Farewell Firefox OS smartphones. Mozilla today announced an end to its smartphone experiment, and said that it would stop developing and selling Firefox OS smartphones. It will continue to experiment on how it might work on other connected devices and Internet of Things networks.
Firefox OS was doomed from the start, just as all the other attempts at competing with iOS and Android. The cold, harsh, and sad truth is that modern mobile computing just isn’t conducive to small and upstart platforms. You need the applications, you need the scale, you need the hearts and minds.
And all of those are taken by Google and Apple, and nobody else matters. It’s too late.
For anyone interested, people on the Maemo / Meego / Sailfish forums have been discussing a fully open source, community driven, complete mobile operating system by further developing Nemo Mobile on top of the Mer software distribution:
http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=96188
http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=96236
I don’t know if the discussion will lead to anything, but I dream of a day when I can buy a generic mobile phone and install any actively developed open source operating system on it that I want.
Sailfish is already way there, so it would be a waste to lose all that effort. Of course if they won’t open source it, then something else would be needed. How about Plasma Mobile?
It will never work and here is why….drivers.
Its a problem as old as time in the FOSS world, the FOSS advocates refuse to have anything but open drivers and often make things nasty for those that try to have closed drivers (just look at how Nvidia has to keep releasing drivers for older hardware with each new kernel because the old drivers get broken for instance) and the companies are NEVER gonna open the drivers so…yeah give it up Chuck.
IMHO the answer should frankly be obvious, a shim of some sort to allow the closed source driver to think its running on the original OS, similar to what ReactOS is working on and how Wine deals with DirectX, but as long as its open drivers or bust? The answer is gonna be bust.
I really wish it weren’t so as I love my phone but am unable to run any ROM but the stock thanks to nobody in the FOSS community having any luck with drivers, but I think its pretty dang obvious by now the corps making the chips for these thing would rather shut down than open up which leaves us with the choices of 1.- pay too much for weaker hardware that supports FOSS, or do like the rest of us and 2.- Buy a phone knowing that even with it rooted you are never gonna run anything but stock.
It sucks but that is just how things are.
Mozilla seems to be backing out of a lot of technologies lately.
Which is good. They need more focus. Rust and Firefox are good areas for them to work on.
Edited 2015-12-08 20:53 UTC
Sadly its not gonna work because Mozilla is a dead corp walking as they just lost all that money they were getting for search.
For those that haven’t heard Yahoo is doing a spin off and basically putting up for sale anything that isn’t their Chinese search holdings which means those hundreds of millions Mozilla was getting for their search? That’s gone as the only 2 corps left that might bid on it are Google (which does not care now that it has Chrome) and MSFT (which does not care as they are busy pushing Win 10 and Edge) so their entire business model went up in flames practically overnight.
So if you want to know why Mozilla is suddenly having a change of heart and abandoning projects like Thunderbird and FirefoxOS? Its not because they want to, its because they just found out their entire revenue stream is about to dry up so they are cutting to the bone to try to survive a little longer while they figure out a new revenue scheme.
Is that web based “apps” have a hard time competing against native ones.
Just look at the attempts made by both Apple and Google and the writing was on the wall what was going to happen to Firefox OS.
Sad but thats how it is.
@HangLoose
Not true. What is a web-based app ? It is an application running HTML and JavaScript to render, process, and complete tasks it was programmed to do, influenced or not by the user. The problem is not the fact that the application is web based, no, the problem will come from the level of optimization and the intensity of the development and support behind it.
Take the example of Android. Who would imagine one day that a s****d JAVA based application OS would compete so efficiently with other (even dead) OS running native code like Symbian. No one. This was a completely insane idea at the beginning IF Google didn’t have the cash and intelligence to promote Android. In other words, what you say have little to do with the fact the OS is running HTML apps.
Edited 2015-12-08 20:12 UTC
You have your way of seeing it and I am going to be the last person trying to change your mind (it is clear you are inclined towards web dev).
