nokia brand, I see Samsung picking up the slack easily if they dare to compete on price like they do in other countries rather than trying to angle as a luxury brand. I'm already starting to see a lot more Galaxies and iPhones on the street in Helsinki and Tampere these days.
  - pjmlp 12y ago
    No, unless it changed the southern countries have a lot of them. Windows Phone are the only alternative to Android, when you are buying pre-paid phones and not willing to shell out more then 500 euros for a mobile phone, when earning 400 euros on average. Even the contracts are not an option for such users.
    - jarcane 12y ago
      Fair enough. I haven't kept up with the numbers in a while. I can certainly understand the price issue, it's the reason I went with a WP here in Finland: My Lumia 1320 was only 300€. Nothing comparable for Android or iOS was available for less than twice that.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- jankeromnes 12y ago
  It's really great to have Windows Phone around, but I think the article calls for a more open and experiment-friendly alternative where you don't have to go "through the interests and lenses of the two dominant players" to innovate (making it "three" doesn't help).
newman314 12y ago
We had one. It was called WebOS. Too bad that bad execution and implementation killed it before its time. =(
- walterbell 12y ago
  Did the open-source project go anywhere?
  - newman314 12y ago
    Not really.
    - walterbell 12y ago
      WebOS (or a variant) seems to be in LG TVs, http://www.cnet.com/news/hands-on-with-lgs-webos-smart-tv-is-simple-enough/ http://www.cnet.com/news/hands-on-with-lgs-webos-smart-tv-is...
      - newman314 12y ago
        LuneOS is probably more applicable. http://pivotce.com/2014/09/01/official-release-of-luneos-and-project-updates/ http://pivotce.com/2014/09/01/official-release-of-luneos-and... LG hasn't given me a TV to hack on =) so I have no idea how much things have changed under the hood. I liked the Samsung TVs till the recent overly invasive creepiness (mic, ads etc.) Maybe I'll get a LG next time.
alphadevx 12y ago
I went from webOS to BB10. The market still offers us options (for now).
franciscop 12y ago
> "For OEMs/handset makers, choice means the ability to do more with software" Please no, this would only yield to more bloatware. The move of Google is smart, moving the OS away from OEMs. [Most] manufacturers have demonstrated again and again that they cannot be trusted with software, since they only care about profit and putting more and more useless apps into the OS. We might need more mobile OS, but not for this reason.
- throwawaymsft 12y ago
  Yep. The thesis of this essay is that choice is unequivocally good for users, handset makers, everyone. Experience doesn't play that out. The experience of a curated, pruned garden vs. a wild west scammy bazaar isn't a good one for users. Here's what happens when you search facebook on Windows Store: http://imgur.com/QDHcpG0 http://imgur.com/QDHcpG0 Choice is great! You can "choose" to install a scam app or the official one. Incompetent OEMs can "choose" to override system behavior. After all, Dell, HP & friends were known for really improving the PC software experience.
  - Brakenshire 12y ago
    > The experience of a curated, pruned garden vs. a wild west scammy bazaar isn't a good one for users. But that is a choice. For example, I would prefer to recommend to my parents a system with more granular control over permissions than stock Android, and a market which is more curated than Google Play. It's fairly absurd that they can send off all of their contacts to some random third party server because they installed a flashlight app. > Choice is great! You can "choose" to install a scam app or the official one. To avoid that, you want to choose not to have to make that choice, by going to a more curated platform. I think the key to creating that alternative is by making both Android and HTML5 apps genuinely cross platform. Blackberry, CyanogenMod and/or Sailfish should support the emerging W3C Web API standards and Cordova, and then create a clear target for Android developers to deploy Android apps that don't rely on Play Services. The real need isn't for a third OS, it's for a real cross-platform development ecosystem, then there will be genuine space for innovation.
  - userbinator 12y ago
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
withdavidli 12y ago
Does this argument parellel Linux vs Windows vs OSX to anyone else? I think the main problem is going to be getting people to develop for an alternative OS. MS had a paid developer per unique app program, which was called desparate by some. Comments here state that license to develop for the WP is a $100??? Jeez, I wonder what their growth team is thinking. Developers are highly sought after, experimenting is fun, but a lot of people are looking for stable jobs either from the beginning or they want to try a start up / own their own business first. This is also a common problem with trying new programming languages, why choose a new one when established languages have large user base, jobs are plentiful, and not much worry it's going to be abandoned 2 years down the line? There has to be incentives to overcome these barriers to gain large spread adoption. At the end of the day a lot of it comes down to livelyhood. Will a person risk time devoting on something new? If a person starts a company on this new OS, will other developers take that risk to join? Will the clients/customers be willing to make that switch?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- asuffield 12y ago
  I think the main problem is that if you want to play in the mobile space, you must invest heavily in lawyers: http://bl.ocks.org/mbostock/1153292 http://bl.ocks.org/mbostock/1153292 http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/whos-suing-whom-in-the-telecoms-trade/ http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/whos-suing-whom-i... It's not the walls that keep people out, it's the sharks.
andybak 12y ago
My biggest hope is that breaking the duopoly makes it essential that someone cracks the nut of cross-platform development - and hopefully forces the focus back onto web apps or a similar open technology. Firefox saved us from an Internet Explorer world. This time round it seems that we need more than just one caped crusader.
- asadotzler 12y ago
  "Firefox saved us from an Internet Explorer world. This time round it seems that we need more than just one caped crusader." Or a whole lot more people joining us in the fight. Mozilla is as capable as you all make it.
- zak_mc_kracken 12y ago
  And Android saved us from an iOS only world.
asdkl234890 12y ago
The web is your 3rd mobile OS. Sure the developing world still needs very cheap phones, and they require software close to the hardware. But in the developed world phones and tables get closer to a full PC every day. They basically are tiny PCs. And exactly how the web made Windows and OSX, and Linux less interesting, so it will make the mobile OSs less interesting. Because even if you can't get close to the hardware, and might require user permissions to access hardware features, still a java script and HTML5 based web app can do almost anything you want on mobile hardware. History keeps repeating itself.
- amirmc 12y ago
