Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mozilla Will Stop Developing and Selling Firefox OS Smartphones (techcrunch.com)

Posted by Soulskill on from the somewhat-outfoxed dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Mozilla announced today at its developer event in Orlando that the company is ending its smartphone experiment. Mozilla will stop developing and selling Firefox OS smartphones. Ari Jaaksi, Mozilla's SVP of Connected Devices, said, "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." However, he added that it didn't end up providing a great user experience, so they decided to move their efforts elsewhere within the "connected devices" ecosystem. The TechCrunch article notes, "Mozilla has been on a streamlining track lately. Last week it announced that it would be looking for alternative homes for its Thunderbird email and chat client. The aim is for the company to focus more on its strongest and core products and reputation."

108 of 174 comments (clear)

  1. No Wonder by ISoldat53 · · Score: 1

    No wonder Mozilla is losing money.

    1. Re:No Wonder by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      They should have sold out to / merged with Yahoo before Yahoo ended up going down the tubes.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:No Wonder by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Nah, yahoo is just trash. Always has been. Even in the old days of the interweb when they were considered so awesome, I still never used their service, and I'm not sure what the appeal ever was (their "search" often meant sifting through topics as they tried to catalogue the web, and their home page was so full of ads and graphics and shit that it was annoying to visit on a 28.8k modem.)

      To be honest, I think Mozilla is doing really well with their Android browser. Unlike other mobile browsers, you get addons. I use it with adblock plus, lastpass, searchonymous, and ghostery. Would like for Privacy Badger to work with it, but EFF doesn't support it for reasons I haven't yet heard.

      Of course, if Chrome supported addons for mobile, I might use it instead, because Firefox mobile does seem a little slower, with or without addons.

    3. Re:No Wonder by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I made a killing on Yahoo! just recently. Almost exactly a year ago, I don't have the date handy, I dumped some shares (like 1800) that I bought for far less than what I paid. I don't know as I'd call them trash, they seem to be doing just fine. You might not like them and, indeed, I don't use a single service they offer nor do I even have their site in my browser's history or bookmarks but that's not an indication that they're trash.

      You never used their services but feel compelled to tell us how it worked and that you had to sift through stuff, while not using their services. You seem to know a lot about something you never used. Then you tell us how it was cluttered and full of ads... On a site you 'still never used their service.' Which one is it?

      Hell, I used to use their curated site and their search engine wasn't really that bad. I used their email and chat. I just don't any more because I've migrated away from those things and found alternatives. I'd still not call them trash.

      Oh, wait, you wanted to feel smug and trendy. Never mind then. I'll just be over here enjoying my stock market lottery winnings. ;-)

      Seriously, I don't actually know what they do but it was a pretty damned good buy. Lots of people were saying they were dead 'cause their stock value had plummeted but others pointed out that they had a ton of assets so, I bought a bunch. I bought a bunch more a few days later. Then I just sat on it and it increased by a factor of about 10 as I recall. I think I held the shares for a year and a half, maybe a bit more. I'd hardly call that trash and it would appear that someone agrees with me. Hell, if they get back down to a price like that again, I'll do it again. I dunno what I'm doing but I'm doing pretty good at it.

      At any rate, I'd not recommend buying them at the moment but don't take it from me as I'm just patient and able to take the risks. If you can put money in and leave it then wait for these companies to slump and then buy. If you want a tip then let the fallout from VW happen and just as they're back in the news for going to court over it - buy and wait a few years. Take a loan out, if you have to. Spend 100k on shares and just sit on them and pay your loan off. I almost guarantee you'll make a shitton of money doing this. I just watch trends and read the gibberish you folks write on sites like this and then I take a look at the actual numbers and assets. It's more lucrative than working ever was. I don't even check values daily or weekly as a general rule. Sit on it like an investment and it's not a bad deal. Just wait for something to make something sell low then wait patiently.

      Oh wait... Err... Mozilla? Yeah, I think the worst phone review that I ever read was about Firefox OS being put on some really cheap phone and being pretty much useless. This might not be a bad idea. It'd be nice if someone good picks up Thunderbird. And Yahoo! isn't that shitty, really. Lots of people still seem to use it. They've got some value which means they're not really trash. Hell, I made some money on 'em. So, they're good for something. (Also, keep an eye on VW. I expect mid-2016 to be when they head even lower than they were in November.)

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    4. Re:No Wonder by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Oh, wait, you wanted to feel smug and trendy. Never mind then.

      No. "Never used" in the context I'm using idiomatically, and means I tried it briefly, and never used it on routine basis. Instead I relied on services like AltaVista. Which you understood that but wanted to be anal retentive about the literal meaning of my words.

      I used their email and chat. I just don't any more because I've migrated away from those things and found alternatives. I'd still not call them trash.

      Yahoo's market cap is LESS than their combined assets. Think about that for a minute. That means that their services are so bad, that they're valued at less than zero. An example of another company valued less than their combined assets is Sprint. That should give you a pretty good idea of what I mean when I say they're trash.

    5. Re:No Wonder by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Ah, just in time. See the new Yahoo! thread? ;-) Nah, they're not trash. They might not be of any value to *you* but they're certainly of value to someone. They've got like a billion users and own a whole bunch of other properties. I don't actually know any of those users, come to think of it. But they've got 'em and they're hard at work taking what they can from 'em. We've got people on this site who pay them to host their email, in this day and age and on this site. Nah, they're not trash just not what you want to use.

      On the other hand, they did make me some rather decent money just by loaning them some cash for a little while. So, they're not trash in those regards either. In fact, it was (and still is) a fairly healthy asset and you should know better than to pay attention to market caps. ;-) Those numbers don't mean a whole lot, at least not as far as I can tell. Half the time I'm pretty sure they just make 'em up.

