9 ms·

Mozilla Will Stop Developing and Selling Firefox OS Smartphones

529 points by kevining 11y ago

kevining 11y ago
Mozilla is shifting to use their web platform for connected devices and IoT efforts. The IoT space is a mess right now and I think that Mozilla could do a lot of good there. I think that Firefox OS as a phone operating system will always be available for hackers to port and install on their own devices.
- binarymax 11y ago
  I was curious and found this for anyone else who may be interested: https://wiki.mozilla.org/FlyWeb https://wiki.mozilla.org/FlyWeb
- ris 11y ago
  "The IoT space is a mess right now" But is also almost entirely vapour. Seeing this news gave me relief that Mozilla might be pulling their heads out of the clouds chasing fantastical dreams of mobile platforms, but if anything IoT is worse!
  - vdnkh 11y ago
    >almost entirely vapour I work for an M2M company whose been around for 25 years now, in some form or another. M2M is the backbone of IoT and while it isn't as glamorous, it's a large space. Industrial gases, especially helium, are very lucrative right now.
    - striking 11y ago
      M2M makes sense. It's great for devices that are not classically connected via the Internet to communicate with each other. It's very helpful in the industrial and medical fields. However, IoT devices should not be consumer-facing tech. IoT devices are on average far more expensive and have shoddy software/firmware. Even when the software is fixed, IoT will remain a niche range of products until their quality surpasses that of the traditional version of the product. From a business perspective, anything IoT hardly makes sense as a standalone product. M2M is a fantastic field. But IoT is not.
  - binarymax 11y ago
    IoT is better for R&D now, because its going to happen (if not through a nice clean adoption but rather through sheer force of will). Mobile was already mature with a well entrenched duopoly when FFOS began. IoT is still up for grabs.
    - adrusi 11y ago
      IoT is an open opportunity in general, but it doesn't really mesh with what Mozialla has done in the past. Mozilla very well could change their focus and compete in that space, but a newcomer without any entrenched ideas would be better off. So would a big company with the resources to spin off and fund a relatively independent branch to work in IoT. Mozilla's only big success has been Firefox. Firefox succeeded because it was competing in a market with only one other player, and that player wasn't innovating at all. Now the browser market is different and firefox remains popular because of free software nerds, people who like its customization power (something that Mozilla is risking with its recent changes to addons, although it looks like they're treading carefully), and people who switched to it from internet explorer because their kids told them to and don't care to use Chrome. Mozilla is good at disrupting, including both developing a superior product and getting people to care about it, but they're bad at... basically everything else, business wise. Like any organization they can get better, but doing so would require a level of change that might ultimately just make them less good at what they are good at. It seems that's what they're trying to do, and it seems that's what's happening. gkoberger's toplevel comment[1] might offer a good opportunity. They started down this path with personas, but then abandoned it when they couldn't make developers care about it. Maybe they've lost their touch. It pains me to say it, since they've done so much good for the things I care about, but Mozilla's time might be ending. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10698997 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10698997
  - Raed667 11y ago
    IoT lacks consistant "full-stack" standards. Someone as big as Mozilla could make things less messier by adopting standards on some/all layers of IoT. This is an area worth exploring "for the greater good".
    - rimantas 11y ago
      Foe me IoT lacks the problem that needs solving. And we do know what happens to the solutions without the problem.
      - Raed667 11y ago
        I'll be graduating in a few months and I study embedded/IoT. And as someone who spent the last 2 years digging in the corners of IoT, I agree that IoT can seem to be over-engineering problems that don't exist. But the market is there, and it is huge. (mainly industrial, energy & transport applications) IoT now is like the early personal computers, they were too expensive and almost no one knew why they needed them.
        dualogy 11y ago
        Would you recommend your favourite resources for techies to dig into this space?
        Raed667 11y ago
        Hard to say, there are so many. - I'd start with embedded environments: Arduino / STM32(F1/F4) / RaspberryPi see how to code for them and how to make them talk to each other (UART/SPI/I2C/CAN...) - Then I'd check how simple kernel modules are made, and try to mess around the kernel in raspberryPi and make something that outputs a value on the terminal and via I2C. - I'd check the "concept" of middlewares and start by something simple WComp[0] (written in C#). It is not used in the industry but it gives you a pretty good sens of how things should work. - For beginners I'd recommend to use Parse[1] for any project where you need a "cloud" infrastructure (Database, API, users, privileges,...) - You should also check how fully distributed systems (that operate in a peer-to-peer manner) work. - After that it comes to ressource optimisation and things like that. EDIT (You should also check these) : - UPnP (Universal Plug and Play) is way to get devices to automatically discover and understand each other. - MQTT: publish-subscribe TCP/IP messaging protocol (I use it for push notifications) [0] : http://www.wcomp.fr http://www.wcomp.fr [1] : https://www.parse.com/ https://www.parse.com/
- cwyers 11y ago
  > The IoT space is a mess right now and I think that Mozilla could do a lot of good there. I think that platforms with a thriving ecosystem in other markets have an advantage over Firefox OS, and Firefox OS doesn't offer any compelling advantages over, say, Linux (since at the kernel level, that's what it IS) to offset that disadvantage.
- bobajeff 11y ago
  I don't know if this counts as IoT but if they made a good Smart Watch I could use as a phone (standalone) and browse the web on I'd buy it. I keep waiting for someone to come out with this but still nothing.
niij 11y ago
Could have seen that being a flop from outer space.
Apocryphon 11y ago
Guess it's up to Canonical to make Ubuntu Touch a viable open source smartphone OS - are there even devices running it that are being sold in the U.S.? Did not expect that Sailfish OS would outlive Firefox OS.
- bad_user 11y ago
  As much as I respect Mozilla, when the user experience is worse than a cheap Android 1.6, you should know you've got a problem. It's cool that they tried, but on one hand if you want an open-source OS it makes much more sense to fork Android, and yes I believe Ubuntu is doomed as well. And for Mozilla this may mean more resources spent into Firefox for Android, a mobile browser that is turning out to be the browser of choice for power users due to its extensions, an awesome browser that could use some love from Mozilla as it's lagging behind Chrome in terms of standards relevant for mobiles (e.g. push notifications, app manifest). And Firefox on the desktop needs some love as well. The multiprocess support is almost there, except for a list of bugs that keep delaying it. Mozilla has many things on its plate. Firefox OS is a cool experiment, but it didn't work, so time to move on.
  - blinkingled 11y ago
    > And for Mozilla this may mean more resources spent into Firefox for Android, a mobile browser that is turning out to be the browser of choice for power users due to its extensions, an awesome browser that could use some love from Mozilla as it's lagging behind Chrome Exactly the thing Mozilla should do - focus on Firefox and maybe even continue to invest in making Thunderbird better. There are a lot of reasons why that approach is more likely to succeed.
- criddell 11y ago
  If you want an open source smartphone OS, why not just use Android (AOSP)?
  - rockdoe 11y ago
    Because the apps ecosystem is getting more and more locked into Play Services, which are not part of AOSP.
draw_down 11y ago
I hope they can figure out something to keep them afloat. Mozilla seems directionless lately.
- flannell 11y ago
  Last week it was Yahoo
gkoberger 11y ago
Firefox appeared at a time when there was huge potential being stifled by a stagnant monopoly in the space, and people were desperate for something good. It filled a real need, and people loved it. FirefoxOS appeared at a time when there was huge potential being actively being pushed forward and innovated on by the two largest tech companies in the space, and people already had two great options to choose from. It filled no real need, and nobody wanted it. For Mozilla to stay alive, they need to pick a space that is currently desperately needed but being ignored by large corporations and the government: privacy and identity. Mozilla could be the champion of the Snowden era, yet instead they're distracting themselves with IoT, VR and other shiny new toys. (And yes, I realize that users don't care about privacy. But nobody cared about web standards, either: it's all about packaging. That's Mozilla's strength.) Mozilla is a non-profit with a mission (https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/). It's time they start acting like one again.
- Certhas 11y ago
  But when they tried to pioneer privacy respecting ads in the new tab window, they were repeatedly and roundly criticised here, too...
  - epoch1970 11y ago
    That's not the kind of innovation that users want, nor is it the kind that they truly benefit from. In general, users don't want any ads at all showing in their browser. They don't want them as part of web pages, they don't want them embedded in videos, and they surely don't want them as part of the browser itself! This should have been obvious given the popularity of various ad-blocking extensions for Firefox. Going against the obvious wishes of a product's users is something that's deserving of criticism.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - rockdoe 11y ago
      Users want to have their cake and eat it too. Following the users wishes when they're self-destructive is bad, and you should feel bad. Ads are enormously important for a lot of quality content out there to exist. Destroying them now, without good alternatives, is destructive to the web.
msh 11y ago
Sad, but properly to be expected.
ForHackernews 11y ago
Well, this comes as a huge surprise to no one.
giancarlostoro 11y ago