Just ask Facebook, Twitter and others that have dumped html+js apps in favor of native ones due to problems.
Peace.
Because webapps weren’t well supported on iOS and Android. FirefoxOS showed that if you optimized for HTML5 you could run great on really lowend hardware.
As someone who was close to Firefox OS, I’d already given up on them (ever since the majority of their team moved to China). The apps were cool and very easy to program, but the relationships with the phone hardware wasn’t great and the team was very small. It was extremely difficult to update your phone and the manufacturers were less than helpful.
I still hope for a day when HTML5 can be considered a serious app platform, but it looks like Chrome Apps are dying and I don’t see anything else.
Like many other things, it was a cool idea but didn’t have the funding. A dream, but only a dream. I’ll pack my 3 FirefoxOS phone and tablet away, right next to the One Laptop Per Child.
To quote from one of the Firefox OS Telegram groups:
“no, actually it’s rather the exact opposite, they’re being honest about dropping commercial device support and chasing after the “striving to becoming the third ecosystem” delusion (which is, apparently, just that – even *Microsoft* has failed there, so not like Mozilla has anything to be ashamed of…).
They’re trying to make it clear (to avoid rumors) that Firefox OS for phones, or more broadly, as a product for *carriers*, OEM-s etc is not just “not a priority” anymore (as communicated several times since spring), but is actually being actively phased out.
Phased out *in favor of* Firefox OS as a product aimed at actual users, consumers etc – see https://twitter.com/jaaksi/status/674266444457185281
Folks. Firefox OS _is_the_Web_.
And it will be more so when Service Workers and other Progressive Apps related stuff ships in gecko.
You shouldn’t be focusing on creating “Firefox OS apps” – you should be creating apps for the web.
Firefox OS in its current form has a *lot* of issues – including proprietary (and apparently hard-or-impossible-to-standardize APIs to access some of the low-level functionality, or the case of “packaged apps”) – but was and is an invaluable part of starting the work that (seems to be) leading to the Web actually becoming a viable platform for such apps (without the limitations and un-webbyness of packaged apps and proprietary APIs).
There is a future for the web platform, and it’s “Progressive Apps”, and Firefox OS made the first explorations into that space. Whether it’s a flashable phone OS, or something less intrusive (like b2gdroid), Firefox OS remains a rather powerful platform for these “explorations” (and a valuable resource for future products, like those of the connected devices platform).
Brendan Eich has a popular saying “Always bet on JS” – paraphrasing that you could say “Always bet on the Open Web” (and not FirefoxOS) and with that, you cannot go wrong…
BTW progressive apps stuff is here:
https://dev.opera.com/blog/progressive-web-apps-future/
try pinning https://www.pokedex.org/ as an app – and see that it’s practically a “hosted Firefox OS app” – except that this *actually works* in chrome as well (as any other browser), with offline support in chrome even.”
I’m still holding out for Ubuntu Touch’s vision of the one unified device. I still have hope!
You need something new and fresh. But for anything new to actually reach the market, you may need deep pockets.
However alternative mobile OSes can evolve even in community form, as long as hardware will be more open (which is the main barrier). I’m waiting for Plasma Mobile. If Sailfish will be open sourced, it can have good future too.
I personally wasn’t so interested in Firefox OS. JavaScript focused OS was a premature experiment with the current level of hardware technology. Native focused OS is the way to go.
Edited 2015-12-08 20:52 UTC
Each platform seems to be settling into one monopoly and one alternative
PC – windows + mac
Server – Linux + windows
Mobile – Android + iOS
Search – Google + Bing
CPU – x86 + ARM
Each of these have small niche players but the reality tends to repeat itself. Most have a 3rd player for a while (which are eventually edged out) but used almost exclusively by OSNews readers only!
Come on, I’m pretty sure that 2016 is going to be the year of Desktop Linux.