      Also, remember this conversation and look at VW stock for the next 18 - 24 months. Expect a drop in early 2016 and consider buying then. *nods* They're not going anywhere and you'll almost certainly make a good percentage on it. A few people have pushed the value back up instead of letting it stay flat for a while but it'll go back down some - maybe lower than it was in November, this may depend on the fallout but the timing should be fairly close. Then just sit on it until you've reached the percentage growth you want. If you're as lazy as I am, you can even automate this sort of thing with your favorite online trade site. It's kind of neat. I dunno what I'm doing but I'm doing it fairly well so far. Err... If you're adventurous, take out a loan or something but keep in mind that it's just really high-stakes gambling - play the player, not the house.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    6. Re:No Wonder by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Nah, yahoo is just trash. Always has been. Even in the old days of the interweb when they were considered so awesome, I still never used their service, and I'm not sure what the appeal ever was (their "search" often meant sifting through topics as they tried to catalogue the web, and their home page was so full of ads and graphics and shit that it was annoying to visit on a 28.8k modem.)

      No, you're just too young to remember. Yahoo was a great service in the early days, but that was when we were using modems a fraction as fast as your 28.8. When Google finally came around, that made Yahoo completely obsolete, but before usable search engines were invented, Yahoo's cataloging was quite useful.

      You probably don't even remember the pre-Google search engines like AltaVista.

    7. Re:No Wonder by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Private foundations can certainly sell significant parts of themselves. Just look at how the National Geographic Society sold off a huge chunk of itself to Rupert Murdoch. In the case of Mozilla, there's no reason it couldn't have sold off the browser/team/support and then wound down their operations.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  2. TIL Mozilla developed and sold Firefox OS phones by technomom · · Score: 2

    Who knew?

    I guess not enough of us....

  3. Reputation? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    Maybe they're wisely cutting their losses, but they're also re-enforcing their poor industry reputation. Here's my previous comment about FirefoxOS:

    Commitment? (Score:5, Insightful)
    by bill_mcgonigle (4333) * on 2012.07.02 12:19 (#40518547) Homepage Journal
    I didn't learn from TFAs what Mozilla's commitment is to this. It seems like a good idea, but Mozilla has such a long history of abandoning [lawrencemandel.com] really good ideas [mozilla.org] when they turn out not to be easy.

    Don't get me wrong - I use Firefox on the desktop, but MoFo was such a grand vision, once upon a time. As MoFo just becomes "the Firefox group" such opportunity is lost. And to think - Fire[bird,fox] was the revolt app against former management that once again seems familiar. Eh ... maybe there's still an ember of a skunkworks left there - one can hope.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  4. Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pretty much everyone saw this coming ....and nothing of value was lost, except the money spent on the salaries of the people in charge promoting this stupidity, instead of investing in their core product. History will continue to repeat itself until the money runs out.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      My theory on firefox OS is that it was the attempted revenge of Mozilla to google for the development of the Chrome browser. It surely has been (and is) bad for firefox that Google now develops and advertises its own browser, instead of Mozilla's as it has been before Chrome.

    2. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What IS their core product?

    3. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Pretty much everyone saw this coming ....and nothing of value was lost, except the money spent on the salaries of the people in charge promoting this stupidity, instead of investing in their core product. History will continue to repeat itself until the money runs out.

      The huge sums of money were the problem. Once they put suit-tards in charge, the fail train started rolling downhill.

    4. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1, Funny

      What IS their core product?

      Memory - Hogging Bugs?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    5. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Informative

      Oh wow, you're like really smart and clairvoyant too.

      No need for clairvoyance
      Or a crystal ball (or two)
      Firefox OS jumped the shark
      Simply failed to make a mark
      It's an outdated bag of poo!

      Burma Shave

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    6. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What IS their core product?

      Memory - Hogging Bugs?

      Bad UX changes despite overwhelming negative feeddback from the user community?

    7. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      instead of investing in their core product.

      By "investing in" you mean "making the tabs rounder and buggering up the UI"?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    8. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      please, stop. youre making yourself look bad.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    9. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by narcc · · Score: 1

      You do realize they haven't stopped development of the OS, don't you? All they've stopped doing is signing agreements with OEMs to produce smartphones. They still have OEM partners for other devices. Further, as development continues, there's nothing to stop an interested manufacturer from producing a smartphone running FxOS.

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
    10. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by narcc · · Score: 1

      I switched to FireFox after the UI update, because I preferred it. The "overwhelmingly negative feedback" came from a tiny, if vocal, minority.

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
    11. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      But why would any smartphone manufacturer do that, when they can get Android for free along with a billion apps?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    12. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by narcc · · Score: 1

      Any number of reasons. The most obvious being To differentiate their product in a sea of uninteresting clones.

      Android isn't terribly good. Competition in this space is badly needed. Why wish for homogeneity?

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
    13. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Any number of reasons. The most obvious being To differentiate their product in a sea of uninteresting clones.

      Blackberry's experience says otherwise. Look what standardization did for the PC industry.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    14. Re:Pretty much everyone saw this coming .... by narcc · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I didn't check your username before I replied last time. I won't feed you any further.

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
  5. Ridiculous Endeavors by vix86 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    About a week ago, me and my friend had actually been discussing all the stupid business decisions that Mozilla has been making. Their OS and the Firefox Phone were two big ones that came to mind that just didn't make any sense to either of us. The money they have received, they've squandered on pointless pursuits into industries they stood no chance at making a dent in.

    Seriously, what was the logic behind trying to get into the phone market in the first place? Other companies have tried just as well (Amazon, Microsoft) with little to no success. The thing that bugged us was the fact that they must have spent millions trying to do this which could have been more smartly invested to ensure that they didn't run out of money to support and improve the current products they know are/were liked (Thunderbird and Firefox). Now as result, we are left with them trying to find money streams to support Firefox, and most of this comes from pushing unwanted software and advertisement into Firefox.

    1. Re:Ridiculous Endeavors by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're forgetting the FirefoxOS Panasonic Smart TV that was announced earlier this year that's going to leave Panasonic with egg on the face.

      My theory is that Mozilla and Canonical were trying to copy each others tactics because they saw the media buzz that was being generated when one of them made an announcement. Phones, Tablets, and TVs were the "canonical" (pun intended) examples.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:Ridiculous Endeavors by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 2

      Sad they are going to cut off Thunderbird, especially since they're only putting in enough effort to keep it on life support.
      However, if some other entity picked up Thunderbird and breathed new life into it that could be an exciting venture.
      On the other hand, from what I gather of the Thunderbird codebase, it is an antiquated beast with a lot of technical debt. Open source developers may be better of putting their effort elsewhere.