I must say I'm not entirely surprised, though part of me wished they had gone through with it, would of been interesting to have more than just 2 options for a phone. I am reminded of PalmOS though for some reason, similar project if I remember correctly.
- wmf 11y ago
  Try Jolla so your dreams can be crushed twice.
  - Apocryphon 11y ago
    I wonder if Jolla has a higher chance of survival, because it's niche enough to be focused, rather than chasing after a world market. Sailfish OS might outlive Ubuntu Touch.
    - raphman_ 11y ago
      Jolla is pretty much insolvent at the moment. Does not really look good. http://techcrunch.com/2015/11/20/jolla-running-out-of-runway-for-its-android-alternative/ http://techcrunch.com/2015/11/20/jolla-running-out-of-runway...
gedrap 11y ago
It was interesting to follow this experiment but have to admit it was against the odds since day 1 (and it's especially easy to say so in retrospective). In terms of regular users, there are tons of dirt cheap chinese no-name android devices that more or less work. For 100 euros, you can get an acceptable Android phone from a major manufacturer (LG, etc). FirefoxOS was competing in a similar price range, however offered much less to the end user. I guess it's fair to say that it didn't deliver any extra value. When I was using FirefoxOS and poking around the code base, I saw potential in their web-first platform as an introduction to programming. It's much easier to write some basic HTML, CSS and JS than to figure how to do the equivalent in Java for Android, etc. However, things like ionic or phonegap and reasonably good, and it's hard to compete with them as they produce something fairly acceptable and available to run on the vast majority of the smartphones. At the end of the day, I really appreciate Mozilla's work on this project. Thanks to all the volunteers who contributed to the project. You are amazing people :)
- nnethercote 11y ago
  Thank you for your positive attitude.
- garrettr_ 11y ago
  Agreed, my favorite thing about Firefox OS was always the "blank-slate" approach to writing apps for it, based on web technologies. Of course, that was good and bad - there was more room for experimentation, but you had to do more work to get the widgets and smooth animation that come for free from iPhone/Android SDK.
AdmiralAsshat 11y ago
Good. I can't remember anyone other than Mozilla actually being excited about Firefox OS. It seemed like a massive sinkhole on the company's part that drew resources away from the development of the browser.
- Steko 11y ago
  Every Firefox OS article on HN seems to have gotten 50 comments from excited people. These are apparently the 50 phones they sold worldwide.
  - zbraniecki 11y ago
    I wish we got that percentage of satisfied users ;)
pjmlp 11y ago
I love the work of Mozilla in the browser space, Thunderbird, Rust and online freedom. Having web pages as native apps goes back to Web Widgets on Series 60 phones, followed by WebOS. On the Series 60, almost everyone favoured native Symbian and J2ME apps to web widgets. WebOS sadly failed to gain major traction. Windows Phone and Android devices can be obtained by fairly low prices and have the advantage of native apps, Webviews besides the browser. On Windows Phone the WinRT is exposed to packaged web apps. So although I respect their efforts, I never really understood the effort, given that they were under the same OEM constraints as Android and the reviews of the available devices weren't that great.
BinaryIdiot 11y ago
That's too bad but like everyone else said pretty obvious what the outcome would be. I wonder what a third player in the mobile OS market would look like and if it's even possible at this point. Microsoft is basically number 3 at this point, right? Yet they have so little market share that companies are activity leaving their marketplace. I wonder if the next mobile OS isn't an OS that requires apps to survive but, instead, offers a crazy amount of integration experiences. For instance if someone came up with a way to unify how to call a car then integrate that directly into the phone (so ultimately it wouldn't matter if it was Uber, Lyft or even yellow cab). Maybe not the best example but I'm getting the feeling creating a phone that needs apps to be highly functional is simply not possible at this time and another angle is needed to break in.
- pjmlp 11y ago
  > Microsoft is basically number 3 at this point, right? Currently they are the only option to Android for those that cannot afford an iOS device, usually in countries where the majority go for pre-paid and average salaries are on the 1000 € or lower range. But if the current trend continues, given the current Windows Phone 10 expectations, it might become a two horses race.
- reddotX 11y ago
  Ubuntu Phone looks interesting and has great potential with the conergence
  - pritambarhate 11y ago
    It will be good to know how resource hungry Ubuntu Touch OS is. That's one problem with Android. It requires a Hexa Core processor and 3GB RAM for super smooth performance. Almost all flagship Android devices have heating issues and they seem to need much bigger batteries than iOS devices.
pmontra 11y ago
> “We are proud of the benefits Firefox OS added to the Web platform and will continue to experiment with the user experience across connected devices. We will build everything we do as a genuine open source project, focused on user experience first and build tools to enable the ecosystem to grow. This doesn't necessarily mean that Firefox OS is over. It means that it's over on the phone but it might move to those "connected devices". I bet Mozilla will release a more precise statement soon.
sp332 11y ago
Remember, the point of Firefox OS was not to challenge or take over the market with Firefox OS devices. It was to develop web APIs for phone things, like the dialer, video, voice, accelerometer, etc. And they succeeded! That's why the statement says "We are proud of the benefits Firefox OS added to the Web platform". Other browsers adopted the tech, and all phone browsers are better off for the project. That's a win.
- dvirsky 11y ago
  There was a lot of money and work invested by Mozilla and their strategic partners in FxOS (e.g. Telefonica) to actually make a dent in the market.
- johansch 11y ago
  That sounds like a post-rationalization to me. All I heard was that this was how they expected to survive without Google. It was expected to bring a lot of revenue.
  - bad_user 11y ago
    Source?
    - johansch 11y ago
      Random industry gossip. From real people obviously, but noone I can name.
    - zbraniecki 11y ago
      You can read the original announcement with the list of goals here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/mozilla.dev.platform/Booting$20to$20the$20Web/mozilla.dev.platform/dmip1GpD5II/CzJSSUMq5HsJ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/mozilla.dev.platf... there used to be a website - arewemobileyet.com which listed the API's that we identified as necessary to make FxOS possible. You can find it in web.archive - http://web.archive.org/web/20140401194921/http://arewemobileyet.com/# http://web.archive.org/web/20140401194921/http://arewemobile... We successfully standardized most of them! :)
Apocryphon 11y ago
So it seems like Firefox OS itself will continue to be iterated upon, it's just that Mozilla will no longer try to use it as a means to create a third commercial way as opposed to iOS/Android: http://firefoxoscentral.com/2015/12/firefox-os-is-dead-firefox-os-is-alive/ http://firefoxoscentral.com/2015/12/firefox-os-is-dead-firef...
spinchange 11y ago
I always wondered why they didn't try a tablet first. Like the Chromebooks, but in tablet form, heavy on Firefox branding. Maybe this too is something that would've been an 'also-ran' or market failure, but I still want one even as I type this.
- dhimes 11y ago
  Damn you. I want one too now.
- striking 11y ago
  What would that solve that a Chromebook wouldn't? Chromebooks already run Linux when so coerced, and are the most bulletproof computing platform for education and business. What could be special about the FirefoxBook? Perhaps, instead of expending that much effort to engineer a new tablet entirely from scratch, find an Android tablet and put a Mozilla sticker on it.
  - spinchange 11y ago
    Literally nothing except a different form factor. FWIW, I wish there were Chrometablets too. The Pixel C is headed this way in form, but unfortunately toward Android and native apps instead of ChromeOS and the Web.
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      > The Pixel C is headed this way in form, but unfortunately toward Android and native apps instead of ChromeOS and the Web. The web -- though not Google's non-standard Chrome apps through the browser, as yet -- works quite well on Android.
      - spinchange 11y ago
        Indeed. I use Android devices and think the market is headed toward native vs. the web too, I just hope it's not zero sum. ChromeOS is arguably less functional than Android, but there are use cases for it, and its stripped-down, web-only nature, in many respects is a feature, not a bug. I also really don't like commercial app stores. Discovery is terrible and then who wants to try a couple different versions of an app, before finding the best in class, if not immediately obvious? At least with web apps discovery is easier and switching costs much lower. Native apps also feel less configurable, less extensible, silo'ed off, and don't offer the freedom software provides for on a desktop anyway. I know this all may change in the future - I'm hopeful it does!
johansch 11y ago
Most of you are probably not aware that Opera Software (where I spent a decade on Opera Mini/Mobile) went down the same rabbit hole around 2002-2006, spending many many man-years building a web-based (pre-smartphone) phone UI platform using web technologies. The product name was "Opera Platform". Here are some screenshots: http://imgur.com/on4gHdi http://imgur.com/on4gHdi It failed for the same, predictable reasons: Yes, there are many web developers in the world compared to the number of (in this example) embedded rtos UI C/C++ developers. However, on resource-constrained platforms (as phones tend to be, since they are battery-powered) it's really hard and requires brilliant developers to be able to build web-based UIs that can compete in performance with non-web-based UIs built by (in comparison) not-so-brilliant developers. And on top of this, Mozilla decided to shoot for (super) low-end devices as their main target - presumably because their bizdev people had spotted a theoretical opportunity, but failed to connect with engineering, or vice-versa. The first time I saw that I just laughed out loud, to be honest. They actually have a time-honored tradition of following in the footsteps of Opera when it comes to ways of making money. Those sponsored tiles introduced in Firefox last year? Opera did that in 2008/2009-ish. (Not to mention the concept of a graphical speed dial on the new tab page itself...) That Google search field to the right of the URL field? Opera pioneered that business model in 2001 - followed by Mozilla and Apple half a decade later. Sorry, I get carried away. :D
