Firefox OS on Android Devices
people.mozilla.org
people.mozilla.org
The fact that this is even possible is pretty great. I've been getting more and more frustrated with Android lately, but being able to do things like this is still a really great feature.
Very neat way to get a feel for Firefox OS without the need for new hardware.
So.. this is just a launcher? Not anything to do with actually running an OS, just pretty icons and such? Shame. I was really looking forward to some kind of dual-boot or co-exist setup. I guess FFOS is in the same place a lot of small and hobbyist projects are at - without the marketshare of android, you simple do not have drivers available for your platform and considering the closed nature of most SoC's, its impossible to write you own.
Its kinda sad that smartphones didnt evolve like PCs. Drivers and specs have become proprietary trade secrets and that hurts us all.
That said, a FFOS Android distro would be pretty nice, especially if it broke away from the Google world of google play services, play store, etc. Imagine CM but without all the suckitude. I could see that having a chance and the driver problem would be solved.
Firefox OS uses Android's kernel and userspace so it has just as many drivers as Android.
Am I close or way off?
Since the userspace of FFOS all runs on web tech, if this has enough of the runtime to power the homescreen, it should be able to power the apps too.
So... my goal with doing that is to lower the barrier to entry and get more people to try the Firefox OS user experience. Currently it needs some dedication (either getting a supported device, or flashing your existing one), and that's obviously preventing us to get mindshare, both from users and developers.
Having simply to install an android app is vastly simpler for many people that are just curious at first. Some things will always be a bit different in the android version compared to a full flash, but I expect that to be relatively minor. I'm trying to get as much meaningful OS integration, like opening links from android apps in our browser frames, bridging our Web Activities and Android Intents, etc.
Feedback welcome at https://etherpad.mozilla.org/b2gdroid !
Because you change screens and you don't scroll. As the swipe motion is over more than 80% of the screen that would not work from top to bottom, only scrolling feels natural.
I think it was in the Nexus S that the rolling effect pictured in the app drawer was added to make the scrolling more interesting.
you can also install v2 from the app store but one looks better.
you can have vertical scroll with or without snapping
Good news, there's a FirefoxOS app for that. http://www.connecta2.im/
See also: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/whatsapp-alternatives-f...
[1]: https://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/widget/gonk/l... is pretty much all taken from Android.
Parent is both technically incorrect as well as semantically incorrect. FirefoxOS uses a large amount of Google-written Android code.
So in this case you are running Firefox OS on Firefox on Android. That is obviously not ideal, but fine for testing.
No use derailing the thread, this project is cool!
Firefox OS sounds ideal if it pans out well.
Android shares more and more information with every app on your phone, with each update (ex. every app get your Google email address and all wifi networks, even with "no special permissions"). iOS is closed source and walled off. FirefoxOS is a refreshing change. For the first time there is a usable mobile OS that puts users in control of everything.
From the business point of view, I don't see any value over the existing options.
After all, we had Internet Explorer, Safari and Opera as perfectly viable browsers.
Firefox OS doesn't make sense the same way, because they aren't making anything that people want. As far as I can tell, it's a way for Mozillans to testify their faith in JavaScript.
With the mobile market being dominated by Google, Microsoft and Apple, Firefox OS makes sense in the same way.
For users, it is about building a platform in which users are not locked to a proprietary silo, and are not spied upon by default.
For carriers and hardware vendors, it is about building a platform that is not 100% controlled by Google. Recall that Google can decide to revoke Android license from any vendor on arbitrary grounds, and if you lose your Android license, you pretty much lose everything (no AGPS, no Google Maps, no Google Play, etc.)
Oh, and yes, it's also a third thing: it's designed to be a cool platform for [web]developers.
How are they not locked into the 'silo' of FirefoxOS and the FirefoxOS APIs? If the answer is that the apps are 100% web standards compliant then users already have web browsers that can run those apps without needing to use FirefoxOS, so what is the point of FirefoxOS for users?
>Recall that Google can decide to revoke Android license from any vendor on arbitrary grounds, and if you lose your Android license, you pretty much lose everything (no AGPS, no Google Maps, no Google Play, etc.)
While this is shitty, it still just leaves you pretty much in the same place as FirefoxOS (being able to access (some of) those services through a web browser rather than a native app). If a hardware vendor is worried about losing the licence to use the native google maps app, why would they move to FirefoxOS - a platform without a native google maps app?
The entire project seems more about politics and religion than an actual business case. Which is fair enough, but isn't a recipe for commercial success or market penetration.
Because the other platforms don't support all of the standards developed by FirefoxOS, and will have no incentive to implement them without competition. Basic economics.
FirefoxOS is fully open source, while the Google platform is not. At the very least, that provides an environment where the source code for all the official supported platform is Free Software, which isn't true for Android.
This means that all users could share the same experience without depending on proprietary software (except maybe for drivers and BIOS specific to the hardware platform).
Once could argue this same "need" exists for smartphone OS's. However, not so easy to swap those out, in contrast to Firefox which was an easy switch for most.
Yes, and imo Firefox was the best browser for several years, until Chrome/Chromium took hold. Chrome is faster, it's developer tools are still better than Firefox's, and maybe more importantly, by usage it currently ranks highest: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers
Mozilla has really struggled in the past several years with Firefox, and Firefox OS is similarly fighting. As noted in http://www.cnet.com/news/firefox-os-in-flux-as-mozilla-loses... "Mozilla joined Microsoft, Samsung and BlackBerry in learning that it's brutally hard to compete successfully. Of the 334 million phones shipped during the first quarter of 2015, Google's Android OS accounted for 78 percent and Apple's iOS 18.3 percent, according to analysis firm IDC. That leaves just 3.7 percent for all other challengers."
> One could argue this same "need" exists for smartphone OS's.
I'm not sure if I agree completely. Firefox OS is modern in the sense that it aims to be HTML/CSS/JS-based, but in what sense is it either lean or fast? If it is HTML/CSS/JS-based, it probably won't take up less space than compiled apps would. And from others here, you can see there are complaints about its speed.
I will continue to use Firefox at home, but I think Firefox OS needs to be rethought before I'll use it. I don't think lean/simplistic and fast should be the goals. Instead I'd suggest:
(1) Freedom: How can it be used almost anywhere for almost anything? Why just mobile devices? What about building atop the Linux kernel, thereby having access to a slew of possible devices, and providing easy access to them via JS?
(2) Fun: How can it be fun to both use and develop for via well-designed but easy to use libraries along with great documentation that automatically generated and given lots of attention along with lots of examples for each version.
However, that would be a huge undertaking and I don't foresee them doing it.