      I hope Libra Office or Apache takes it under its wings
      Libra Office makes since as it fits well with it office suite and fills a gap in its product offerings, as well as some shared code already.
      Apache has OpenOffice and it would fit their the same as it would fit with Libra Office.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    3. Re:Ridiculous Endeavors by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Mozilla wanted to provide a more open platform than even Android offers, that doesn't revolve around a single app store and bases everything on free and open technologies. They faced two major problems:

      1. No-one really understood their motivation or cared about it, they just wanted a phone with some apps.

      2. Android is pretty open, especially devices shipping with Cyanogen, so Firefox OS just didn't offer many advantages and there were many disadvantages.

      In hindsight they might have been better off doing what Amazon did and forking Android.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Ridiculous Endeavors by sad_ · · Score: 1

      FirefoxOS will still be around, just not on phones (focus on IoT). Perhaps it will be more suited to something like a TV.
      Panasonic loses nothing, the OS is open source and they are a big enough company to continue support even if Mozilla would totally abandon FirefoxOS.

      --
      On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
    5. Re:Ridiculous Endeavors by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      It's LibreOffice, not "Libra Office".

      "Libre" is the Latin/Romance-language word for free (as in liberty). You would know this if you knew any French or Spanish, as most kids learn in high school at the least. "Libra" is a Zodiac sign. And it's one word: "LibreOffice". I don't care if you're one of those curmudgeons who doesn't like CamelCase, you can at least get the name right. You got "OpenOffice" right after all.

    6. Re:Ridiculous Endeavors by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Exactly; they should have just teamed up with Cyanogen or made their own Android version like that. We could really use an alternative Android distro which is super-easy to install. They could just concentrate on certain popular phones even.

    7. Re:Ridiculous Endeavors by korgitser · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry to say but we are not witnessing just stupid and a lack of logic. I'm afraid Mozilla... has manageritis.
      We all here on Slashdot are used to Mozilla so often doubling down on being the butt of the joke. But they exist in another reality than us, in which they are just merely following the one true way of the managerie.

      They just want to leverage strategic strengths to deliver marketable products, and to synergize first-rate innovation with actionable core competencies towards timely enters into growth markets.

      It's just that as usual, this ends in misplaced priorities and sizable write-downs.

      I mean, what would you do if your marketing efforts start to short your strategic strengts, all the while you empower your human capital to channel market-leading billable hours into cargo-cult fantasies? Double down, baby, double down. They'll be back with more advanced stupid next week.

      --
      FCKGW 09F9 42
  6. What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have this nagging feeling that Mozilla is about to do something monumentally stupid to Firefox. An un-skippable 5 second splash screen? Removal of the Back button? Permanent removal of the Menu Bar? Auto-hiding scroll bars? Remove the ability to use Firefox without logging in to a Firefox account? Disable your mouse's scroll wheel in favor of Auto-scrolling? Forced telemetry?

    If there is one thing that they have shown us is that there is nothing that they wont do.

    1. Re:What's next? by sunderland56 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I have this nagging feeling that Mozilla is about to do something monumentally stupid to Firefox. An un-skippable 5 second splash screen? Removal of the Back button? Permanent removal of the Menu Bar? Auto-hiding scroll bars? Remove the ability to use Firefox without logging in to a Firefox account? Disable your mouse's scroll wheel in favor of Auto-scrolling? Forced telemetry?

      If you're going to move up to the big league, and compete with the likes of Microsoft, you need to prove that you can make corporate decisions just like Microsoft.

      If there is one thing that they have shown us is that there is nothing that they wont do.

      Yeah, maybe next release they will *only* support the left mouse button, and ignore anything else. Nah, I'm being cynical here - no major corporation would ever do anything as stupid as only supporting one mouse button.

    2. Re:What's next? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Why the hell would a display protocol define what to do on mouse presses?

    3. Re:What's next? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      If they're going to go the whole Microsoft then the next edition of Firefox will be run purely from the cloud. You can access it by using Chrome and navigating to usefirefox.com.

      Yo dawg we heard you like browsers...

    4. Re:What's next? by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      The official way wayland proposes clipboards to be implemented is via "data sharing".

      There, there is not even real distinction between copy+paste and drag+drop. All data is offered by the origin client via "wl_data_source::offer". The only actual param this accepts is the MIME type. Drag&drop isn't distinguishable from copy paste or just simply when the user selects something. In fact, one can distinguish between drag&drop by listening for additional events, but still the only "real" distinguish factor is the MIME type. And also the only real one you could use for talking about the selection for middle click usage later on. You would have to get registered at IANA for this case only or violate the RFC's.

      The wayland protocol doesn't even mention middle click pasting. Note that it mentions drag+drop and (normal) copy+paste multiple times.

      And lastly, I know that weston doesn't support it. Yes, weston isn't intended to be the best compositor of all times, but still, it means that I can't use middle click pasting for weston-terminal. That's a big minus against actually using that program. And weston-terminal is much more sophisticated than xterm. But even xterm has middle click paste. Sorry to say but I'd rather use xterm than weston-terminal.

    5. Re:What's next? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Heh... We're gonna get the clipboard functioning with the kernel used to serve it up and implemented with systemd. It'll get tied in to the kernel, parsed with clipboardd, and you'll be able to use your favorite middle-button-click settings that way.

      I'm only partially kidding. Actually, I'm not sure where the clipboard is stored, I've never bothered to look, and I'm not sure how it is implemented - it may already be functioning at a server level for all I know. Seems unlikely but I'm not gonna go chase it down and look. At any rate... The middle-button-click is for double-click! (I sure as hell hope that that's supported.)

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    6. Re:What's next? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      There, there is not even real distinction between copy+paste and drag+drop. All data is offered by the origin client via "wl_data_source::offer". The only actual param this accepts is the MIME type

      You're not really explaining why that's a terrible design decision. The reason is that drag-and-drop (and the X11 selection buffer) are bidirectional operations, whereas copy-and-paste is unidirectional. When you copy something, you are providing it to the pasteboard service, which must then store every representation that it might want to contain. The receiver of the paste operation then checks which type it wants. You're limited by storage space and by processing time to a relatively restricted set of types. In contrast, drag-and-drop involves live content type negotiation. The sender advertises a potentially huge set of types, the receiver filters out the ones that it doesn't understand and then selects the one that it most wants. This gives a lot more flexibility, because the dragged object may be something that's comparatively expensive to generate / huge (for example, you might offer video in a load of different codecs and resolutions and have a drop target that picks the ideal one, but you wouldn't want to be spending half a second each preparing all of them when the user hits copy and then asking the pasteboard to store a few GBs of data).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    7. Re:What's next? by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      I usually copy/paste more often than I need to double click. *Any* patent microsoft had is surely now out of date for "real" double click functionality. That trick should be default only on mac os.