- raphman_ 11y ago
  > The product name was "Opera Platform". Thank you - I didn't know about this.
- karussell 11y ago
  +1 interesting. Started using Opera since ~2000 and really liked it. Really innovative (tabs, mouse gestures, download manager, ...) and fast! Even an email client was included :) ! But replaced it with Firefox by the time FF had tabs and was fast enough, due to 'trust/privacy' reasons. For the same reasons I do not use chrome. And if FF keeps disappointing me and Opera gains trust I can imagine a switch :) (hmmh, but how if closed source?)
  - johansch 11y ago
Animats 11y ago
A few days ago, it looked like they were ditching Thunderbird so they could concentrate on their phone products. What's left besides Firefox? - "WebMaker", whatever that does. - Rust. - The $60 Mozilla hoodie. - Their world tour of meetups.[1] - The really fancy headquarters overlooking SF bay. A tight focus on Firefox might be a win. I'm looking forward to an all-Rust browser. [1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/contribute/events/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/contribute/events/
- gtk40 11y ago
  SeaMonkey? Or is there practically no connection left with Mozilla? (I still use Composer for maintaining some basic stuff and use it on my netbook where it ironically is faster than Firefox).
  - wott 11y ago
    4 days ago, I read a Mozilla employee writing "Seamonkey does not interest anyone inside Mozilla. Who would nowadays use a Netscape-like tool?".
    - thesimp 11y ago
      I use Seamonkey because it has sane UI interface elements like "buttons+text" that are actually larger than 15 pixels so that I can click on them without having to exactly aim my mouse on a tiny little button. My guess is that every Firefox developer still runs a 2007 Asus eeebook with a 7" screen. I got more pixels than I care to count, so I just want a UI that scales in proportion with the screen. Just one example why Seamonkey is important (for me at least).
      - rockdoe 11y ago
        Firefox on Windows respects the DPI settings (unlike Chrome!). So if you enable the relevant options in Windows' display settings, everything in the Firefox UI and webpages, including icons gets scaled up appropriately. So it actually does exactly what you want?!
T3RMINATED 11y ago
RIP Thunderbird... RIP Mozilla OS... and soon RIP Mozilla.
chris_wot 11y ago
Got to ask: what is the point of Mozilla?
- Splendor 11y ago
  I'm not sure if you're serious or not. If you are, here's a good place to start: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/
  - chris_wot 11y ago
    That's not very useful. I think you mean to link to this: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/details/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/details/ I'm going to get voted down by those who don't like dissent or opinions that they fear are "offensive" (and certainly they probably won't participate in the discussion or even attempt to answer the issues I raise!), but here is why I asked the question: Basically, I just don't see that Mozilla is actually doing anything terribly innovative any more. Certainly anything that seems to support their manifesto is dumped when it seems to get a bit hard. I'm specifically looking at the following: 1. Persona: Persona specifically fits into "build and enable open-source technologies and communities that support the Manifesto’s principles" and also "promote models for creating economic value for the public benefit". They just didn't support it very well, or for long enough to make an impact. An identity service needs Facebook-like periods to make it work - Facebook took a LONG time to get to where it was an complete persistence of vision against pretty much overwhelming odds. Ultimately, that Personna failed was because Mozilla didn't have courage and weren't willing to run with something they truly believe in. IMO, the heads of Mozilla have no real grit and only go for short to medium term goals. 2. Allowing EME to be implemented in Firefox. EME should only ever have been an extension, and not baked into the core Firefox platform. EME does not fit into point 2 of their manifesto: 2. The Internet is a global public resource that must remain open and accessible. Here is an opinionated view of Mozilla initiatives: * Rust - this is important and long-term. But it handles the underlying development of their browser, and as important as it is, it only goes so far in really making a big impact on promoting an open web * Personna - abandoned, but this would have been a key way of opening the web. A secure, cross-browser website authentication mechanism which allows a user to use a single username and password (or other authentication method) to log in to multiple sites - I just can't think of a more important initiative. That this was abandoned shows the sort of short term mentality of those leading Mozilla. * Mozilla Location Service - interesting idea, but there are privacy concerns - they sell the underlying data to Combain AB, and Combain allow you to search on all sorts of things. I don't see how this helps Mozilla's underlying foundational principles! * The MDN - now this is truly great, and does satisfy all the points of the manifesto. I hope that Mozilla keep this up! * Firefox OS - now abandoned, but this was truly something that was needed in a market that is more and more proprietary. Evidently Mozilla have no stomach for keeping a project going for more than 2-3 years; there is no medium or long-term commitment. So, given that Mozilla largely don't seem to want to do anything that they will commit to in the medium to long term (with a few exceptions, though these are already established) I have to ask: what is the point of Mozilla? All the things Mozilla now promote (like the ad-blocker in iOS, which their own browser can't even use) seem like things that aren't very ambitious; certainly they won't change the world!
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- scott_karana 11y ago
  > Our mission is to promote openness, innovation & opportunity on the Web. How is Firefox OS contrary to that, exactly? I agree that they could use better focus, but FirefoxOS was entirely within their stated scope. (Even if it was a strategic blunder)
Mikeb85 11y ago
Hate to say it, but good. Firefox OS was going in a backwards direction. The UI was designed for low-res screens, and it ran mostly on hardware barely better than the iPhone 1, except with JS. Something like this could have been the future if Webassembly was ready for prime time - you could have 'native' apps all running on top on Firefox, on top of the Android/CM base. Anyhow, hopefully Mozilla refocuses their efforts on Firefox, Rust and Webassembly, and regain relevance.
ausjke 11y ago
Lots of headlines at HN from Mozilla these days. Tried Firefox OS emulator and it's fine, but not impressed enough to actually to get a real device. Yes they better focus on privacy/identity and revamp Thuderbird to make it a unique product.
- SwellJoe 11y ago
  Revamping Thunderbird has already been ruled out by one of those previous headlines. Mozilla has cut the cord with Thunderbird. So, they're either focusing on their core strengths or giving up on a lot of fronts, depending on your perspective.
- rockdoe 11y ago
  Lots of headlines at HN from Mozilla these days. They're having a developer conference so big announcements are concentrated.
  - steveklabnik 11y ago
    It's more accurately described as an employee all-hands, with some volunteers invited too. 1200 employees, ~200 volunteers, not really people developing things on Mozilla platforms.
    - bronson 11y ago
      Twelve hundred employees??? And they couldn't find one or two of them to port Thunderbird to Qt.
      - steveklabnik 11y ago
        I think you seriously underestimate the amount of work that would take.
        bronson 11y ago
        Wow, you think it would take more than a few developer-years?
issaria 11y ago
Two days ago when Mozilla discontinues Thunderbird, people cheering "oh yeah, finally they can focus on firefoxOS", the same people are yelling Mozilla should focus on their mission (the browser)? Not to mention rust, it's adoption is nowhere comparable to Java, see what happened to Sun, I would boldly say Mozilla's mission has completed.
- pcwalton 11y ago
  > Not to mention rust, it's adoption is nowhere comparable to Java By that metric, no language produced in the past 10 years has been a success.
  - kibwen 11y ago
    By that metric, and considering absolute numbers, there's a good chance that no other language ever produced has been a success. :P
SwellJoe 11y ago
I was always waiting for a credible Firefox OS phone in the US; ready to buy immediately on arrival. Nothing ever arrived. The phones were weak by Android phone standards, expensive by low-end Android phone standards, and often didn't support all of the bands of my carrier and so would have had less connectivity in remote locations. I'm disappointed, though. I looked forward to a more open phone built by an organization I trust. Google is barely OK. Apple is not even that. Microsoft is improving, but still out of the running in terms of openness.
wiremine 11y ago
Is anyone actually surprised by this announcement? It feels like Mozilla tries a lot of things, but rarely gets traction on any of them. Mean while, Firefox isn't getting that much better and seems to be loosing marketshare. What's the long-term plan?
- bronson 11y ago
  Shovel more crap like Pocket and Hello into their flagship product and pray that something sticks? Agreed, it seems like they're rapidly running out of options. It's getting a little concerning.
hardwaresofton 11y ago
tldr; sad but ultimately no problem, it's just up to the open source community to maintain b2g (boot2gecko) now. It's already a more-than-functional platform, excited to take part in porting it and maintaining it from here on out, because I'll still be using it. As a person that runs FirefoxOS on my main phone (LG Nexus 5 running FFOS v2.5), this sucks to hear. I used to own a Flame which was the developer reference phone and basically the best ffos phone you could buy except the fx0 which is for sale only with contract in japan (or very very expensively otherwise), and it was pretty good phone, and got better with every update. However, as far as FirefoxOS (aka b2g/boot2gecko) itself goes, it's open source, so it's got a life of it's own (though it may be significantly less contributed to from now on) -- and I'm totally OK with that. I will continue to run FirefoxOS because it still does the things it should (makes calls, text messages, use apps) -- and can be (relatively) easily ported to existing phones (some flagships). Sad day, but also kind of fine, because they did what they set out to do, and I'm running this OS on my phone, and it's verifiably not garbage (I think it's great). Looking forward to a leaner, meaner, faster Firefox on my desktop -- I'll be getting my hands dirty with FFOS on my phone in the meantime.
