Hacker News Reader

Comment by derf_ | Hacker News Reader

You're confusing strategy with the objective that strategy was intended to achieve. The real reason for Firefox OS was because

a) everything is moving to mobile, and

b) every mobile OS ships its own browser which is not Firefox.

We know from Netscape how hard it is to stay relevant against that kind of pressure, and there isn't even a way to cry "Anti-trust!" because none of these players are monopolies. They just all behave the same way.

View on HN

If Mozilla creates their own distribution of Android and sells phones with it, then they're extremely relevant in the mobile space. Take a look at the principles of the Mozilla manifesto[1]. Nowhere does it say, 'we need to have a relevant web browser'. It's a bigger mission about an open internet, unrestrained communication, libre software and ultimately end-user sovereignty. When Mozilla.org was created, the best way to achieve those goals was by having an awesome libre browser. As you rightly point out, the world has gone mobile, and the way for Mozilla to continue their mission is by releasing a mobile OS built with their principals in mind. If this was 2007, building Firefox OS may have been a viable strategy. But it's 2015, and the quickest, and in my opinion the only, way to succeed is with a distribution of Android with Mozilla services.

[1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/

You make a good point. One possible objection: does that actually allow them to do what they are trying to do? Is Android flexible enough for them to bend it to their will?

Shipping a Mozilla Android with their own app store and Firefox on it instead of Chrome is surely a path of less resistance than starting an entirely new OS.

It is worth remembering that Mozilla is a relatively small organization, all things considered.

> starting an entirely new OS.

Gonk, the core of FxOS, is based on Android. It is 'only' Gaia (the UI) that was written anew in HTML, along with performance work on the Gecko rendering engine.

Keeping the UI all in HTML5 (and rendered entirely by Gecko) meant they had to develop APIs and improve OpenWebApps as a spec to fill on the common use cases.

> Shipping a Mozilla Android with their own app store and Firefox

... would require Mozilla supporting a lot more Java code and use cases that don't further the Firefox mission. What does Mozilla gain from running a third-party Android app store, and the support costs that entails?

FxOS, success or failure, pushes the Firefox product as a whole further and faster than a Mozilla-branded Android fork ever would have.

Are we agreed that Mozilla needs a mobile platform of some kind (or a partnership) in order to ensure Firefox is the browser on it? (be it FxOS, MozDroid, or something else entirely)

Re: "FxOS, success or failure, pushes the Firefox product as a whole further," I don't see how FxOS is anything other than a waste of resources if it fails.

If Mozilla went the route of rebranding Android, they needn't fork it entirely. They could just apply their branding & app store on top of Google's releases. The app store is a necessary component because Google won't allow the use of theirs (at least without a price), and it's a user expectation of any mobile OS. (even FxOS has an app store; marketplace.firefox.com)

It's unrealistic to expect Mozilla would become a dominant mobile platform in the foreseeable future, no matter what they do. Like Microsoft, they just need to have some territory, for now. (perhaps they should also consider partnerships with "the new Microsoft", Yahoo, Amazon, Facebook, etc.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com