  That's not the way the current evidence is pointing. People do like apps and so far the pendulum doesn't seem to be swinging back to the web. See slides 11 & 30 at http://a16z.com/2014/10/28/mobile-is-eating-the-world/ http://a16z.com/2014/10/28/mobile-is-eating-the-world/
  - morenoh149 12y ago
    it's more nuanced than that. The web is now also reponsive websites. I'm bullish on mobile mostly due to that very presentation. I'm counting the web under mobile.
    - amirmc 12y ago
      The graph on slide 11 is pretty clear that the trend is for more time being spent in mobile apps than on the web. Unless you want to take issue with the data, there isn't much nuance there. To whoever downvoted my earlier comment (if it wasn't the parent), please explain why. I don't have a strong opinion on app vs web so I'm keen to see data.
  - rokhayakebe 12y ago
    People do like apps I do not agree entirely. Do you people like apps? Or do people like these bookmarks* to things they can get to easily? May even be a web app for all they care, can they just click and get to it.
levlandau 12y ago
This is a classic network effects problem. The two OS's are dominant because they are powerful two sided networks (developers + users) and so breaking the duopoly is that much harder. As is typical with these sorts of networks you really need to solve a problem a user or developer has 10X better than the existing networks do. The few times we've seen this happen on the internet are when the new company focuses on a specific vertical (airbnb to craigslist) and/or is aided by a specific technology wave or breakthrough. I suspect the "third" "mobile" OS will succeed similarly i.e. it will either solve for a narrow use case and blow every alternative out of the water and/or be aided by some new technology. Definitely won't happen via brute force...not 8 years in at least
johnnyhead 12y ago
There are Windows Phone and BlackBerry 10 that are both excellent OSes.
- aceperry 12y ago
  BB10, yes. WP, not so much. It may be better than the older Windows mobile, but not really in the same class as iOS and Android.
fpgeek 12y ago
Think about the type of deep integration that Apple-owned Siri has on iPhones, or Google-owned Gmail has on stock Android phones, for instance. Those apps operate much more contextually and fluidly, and far more powerfully, on those phones than 3rd-party apps downloaded from an app store would. While I understand the point about Siri, Gmail (of all the Google apps) seems like a terrible example of the same thing on the Android side (Maps and its incestuous relationship with Play Services might be a better fit). What does Gmail do that Microsoft's Outlook app couldn't do if Microsoft were willing to invest the effort? Maybe I'm missing a feature I don't use, but the best I can come up with is being bundled with the device, but even there if Microsoft struck a deal with, say, Verizon, I don't think there's much Google could do about it.
- jankeromnes 12y ago
  I think a better example for Google's deep integration into android is the "Google Search app" (previously "Google Now") that is sort of a Siri-equivalent: you can talk to it, it can manage your phone, send emails, create new alarms, manage your calendar, assist your transit, even change the temperature at home if you have Nest. Worth noting that this type of deep integration is totally possible with the Web: you can use many APIs like voice recognition, alarms, etc. "3rd-party apps" from the web can very well integrate deeply with your device, if you allow them.
amirmc 12y ago
He's asking for innovation in the wrong place. The OP conveniently ignores all the other mobile OSs out there such as Windows, Firefox, Ubuntu and also people like Fairphone. It's pretty lazy to just claim we need more, when what he really wants is one more (open) winner. I say that he's looking in the wrong place because to "democratize the mobile operating system" is to ignore a critical part of what makes mobile worthwhile. All those cloud services and apps that do useful things for you. How about we democratize the cloud instead? There should be no real reason I can't point my iOS device at my own infrastructure to co-ordinate sync, backup and sharing of all my stuff (instead of iCloud). Must I sign up for yet another third-party service/app just to provide me with an incremental feature? Why can't I just install apps into my own little cloud backend that my phone can connect to and do useful things for me? Have that be open for developers to target and maybe I can pay them for their work. Then it matters less what physical hardware I happen to be using. Of course, you can only access the plethora of sensors with a native app but most services I use don't need this much context. In any case, this is a concept many people are beginning to advocate for with a variety of reasons. FWIW, some of us are taking a clean-slate approach to tackle the distributed systems issues http://amirchaudhry.com/brewing-miso-to-serve-nymote/ http://amirchaudhry.com/brewing-miso-to-serve-nymote/
- zanny 12y ago
  > There should be no real reason I can't point my iOS device at my own infrastructure to co-ordinate sync Well there is a real reason, you never own the iphone you have. You never have control of the device, Apple does. They have final say in what can be built to run on it, what can run on it, what you can install, what OS you can run, whether you get updates, and what the phone does. You have no control over it, at all. So don't act surprised when Apple takes advantage of absolute power to screw you over. At that, I know owncloud exists for iOS, so you could just use that, at least for the bullet points you mentioned, not so much for the sensors-aware network of devices.
- bsbechtel 12y ago
  >>There should be no real reason I can't point my iOS device at my own infrastructure to co-ordinate sync, backup and sharing of all my stuff (instead of iCloud). I want this as much as you and everyone else who upvoted you, but the problem is there is no obvious business model in it. Sure, techies will pay (app.net?), but the general population doesn't care enough to put out money for this.
the_gipsy 12y ago
Apps that I explicitly installed on my Nexus 5: Chrome-to-phone, Chromecast, Google Drive (maybe that one came installed?), a metronome, and WhatsApp. What I'm getting at, is that apps interfaces are generally better than web pages or "web apps", but everything else about them sucks. They nag you constantly with updates and unsolicited request to do some action, require to think about permissions, and crash often.
flyinglizard 12y ago
That sounds like a great way to increase fragmentation. Even the current duopoly situation is, to me, an anomaly and a general waste of resources, only existing because of how powerful are the backers and interests of both mobile OSes. These are two incredibly rich players in a fight for survival, which is why the market hasn't been completely overrun by one of them. I'm sorry to say that, but if you want to get more choices and freedom, the most likely course to succeed is the legal one. Once the prominent player is attacked with anti trust litigation, they'll open up whatever needed to quiet things down. That being said, Google is pretty good on openness from the first place. Another mobile OS would just mean an awful experience for users, fragmentation for developers and a temptation for device makers to create crap user experience. In terms of resources, if you want to see the mobile market moving forward and not sideways, better invest precious developer efforts in content and functionality, not on more cross platform madness and reinvention of the wheel. Finally, users get a better experience when things are curated. No one can argue Apple's model doesn't work. People are less concerned about what they can do with their phones, and more concerned about what they actually do with their phones, which is why quality and polish win every time over choice and openness.
