Very exciting. In my view, Firefox Mobile OS has a much better chance of gaining broad adoption than Windows Phone, Blackberry, Symbian, Tizen, and all other non-Android, non-iOS platforms, because its native applications are built with HTML5 and related technologies that have <i>already</i> been embraced by developers worldwide.<p>From users' perspective, virtually the entire universe of existing HTML5 applications that work on small screens <i>will be native apps for the platform</i> -- from day one.
To me this is one of the most exciting projects coming up. it is still in early, early days, but it seems to pose the most realistic sane alternative to Android and iOS.<p>Android is great in that they are open, but their UI library is really just a mess, anybody who uses it for any amount of time yearns for the days of laying things out using HTML. iOS is much better in this respect but has the problem of limited devices and of being a closed platform.<p>I have no idea how they B2G (Boot2Gecko) will navigate the patent minefield, but I hope they do. I'm picking up another Galaxy Nexus just so I can have a phone dedicated to hacking on it.
I've repeatedly seen HTML5+JS claimed as some kind of panacea for easy, cross-platform application development, but don't really see how it is possible, particularly on mobile devices.<p>Both the Android and iOS SDKs are pretty specifically optimized for performance on their respective devices, and I don't see the need for those types of optimizations going away anytime soon. As an example, take a UITableView (iOS) or ListView (Android), backed by a SQLite data store that has returned 2000 rows to display.<p>It's not actually feasible (for performance & memory reasons) to simply render all 2000 rows and allow the user to scroll through them. Instead, both the UITableView & ListView recognize that on a phone, there's only really enough room to display 5-6 rows anyway. So they instantiate those 5-6 rows and populate them with the first few rows from the result set. Then, as the user scrolls down, additional rows can be loaded in, and the previously used rows (that have now been scrolled off-screen) get recycled to represent new rows at the bottom of the table view. Additionally, the data for each row can be loaded on-demand as the user scrolls the row into view, and then be freed once that row has scrolled off screen.<p>It's a nice and tidy optimization that is absolutely necessary on both platforms (failure to implement the recycling mechanism can basically kill your scrolling performance). That is just one example, there are many more optimizations developers make to keep their apps smooth and responsive on iOS/Android, and a lot of those optimizations involve relatively low-level interaction with the underlying GUI toolkit.<p>I don't think these types of optimizations are feasible when writing HTML+JS apps, they're simply abstracted too far away from the underlying GUI toolkit. (Some might even say that layer of abstraction is the entire point of using HTML+JS in the first place.) Regardless, I think it severely limits the scope of the types of apps you can create using HTML+JS.<p><i>And I haven't even mentioned games, or apps that do any sort of audio/image/video processing. (Even on the web these are often relegated to Flash.)</i>
I am worried by this:<p>>Due to the optimization of the platform for entry-level smartphones and the removal of unnecessary middleware layers, mobile operators will have the ability to offer richer experiences ...<p>So, can we expect that mobile operators and/or manufacturers will yet again put junk on the phones?
This is the right strategical move for Mozilla.<p>I think they made a mistake to wait this long to do something new and bold, but at least now they are on a solid path.<p>IMO, their first mistake was not-launching an open source search engine to compete with Google (pre-Chrome era). Second mistake was waiting too long to get this Mobile OS out the door (which is still a ways off it seems).<p>But this is definitely promising. However, I can't help but wonder about the missed opportunity for collaboration with Canonical. Its clear that Canonical is on a similar mobile trajectory for Ubuntu. An Ubuntu / Firefox Mobile OS would have been cool; and arguably a stronger force to compete against Android/Chrome and iOS.
Building B2B on an Android kernel was clever. Mozilla can leverage all the Android hardware support implemented by device OEMs and ongoing kernel maintenance by Google.
While I am exited about this project, I wonder what are actually
HTML5 apps? Where will users get them (will there be some market and who will operate it), will they work online? How are they installed?
Are we one step closer to the mozilla seabird?<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG3tLxEQEdg&feature=youtube_gdata" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG3tLxEQEdg&feature=youtu...</a><p>I wish, but realistically that phone would probably cost $6k today.
It was kind of interesting comparing the quotes from the various network operators. For instance, this management-speak gem could apply to any product at all:<p>"Etisalat aim to enrich the user experience and improve the life of its customers by providing enhanced services across a complete portfolio of devices and operating systems. Firefox OS will provide an open source platform to our customers and various ecosystem players, such as application developers, to experience innovative services. Thanks to this strategic initiative, the industry will benefit from a sustained growth in mobile data and the development of cutting edge applications, as well as the promise of affordable smartphone devices that provide an enriched customer experience."<p>[edit: off-topic, i know]
That digital mockup looks a lot like an iPhone...I'm sure it won't be long before Apple claims that this free software is causing them irreparable harm and moves for an injunction banning anyone from downloading the Mozilla OS or purchasing devices from ZTE.<p>Sarcasm...but just barely
An exciting development indeed, but I'm afraid what will happen if the phones have bad build quality and how will that affect it's popularity.<p>I've had an Alcatel phone and it's.. I don't know how to say, but Huawei is a better manufacturer than them now, so get the picture.
In this case global support means the multi-national mobile telecoms of industrialized nations. In other words, all the mobile providers scared of a world where Apple, Google, and Microsoft call the shots and squeeze the profit margins that used to be protected by government bandwidth licensing.<p>On the other hand, I have a hard time comprehending how a platform like Mozilla that's slow enough on desktops can make headway in the mobile space. Clearly WebKit is ahead of the game and is open source as well. I'm reluctantly using Mozilla on the desktop.<p>HTML5 technology is the future of browsing for sure but lets not turn it into the Java of mobile technology. Native apps have a proper place just by virtue of the performance gains. Putting everything on HTML5 is not only expensive in terms of bandwidth but also processing power, therefore a battery drain. The bandwidth and more importantly the battery are the Achilles heel of mobile.<p>Also, where does this leave developing countries that are far behind and mainly surviving on WAP phones?<p>I just find the framing of this press release as nothing but unwarranted hyperbole that is more an corporate alliance where your enemy's enemy is your friend.
I think this is very exciting and I love that they're targeting the cheaper market and also emerging markets where Android, iOS and Blackberry tend to cost too much and Symbian is losing marketshare.
I hope the mobile OS doesn't blackout as the Firefox navigator tends to. I lost all hope on Firefox because of this behavior.<p>I don't know if this has been fixed. But anyways, I won't go back to Firefox.