Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla Jumps On IoT Bandwagon (thestack.com)

mikejuk writes: Mozilla has been clarifying some of its plans to convert the Firefox OS project into four IoT based projects. At a casual glance, this seems like a naive move that is doomed to failure. Project Link is a 'user agent' for the smart home, that helps the end user set preferences for device interaction, and automates those connections for the user in a secure environment. Next, Project Sensor Web will be a pilot project for crowdsourcing a pm2.5 sensor network. Project Smart Home is focused on bridging the gap in IoT smart home providers between completely boxed solutions like Apple HomeKit, and completely DIY solutions like Raspberry Pi. Finally, Project Vaani is a voice interface for IoT access, which Mozilla credits as the 'most natural way to interact with connected devices.' With Firefox losing market share and projects like Firefox OS, Thunderbird, Shumway, and Persona closing down, perhaps Mozilla should try and find its way back to core concerns. All four of the projects need significant AI expertise and a powerful cloud computing resource neither of which Mozilla is likely to be able to afford.

18 of 191 comments (clear)

  1. mozilla distracted to death by sittingnut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    what are people in charge of mozilla thinking ? or can they even think ?
    they are ultra concerned with everything other than their core project, which has suffered and is losing.
    it is not just related peripherals, but what amounts completely different things which should be handled as completely separate projects with groups and resources set up for them, if there is a need.
    nor is that all, mozilla is way too much concerned with pandering to market hype (hype not market reality as represented by numbers) and spout out the latest buzz words and social ideology of the western 'liberal' elite.

    shame!

    1. Re:mozilla distracted to death by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > what are people in charge of mozilla thinking ? or can they even think ?
      > they are ultra concerned with everything other than their core project, which has suffered and is losing.
      > it is not just related peripherals, but what amounts completely different things which should be handled as completely separate projects with groups and resources set up for them, if there is a need.

      That's exactly the point. People have penetrated and co-opted Mozilla to redirect it's resources towards their own pet projects. Mozilla has become their own little cookie jar.

    2. Re:mozilla distracted to death by narcc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pocket isn't a Mozilla project. FireFoxOS is important for a litany of reasons you've already heard countless times. IoT is a natural evolution of FXOS which is why it's such a shame to see FXOS for smartphones being moved to a community project.

      As for dicking with the UI, that's the most foolish complaint I've ever heard. The move to Australis brought with it far more customization options than the browser ever had before, all while a few vocal Slashdot users cried that they wanted their customization back. As for Mozilla " constantly dicking with the UI", that's just ridiculous. There have been no significant changes since Australis. If it really bugs you, just install the Classic Theme Restorer add-on. Though I don't know why you'd want the old UI everyone complained about before complaining about Australis. As to your complaint about multiprocess support, e10s has been moving along just fine. I have it enabled now.

      As for regular users caring about e10s and the UI, well, that's just pure delusion. An overwhelming majority of users won't even notice the minor UI tweeks since Australis, and have little hope of understanding what multiprocess support even means. Though I wonder how Chrome would be doing if it didn't come bundled with a host of popular apps while also setting itself as the default browser. The UI is very similar, after all, so if the UI were a serious problem, you'd think Chrome wouldn't have gained much share on that basis alone. It's not like it's the winner on performance these days; its primary advantage is long gone. Or are you suggesting most users really, really, want multiprocess support so badly that they'll overlook the UI, poor performance, and privacy issues?

      Mozilla is very important to the web. Rather than bashing them needlessly in some weird attempt to hasten their demise, how about you find some real (as opposed to imagined) criticisms or, better yet, contribute yourself. Do you really want to let the future of the web be decided by Google and Microsoft? We had a similar war once. Everyone lost.

  2. Just what I need by Snotnose · · Score: 2

    My thermostat using my 2TB NAS as swap space after running for 3 days.