jankeromnes 12y ago
Call me biased, but Firefox OS makes the web run on 25$ smartphones, is fully open and customizable because it's the web, has the biggest "app store" of the world because it runs any web app, is totally royalty-free (just like the other Mozilla projects), and is already being shipped on lots of devices all around the globe. How's that for an open, unlocked and innovation-friendly alternative?
- minthd 12y ago
  It's just the reviews on such low cost phones runing FFoS are pretty bad, and once you climb to $65 or $100 , windows phone and android offer much better alternatives.
  - jankeromnes 12y ago
    Most of these reviews are unfair (comparing a 25$ FxOS to devices at 2x the cost or more) but you make a point about FxOS not being attractive for higher-end. That's part of why it's currently being reinvented.
- squeaky-clean 12y ago
  Is there anywhere to buy a $25 Firefox phone? I'd like to get one to try developing on, but can't find any info about purchasing any Firefox phone in the USA.
- bonn1 12y ago
  > 25$ smartphones Where do I get a 25$ Firfox smartphone? > has the biggest "app store" of the world because it runs any web app How many web apps are ready to run offline, e.g. in the subway? > is totally royalty-free yes of course and not any patents from Apple, Google, Lenovo/Motorola will be used > is already being shipped on lots of devices all around the globe again where? I like the Firefox very very much but we need someone with money and power to push and even then I doubt that it will be a succes, just look at Microsoft, they have an excellent product but they can't get a foot into the door and again on Firefox OS you need dedicated apps too even if they are web apps.
RyanMcGreal 12y ago
Duopoly? Worldwide, Android's market share has increased from under 60% in 2011 to around 85% by the end of 2013. Likewise, over the same period the iOS market share has gone from around 20% to just over 10%, while all other platforms have dwindled down to the remaining <5%. http://www.idc.com/prodserv/smartphone-os-market-share.jsp http://www.idc.com/prodserv/smartphone-os-market-share.jsp The only sense in which this is still a duopoly is that the iOS platform, while a relatively tiny share of the total market, is still a significant share of paid apps.
melling 12y ago
What happened to fixing the desktop monopoly? Two decades with Microsoft >= 90% of the desktop. It wouldn't matter if it was Apple with 90%. One company with that much market share hurts innovation.
PaulHoule 12y ago
Huh? I thought he was talking about AT&T and Verizon.
- dredmorbius 12y ago
  My thought as well. And a vastly more interesting conversation to have. My sense is that with ubiquitous WiFi and IP based protocols, I can ditch my Smartphone for most uses, and with it the massive amounts of intrusion and data surveillance it represents. A small "feature phone" (with vastly superior battery performance) for general comms, and functioning as a modem in a pinch, with a tablet that's used in a cache-and-burst mode most of the time, and with more continuous connectivity where that's available. Mobile phone operators are well on the way to making themselves obsolete.
  - PaulHoule 12y ago
    He's a VC so he probably thinks that $10 a GB is cheap.
bonn1 12y ago
> We Need to Break the Mobile Duopoly Yes, we all know this—maybe the OP wouldn't mind also to tell how we or whoever should break this duopoly if even Microsoft is not able to.
arikrak 12y ago
1. There's no chance of a completely different mobile OS succeeding at any point in the near future. An OS needs a huge platform of partners to work, even Blackberry and Microsoft haven't succeeded. The only chance is a fork of Android that can build off their software and apps, but look how hard of a time Amazon has with that. (Though obviously a16z is hoping their company Cyanogen can succeed.) 2. The more OS's there are, the worse it is for companies that have to build apps for multiple systems. It would be easiest if there was just one OS, but like Communism, that doesn't work out. So a duopoly seems like the best compromise.
- jbigelow76 12y ago
  I agree with you on the first point. I think it might be worthwhile for MS to give up on WP and go all in with their own fork of Android, specifically because of how hard of a time Amazon has had. If MS joined Amazon with their own individual forks between the two of them, along with MS's services that could replace Google Play Services (Outlook for GMail, Cortana for Now, Maps for Maps, etc...) that might capture enough of the Android user base to incentivize Android devs to target all Android app stores and not focus just on Google Play. That would break the duoply not at the OS level but it would mean that Google would have to compete harder to keep Android users on their implementation rather than MS/Amazon/Cyanogen's.
thisIsNotMikey 12y ago
I think the system will eventually implode. I'm actually here after my app got arbitrarily rejected by apple and I found Paul Graham's essay on how apple treats developers. I've spent the last year of my life learning iOS, first OC, then swift. I've dedicated thousands of hours developing, promoting, and even helping aspiring iOS developers on SO. I have been a loyal customer, developer, and investor, but today I sold all of my stock and pledged to never develop for or buy apple products again. It's just not worth it. We've all heard the saying the customer is always right, but in this industry it should be the developer is always right. The current system we have harms developers. Yes google and apple have incentives to keep it closed, but they can't hold forever. Although many will argue they are dead, I think web-apps will take over as more system Apis are supported.
midnitewarrior 12y ago
There is a viable 3rd ecosystem out there and it is Microsoft Windows Phone. However, the existence of Windows Phone has proven that developers do not want to support more than 2 mobile platforms. It creates a barrier for entry and support updates if you want to keep all of your platforms at parity. As a result, the fate of any 3rd ecosystem is a slow non-growth existence in the froth of the industry platform churn.
fiatjaf 12y ago
What? You haven't heard of Firefox OS? You totally should! Check out this blog post for a small sample of the amazing power of Firefox OS: http://binary-choice.blogspot.com.br/2014/08/firefox-os-is-developers-best-friend.html http://binary-choice.blogspot.com.br/2014/08/firefox-os-is-d... Seriously, if you want more mobile OSes, but you're not even considering Firefox OS you should probably shut up and start writing your super-powerful-mega-winner OS yourself and stop complaining.