AMD vs Nvidia…
Sony vs Nintentdo
Ebay vs Amazon
Digikey vs Newark
AT&T vs TWC (where I live anyway)
Almost any industry where there’s a high barrier to movement is going to boil down to a handful of big players. DSLR cameras are another; Canon and Nikon. Once you start buying lenses and what not, it becomes prohibitive to jump to the other or one of the smaller brands since you’d have to re-buy everything. And if you go to a smaller brand, you may have to accept that there will be some options aren’t available because there’s not a large enough community to fund the niche stuff.
In Taiwan Pentax is also very popular and you could argue Sony is, too. So I don’t think DSLR apply.
i hope this will free up some resources for thunderbird…
The announcement wasn’t about discontinuing Firefox OS development – which in fact is being broadened in scope – it was about Mozilla ceasing to develop Firefox OS in cooperation with carriers and vendors with the aim to ship commercial devices.
The idea here is that if a vendor/carrier wants to ship a device they’re free to do it – and it will be with an OS that’s under active development – but they won’t get any direct help from Mozilla, nor their phone release schedule will in any way be binding of the Firefox OS release schedule.
As a FirefoxOS user, I think it’s great that carriers and OEMs are being left out as “partners”. Seriously, it was a joke. My ZTE phone never had any OS update and they weren’t even releasing the kernel sources. And they were official Mozilla partners. Also it doesn’t help that Mozilla keeps slowly releasing “development releases”, and still considering stable the godawful version that was released almost one year and a half ago.
Come on, release early, release often. We’re choosing this platform over others because we believe in it and we don’t mind coming along for the bumpy ride, just don’t leave us in the cold. Like, for example, my officially branded FirefoxOS phone not having official updates for a year now, and never having official updates ever again. Thanks. I’m glad there are some French dudes still working on the port.
Year of the Linux Desktop – it won’t ever happen now. At least not in the form of millions of end users actively choosing to switch from Windows on x86 workstations over to a Linux distribution. It won’t happen. On other kinds of semi-general-purpose computers (for developers or HPC) however, Windows is dead in the water. As for servers, it looks like there’s going to be a war of the unikernels. The victor there might not even be Linux. You will probably find that Genode on top of Xen, vSphere, Hyper-V or the Muen Separation Kernel become quite the powerhouse over the coming years.
Edited 2015-12-09 12:57 UTC
So did anyone else laugh about Apple bringing on the iPhone to the market in a world dominated by Symbian and PocketPC.
It’s not too late to do anything. Main problem is that these phones could not be found easily and (as far as I am aware) not even one carrier has one of these devices in their offerings.
Same thing will happen to Ubuntu Phone or any other small companies if they do not work properly on their distribution channels and make their products easily accesible to the public.
Only for the sake of having something different in their hands that doesn’t cost an arm and a leg, people will be inclined to buy it.
They sure did laugh. The difference here is that Apple had brought something new in terms of device interaction and capacitive touch screen. They didn’t invent them, however they did bring them to the mainstream market. Android was the first major competitor, so they won themselves a place and they, too, brought something new: a phone that was more like a computer than an iPhone, and more open.
What, however, has Microsoft/Mozilla/Blackberry/Sailfish brought that is new? I don’t mean in terms of new gestures, I mean in terms of their platform. Android and iOS have native apps. They have web browsers. They have app repositories… so what, precisely, are these new players bringing that most people will care about?
There is always room for a third option, and it is never too late. On those points we agree. However said third option has to be different, not a rehash of old concepts… and what was Firefox OS, really, but ChromeOS Mobile with a different web engine?
It’s more about usability than features. Name one Android phone that for 50 bucks runs smooth and offers enough performance to be a daily driver.
It’s always good to have other options but they need to be available to everyone to even consider it.
FirefoxOS phones were quite decent compared to other symbian clones that are still around. Sure it was not ready for premium time but it was a decent option to have.
Regarding Apple, I respect for what they did. It was at a time when Microsoft didn’t prioritise the web market and mobile industry and Google was a bit late to the party.
I do not buy this idea. The future is long and unknown, so many upstarts can still make it through.