efes 11y ago
I really wanted them to merge themselves in as an alternate userland mode for cyanogenmod and any other AOSP. I'm not sure if microsoft's investment in cyanogenmod was a response to those kinds of possibilities..
listic 11y ago
Looks like Smart Feature Phones won't materialize :( https://youtu.be/JIiIjjIsuzc https://youtu.be/JIiIjjIsuzc Though they aren't quite saying that, I guess there'll be no new Firefox OS Smart TV's, too? http://www.techradar.com/news/television/6-best-smart-tv-platforms-in-the-world-today-1120795/2 http://www.techradar.com/news/television/6-best-smart-tv-pla...
CrackpotGonzo 11y ago
Anyone know the status of the smart feature phone os they were talking about a few months back? I can't find anything on it but am interested in the project.
tacojuan 11y ago
I bought one of the Fx0 phones last month. Sad to hear this news. I wanted to move away from Android and iOS, and saw FFOS as the only viable option. They should've mass produced whatever the developer phone was, the Flame I think? Sell it to consumers as a flagship, supported by Mozilla devs, and community devs...
benlower 11y ago
I'm saddened by this because I am not a fan of the current state in mobile where everything is an app. I liked their idea of having 'apps' be about the open web. Sure, native apps can be great but I don't want to be locked in to anyone's proprietary platform.
dcw303 11y ago
Linux as a platform took off because it was possible for a smart user to install it on hardware they already had. If there had of been a way to install Firefox OS on an iPhone or Android phone, I would have certainly tried it out. Mozilla really needed to target power users, but it was just too hard to get hold of the hardware - both hardware availability and the stupid state of carrier contracts are to blame here. I don't know that Mozilla's business model works if they are not bundling their software to a licensed phone, but it's a shame that the mobile platforms can't be opened up the same way desktops are.
- ocdtrekkie 11y ago
  Yup. That was one thing I was really hoping Ubuntu Touch would give me a chance with, their whole "install on Android" thing. But it's supported on a pittance of device options. Currently mobile hardware is in a space where the OS has to be custom built for the hardware choices of that particular phone manufacturer, unlike PCs which have a robust system of drivers you have some manner of control over as a user. Seems to be the biggest limitation.
hackuser 11y ago
What is the future of Mozilla and of open platforms? 1) Without FirefoxOS, what is Mozilla's future on mobile devices? The Firefox browser, while I think it's great, has very low adoption on mobiles. I'm not sure content-blockers are enough, and they now need the platform owner's cooperation to get their product in front of users (i.e., to get into the app store and to be compatible with the user systems). 2) Without a future on mobile devices, what is Mozilla's future? How influential can they be while playing no role on the most popular Internet platform? 3) Without a player on mobile devices, what is the future of open platforms in general? On the desktop there are several mature operating systems and ecosystems but what is there on mobile? Can open platforms be relevant without a presence on mobile? Where are the BSDs for mobile? GNU tools? Vim? There are Android forks, but they depend on the continued generosity of the market leader (to release AOSP, a version of Android designed for that purpose). And having looked around for a good option, I can report that the various forks are unambitious, provide little to differentiate themselves from Android, and their organization and support don't inspire confidence.
Patronus_Charm 11y ago
It was doomed from the beginning, already such a crowded space. Firefox OS had no chance at all.
fiatjaf 11y ago
That's a shame and awful. Web apps should really be winning this fight against "native". Firefox OS was our greatest warrior. Or wasn't it?
erikpukinskis 11y ago
A federated web payment infrastructure would be the holy grail Mozilla could build a life around.
daleharvey 11y ago
So the headline is fairly misleading, Firefox OS is not cancelled and development will not be stopped. The strategy of trying to push distribution via carriers has not worked so we will no longer be doing that. The "Firefox OS" team was renamed to "Connected Devices" to reflect the fact we are not only building a smartphone, TV's are already being sold and other factors (iot / wearables etc) are being looked into.
xylon 11y ago
I never knew Firefox OS existed. Maybe they should've marketed it better?
Rapzid 11y ago
Something that has been on my mind.. A lot of commenters keep saying there are two good options out there, but really the choice is more "iPhone. Yes or No?". If you don't want an iPhone you are going to end up with an Android device. I can't put iOS on my nexus 5. There is a space there for another OS that you can put on your non-iphone. I just don't think that's Mozilla's space to fill. Really, in all practicality, this is a space Microsoft needs to fill. It's almost like the world is waiting for them to step it up. Their new open source strategy is going to produce some big plays along these lines; .net in particular. Think about the native and multi-arch work being done for it.. ARM for Windows10 and .net; where is it all going you think? I can tell you that if I could load up Windows10 on my nexus5 even if just for a test drive I certainly would.
aswanson 11y ago
When did they start?
selvan 11y ago
FFxOS kernel is a fork of android kernal, but optimized to run on small memory footprint (128 MB RAM). Its speed on 128 MB RAM devices is commendable. Javascript is the only and primary development language for FFxOS & we get to access all hardware devices (Bluetooth, wifi, camera, etc ) via Javascript.
coldtea 11y ago
Funny, I just advised for that in a HN thread. I guess the writing was on the wall of course -- but in case they just heard me and decided to stop it: please guys prioritize a native-UI on all platforms, servo based release for 2016.
ramanamit1234 11y ago
Money well wasted.
rasengan0 11y ago
Anyone remember the Facebook phone?
devilirium 11y ago
Finally.
jbiddy 11y ago
Hugely disappointing. Actually love my Open C once I upgraded it to FxOS 2.2 Dear Mozilla, I hate IoT devices. I don't want them. They are security exploits incarnate. At least a phone is useful, why the hell do I really need a microwave with an IP address? I don't.
znpy 11y ago
It's high time Mozilla gets its shit together.
zdkl 11y ago
I'm writing from my buggy, crashing ZTE Open C... And this is the final straw: I've had it Mozilla. It's not me, it's you. You were the symbol of informatics progress in the right direction, but now you're just another pusher of one size fits all crapware. Hope this changes again because we need a good guy in this space. Now to finally remove the slow, crashing behemoth that has become Firefox...
ionised 11y ago
Well that sucks. I desperately want to drop Android and was hoping Firefox OS would continue to mature and improve.
anonyfox 11y ago
Thunderbird: stopped. FirefoxOS: stopped. Rust: as nice as the language is, I can see it become irrelevant in the rise of Swift (and tons of developers already using and praising it). so the last thing that remains is the very core of mozilla: firefox. But then version 42 hit me, disabled the support for custom themes, leaving me alone with a crappy UI I can't stand any longer to the point I uninstalled Firefox forever. As others have already mentioned: from several sessions of customer development out in the streets, I can confirm that privacy is something that no-one has really interest in, let alone pay a penny for it nowadays. I'd love to know what Mozilla's vision of the future is, given that the points above are real and Firefox itself becomes more and more an awful "me too!" of other, better browsers.
- pcwalton 11y ago
  > Rust: as nice as the language is, I can see it become irrelevant in the rise of Swift (and tons of developers already using and praising it). How are Rust and Swift in the same language niche at all?
newscracker 11y ago
I was waiting for a Firefox OS phone with great hardware, but that didn't seem to materialize (AFAIK). Making both high end and low end phones together, perhaps in different volumes, could have helped. Focusing only on the extreme low end with poor hardware was probably a mistake. While I'm unhappy that Mozilla is not going to focus on Firefox OS smartphones, I do consider this as an experiment that organizations like Mozilla ought to do. I'm sure there were a lot of things accomplished (like some mentioned in the comments for phone APIs) and a lot of things learned. These will in turn help other initiatives. Now, please put Thunderbird back on the development track with the same priority as Firefox. :) And while you're at it, we want Persona too! :)
l_stover 11y ago
do you need any hack espionage done ? email or social network hack , remote mobile device hack or any of the below services: Mugshot Picture Removal Blog Link Removed Google Link Removed Locate or track Missing People Background Check SSN Trace Address History 7-Year National Criminal Database Search Courthouse Verification of Criminal Database Records (up to 3) National Sex Offender Registry Check ??? Geniushack08@gmail.com
endemic 11y ago
I'm surprised this project didn't pivot into something more like ChromeOS. The market there, as proven by Chromebooks. As others have mentioned, Mozilla could have played up the security/privacy aspect of a "Firefox-book". As a smartphone OS, I don't see what problems Firefox OS solves. Both iOS and Android have great browsers, and can pin webapps to their homescreens.
contingencies 11y ago
They failed because they missed the great opportunity of promoting ad-hoc and mesh applications in their API and security model as first class citizens.
mrottenkolber 11y ago
Good riddance. Firefox OS was a technical disaster. It was vulnerable by design as it had no capabilities for updating Gecko. I had hopes for it, and I will happily continue to use my first generation ZTE (70 bucks) FxOS phone, but I am happy they are no longer sold. Distribution of the OS was a reckless debacle and, from the perspective of a non-technical customer, fraud, if you ask me.