88 points by r0h1n 12y ago

I'm not sure what the article is asking for exactly, we've had a third OS for quite some time. We had Blackberry, iOS, and Android; now we have legitimate Windows Phone adoption, iOS, and Android; and if one of those three should die, we have FirefoxOS to fill in the gap.

V-2 12y ago
It seems to be asking for the third OS to play any significant role, so as to exert competitive pressure on the Big Two. I also don't think that Windows Phone is giving them a run for they money just yet.
reddotX 12y ago
+ Ubuntu phone, Jolla, Tizen

lovelearning 12y ago

Tizen, Firefox OS and Ubuntu are probably the candidates, but I think Tizen has a combination of things going for it: 1) It's not based on AOSP (unlike Firefox OS) 2) Supports both native and HTML5 apps (Firefox OS apps are limited to HTML5) 3) Backed by Samsung, still a powerful hardware player in most markets. Both Firefox OS and Ubuntu [have had/will have] a tough time getting device manufacturers to adopt their OS, but Tizen doesn't have that problem.

emsy 12y ago
There's also Salifish OS (https://sailfishos.org/ https://sailfishos.org/). AFAIK, it's open source except the UI. Personally, I'd love to see a true open source OS succeed, but I don't believe it will happen.
- raphman_ 12y ago
  There is still a little bit more closed source than only the UI [1]. However, the folks at Jolla are quite committed to open-sourcing as much as possible. [1] http://jollafr.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/oss-vs-nonoss.png http://jollafr.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/oss-vs-nonoss.... [2] http://merproject.org/meetings/mer-meeting/2014/mer-meeting.2014-11-25-15.00.log.html#l-215 http://merproject.org/meetings/mer-meeting/2014/mer-meeting....
rys 12y ago
Just on point 3, it's not really a matter of getting device vendors to use it. I think it's pretty clear today that incumbent platforms live and die by the quality of their apps and the app delivery and discovery mechanisms. By extension that means the quality of the developer environment, APIs, device functionality you can use, and related tooling. Tizen is nothing without that. Samsung Mobile picking it up for 1, 10 or 100 handsets doesn't guarantee success.
- lovelearning 12y ago
  It's true that sales volumes are not guaranteed, but what I meant was that because of Samsung, Tizen is in a position to atleast circumvent the chicken and egg problem that dogs any new mobile OS. Manufacturers hesitate to bring out devices with a new OS until there is enough developer and user mindshare, but developer and user mindshare grow only when there are enough competitive devices on the market. Right now, Firefox OS is found only on some low to mid range devices. Ubuntu OS did not even hit the crowdsourced funding target last time. Tizen is in a better position to circumvent this, if Samsung commits to Tizen (which I don't see them doing at the moment) and avoids making the same mistakes as Bada.
  - aceperry 12y ago
    The only Tizen phone out in the wild has had some bad reviews. I think Samsung is committed to Tizen for at least a couple more years, mainly as a foil to Google Android, as Samsung has stated repeatedly.
pjmlp 12y ago
Sorry but I don't buy into Tizen. They already did a full native API revamp a few times, with no upgrade path every time it was done. First they threw out the APIs they got from Meego and replaced with straight Bada C++, then they did a facelift, but kept the Bada feeling to the APIs[0], now C++ is out the door and one is supposed to use EFL with C. Also the documentation leaves a lot to wish for. [0] Similar to the Symbian C++ dialect, dual step initialization, handles, macros for exceptions
- aceperry 12y ago
  Yeah, sounds bad. The constantly changing API is just too much to keep up with.

