Mind you, to people in emerging markets, it is a tool, not a toy, even if they only pay $25 for it. To these people, it's a lot of money.
The hardware is very slow. It is too slow to render HTML5, which is especially hard when you have to type on the touch screen. The problem is that the system lags quite long after you touch the screen, so you are a few letters ahead of what is on the screen. There is no feedback.
So, to me, Mozilla is really disconnected from reality if they think this could work.
I love the idea of ruthlessly developing for low end systems rather than just assuming everyone has 1 GHz and 1GB.
I hope designers and coders enjoy the challenge of working with such limited systems.
I tried to use Paypal website on an iPhone 4 yesterday. It was painfully slow. It was loading a bunch o stuff that I just didn't need or want. Horrible experience.
Firefox OS is very, very heavily focused on the use of HTML5, JavaScript, and other web technologies for the development of mobile applications.
Yet as you found out recently, apps or websites built using these technologies are often extremely inefficient, even when highly tuned by very experienced developers.
To get good performance on limited devices, the best thing to do is to move away from HTML5, JavaScript, and related technologies. Applications written in C, C++, Objective-C and even Java vastly outperform HTML5/JavaScript-based apps, especially on devices with limited capabilities.
Yet this is completely contrary to what Mozilla is doing with Firefox OS. So it seems really unusual to me to support them and their efforts, when it's clear that their approach flies totally in the face of what you'd like to see happen.
Citation when it comes to Java (assuming you're talking about Dalvik, because that's the relevant Java implementation on mobile)? Dalvik is not generally considered as fast as either V8 or SpiderMonkey. For example: https://blog.mozilla.org/javascript/2013/08/01/staring-at-th...
You might also want to check out what Sencha did with Fastbook: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCn3R3-XxBU
They do. However, don't be so quick to dismiss the point they are making: on high-end devices at least, html5 apps are at least as good/performant as native apps.
By the way, Apple, Google and Microsoft each have an agenda as well: to enclose developers in their walled garden, making them learn and use proprietary non-cross-platform APIs so that apps can't achieve a "ship new features everywhere, at the same time, easily" approach. They also want you as a user and a developer to abandon your phone after a while by deprecating APIs and making the OS effectively non-updatable, and making it very hard to update manually (do you know how to port Cyanogenmod to your device? Fix its bugs?).
as soon as your target middle to low end handsets it is turtle speed time.
... on Android. It probably isn't great on low-end or old hardware (although light pages should still run fine). However, Firefox OS is designed and optimized for running those webapps on low-end hardware, contrary to Android.
Which vendor do you trust to make the web fast? The ones who have nothing to gain from it, because they wouldn't be able to retain users anymore who could switch to a new OS in a heartbeat if all the apps were webapps? Or the vendor who made huge contributions to the open web?
Too much pain with web development projects since the .com days.
On a low hand device,you cant honestly say, an HTML5 ui on firefox os will be faster and more reponsive than an android ui coded with the android framework. Wether X javascript engine is fast or not is irrelevant. Users are not stupid, they can tell a fast and responsive ui from a clunky HTML/JS one.
Finally Javascript gives you 0 tool for manual memory management,which is central for any embedded programming. On Android and Iphone one can go down to C/C++ if necessary.
The idea of a 25$ device that would run javascript programs/uis efficiently is preposterous.
asm.js offers manual memory management, with no garbage collection. You can compile C and C++ and it will run essentially natively, modulo the sandboxed safety checks.
What kind of person are you?
But. I've been happily using it as my main phone since I got it in early January, and I expect that to stay true for a fair while. It's not at all 'unusable'. It makes phone calls and sends and receives text messages. It even seems to handle MMS better than my Galaxy Nexus did. It browses the web, although that can take some patience. The Marketplace has few apps, and fewer good ones, but it does my calculations, tells me the weather, helps me find directions when I'm lost, and has numerous Flappy Bird clones.
I think it's amazing that it only took $100 to have something that does all that arrive on my doorstep. Sometimes it's more amazing, though, that the technology around us is so cool that to m[ost|any] people that doesn't feel good enough.