529 points by kevining 11y ago

Mozilla is shifting to use their web platform for connected devices and IoT efforts. The IoT space is a mess right now and I think that Mozilla could do a lot of good there. I think that Firefox OS as a phone operating system will always be available for hackers to port and install on their own devices.

binarymax 11y ago
I was curious and found this for anyone else who may be interested: https://wiki.mozilla.org/FlyWeb https://wiki.mozilla.org/FlyWeb
ris 11y ago
"The IoT space is a mess right now" But is also almost entirely vapour. Seeing this news gave me relief that Mozilla might be pulling their heads out of the clouds chasing fantastical dreams of mobile platforms, but if anything IoT is worse!
- vdnkh 11y ago
  >almost entirely vapour I work for an M2M company whose been around for 25 years now, in some form or another. M2M is the backbone of IoT and while it isn't as glamorous, it's a large space. Industrial gases, especially helium, are very lucrative right now.
  - striking 11y ago
    M2M makes sense. It's great for devices that are not classically connected via the Internet to communicate with each other. It's very helpful in the industrial and medical fields. However, IoT devices should not be consumer-facing tech. IoT devices are on average far more expensive and have shoddy software/firmware. Even when the software is fixed, IoT will remain a niche range of products until their quality surpasses that of the traditional version of the product. From a business perspective, anything IoT hardly makes sense as a standalone product. M2M is a fantastic field. But IoT is not.
- binarymax 11y ago
  IoT is better for R&D now, because its going to happen (if not through a nice clean adoption but rather through sheer force of will). Mobile was already mature with a well entrenched duopoly when FFOS began. IoT is still up for grabs.
  - adrusi 11y ago
    IoT is an open opportunity in general, but it doesn't really mesh with what Mozialla has done in the past. Mozilla very well could change their focus and compete in that space, but a newcomer without any entrenched ideas would be better off. So would a big company with the resources to spin off and fund a relatively independent branch to work in IoT. Mozilla's only big success has been Firefox. Firefox succeeded because it was competing in a market with only one other player, and that player wasn't innovating at all. Now the browser market is different and firefox remains popular because of free software nerds, people who like its customization power (something that Mozilla is risking with its recent changes to addons, although it looks like they're treading carefully), and people who switched to it from internet explorer because their kids told them to and don't care to use Chrome. Mozilla is good at disrupting, including both developing a superior product and getting people to care about it, but they're bad at... basically everything else, business wise. Like any organization they can get better, but doing so would require a level of change that might ultimately just make them less good at what they are good at. It seems that's what they're trying to do, and it seems that's what's happening. gkoberger's toplevel comment[1] might offer a good opportunity. They started down this path with personas, but then abandoned it when they couldn't make developers care about it. Maybe they've lost their touch. It pains me to say it, since they've done so much good for the things I care about, but Mozilla's time might be ending. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10698997 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10698997
- Raed667 11y ago
  IoT lacks consistant "full-stack" standards. Someone as big as Mozilla could make things less messier by adopting standards on some/all layers of IoT. This is an area worth exploring "for the greater good".
  - rimantas 11y ago
    Foe me IoT lacks the problem that needs solving. And we do know what happens to the solutions without the problem.
    - Raed667 11y ago
      I'll be graduating in a few months and I study embedded/IoT. And as someone who spent the last 2 years digging in the corners of IoT, I agree that IoT can seem to be over-engineering problems that don't exist. But the market is there, and it is huge. (mainly industrial, energy & transport applications) IoT now is like the early personal computers, they were too expensive and almost no one knew why they needed them.
      - dualogy 11y ago
        Would you recommend your favourite resources for techies to dig into this space?
        Raed667 11y ago
        Hard to say, there are so many. - I'd start with embedded environments: Arduino / STM32(F1/F4) / RaspberryPi see how to code for them and how to make them talk to each other (UART/SPI/I2C/CAN...) - Then I'd check how simple kernel modules are made, and try to mess around the kernel in raspberryPi and make something that outputs a value on the terminal and via I2C. - I'd check the "concept" of middlewares and start by something simple WComp[0] (written in C#). It is not used in the industry but it gives you a pretty good sens of how things should work. - For beginners I'd recommend to use Parse[1] for any project where you need a "cloud" infrastructure (Database, API, users, privileges,...) - You should also check how fully distributed systems (that operate in a peer-to-peer manner) work. - After that it comes to ressource optimisation and things like that. EDIT (You should also check these) : - UPnP (Universal Plug and Play) is way to get devices to automatically discover and understand each other. - MQTT: publish-subscribe TCP/IP messaging protocol (I use it for push notifications) [0] : http://www.wcomp.fr http://www.wcomp.fr [1] : https://www.parse.com/ https://www.parse.com/
cwyers 11y ago
> The IoT space is a mess right now and I think that Mozilla could do a lot of good there. I think that platforms with a thriving ecosystem in other markets have an advantage over Firefox OS, and Firefox OS doesn't offer any compelling advantages over, say, Linux (since at the kernel level, that's what it IS) to offset that disadvantage.
bobajeff 11y ago
I don't know if this counts as IoT but if they made a good Smart Watch I could use as a phone (standalone) and browse the web on I'd buy it. I keep waiting for someone to come out with this but still nothing.

niij 11y ago

Could have seen that being a flop from outer space.

Apocryphon 11y ago

Guess it's up to Canonical to make Ubuntu Touch a viable open source smartphone OS - are there even devices running it that are being sold in the U.S.? Did not expect that Sailfish OS would outlive Firefox OS.

bad_user 11y ago
As much as I respect Mozilla, when the user experience is worse than a cheap Android 1.6, you should know you've got a problem. It's cool that they tried, but on one hand if you want an open-source OS it makes much more sense to fork Android, and yes I believe Ubuntu is doomed as well. And for Mozilla this may mean more resources spent into Firefox for Android, a mobile browser that is turning out to be the browser of choice for power users due to its extensions, an awesome browser that could use some love from Mozilla as it's lagging behind Chrome in terms of standards relevant for mobiles (e.g. push notifications, app manifest). And Firefox on the desktop needs some love as well. The multiprocess support is almost there, except for a list of bugs that keep delaying it. Mozilla has many things on its plate. Firefox OS is a cool experiment, but it didn't work, so time to move on.
- blinkingled 11y ago
  > And for Mozilla this may mean more resources spent into Firefox for Android, a mobile browser that is turning out to be the browser of choice for power users due to its extensions, an awesome browser that could use some love from Mozilla as it's lagging behind Chrome Exactly the thing Mozilla should do - focus on Firefox and maybe even continue to invest in making Thunderbird better. There are a lot of reasons why that approach is more likely to succeed.
criddell 11y ago
If you want an open source smartphone OS, why not just use Android (AOSP)?
- rockdoe 11y ago
  Because the apps ecosystem is getting more and more locked into Play Services, which are not part of AOSP.

draw_down 11y ago

I hope they can figure out something to keep them afloat. Mozilla seems directionless lately.

flannell 11y ago
Last week it was Yahoo

gkoberger 11y ago

Firefox appeared at a time when there was huge potential being stifled by a stagnant monopoly in the space, and people were desperate for something good. It filled a real need, and people loved it. FirefoxOS appeared at a time when there was huge potential being actively being pushed forward and innovated on by the two largest tech companies in the space, and people already had two great options to choose from. It filled no real need, and nobody wanted it. For Mozilla to stay alive, they need to pick a space that is currently desperately needed but being ignored by large corporations and the government: privacy and identity. Mozilla could be the champion of the Snowden era, yet instead they're distracting themselves with IoT, VR and other shiny new toys. (And yes, I realize that users don't care about privacy. But nobody cared about web standards, either: it's all about packaging. That's Mozilla's strength.) Mozilla is a non-profit with a mission (https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/). It's time they start acting like one again.

Certhas 11y ago
But when they tried to pioneer privacy respecting ads in the new tab window, they were repeatedly and roundly criticised here, too...
- epoch1970 11y ago
  That's not the kind of innovation that users want, nor is it the kind that they truly benefit from. In general, users don't want any ads at all showing in their browser. They don't want them as part of web pages, they don't want them embedded in videos, and they surely don't want them as part of the browser itself! This should have been obvious given the popularity of various ad-blocking extensions for Firefox. Going against the obvious wishes of a product's users is something that's deserving of criticism.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - rockdoe 11y ago
    Users want to have their cake and eat it too. Following the users wishes when they're self-destructive is bad, and you should feel bad. Ads are enormously important for a lot of quality content out there to exist. Destroying them now, without good alternatives, is destructive to the web.

msh 11y ago

Sad, but properly to be expected.