msturgill 12y ago

Windows Phone is not that bad. Google has done a good job trying to starve WP users of their services, but I think we can all survive without Hangouts (Telegram, etc) and Google Voice (who cares anymore) at this point.

pjmlp 12y ago
I got a 630 for the alternative number I use, and was quite impressed with it, specially in regards to the Android devices on the same price range.
nailer 12y ago
Gmail only has a very limited public API, which (according to Google) isn't enough to make a fully fledged email client. So non official Gmail apps futz it with IMAP, which doesn't logically map to search based email.
jarcane 12y ago
WinPhone8.x is a fantastic mobile OS. The interface is great. I've dealt with some bugs since switching to the developer preview, but that's to be expected, and my experience running production code was always rock solid. But the app situation is abominable, and getting worse. The Xbox program seems to have been all but abandoned. Microsoft seems to have largely given up even monitoring the app store; half the top/new games on the lists for the last several months have been blatantly pirated material, either blatant copies of whatever iOS/Android fad is running at the moment, or actual emulator ROMs of old console games running in a buggy, half-broken wrapper. They don't even have an actual category for reporting copyright infringement on the report form. They've also made some missteps on a fair few occasions regarding their own apps, especially with the move to 8.1; replacing or breaking the existing functionality like the Xbox Games portal and the Music app. On the technical side, there's also some issues regarding app support and limitations on both hardware and software. Manufacturers have to agree to very strict tech specifications in order to license WP, so very few other than Nokia have ever bothered to take them up on it. WP apps are heavily sandboxed and limited in a way reminiscent of pre-multitasking iOS, and the official line from MS seems to be that the only acceptable way to build WP apps is in C# with .NET on Visual Studio. Period. Very grudgingly, HTML5 apps are supported. Other options are possible, but largely only through workarounds, which often are grossly undocumented or hacky. Even MS' own other languages, like VB.net and F# are not officially supported, save as libraries in the latter case. (though again in the latter case, MS seems to not believe anyone should want to build full apps in pure F# at all.) The OS and the interface themselves are great, and some of those limitations are no doubt part of why by forcing a more predictable environment. But a lot of it just seems to be MS repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot, and I dread to think how much worse it would get if MS had any actual leverage on the market.

eloisant 12y ago

"For OEMs/handset makers, choice means the ability to do more with software" Well, that's what Google did with Android but the makers were so bad at it (making the Android worse, not updating...) that Google had to take back control by moving more and more elements to the Play services.

tonyedgecombe 12y ago
I think that was more about control than improving quality.
andybak 12y ago
I think Google had mixed motives - it wasn't just the quality thing, it was that some OEMs were obviously trying to make a platform play of their own. However the fact that quality was also an issue put me in the very weird position of applauding the increased centralization of Android. I'm hoping Cyanagenmod can somehow square the circle here.

nateguchi 12y ago

It's a shame Blackberry's new OS didn't take off...

aceperry 12y ago
Really. I liked the hardware and BB10 very much. They had lots of unique and innovative features which would've made Blackberrys a viable 3rd OS.
- dublinben 12y ago
  The Blackberry Classic would have been an excellent phone five years ago. Unfortunately, they've been playing catch up to Apple and Android OEMs for almost a decade.

pjmlp 12y ago

We already have a 3rd mobile OS, it is called Windows Phone and is doing quite well (actually more than iOS) in a few European countries.

jarcane 12y ago
Pretty much only Finland, really, and that's because of the local Nokia brand loyalty and aggressive local pricing. With MS axing the Nokia brand, I see Samsung picking up the slack easily if they dare to compete on price like they do in other countries rather than trying to angle as a luxury brand. I'm already starting to see a lot more Galaxies and iPhones on the street in Helsinki and Tampere these days.
- pjmlp 12y ago
  No, unless it changed the southern countries have a lot of them. Windows Phone are the only alternative to Android, when you are buying pre-paid phones and not willing to shell out more then 500 euros for a mobile phone, when earning 400 euros on average. Even the contracts are not an option for such users.
  - jarcane 12y ago
    Fair enough. I haven't kept up with the numbers in a while. I can certainly understand the price issue, it's the reason I went with a WP here in Finland: My Lumia 1320 was only 300€. Nothing comparable for Android or iOS was available for less than twice that.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
jankeromnes 12y ago
It's really great to have Windows Phone around, but I think the article calls for a more open and experiment-friendly alternative where you don't have to go "through the interests and lenses of the two dominant players" to innovate (making it "three" doesn't help).

newman314 12y ago

We had one. It was called WebOS. Too bad that bad execution and implementation killed it before its time. =(

walterbell 12y ago
Did the open-source project go anywhere?
- newman314 12y ago
  Not really.
  - walterbell 12y ago
    WebOS (or a variant) seems to be in LG TVs, http://www.cnet.com/news/hands-on-with-lgs-webos-smart-tv-is-simple-enough/ http://www.cnet.com/news/hands-on-with-lgs-webos-smart-tv-is...
    - newman314 12y ago
      LuneOS is probably more applicable. http://pivotce.com/2014/09/01/official-release-of-luneos-and-project-updates/ http://pivotce.com/2014/09/01/official-release-of-luneos-and... LG hasn't given me a TV to hack on =) so I have no idea how much things have changed under the hood. I liked the Samsung TVs till the recent overly invasive creepiness (mic, ads etc.) Maybe I'll get a LG next time.