      But yeah, it would be great if you could configure what the middle mouse button means.

    8. Re:What's next? by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      The current way middle click is implemented on X11 is that you have basically two separate clipboards. You ctrl+c something, and then select something else, then you can paste with middle click to a third place. The main advantage of this is that it doesn't override your buffer if you select e.g. the text that the pasted text should replace.

      For implementing two clipboards, you need to be able to tell which one you mean if you advertise it or want to get its content for pasting.

    9. Re:What's next? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      The middle-click mechanism (selection buffer) on X11 is a lot closer to a drag and drop event than a copy and paste event. There is no intermediate holding a buffered copy and there is bidirectional communication for negotiating content type. If Wayland actually implements copy and paste as you've described, then I can only assume that the developers have never written a GUI application on a platform where people actually use drag and drop.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    10. Re:What's next? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Mine double-clicks. However, I'd like to (without bothering to use a fancy mouse, I own a few but haven't liked many of the larger ones) be able to do combinations. I'd like to be able to left-click + middle-click and have it do one thing and all the combinations therein up to and including variations depending on which was pressed and held first. I've had some nice Microsoft mice that did a decent job and weren't too uncomfortable but I have an RSI (and won't let them operate on it) in my right wrist and I just find the larger mice to be uncomfortable.

      For the record, the wrist is sometimes flared up to the point where opening a door is difficult, turning the handle doesn't work well. Any rotation, at all, is quite painful and any weight sucks. Oddly, if I just use a keyboard then it flares up less often so I do a lot of that but the rodent still gets used until it flairs up again and I start the cycle anew. I'd still like to be able to press and hold the middle mouse button and then right click or left click to perform different tasks such as copy/paste, save, open, etc... A combination would be awesome.

      Hmm... It might not even be that difficult, really. I should look into that and be a little less lazy.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    11. Re:What's next? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Note that it mentions drag+drop and (normal) copy+paste multiple times.

      I'm not talking about the handling of functions. I'm talking about the specific handling of inputs. Why should it be up to a display protocol to define what input handlers are associated with what functions? Defining every little detail on a protocol level is how you ended up with the X11 mess in the first place.

    12. Re:What's next? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Well even if they did any of that, Firefox is open-source, so for the Linux distros you'd see something like PaleMoon or IceWeasel simply strip those changes out.

    13. Re:What's next? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Sounds bad... why don't you just switch to using your left hand for the mouse? Lots of right-handed people do just this. It also makes it easier to mouse and type simultaneously, since one-handed typing is easier with the right hand.

    14. Re:What's next? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      My body just won't let me. The funny thing is, I was left-handed until I went to Kindergarten. The teacher forced me to write with my right hand. Over the years that ability, for some things, has been lost. I just can't write with my left any more and I can't seem to get the mouse under control with my left hand. I've tried. I've tried numerous times.

      It doesn't flare up too often but it does kind of suck when it does. I can wear a brace, just a wrist wrap, and that makes them far less frequent but then New England weather hits or something else triggers it and it flares up and stays that way for a couple of weeks. They want to go in, clean it out, maybe repair a tendon (they think one might be torn partially), and clean out some sheath but I'm simply not going to let them do that. I've known too many people who have had surgeries and had them fail. I, myself, have had one that went reasonably well but right now - it still works and is only subject to flaring up infrequently. I figure I'm ahead of the game and it's a risk not worth taking - at this time.

      They say that it's unlikely to progress much/any further so it doesn't really matter a whole lot if I put the surgery off. Ice and Ibuprofen. I immobilize it to some extent (I have a second, firmer, brace) if it gets bad but usually I just wear the wrap. Meh... I'll live. I guess. It could be *much* worse and, frankly, I don't have anything to complain about even if I do have a little pain. (It was likely caused from keying in piles and piles of data back in the day. I can/could run a number-pad like a champ but not like the accountants with their 10-key or whatever-key stuff it is that they do.)

      Err... Ergonomics wasn't really a thing back then. Well, it was just starting to become something we paid attention to. It also doesn't help that I've had a very fun life and have broken that wrist twice and probably never let it fully heal properly but just kept using it. Yay! Opiates!

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    15. Re:What's next? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      What about a touchpad or trackpoint? Or trackball?

      The thing about surgeries sounds just a bit paranoid to me. You've known multiple people with RSI surgeries that went bad? Or surgeries in general? And how far in the past? It might be worth it to find a reputable surgeon for RSI work and get it done, just to save yourself all the pain and aggravation. Heck, you could probably get it done in Belgium out-of-pocket for pretty cheap and enjoy a nice vacation there to boot. Belgium has the lowest surgical infection rates in the world.

    16. Re:What's next? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      +1 for the touchpad etc options.

      As for RSI surgery, yes, any surgery can go wrong for any number of reasons no matter who does the surgery. Death is not unknown, for any number of reasons, including allergic reactions to anesthesia, infections from the surgery, possible bad reaction to the "correction". Not all bodies like having stuff disturbed, I know one that even the smallest paper cut leaves a noticeable scar. So yes, if surgery can be avoided, by all means avoid it. You should only undergo surgery if avoiding it will be worse than having it.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    17. Re:What's next? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Honestly, I think you're a lot more likely to die driving to the grocery store than you are from surgical infection. As for reactions, you should be able to tell if that's a problem if you've actually had any surgeries before; if you haven't, that may be a worry, but if you have, then you know you're not allergic to the anesthesia (they seem to mostly use propofol these days, according to my last anesthetist) and can tolerate the surgery itself. These days it seems like most people have had surgery for something.