ForHackernews 11y ago

Well, this comes as a huge surprise to no one.

giancarlostoro 11y ago

I must say I'm not entirely surprised, though part of me wished they had gone through with it, would of been interesting to have more than just 2 options for a phone. I am reminded of PalmOS though for some reason, similar project if I remember correctly.

wmf 11y ago
Try Jolla so your dreams can be crushed twice.
- Apocryphon 11y ago
  I wonder if Jolla has a higher chance of survival, because it's niche enough to be focused, rather than chasing after a world market. Sailfish OS might outlive Ubuntu Touch.
  - raphman_ 11y ago
    Jolla is pretty much insolvent at the moment. Does not really look good. http://techcrunch.com/2015/11/20/jolla-running-out-of-runway-for-its-android-alternative/ http://techcrunch.com/2015/11/20/jolla-running-out-of-runway...

gedrap 11y ago

It was interesting to follow this experiment but have to admit it was against the odds since day 1 (and it's especially easy to say so in retrospective). In terms of regular users, there are tons of dirt cheap chinese no-name android devices that more or less work. For 100 euros, you can get an acceptable Android phone from a major manufacturer (LG, etc). FirefoxOS was competing in a similar price range, however offered much less to the end user. I guess it's fair to say that it didn't deliver any extra value. When I was using FirefoxOS and poking around the code base, I saw potential in their web-first platform as an introduction to programming. It's much easier to write some basic HTML, CSS and JS than to figure how to do the equivalent in Java for Android, etc. However, things like ionic or phonegap and reasonably good, and it's hard to compete with them as they produce something fairly acceptable and available to run on the vast majority of the smartphones. At the end of the day, I really appreciate Mozilla's work on this project. Thanks to all the volunteers who contributed to the project. You are amazing people :)

nnethercote 11y ago
Thank you for your positive attitude.
garrettr_ 11y ago
Agreed, my favorite thing about Firefox OS was always the "blank-slate" approach to writing apps for it, based on web technologies. Of course, that was good and bad - there was more room for experimentation, but you had to do more work to get the widgets and smooth animation that come for free from iPhone/Android SDK.

AdmiralAsshat 11y ago

Good. I can't remember anyone other than Mozilla actually being excited about Firefox OS. It seemed like a massive sinkhole on the company's part that drew resources away from the development of the browser.

Steko 11y ago
Every Firefox OS article on HN seems to have gotten 50 comments from excited people. These are apparently the 50 phones they sold worldwide.
- zbraniecki 11y ago
  I wish we got that percentage of satisfied users ;)

pjmlp 11y ago

I love the work of Mozilla in the browser space, Thunderbird, Rust and online freedom. Having web pages as native apps goes back to Web Widgets on Series 60 phones, followed by WebOS. On the Series 60, almost everyone favoured native Symbian and J2ME apps to web widgets. WebOS sadly failed to gain major traction. Windows Phone and Android devices can be obtained by fairly low prices and have the advantage of native apps, Webviews besides the browser. On Windows Phone the WinRT is exposed to packaged web apps. So although I respect their efforts, I never really understood the effort, given that they were under the same OEM constraints as Android and the reviews of the available devices weren't that great.

BinaryIdiot 11y ago

That's too bad but like everyone else said pretty obvious what the outcome would be. I wonder what a third player in the mobile OS market would look like and if it's even possible at this point. Microsoft is basically number 3 at this point, right? Yet they have so little market share that companies are activity leaving their marketplace. I wonder if the next mobile OS isn't an OS that requires apps to survive but, instead, offers a crazy amount of integration experiences. For instance if someone came up with a way to unify how to call a car then integrate that directly into the phone (so ultimately it wouldn't matter if it was Uber, Lyft or even yellow cab). Maybe not the best example but I'm getting the feeling creating a phone that needs apps to be highly functional is simply not possible at this time and another angle is needed to break in.

pjmlp 11y ago
> Microsoft is basically number 3 at this point, right? Currently they are the only option to Android for those that cannot afford an iOS device, usually in countries where the majority go for pre-paid and average salaries are on the 1000 € or lower range. But if the current trend continues, given the current Windows Phone 10 expectations, it might become a two horses race.
reddotX 11y ago
Ubuntu Phone looks interesting and has great potential with the conergence
- pritambarhate 11y ago
  It will be good to know how resource hungry Ubuntu Touch OS is. That's one problem with Android. It requires a Hexa Core processor and 3GB RAM for super smooth performance. Almost all flagship Android devices have heating issues and they seem to need much bigger batteries than iOS devices.

pmontra 11y ago

> “We are proud of the benefits Firefox OS added to the Web platform and will continue to experiment with the user experience across connected devices. We will build everything we do as a genuine open source project, focused on user experience first and build tools to enable the ecosystem to grow. This doesn't necessarily mean that Firefox OS is over. It means that it's over on the phone but it might move to those "connected devices". I bet Mozilla will release a more precise statement soon.

sp332 11y ago

Remember, the point of Firefox OS was not to challenge or take over the market with Firefox OS devices. It was to develop web APIs for phone things, like the dialer, video, voice, accelerometer, etc. And they succeeded! That's why the statement says "We are proud of the benefits Firefox OS added to the Web platform". Other browsers adopted the tech, and all phone browsers are better off for the project. That's a win.

dvirsky 11y ago
There was a lot of money and work invested by Mozilla and their strategic partners in FxOS (e.g. Telefonica) to actually make a dent in the market.
johansch 11y ago
That sounds like a post-rationalization to me. All I heard was that this was how they expected to survive without Google. It was expected to bring a lot of revenue.
- bad_user 11y ago
  Source?
  - johansch 11y ago
    Random industry gossip. From real people obviously, but noone I can name.
  - zbraniecki 11y ago
    You can read the original announcement with the list of goals here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/mozilla.dev.platform/Booting$20to$20the$20Web/mozilla.dev.platform/dmip1GpD5II/CzJSSUMq5HsJ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/mozilla.dev.platf... there used to be a website - arewemobileyet.com which listed the API's that we identified as necessary to make FxOS possible. You can find it in web.archive - http://web.archive.org/web/20140401194921/http://arewemobileyet.com/# http://web.archive.org/web/20140401194921/http://arewemobile... We successfully standardized most of them! :)

Apocryphon 11y ago

So it seems like Firefox OS itself will continue to be iterated upon, it's just that Mozilla will no longer try to use it as a means to create a third commercial way as opposed to iOS/Android: http://firefoxoscentral.com/2015/12/firefox-os-is-dead-firefox-os-is-alive/ http://firefoxoscentral.com/2015/12/firefox-os-is-dead-firef...

spinchange 11y ago

I always wondered why they didn't try a tablet first. Like the Chromebooks, but in tablet form, heavy on Firefox branding. Maybe this too is something that would've been an 'also-ran' or market failure, but I still want one even as I type this.

dhimes 11y ago
Damn you. I want one too now.
striking 11y ago
What would that solve that a Chromebook wouldn't? Chromebooks already run Linux when so coerced, and are the most bulletproof computing platform for education and business. What could be special about the FirefoxBook? Perhaps, instead of expending that much effort to engineer a new tablet entirely from scratch, find an Android tablet and put a Mozilla sticker on it.
- spinchange 11y ago
  Literally nothing except a different form factor. FWIW, I wish there were Chrometablets too. The Pixel C is headed this way in form, but unfortunately toward Android and native apps instead of ChromeOS and the Web.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > The Pixel C is headed this way in form, but unfortunately toward Android and native apps instead of ChromeOS and the Web. The web -- though not Google's non-standard Chrome apps through the browser, as yet -- works quite well on Android.
    - spinchange 11y ago
      Indeed. I use Android devices and think the market is headed toward native vs. the web too, I just hope it's not zero sum. ChromeOS is arguably less functional than Android, but there are use cases for it, and its stripped-down, web-only nature, in many respects is a feature, not a bug. I also really don't like commercial app stores. Discovery is terrible and then who wants to try a couple different versions of an app, before finding the best in class, if not immediately obvious? At least with web apps discovery is easier and switching costs much lower. Native apps also feel less configurable, less extensible, silo'ed off, and don't offer the freedom software provides for on a desktop anyway. I know this all may change in the future - I'm hopeful it does!

johansch 11y ago

Most of you are probably not aware that Opera Software (where I spent a decade on Opera Mini/Mobile) went down the same rabbit hole around 2002-2006, spending many many man-years building a web-based (pre-smartphone) phone UI platform using web technologies. The product name was "Opera Platform". Here are some screenshots: http://imgur.com/on4gHdi http://imgur.com/on4gHdi It failed for the same, predictable reasons: Yes, there are many web developers in the world compared to the number of (in this example) embedded rtos UI C/C++ developers. However, on resource-constrained platforms (as phones tend to be, since they are battery-powered) it's really hard and requires brilliant developers to be able to build web-based UIs that can compete in performance with non-web-based UIs built by (in comparison) not-so-brilliant developers. And on top of this, Mozilla decided to shoot for (super) low-end devices as their main target - presumably because their bizdev people had spotted a theoretical opportunity, but failed to connect with engineering, or vice-versa. The first time I saw that I just laughed out loud, to be honest. They actually have a time-honored tradition of following in the footsteps of Opera when it comes to ways of making money. Those sponsored tiles introduced in Firefox last year? Opera did that in 2008/2009-ish. (Not to mention the concept of a graphical speed dial on the new tab page itself...) That Google search field to the right of the URL field? Opera pioneered that business model in 2001 - followed by Mozilla and Apple half a decade later. Sorry, I get carried away. :D

raphman_ 11y ago
> The product name was "Opera Platform". Thank you - I didn't know about this.
karussell 11y ago
+1 interesting. Started using Opera since ~2000 and really liked it. Really innovative (tabs, mouse gestures, download manager, ...) and fast! Even an email client was included :) ! But replaced it with Firefox by the time FF had tabs and was fast enough, due to 'trust/privacy' reasons. For the same reasons I do not use chrome. And if FF keeps disappointing me and Opera gains trust I can imagine a switch :) (hmmh, but how if closed source?)
- johansch 11y ago