alphadevx 12y ago

I went from webOS to BB10. The market still offers us options (for now).

franciscop 12y ago

> "For OEMs/handset makers, choice means the ability to do more with software" Please no, this would only yield to more bloatware. The move of Google is smart, moving the OS away from OEMs. [Most] manufacturers have demonstrated again and again that they cannot be trusted with software, since they only care about profit and putting more and more useless apps into the OS. We might need more mobile OS, but not for this reason.

throwawaymsft 12y ago
Yep. The thesis of this essay is that choice is unequivocally good for users, handset makers, everyone. Experience doesn't play that out. The experience of a curated, pruned garden vs. a wild west scammy bazaar isn't a good one for users. Here's what happens when you search facebook on Windows Store: http://imgur.com/QDHcpG0 http://imgur.com/QDHcpG0 Choice is great! You can "choose" to install a scam app or the official one. Incompetent OEMs can "choose" to override system behavior. After all, Dell, HP & friends were known for really improving the PC software experience.
- Brakenshire 12y ago
  > The experience of a curated, pruned garden vs. a wild west scammy bazaar isn't a good one for users. But that is a choice. For example, I would prefer to recommend to my parents a system with more granular control over permissions than stock Android, and a market which is more curated than Google Play. It's fairly absurd that they can send off all of their contacts to some random third party server because they installed a flashlight app. > Choice is great! You can "choose" to install a scam app or the official one. To avoid that, you want to choose not to have to make that choice, by going to a more curated platform. I think the key to creating that alternative is by making both Android and HTML5 apps genuinely cross platform. Blackberry, CyanogenMod and/or Sailfish should support the emerging W3C Web API standards and Cordova, and then create a clear target for Android developers to deploy Android apps that don't rely on Play Services. The real need isn't for a third OS, it's for a real cross-platform development ecosystem, then there will be genuine space for innovation.
- userbinator 12y ago

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

withdavidli 12y ago

Does this argument parellel Linux vs Windows vs OSX to anyone else? I think the main problem is going to be getting people to develop for an alternative OS. MS had a paid developer per unique app program, which was called desparate by some. Comments here state that license to develop for the WP is a $100??? Jeez, I wonder what their growth team is thinking. Developers are highly sought after, experimenting is fun, but a lot of people are looking for stable jobs either from the beginning or they want to try a start up / own their own business first. This is also a common problem with trying new programming languages, why choose a new one when established languages have large user base, jobs are plentiful, and not much worry it's going to be abandoned 2 years down the line? There has to be incentives to overcome these barriers to gain large spread adoption. At the end of the day a lot of it comes down to livelyhood. Will a person risk time devoting on something new? If a person starts a company on this new OS, will other developers take that risk to join? Will the clients/customers be willing to make that switch?

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
asuffield 12y ago
I think the main problem is that if you want to play in the mobile space, you must invest heavily in lawyers: http://bl.ocks.org/mbostock/1153292 http://bl.ocks.org/mbostock/1153292 http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/whos-suing-whom-in-the-telecoms-trade/ http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/whos-suing-whom-i... It's not the walls that keep people out, it's the sharks.

andybak 12y ago

My biggest hope is that breaking the duopoly makes it essential that someone cracks the nut of cross-platform development - and hopefully forces the focus back onto web apps or a similar open technology. Firefox saved us from an Internet Explorer world. This time round it seems that we need more than just one caped crusader.

asadotzler 12y ago
"Firefox saved us from an Internet Explorer world. This time round it seems that we need more than just one caped crusader." Or a whole lot more people joining us in the fight. Mozilla is as capable as you all make it.
zak_mc_kracken 12y ago
And Android saved us from an iOS only world.

asdkl234890 12y ago

The web is your 3rd mobile OS. Sure the developing world still needs very cheap phones, and they require software close to the hardware. But in the developed world phones and tables get closer to a full PC every day. They basically are tiny PCs. And exactly how the web made Windows and OSX, and Linux less interesting, so it will make the mobile OSs less interesting. Because even if you can't get close to the hardware, and might require user permissions to access hardware features, still a java script and HTML5 based web app can do almost anything you want on mobile hardware. History keeps repeating itself.

amirmc 12y ago
That's not the way the current evidence is pointing. People do like apps and so far the pendulum doesn't seem to be swinging back to the web. See slides 11 & 30 at http://a16z.com/2014/10/28/mobile-is-eating-the-world/ http://a16z.com/2014/10/28/mobile-is-eating-the-world/
- morenoh149 12y ago
  it's more nuanced than that. The web is now also reponsive websites. I'm bullish on mobile mostly due to that very presentation. I'm counting the web under mobile.
  - amirmc 12y ago
    The graph on slide 11 is pretty clear that the trend is for more time being spent in mobile apps than on the web. Unless you want to take issue with the data, there isn't much nuance there. To whoever downvoted my earlier comment (if it wasn't the parent), please explain why. I don't have a strong opinion on app vs web so I'm keen to see data.
- rokhayakebe 12y ago
  People do like apps I do not agree entirely. Do you people like apps? Or do people like these bookmarks* to things they can get to easily? May even be a web app for all they care, can they just click and get to it.

levlandau 12y ago

This is a classic network effects problem. The two OS's are dominant because they are powerful two sided networks (developers + users) and so breaking the duopoly is that much harder. As is typical with these sorts of networks you really need to solve a problem a user or developer has 10X better than the existing networks do. The few times we've seen this happen on the internet are when the new company focuses on a specific vertical (airbnb to craigslist) and/or is aided by a specific technology wave or breakthrough. I suspect the "third" "mobile" OS will succeed similarly i.e. it will either solve for a narrow use case and blow every alternative out of the water and/or be aided by some new technology. Definitely won't happen via brute force...not 8 years in at least

johnnyhead 12y ago

There are Windows Phone and BlackBerry 10 that are both excellent OSes.