    18. Re:What's next? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      The touchpad isn't too bad until a flair-up and then it's probably worse as the natural position is elevated above. To solve that, I use (when I'm smart enough) a wrist-rest. I even carry one with me in my laptop bag. The trackball is worse, think of the motions as you move your fingers. The trackpoint, I kind of like and would like something similar but disconnected and not in the typical Toshiba spot. I did have a laptop where there was one just below the space bar, that wasn't bad. Unfortunately, it wasn't very good hardware.

      I've known multiple people who have had very similar surgeries to the one which I'd have. Out of all of them, they all say that they have pain more often than before except for one who is quite happy. Oddly, they had their surgery years ago. The others are much more recent. I've known a bunch of others who have had surgeries that went poorly. With poorly meaning, yes, it solved some of the problem(s) but it introduced others and leaves lingering other pains.

      I have thought of going overseas for it. There's some good RSI specialists in Japan. There are some fine ones in the US as well. It's not life-threatening so I've not looked at it with any intensity. I do tend to look and think about it more during a flair up. I have tiny, almost delicate, hands and wrists. (I'm like 172 pounds and 5' 11", not a big person.) I spent countless hours at a keyboard when they still required force. I've broken that wrist before. I still worked with it while it was healing.

      So, yeah, it sucks but I have't opted to go with the surgery route because it's not yet so bad that it's stopping me from doing anything for the most part. It won't get much worse and the surgery won't change if it does get worse. If anything, it will become a more successful surgery as time progresses. I've had it checked, multiple times, imaged, poked, prodded, etc... I let them do the Cortisone shot once. Not only did that not help one bit, it hurt for *ages* afterwards. I've done physical therapy. I had one doctor who hooked me up with a TENS unit (I think that's the name) and that does help alleviate pain when it flairs up but I don't carry it with me.

      No, it might not make complete sense but it kind of, sort of, works for me. For some definition of works. It's currently in the midst of easing up a bit - it was pretty rough for a few days. I use the touchpad, wrist-rest, wrap, and ice.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    19. Re:What's next? by maestroX · · Score: 1

      Yeah, maybe next release they will *only* support the left mouse button, and ignore anything else. Nah, I'm being cynical here - no major corporation would ever do anything as stupid as only supporting one mouse butto

      Try the fsck gesture, it's in the public domain.

    20. Re:What's next? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The touchpad isn't too bad until a flair-up and then it's probably worse as the natural position is elevated above. To solve that, I use (when I'm smart enough) a wrist-rest.

      Aren't there touchpads which are stand-alone USB-connected devices? You could get one of those and just keep it in your lap or some other orientation that works better, instead of being stuck with where the laptop maker decided to put it.

    21. Re:What's next? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      At that point, I'm starting to lose the mobility feature of a laptop. My poor laptop bag is full. I've already got an external drive, etc... I might have to consider it though. I did have a nice wireless, small too, keyboard that had a touchpad on it. I think it was BT. Thanks, I'll have to give it a shot at some point. Probably at my next stop. I'll be leaving here over the weekend or on Monday, probably. Off to Florida with the missus in tow. Well, maybe a stop in Georgia first. I can go pick on the alligators.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  7. Um, what did they offer? by Burz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The way I see it, there is plenty of room to improve security on mobile devices. Maybe there are some other goals that could be incorporated in "new and innovative" products as well, but security is the big one for me. Mozilla seems like all the rest in its mobile offering: Look, a slightly new UI! But security as a top-tier feature with the kind of focus that could cause a paradigm shift? Forget it.

    There's no reason for me to adopt FF OS, with few users and available apps, then suffer some ignominious revelation that I paid for yet another swiss cheese device that any sane person should be afraid to use.

    I think the only unique angle they had with FF OS was that the "platform" was simply web server meets browser. IOW, more mainframe-oriented than even iOS and Android. No, thanks; I'm not looking for a fancy terminal.

    1. Re:Um, what did they offer? by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      I wanted a fancy terminal.

      The smartphone is a full-fledged computer, that's true and I will be the first to point out that computer are computers not appliances, but it's also a computer where you have no keyboard or mouse and that you can't boot from a USB drive. Immediacy is rewarded, not customer's intelligence, we're asked to be turned into idiot button mashers (without the button). Even the ridiculous and long-winded EULA is lost : at installation of a program you're asked to allow a blanket authorization for reading your contacts and text messages and they won't tell why.

      The equivalent in the 90s would have been that to run some Windows 3.1 or 95 freeware, you have to mail (to the US, over the ocean) photocopies of your phone book, letters you received and sent in the past month and your identifying details like name, address, SSN, mother's maiden name etc. That's ridiculous, so why would it be better now?

      Mozilla's browser-only OS would likely have suffered some of the usual issues, e.g. a security update should take a couple days at most to get to the phone, not a six month wait for the phone manufacturer to publish it through its channel. But there's just less stuff running if there's only the browser, so that's an obvious plus for security. The only phone that's more secure than that is a phone that doesn't run a browser at all.

    2. Re:Um, what did they offer? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      That's really what's going on. Mozilla Corporation is "streamlining"; when HP does it, we call it "stumbling over failed business endeavors".

      --
      Support my political activism on Patreon.
  8. Re:Yay! Get out your pitchforks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'm really eager to see how Slashdot spins this into the next episode of "Mozilla isn't listening to us, and they're ruining everything." This is one of the most entertaining over-the-top comedies I've seen to date.

    Well, Mozilla is starting to undo the things that people were complaining about. So, the people at Slashdot were correct.

  9. Burnt by early adoption, again. by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 4, Informative

    (I have a Nokia 770 in a storage box)

    My Mozilla Flame has been my daily phone for nearly 18 months. The initial builds (v1.3) weren't great for usability but things got pretty stable around the 2.1 release. I use the phone as a phone, with a killer web browser, so 'apps' weren't an issue. But the writing has been on the wall for a while, with feature implementation slowing to a crawl over the past few months on the nightly builds.

    IoT with a javascript API derived from Firefox OS has already been done in the form of JanOS.io thus a couple of hackers are ahead of the curve...