Animats 11y ago

A few days ago, it looked like they were ditching Thunderbird so they could concentrate on their phone products. What's left besides Firefox? - "WebMaker", whatever that does. - Rust. - The $60 Mozilla hoodie. - Their world tour of meetups.[1] - The really fancy headquarters overlooking SF bay. A tight focus on Firefox might be a win. I'm looking forward to an all-Rust browser. [1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/contribute/events/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/contribute/events/

gtk40 11y ago
SeaMonkey? Or is there practically no connection left with Mozilla? (I still use Composer for maintaining some basic stuff and use it on my netbook where it ironically is faster than Firefox).
- wott 11y ago
  4 days ago, I read a Mozilla employee writing "Seamonkey does not interest anyone inside Mozilla. Who would nowadays use a Netscape-like tool?".
  - thesimp 11y ago
    I use Seamonkey because it has sane UI interface elements like "buttons+text" that are actually larger than 15 pixels so that I can click on them without having to exactly aim my mouse on a tiny little button. My guess is that every Firefox developer still runs a 2007 Asus eeebook with a 7" screen. I got more pixels than I care to count, so I just want a UI that scales in proportion with the screen. Just one example why Seamonkey is important (for me at least).
    - rockdoe 11y ago
      Firefox on Windows respects the DPI settings (unlike Chrome!). So if you enable the relevant options in Windows' display settings, everything in the Firefox UI and webpages, including icons gets scaled up appropriately. So it actually does exactly what you want?!

T3RMINATED 11y ago

RIP Thunderbird... RIP Mozilla OS... and soon RIP Mozilla.

chris_wot 11y ago

Got to ask: what is the point of Mozilla?

Splendor 11y ago
I'm not sure if you're serious or not. If you are, here's a good place to start: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/
- chris_wot 11y ago
  That's not very useful. I think you mean to link to this: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/details/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/details/ I'm going to get voted down by those who don't like dissent or opinions that they fear are "offensive" (and certainly they probably won't participate in the discussion or even attempt to answer the issues I raise!), but here is why I asked the question: Basically, I just don't see that Mozilla is actually doing anything terribly innovative any more. Certainly anything that seems to support their manifesto is dumped when it seems to get a bit hard. I'm specifically looking at the following: 1. Persona: Persona specifically fits into "build and enable open-source technologies and communities that support the Manifesto’s principles" and also "promote models for creating economic value for the public benefit". They just didn't support it very well, or for long enough to make an impact. An identity service needs Facebook-like periods to make it work - Facebook took a LONG time to get to where it was an complete persistence of vision against pretty much overwhelming odds. Ultimately, that Personna failed was because Mozilla didn't have courage and weren't willing to run with something they truly believe in. IMO, the heads of Mozilla have no real grit and only go for short to medium term goals. 2. Allowing EME to be implemented in Firefox. EME should only ever have been an extension, and not baked into the core Firefox platform. EME does not fit into point 2 of their manifesto: 2. The Internet is a global public resource that must remain open and accessible. Here is an opinionated view of Mozilla initiatives: * Rust - this is important and long-term. But it handles the underlying development of their browser, and as important as it is, it only goes so far in really making a big impact on promoting an open web * Personna - abandoned, but this would have been a key way of opening the web. A secure, cross-browser website authentication mechanism which allows a user to use a single username and password (or other authentication method) to log in to multiple sites - I just can't think of a more important initiative. That this was abandoned shows the sort of short term mentality of those leading Mozilla. * Mozilla Location Service - interesting idea, but there are privacy concerns - they sell the underlying data to Combain AB, and Combain allow you to search on all sorts of things. I don't see how this helps Mozilla's underlying foundational principles! * The MDN - now this is truly great, and does satisfy all the points of the manifesto. I hope that Mozilla keep this up! * Firefox OS - now abandoned, but this was truly something that was needed in a market that is more and more proprietary. Evidently Mozilla have no stomach for keeping a project going for more than 2-3 years; there is no medium or long-term commitment. So, given that Mozilla largely don't seem to want to do anything that they will commit to in the medium to long term (with a few exceptions, though these are already established) I have to ask: what is the point of Mozilla? All the things Mozilla now promote (like the ad-blocker in iOS, which their own browser can't even use) seem like things that aren't very ambitious; certainly they won't change the world!

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

scott_karana 11y ago
> Our mission is to promote openness, innovation & opportunity on the Web. How is Firefox OS contrary to that, exactly? I agree that they could use better focus, but FirefoxOS was entirely within their stated scope. (Even if it was a strategic blunder)

Mikeb85 11y ago

Hate to say it, but good. Firefox OS was going in a backwards direction. The UI was designed for low-res screens, and it ran mostly on hardware barely better than the iPhone 1, except with JS. Something like this could have been the future if Webassembly was ready for prime time - you could have 'native' apps all running on top on Firefox, on top of the Android/CM base. Anyhow, hopefully Mozilla refocuses their efforts on Firefox, Rust and Webassembly, and regain relevance.

ausjke 11y ago

Lots of headlines at HN from Mozilla these days. Tried Firefox OS emulator and it's fine, but not impressed enough to actually to get a real device. Yes they better focus on privacy/identity and revamp Thuderbird to make it a unique product.

SwellJoe 11y ago
Revamping Thunderbird has already been ruled out by one of those previous headlines. Mozilla has cut the cord with Thunderbird. So, they're either focusing on their core strengths or giving up on a lot of fronts, depending on your perspective.
rockdoe 11y ago
Lots of headlines at HN from Mozilla these days. They're having a developer conference so big announcements are concentrated.
- steveklabnik 11y ago
  It's more accurately described as an employee all-hands, with some volunteers invited too. 1200 employees, ~200 volunteers, not really people developing things on Mozilla platforms.
  - bronson 11y ago
    Twelve hundred employees??? And they couldn't find one or two of them to port Thunderbird to Qt.
    - steveklabnik 11y ago
      I think you seriously underestimate the amount of work that would take.
      - bronson 11y ago
        Wow, you think it would take more than a few developer-years?

issaria 11y ago

Two days ago when Mozilla discontinues Thunderbird, people cheering "oh yeah, finally they can focus on firefoxOS", the same people are yelling Mozilla should focus on their mission (the browser)? Not to mention rust, it's adoption is nowhere comparable to Java, see what happened to Sun, I would boldly say Mozilla's mission has completed.

pcwalton 11y ago
> Not to mention rust, it's adoption is nowhere comparable to Java By that metric, no language produced in the past 10 years has been a success.
- kibwen 11y ago
  By that metric, and considering absolute numbers, there's a good chance that no other language ever produced has been a success. :P

SwellJoe 11y ago

I was always waiting for a credible Firefox OS phone in the US; ready to buy immediately on arrival. Nothing ever arrived. The phones were weak by Android phone standards, expensive by low-end Android phone standards, and often didn't support all of the bands of my carrier and so would have had less connectivity in remote locations. I'm disappointed, though. I looked forward to a more open phone built by an organization I trust. Google is barely OK. Apple is not even that. Microsoft is improving, but still out of the running in terms of openness.

wiremine 11y ago

Is anyone actually surprised by this announcement? It feels like Mozilla tries a lot of things, but rarely gets traction on any of them. Mean while, Firefox isn't getting that much better and seems to be loosing marketshare. What's the long-term plan?

bronson 11y ago
Shovel more crap like Pocket and Hello into their flagship product and pray that something sticks? Agreed, it seems like they're rapidly running out of options. It's getting a little concerning.

hardwaresofton 11y ago

tldr; sad but ultimately no problem, it's just up to the open source community to maintain b2g (boot2gecko) now. It's already a more-than-functional platform, excited to take part in porting it and maintaining it from here on out, because I'll still be using it. As a person that runs FirefoxOS on my main phone (LG Nexus 5 running FFOS v2.5), this sucks to hear. I used to own a Flame which was the developer reference phone and basically the best ffos phone you could buy except the fx0 which is for sale only with contract in japan (or very very expensively otherwise), and it was pretty good phone, and got better with every update. However, as far as FirefoxOS (aka b2g/boot2gecko) itself goes, it's open source, so it's got a life of it's own (though it may be significantly less contributed to from now on) -- and I'm totally OK with that. I will continue to run FirefoxOS because it still does the things it should (makes calls, text messages, use apps) -- and can be (relatively) easily ported to existing phones (some flagships). Sad day, but also kind of fine, because they did what they set out to do, and I'm running this OS on my phone, and it's verifiably not garbage (I think it's great). Looking forward to a leaner, meaner, faster Firefox on my desktop -- I'll be getting my hands dirty with FFOS on my phone in the meantime.

efes 11y ago

I really wanted them to merge themselves in as an alternate userland mode for cyanogenmod and any other AOSP. I'm not sure if microsoft's investment in cyanogenmod was a response to those kinds of possibilities..

listic 11y ago

Looks like Smart Feature Phones won't materialize :( https://youtu.be/JIiIjjIsuzc https://youtu.be/JIiIjjIsuzc Though they aren't quite saying that, I guess there'll be no new Firefox OS Smart TV's, too? http://www.techradar.com/news/television/6-best-smart-tv-platforms-in-the-world-today-1120795/2 http://www.techradar.com/news/television/6-best-smart-tv-pla...