aceperry 12y ago
BB10, yes. WP, not so much. It may be better than the older Windows mobile, but not really in the same class as iOS and Android.

fpgeek 12y ago

Think about the type of deep integration that Apple-owned Siri has on iPhones, or Google-owned Gmail has on stock Android phones, for instance. Those apps operate much more contextually and fluidly, and far more powerfully, on those phones than 3rd-party apps downloaded from an app store would. While I understand the point about Siri, Gmail (of all the Google apps) seems like a terrible example of the same thing on the Android side (Maps and its incestuous relationship with Play Services might be a better fit). What does Gmail do that Microsoft's Outlook app couldn't do if Microsoft were willing to invest the effort? Maybe I'm missing a feature I don't use, but the best I can come up with is being bundled with the device, but even there if Microsoft struck a deal with, say, Verizon, I don't think there's much Google could do about it.

jankeromnes 12y ago
I think a better example for Google's deep integration into android is the "Google Search app" (previously "Google Now") that is sort of a Siri-equivalent: you can talk to it, it can manage your phone, send emails, create new alarms, manage your calendar, assist your transit, even change the temperature at home if you have Nest. Worth noting that this type of deep integration is totally possible with the Web: you can use many APIs like voice recognition, alarms, etc. "3rd-party apps" from the web can very well integrate deeply with your device, if you allow them.

amirmc 12y ago

He's asking for innovation in the wrong place. The OP conveniently ignores all the other mobile OSs out there such as Windows, Firefox, Ubuntu and also people like Fairphone. It's pretty lazy to just claim we need more, when what he really wants is one more (open) winner. I say that he's looking in the wrong place because to "democratize the mobile operating system" is to ignore a critical part of what makes mobile worthwhile. All those cloud services and apps that do useful things for you. How about we democratize the cloud instead? There should be no real reason I can't point my iOS device at my own infrastructure to co-ordinate sync, backup and sharing of all my stuff (instead of iCloud). Must I sign up for yet another third-party service/app just to provide me with an incremental feature? Why can't I just install apps into my own little cloud backend that my phone can connect to and do useful things for me? Have that be open for developers to target and maybe I can pay them for their work. Then it matters less what physical hardware I happen to be using. Of course, you can only access the plethora of sensors with a native app but most services I use don't need this much context. In any case, this is a concept many people are beginning to advocate for with a variety of reasons. FWIW, some of us are taking a clean-slate approach to tackle the distributed systems issues http://amirchaudhry.com/brewing-miso-to-serve-nymote/ http://amirchaudhry.com/brewing-miso-to-serve-nymote/

zanny 12y ago
> There should be no real reason I can't point my iOS device at my own infrastructure to co-ordinate sync Well there is a real reason, you never own the iphone you have. You never have control of the device, Apple does. They have final say in what can be built to run on it, what can run on it, what you can install, what OS you can run, whether you get updates, and what the phone does. You have no control over it, at all. So don't act surprised when Apple takes advantage of absolute power to screw you over. At that, I know owncloud exists for iOS, so you could just use that, at least for the bullet points you mentioned, not so much for the sensors-aware network of devices.
bsbechtel 12y ago
>>There should be no real reason I can't point my iOS device at my own infrastructure to co-ordinate sync, backup and sharing of all my stuff (instead of iCloud). I want this as much as you and everyone else who upvoted you, but the problem is there is no obvious business model in it. Sure, techies will pay (app.net?), but the general population doesn't care enough to put out money for this.

the_gipsy 12y ago

Apps that I explicitly installed on my Nexus 5: Chrome-to-phone, Chromecast, Google Drive (maybe that one came installed?), a metronome, and WhatsApp. What I'm getting at, is that apps interfaces are generally better than web pages or "web apps", but everything else about them sucks. They nag you constantly with updates and unsolicited request to do some action, require to think about permissions, and crash often.

flyinglizard 12y ago

That sounds like a great way to increase fragmentation. Even the current duopoly situation is, to me, an anomaly and a general waste of resources, only existing because of how powerful are the backers and interests of both mobile OSes. These are two incredibly rich players in a fight for survival, which is why the market hasn't been completely overrun by one of them. I'm sorry to say that, but if you want to get more choices and freedom, the most likely course to succeed is the legal one. Once the prominent player is attacked with anti trust litigation, they'll open up whatever needed to quiet things down. That being said, Google is pretty good on openness from the first place. Another mobile OS would just mean an awful experience for users, fragmentation for developers and a temptation for device makers to create crap user experience. In terms of resources, if you want to see the mobile market moving forward and not sideways, better invest precious developer efforts in content and functionality, not on more cross platform madness and reinvention of the wheel. Finally, users get a better experience when things are curated. No one can argue Apple's model doesn't work. People are less concerned about what they can do with their phones, and more concerned about what they actually do with their phones, which is why quality and polish win every time over choice and openness.

jankeromnes 12y ago

Call me biased, but Firefox OS makes the web run on 25$ smartphones, is fully open and customizable because it's the web, has the biggest "app store" of the world because it runs any web app, is totally royalty-free (just like the other Mozilla projects), and is already being shipped on lots of devices all around the globe. How's that for an open, unlocked and innovation-friendly alternative?