    I have no desire to go back to Android and an iPhone is out of my price range, so I guess I'll cross over to the dark side and get a cheap Lumia when the current handset dies. :(

    1. Re: Burnt by early adoption, again. by iampiti · · Score: 2

      May I ask why do you dislike Android? And what makes Windows Phone better for you? Thanks

    2. Re: Burnt by early adoption, again. by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A variety of reasons.

      The latest Nexus phones by Huawei and LG have priced themselves out of the market, for those of us not willing to spend $500+ on bling. Particularly brutal with the current $AU exchange rate. I'd consider buying a 2nd hand Nexus 4 if only it had a user-replaceable battery to extend its life by another couple of years but no.

      So then you're in the land of vendor crapware, Chinese spyware (if purchased online) or carrier bloatware. So the solution then is flashing your device with an unofficial cyanogenmod port if it's not one of their 'blessed' models that still receives updates. That is if your handset vendor doesn't boobytrap its bootloader (Moto) or if your arch is still supported (armv6). Which all things being equal, you might find most things work smoothly except the video record feature is borked.

      That's been my experience, anyway... Oh and I can't stand Chrome the mobile web browser, so I'd just be installing Firefox anyway, which was the motivation for running Mozilla's own OS...

      Maybe things have changed in Android land but twice bitten thrice shy.

      Windows Phone is a great unknown but I think Continuum is worth exploring since I have a spare LCD monitor, keyboard and mouse and for much casual computing use (e.g. my university studies in humanities), all I need is a web browser and MS Office. (And yes i have several x86 machines on the desk here booting Windows and Linux for specialist tasks, so it's not like I don't appreciate 'real' software)

    3. Re:Burnt by early adoption, again. by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      You might want to try rooting an Android phone, then installing Pale Moon on it as your browser.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    4. Re:Burnt by early adoption, again. by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Well I would but recent announcements about redundancies and debt restructuring don't fill me with confidence they'll be around in 12 months time.

    5. Re: Burnt by early adoption, again. by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      Have you looked at BLU phones? they have both Windows and Android and I just love my Android phone I got from BLU, good camera, 1GB of RAM, 8GB of storage with MicroSD slot, nice clear screen, quad core,no extra carrier crap and the phone with a protective cover and screen protector cost just $109 USD. Its probably as close as you'll get to running stock Android without buying a Cyanogen phone and despite my being pretty rough on phones? It just keeps on chugging.

      So I don't know how AU prices would be but I do know they sell worldwide and have phones going from $50 USD to $300+ USD so they should have something in your price range no matter what...oh yeah and dual SIMs so it'll work just about anywhere, nice.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    6. Re: Burnt by early adoption, again. by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Not a brand I've heard of, no. I'll take a look. :)

      In Australia it's mainly the international GSM brands like Samsung, LG, HTC etc plus Apple and MS with Chinese makers Huawei and ZTE targeting bargain pre-paid burner phones one buys at a supermarket.

      'Buying American' would have some appeal in comparison to a similarly specced generic brand off a dodgy Chinese website if it meant aftermarket support in the form of OS updates and international warranties,

    7. Re:Burnt by early adoption, again. by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      I have no desire to go back to Android and an iPhone is out of my price range, so I guess I'll cross over to the dark side and get a cheap Lumia when the current handset dies. :(

      Better be quick. Windows Phone's market share keeps slipping, it's now under 2%, no one should be surprised when they discontinue it in a year or two.

      --
      Circumcision is child abuse.
    8. Re:Burnt by early adoption, again. by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      As I understand the rumours, Lumia represents the last of the Nokia IP and MS will release their own 'Surface' branded devices in 2016. I'd think they'd see out that transition first, particularly with Universal App and Win 10 integration before culling WP altogether.

      That said, yes it does look likely of a complete Android/iOS duopoly within years with respect to the alt-os graveyard.

    9. Re:Burnt by early adoption, again. by GNious · · Score: 1

      I know Jolla is in a bit of a rough patch at the mo' (*cough*cough*), but have a 2nd look, perhaps in January when there should be more news about the financials ?

    10. Re:Burnt by early adoption, again. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I have a fairly cheap Samsung phone with Windows on it. I wanted to give them a try. Considering the hardware specs? It's fantastic! I even get *updates* in a timely fashion. I can't think of anything that I want to do with it that I can not do with it and I'm a pretty happy Linux user. I don't like Android.

      I should also add, I'm not overly fond of the devices as compute devices. I do browse, send emails, send texts, and make phone calls but I've never installed an application on it and I've already got dedicated GPS devices but the phone works for that just fine. I've bought upwards of a dozen tablets (for my own use) and just sent a couple off not that long ago (before I left home to go on my romp). I've just not been able to get any real use out of them for anything other than browsing the web and the few other things I mentioned.

      I want to like them. I mean, I really want to like them. The closest I've come to liking them is a phone with a sliding keyboard and then I only use it for composing texts, emails, and entering URLs into the browser. At any rate, I'd been pondering buying a Windows phone for a while and someone here finally pushed me over the edge. I had one sent to me from home and have been pretty happy with it.

      I know... I know... Yes, it's a Microsoft product. I'm pretty happy with it. I guess I can put Windows 10 on it but I've not bothered figuring out how to nor will I probably bother doing so. I'm probably just going to stop in and buy one that takes a SIM card at some shop somewhere (I now know my carrier supports this - they didn't the last time I'd checked, which was years ago, and they wouldn't activate an unbranded phone) and I'll probably get something with a bit more compute power and space. No, I'm not sure why. It's just what I do.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    11. Re: Burnt by early adoption, again. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Have a look at OnePlus phones. Killer specs, very cheap, ships with Cyanogen and no spyware. User replaceable battery.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re: Burnt by early adoption, again. by phil.swansborough · · Score: 1

      If you can't find an Android phone that suits your usage I think you're being deliberately obtuse about it. The array of choices is staggering, too much probably.

    13. Re: Burnt by early adoption, again. by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Yeah they are a company out of Miami, been making phones for the past few years. they were originally for the Latin market only and then branched out, good phones if you ask me.

      I don't know if this place has good prices or not, you could probably do better, but to just give you a rough look here is a company selling BLU phones in Australia and it looks like they have most if not all the models. The one I got is the studio mini LTE and I just love the thing, decent battery life, nice bright screen, quad with plenty of memory, just an all around good phone.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    14. Re: Burnt by early adoption, again. by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      The Mozilla t2mobile Flame I'm using is a dual core but otherwise the specs are similar though perhaps the BLU supports more 4G bands being a slightly newer Qualcomm.