CrackpotGonzo 11y ago

Anyone know the status of the smart feature phone os they were talking about a few months back? I can't find anything on it but am interested in the project.

tacojuan 11y ago

I bought one of the Fx0 phones last month. Sad to hear this news. I wanted to move away from Android and iOS, and saw FFOS as the only viable option. They should've mass produced whatever the developer phone was, the Flame I think? Sell it to consumers as a flagship, supported by Mozilla devs, and community devs...

benlower 11y ago

I'm saddened by this because I am not a fan of the current state in mobile where everything is an app. I liked their idea of having 'apps' be about the open web. Sure, native apps can be great but I don't want to be locked in to anyone's proprietary platform.

dcw303 11y ago

Linux as a platform took off because it was possible for a smart user to install it on hardware they already had. If there had of been a way to install Firefox OS on an iPhone or Android phone, I would have certainly tried it out. Mozilla really needed to target power users, but it was just too hard to get hold of the hardware - both hardware availability and the stupid state of carrier contracts are to blame here. I don't know that Mozilla's business model works if they are not bundling their software to a licensed phone, but it's a shame that the mobile platforms can't be opened up the same way desktops are.

ocdtrekkie 11y ago
Yup. That was one thing I was really hoping Ubuntu Touch would give me a chance with, their whole "install on Android" thing. But it's supported on a pittance of device options. Currently mobile hardware is in a space where the OS has to be custom built for the hardware choices of that particular phone manufacturer, unlike PCs which have a robust system of drivers you have some manner of control over as a user. Seems to be the biggest limitation.

hackuser 11y ago

What is the future of Mozilla and of open platforms? 1) Without FirefoxOS, what is Mozilla's future on mobile devices? The Firefox browser, while I think it's great, has very low adoption on mobiles. I'm not sure content-blockers are enough, and they now need the platform owner's cooperation to get their product in front of users (i.e., to get into the app store and to be compatible with the user systems). 2) Without a future on mobile devices, what is Mozilla's future? How influential can they be while playing no role on the most popular Internet platform? 3) Without a player on mobile devices, what is the future of open platforms in general? On the desktop there are several mature operating systems and ecosystems but what is there on mobile? Can open platforms be relevant without a presence on mobile? Where are the BSDs for mobile? GNU tools? Vim? There are Android forks, but they depend on the continued generosity of the market leader (to release AOSP, a version of Android designed for that purpose). And having looked around for a good option, I can report that the various forks are unambitious, provide little to differentiate themselves from Android, and their organization and support don't inspire confidence.

Patronus_Charm 11y ago

It was doomed from the beginning, already such a crowded space. Firefox OS had no chance at all.

fiatjaf 11y ago

That's a shame and awful. Web apps should really be winning this fight against "native". Firefox OS was our greatest warrior. Or wasn't it?

erikpukinskis 11y ago

A federated web payment infrastructure would be the holy grail Mozilla could build a life around.

daleharvey 11y ago

So the headline is fairly misleading, Firefox OS is not cancelled and development will not be stopped. The strategy of trying to push distribution via carriers has not worked so we will no longer be doing that. The "Firefox OS" team was renamed to "Connected Devices" to reflect the fact we are not only building a smartphone, TV's are already being sold and other factors (iot / wearables etc) are being looked into.

xylon 11y ago

I never knew Firefox OS existed. Maybe they should've marketed it better?

Rapzid 11y ago

Something that has been on my mind.. A lot of commenters keep saying there are two good options out there, but really the choice is more "iPhone. Yes or No?". If you don't want an iPhone you are going to end up with an Android device. I can't put iOS on my nexus 5. There is a space there for another OS that you can put on your non-iphone. I just don't think that's Mozilla's space to fill. Really, in all practicality, this is a space Microsoft needs to fill. It's almost like the world is waiting for them to step it up. Their new open source strategy is going to produce some big plays along these lines; .net in particular. Think about the native and multi-arch work being done for it.. ARM for Windows10 and .net; where is it all going you think? I can tell you that if I could load up Windows10 on my nexus5 even if just for a test drive I certainly would.

aswanson 11y ago

When did they start?

selvan 11y ago

FFxOS kernel is a fork of android kernal, but optimized to run on small memory footprint (128 MB RAM). Its speed on 128 MB RAM devices is commendable. Javascript is the only and primary development language for FFxOS & we get to access all hardware devices (Bluetooth, wifi, camera, etc ) via Javascript.

coldtea 11y ago

Funny, I just advised for that in a HN thread. I guess the writing was on the wall of course -- but in case they just heard me and decided to stop it: please guys prioritize a native-UI on all platforms, servo based release for 2016.

ramanamit1234 11y ago

Money well wasted.

rasengan0 11y ago

Anyone remember the Facebook phone?

devilirium 11y ago

Finally.

jbiddy 11y ago

Hugely disappointing. Actually love my Open C once I upgraded it to FxOS 2.2 Dear Mozilla, I hate IoT devices. I don't want them. They are security exploits incarnate. At least a phone is useful, why the hell do I really need a microwave with an IP address? I don't.

znpy 11y ago

It's high time Mozilla gets its shit together.

zdkl 11y ago

I'm writing from my buggy, crashing ZTE Open C... And this is the final straw: I've had it Mozilla. It's not me, it's you. You were the symbol of informatics progress in the right direction, but now you're just another pusher of one size fits all crapware. Hope this changes again because we need a good guy in this space. Now to finally remove the slow, crashing behemoth that has become Firefox...

ionised 11y ago

Well that sucks. I desperately want to drop Android and was hoping Firefox OS would continue to mature and improve.

anonyfox 11y ago

Thunderbird: stopped. FirefoxOS: stopped. Rust: as nice as the language is, I can see it become irrelevant in the rise of Swift (and tons of developers already using and praising it). so the last thing that remains is the very core of mozilla: firefox. But then version 42 hit me, disabled the support for custom themes, leaving me alone with a crappy UI I can't stand any longer to the point I uninstalled Firefox forever. As others have already mentioned: from several sessions of customer development out in the streets, I can confirm that privacy is something that no-one has really interest in, let alone pay a penny for it nowadays. I'd love to know what Mozilla's vision of the future is, given that the points above are real and Firefox itself becomes more and more an awful "me too!" of other, better browsers.

pcwalton 11y ago
> Rust: as nice as the language is, I can see it become irrelevant in the rise of Swift (and tons of developers already using and praising it). How are Rust and Swift in the same language niche at all?

newscracker 11y ago

I was waiting for a Firefox OS phone with great hardware, but that didn't seem to materialize (AFAIK). Making both high end and low end phones together, perhaps in different volumes, could have helped. Focusing only on the extreme low end with poor hardware was probably a mistake. While I'm unhappy that Mozilla is not going to focus on Firefox OS smartphones, I do consider this as an experiment that organizations like Mozilla ought to do. I'm sure there were a lot of things accomplished (like some mentioned in the comments for phone APIs) and a lot of things learned. These will in turn help other initiatives. Now, please put Thunderbird back on the development track with the same priority as Firefox. :) And while you're at it, we want Persona too! :)

l_stover 11y ago

do you need any hack espionage done ? email or social network hack , remote mobile device hack or any of the below services: Mugshot Picture Removal Blog Link Removed Google Link Removed Locate or track Missing People Background Check SSN Trace Address History 7-Year National Criminal Database Search Courthouse Verification of Criminal Database Records (up to 3) National Sex Offender Registry Check ??? Geniushack08@gmail.com

endemic 11y ago

I'm surprised this project didn't pivot into something more like ChromeOS. The market there, as proven by Chromebooks. As others have mentioned, Mozilla could have played up the security/privacy aspect of a "Firefox-book". As a smartphone OS, I don't see what problems Firefox OS solves. Both iOS and Android have great browsers, and can pin webapps to their homescreens.

contingencies 11y ago

They failed because they missed the great opportunity of promoting ad-hoc and mesh applications in their API and security model as first class citizens.

mrottenkolber 11y ago

Good riddance. Firefox OS was a technical disaster. It was vulnerable by design as it had no capabilities for updating Gecko. I had hopes for it, and I will happily continue to use my first generation ZTE (70 bucks) FxOS phone, but I am happy they are no longer sold. Distribution of the OS was a reckless debacle and, from the perspective of a non-technical customer, fraud, if you ask me.