minthd 12y ago
It's just the reviews on such low cost phones runing FFoS are pretty bad, and once you climb to $65 or $100 , windows phone and android offer much better alternatives.
- jankeromnes 12y ago
  Most of these reviews are unfair (comparing a 25$ FxOS to devices at 2x the cost or more) but you make a point about FxOS not being attractive for higher-end. That's part of why it's currently being reinvented.
squeaky-clean 12y ago
Is there anywhere to buy a $25 Firefox phone? I'd like to get one to try developing on, but can't find any info about purchasing any Firefox phone in the USA.
bonn1 12y ago
> 25$ smartphones Where do I get a 25$ Firfox smartphone? > has the biggest "app store" of the world because it runs any web app How many web apps are ready to run offline, e.g. in the subway? > is totally royalty-free yes of course and not any patents from Apple, Google, Lenovo/Motorola will be used > is already being shipped on lots of devices all around the globe again where? I like the Firefox very very much but we need someone with money and power to push and even then I doubt that it will be a succes, just look at Microsoft, they have an excellent product but they can't get a foot into the door and again on Firefox OS you need dedicated apps too even if they are web apps.

RyanMcGreal 12y ago

Duopoly? Worldwide, Android's market share has increased from under 60% in 2011 to around 85% by the end of 2013. Likewise, over the same period the iOS market share has gone from around 20% to just over 10%, while all other platforms have dwindled down to the remaining <5%. http://www.idc.com/prodserv/smartphone-os-market-share.jsp http://www.idc.com/prodserv/smartphone-os-market-share.jsp The only sense in which this is still a duopoly is that the iOS platform, while a relatively tiny share of the total market, is still a significant share of paid apps.

melling 12y ago

What happened to fixing the desktop monopoly? Two decades with Microsoft >= 90% of the desktop. It wouldn't matter if it was Apple with 90%. One company with that much market share hurts innovation.

PaulHoule 12y ago

Huh? I thought he was talking about AT&T and Verizon.

dredmorbius 12y ago
My thought as well. And a vastly more interesting conversation to have. My sense is that with ubiquitous WiFi and IP based protocols, I can ditch my Smartphone for most uses, and with it the massive amounts of intrusion and data surveillance it represents. A small "feature phone" (with vastly superior battery performance) for general comms, and functioning as a modem in a pinch, with a tablet that's used in a cache-and-burst mode most of the time, and with more continuous connectivity where that's available. Mobile phone operators are well on the way to making themselves obsolete.
- PaulHoule 12y ago
  He's a VC so he probably thinks that $10 a GB is cheap.

bonn1 12y ago

> We Need to Break the Mobile Duopoly Yes, we all know this—maybe the OP wouldn't mind also to tell how we or whoever should break this duopoly if even Microsoft is not able to.

arikrak 12y ago

1. There's no chance of a completely different mobile OS succeeding at any point in the near future. An OS needs a huge platform of partners to work, even Blackberry and Microsoft haven't succeeded. The only chance is a fork of Android that can build off their software and apps, but look how hard of a time Amazon has with that. (Though obviously a16z is hoping their company Cyanogen can succeed.) 2. The more OS's there are, the worse it is for companies that have to build apps for multiple systems. It would be easiest if there was just one OS, but like Communism, that doesn't work out. So a duopoly seems like the best compromise.

jbigelow76 12y ago
I agree with you on the first point. I think it might be worthwhile for MS to give up on WP and go all in with their own fork of Android, specifically because of how hard of a time Amazon has had. If MS joined Amazon with their own individual forks between the two of them, along with MS's services that could replace Google Play Services (Outlook for GMail, Cortana for Now, Maps for Maps, etc...) that might capture enough of the Android user base to incentivize Android devs to target all Android app stores and not focus just on Google Play. That would break the duoply not at the OS level but it would mean that Google would have to compete harder to keep Android users on their implementation rather than MS/Amazon/Cyanogen's.

thisIsNotMikey 12y ago

I think the system will eventually implode. I'm actually here after my app got arbitrarily rejected by apple and I found Paul Graham's essay on how apple treats developers. I've spent the last year of my life learning iOS, first OC, then swift. I've dedicated thousands of hours developing, promoting, and even helping aspiring iOS developers on SO. I have been a loyal customer, developer, and investor, but today I sold all of my stock and pledged to never develop for or buy apple products again. It's just not worth it. We've all heard the saying the customer is always right, but in this industry it should be the developer is always right. The current system we have harms developers. Yes google and apple have incentives to keep it closed, but they can't hold forever. Although many will argue they are dead, I think web-apps will take over as more system Apis are supported.

midnitewarrior 12y ago

There is a viable 3rd ecosystem out there and it is Microsoft Windows Phone. However, the existence of Windows Phone has proven that developers do not want to support more than 2 mobile platforms. It creates a barrier for entry and support updates if you want to keep all of your platforms at parity. As a result, the fate of any 3rd ecosystem is a slow non-growth existence in the froth of the industry platform churn.

fiatjaf 12y ago

What? You haven't heard of Firefox OS? You totally should! Check out this blog post for a small sample of the amazing power of Firefox OS: http://binary-choice.blogspot.com.br/2014/08/firefox-os-is-developers-best-friend.html http://binary-choice.blogspot.com.br/2014/08/firefox-os-is-d... Seriously, if you want more mobile OSes, but you're not even considering Firefox OS you should probably shut up and start writing your super-powerful-mega-winner OS yourself and stop complaining.