      Cheers, again.

    15. Re: Burnt by early adoption, again. by exomondo · · Score: 1

      If you can't find an Android phone that suits your usage I think you're being deliberately obtuse about it. The array of choices is staggering, too much probably.

      Nexus phones were the go-to choice because they were the ones that actually got updates in a reasonable timeframe and for a reasonable length of time. So what budget Android phone manufacturer is giving a comparable level of support for their devices?

  10. ehh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    and I was just eyeing some firefox TV for xmas... But yeah it's hard to deny the lure of Android. Anyway, just focus on Android, I will remain forever a Firefox user. Snobs can keep Jobs's dick in their mouth.

  11. Shame ... but not surprised by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    I hate the monopoly of Android that is starting. I even roooted for Windows Phone to take off. Not that I like the platforms but because I want to see a 3 to 4 party healthy ecosystem.

    Android and webkit specific CSS/HTML 5 is not healthy and Google is now the new Microsoft in the mobile world :-(

    But Firefox OS was really really awful and only marketed in 3rd world countries.

    Android today is bloated as hell and requires over 1 gig of ram. That is because outside of Apple there is no competition nor reason to improve their products.Mozilla at least tries to respect privacy but they need revenue and Android is free even if it is a poor performer on phones with 512 megs of ram. Andorid 2.2 gingerbread is still being sold in INdia and China for this reason. Again not healthy to have a 5 year old OS.

    --
    http://saveie6.com/
    1. Re:Shame ... but not surprised by NotInHere · · Score: 2

      Android today is bloated as hell and requires over 1 gig of ram.

      Android describes many things:

      1. The ROM. It is usually used to ship bloatware with the phone. Once you get a free rom like CyanogenMod (which is not the same as Cyanogen OS), you have no bloatware anymore. Just get a popular enough phone that is supported well by such a ROM provider.

      2. The google apps (gapps). These are the sole place google has any real influence over, because they are the only closed source non-vendor-specific component. Amazon has I think the most full set of replacement apps. There are also even libre alternatives, like F-droid.

      3. The actual AOSP project. It is led by google. They try to do some influence over it as well, like for example by making the build system extra ugly (and putting the informative docs into internal wikis instead of the trimmed down public wiki), so that you have to download their binaries, and have to agree to the license to not fragment Android. But mostly, these things can't really stop any competitors, as the source is openly licensed. Google knows this, therefore their trend to abandon apps from AOSP and to put them into the gapps package instead.

      One of the advantages of AOSP being open source is that the app format isn't something proprietary, but can be used by competition as well. Yes, currently the only major player is google, but in a few years it can be some other company, too.

      Google is not the microsoft of the phone world. Yes, their system is the most successful one, but they don't do EEE, because most of their formats are open, most prominently their base OS, and those which aren't are forced to be closed by competitors (think for example of the xmpp abandoning which was caused by skype). Yes, most apps won't work without google apps, but porting an app from using google apps to some alternative is much easier than eg porting a game from directx to opengl, or porting a windows desktop application to use X11.

    2. Re:Shame ... but not surprised by non0score · · Score: 1

      Isn't webkit...Apple? Android weaned itself off of webkit a while ago.

  12. Re:the what, now? by kamapuaa · · Score: 1

    Review websites called Firefox phones the worst phones they had ever tested. You can't polish shit.

    --
    Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
  13. More proof they're on the wrong track by hyades1 · · Score: 1

    My buddy just installed Pale Moon (think old school Firefox) on a rooted Galaxy S6 Edge, and he freakin' loves it. So I have to suspect the issue here isn't with users...at least as far as the browser part of the situation is concerned.

    I think I'm just going to put this down as another example of the idiots running the show refusing to admit they made a huge mistake by trying to turn Firefox into a half-assed version of Chrome.

    Firefox is now circling the drain. I'm glad I moved on when I did, rather than hoping in vain that heads would roll before the browser was totally ruined. I'll be truly sorry to see it go.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    1. Re:More proof they're on the wrong track by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      I actually have reviewed it. I left Firefox with a heavy heart, but for good reason. What attracted me in the first place was that you could pick and choose what features you wanted, and "under the hood" configuration options were virtually unlimited. This is exactly what's being compromised as the design team has tried to make it more and more like Chrome. Yes there are differences...but the direction they're moving in is obvious.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    2. Re:More proof they're on the wrong track by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      Isn't that the case with anything?

      Pale Moon has lots of options, and remains largely compatible with a wide range of Firefox add-ons. You mention accessibility options (with good cause), but that's a special case rather than a wide-ranging failure. I suspect it has to do with the limited capacity of their small design team.

      I don't want to come across as some kind of fan boy, but I've found it works well for my needs, and it has now become my main browser (though not my only one).

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  14. Re:Mozilla are LUDDITES. by epyT-R · · Score: 2

    apperating system. I'll have to remember that one.

  15. As long as "products" remains plural by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

    >> to focus more on its strongest and core products

    As long as "products" remains plural Mozilla will still have a problem.

  16. The stats show it isn't spin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In August of 2013, Firefox had a market share of over 16%.

    Today, Firefox has a market share of about 7%.

    That tells us everything we need to know.

    Two things have happened:

    1. They've driven away a lot of their existing users with shitty UI changes, and a lack of progress when it comes to fixing Firefox's slow performance.

    2. They haven't attracted any new users.

    Together, they have resulted in Firefox's market share being cut down to less than half of what it is, in just over two years!

    In other companies, this would be considered a huge disaster.

    1. Re:The stats show it isn't spin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      actually most of what happened is that Microsoft Windows 10 put edge as default browser automatically, and users using edge + using google services got chrome auto-re-asked-to-enable and/or got prompted to do on every damn webpage they visit. windows is still the largest user base.

      that's is much closer to the truth that what you're trying to paint...

    2. Re:The stats show it isn't spin. by xfizik · · Score: 1

      Actually, just one thing happened - Chrome.

    3. Re:The stats show it isn't spin. by Blaskowicz · · Score: 3, Informative

      What happens is Windows software and antiviruses are bundled with Chrome, and most people end up with it installed. That and 80% smartphone users use a Google browser, though often just called "Internet" or "Browser".

    4. Re:The stats show it isn't spin. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Actually, just one thing happened - Chrome.

      Chrome was released several years prior to those stats, and it doesn't change the logical conclusion in any way. Firefox drove away the existing use base and failed to attract new users.

      Where they went is irrelevant. A company which gets decimated the introduction of a competitor is still considered a huge disaster.

    5. Re:The stats show it isn't spin. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Chrome was released a bit earlier, but Google started putting massive amounts of Chrome advertising everywhere about two years ago. It's advertised on TV, and it's advertised on the Google front page. Mozilla isn't coming close to matching this.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re:The stats show it isn't spin. by Merk42 · · Score: 1

      Could part of it also be that there are more devices online now that 2.5 years ago? Most of those running Chrome (because, Android).

    7. Re:The stats show it isn't spin. by jopsen · · Score: 1

      Chrome happened... And microsoft started delivering an almost usable browser.

      Finally, the marked has grown... There is a lot more people online today. I just saw presentations of how many new users Mozilla got, but also that this didn't really move the market share, because the market is so huge.

    8. Re:The stats show it isn't spin. by narcc · · Score: 1

      For clarity: Chrome comes bundled, Ask Toolbar style, with a number of popular windows programs like CCleaner and Avast Anti-Virus. Naturally, it tries to set itself as the default browser.

      Don't we have a term for software that comes bundled, opt out via a tiny checkbox, with other software, changes your settings, and then doesn't respect your privacy?

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
    9. Re:The stats show it isn't spin. by ChipMonk · · Score: 1

      You forgot the Brendan Eich debacle.

    10. Re:The stats show it isn't spin. by xfizik · · Score: 1

      Chrome was released earlier, but it didn't immediately catch up so it all makes sense. I personally never thought of Mozilla as a company. And since they are not a company they don't have the survival skills of one. Google, on the other hand, is a predator and Mozilla is no match. It sucks, but that's how the real world works.

  17. Re:the what, now? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

    2 problems.

    - handsets were garbage, aimed at the $35 range. Android or iOS wouldn't run on such hardware smoothly.
    - software wasn't mature when most of the reviews came out in 2014. But try running a v2.5 nightly on Flame or a spare nexus 4/5 device and the experience is vastly improved from when I purchased my Flame last year.

  18. Re:the what, now? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

    The Flame was a developer phone that shipped for around $US170 and wasn't about price but providing a reference platform for Mozilla employees and curious app-writing public such as myself.

    Contrast that with shipping consumer hardware, priced at that reviewers saw with 320 Ã-- 480 screens, Cortex A5 and 256MB RAM or less.

  19. Re:Yay! Get out your pitchforks! by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

    Ugh I can't tolerate yahoo for more than about 3 seconds, because that's how long it takes to load a page that you found through their search results because of their shit ass slow redirect.

  20. Got crushed by rasmusbr · · Score: 1

    Ah, yes. I figure they got crushed by Ubuntu Phone...

  21. Too late by kbg · · Score: 1

    I could have told them 2 years ago that this was a braindead idea. This was maybe viable in 2003-2005 when the smart phones where starting to appear, but doing something like this now, when Apple, Android and Windows dominate the market is just futile. It's like trying to develop a new consumer operating system for x86 computers, that market is full and complete and doing so is never going to catch on.

  22. Re:the what, now? by KGIII · · Score: 1

    For you and for the uninitiated:
    http://arstechnica.com/gadgets...

    Yeah... Just, umm... Just, yeah... Have a peek at that review. ;-)

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  23. It never seemed likely to work by DrXym · · Score: 1

    People want apps to use on their smart phones. Firefox OS was never going to get the apps and therefore it was doomed to fail regardless of what merits the OS may have had. And it's hard to see many of those either.

  24. Re:the what, now? by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    This phone was a horrid failure, but ZTE Open C was well received, with 512MB RAM.
    I was waiting for the next ZTE, Open L, with 1GB RAM and FF OS 2.x out of the box. I guess the launch won't happen although the phone does exist.

  25. There's a mistake in the headline by Gumbercules!! · · Score: 1

    "Mozilla Will Stop Developing and Selling Firefox OS Smartphones"

    should read: "Mozilla Will Stop Developing and Making Firefox OS Smartphones".

    You can't stop selling something no one was buying! :-)

  26. So what should we use? by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    Any recommendation from say, Mozilla?
    So, you were proudly making a non-spyware cell phone OS and now you're abruptly announcing you're quitting? I guess that means that if we wish to run a smartphone, then we need to run a spyware OS. Well, crap.
    Was waiting for version 2.5 : now that looked promising. Also waiting for 1GB RAM, or 768MB RAM, to be on a bit more of a safe side.

    I will simply continue to use and recommend using a dumb phone, but what about eventually needing a "smart" one for business reasons? Bringing the Internet to homeless people, or whatever?

  27. Re:TIL Mozilla developed and sold Firefox OS phone by narcc · · Score: 2

    The problem was getting one. They were only released in small emerging markets. Even their developer phone sold out before a lot of interested users knew it existed. The easiest one to get was the ZTE Open, an incredibly low-end phone with virtually non-existent support from ZTE. (you were stuck with v1.0 for a while. We got a 1.1 release, with impressive performance improvements, and a buggy 1.2 release long after those were outdated. Savvy users have 2.0 unofficially now, though that is also now outdated, with 2.5 being a rather dramatic update.) The Fx0 is the next viable option, as it was very recently discovered for a good price on Amazon. It sold so many so quickly that the vendor raised the price, all despite the locked bootloader making it less attractive as a dev unit.

    Why they never released it a budget phone in established markets is beyond me. Or why they didn't produce enough dev units to meet the demand of interested developers. Unbelievably, they even gave some of those away to developers as an incentive, while shorting the clamoring hoards who wanted to buy the thing!

    There was some talk about selling smart feature-phones running FxOS in the US next year. I guess we'll see if those partners strike out on their own or not.

    --
    Required reading for internet skeptics
  28. Re:Too late by narcc · · Score: 1

    If by "industry" you mean "slashdot" which has it's own version of reality.

    --
    Required reading for internet skeptics