  3. GOD FUCKING DAMN IT, MOZILLA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's no secret that Firefox is seriously losing market share. Firefox is likely under 8% of the browser market now, across all desktop and mobile platforms! To put that number into perspective, note that desktop Chrome 48 alone has over 3 times the number of users that Firefox has in total, and Chrome for Android 47 has over 2 times that number. IE 11, iOS Safari 9.2, and UC Browser for Android each have about the same number of users as Firefox does. Firefox nearly has fewer users than even Opera Mini has! And Firefox has essentially no mobile presence at all. Firefox for Android is only at 0.04%!

    Despite being one of the most popular browsers several years ago, I think that Mozilla has gone out of their way to alienate Firefox users as often as they can. They've trashed Firefox's UI, turning it into an awful clone of Chrome. They've injected unwanted shit like Pocket and Hello into Firefox by default. They even put ads into the browser itself, although rumor has it they finally realized how fucking idiotic this was and are removing them. They've removed useful options from the preferences window. And despite making all of these changes that users don't want, they never seem to get around to fixing the longstanding memory and performance issues that have plagued Firefox for years.

    The mandatory extension signing bullshit they've got in the works, along with changing to Chrome's extension model at some point, will utterly destroy Firefox's usability I think. The inconvenience these changes will bring to Firefox's few remaining users and extension developers will likely be enough to push them away completely. Firefox's 8% of the browser market will likely drop to the low single digits far quicker than anyone will have imagined.

    To make matters worse, Mozilla has wasted a huge amount of time and effort on the Rust programming language and the Servo browser engine. In my view, Rust is a totally failed attempt to replace C++ with a "safer" language. I think that all they've managed to create is a language with an ugly syntax (even by C++'s standards!), an impractical ownership system, a single slow implementation (which itself is quite buggy despite being written in Rust, a language that's supposed to avoid this!), a rather awful standard library, and a questionable community that's highly focused on codes of conduct and censorship in the name of "tolerance" and "diversity".

    Servo, which is written in Rust, is abysmal in my experience. I tried it last week, and I think I'd get better results using IE 3 today. Hell, Servo wouldn't even render any page for me for more than a minute before it crashed! Despite all of the hype around it, it fails to deliver even a 1990s browser experience.

    In my opinion, things are looking extraordinarily bleak for Mozilla. They've ruined Firefox for so many users already. The replacement is going absolutely nowhere. And now it appears that they're going to make the Firefox experience even worse for the few users who remain! It's unbelievably sad what's happening to Firefox and Mozilla. Please, Mozilla, don't do this! Don't make yourself irrelevant! Please! For the sake of the web, please!

    1. Re:GOD FUCKING DAMN IT, MOZILLA! by NotInHere · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Firefox is likely under 8% of the browser market

      This is partly because of mobile. The loss on the desktop wasn't as bad, some small decline was caused by iexplore.exe deserving the name "browser", and google doing a very agressive ad campaign for chrome. But for the mobile market, its just that the other browsers grew, and firefox didn't.

      Firefox for Android is only at 0.04%!

      That's thanks to Firefox for android being a third level priority for a long time, and the strong Google predominance on Android. Most people don't change their default browser, and on android which is targeted at making the user stupid even less so.

      changing to Chrome's extension model at some point

      This is a very risky descision and for some time I really hated them for it. However, the industry trend goes towards Chrome's extension model, edge plans it as well as safari. This can be the chance for firefox to use this in order to offer a more feature-full API on firefox than on any other browser.

      I think that all they've managed to create is a language with an ugly syntax (even by C++'s standards!)

      If you like python, and other "expressive" languages, you can't be healed. In fact you even have less stuff than in C++, for example type information gets filled in automatically, where it's possible, except for function declarations, because it should be understandable for the human reader at first glance.

      an impractical ownership system

      Types are impractical too if you have them, just use python or something even more script-y if you don't want your compiler to do anything.

      (which itself is quite buggy despite being written in Rust, a language that's supposed to avoid this!)

      Its a young language, and more effort was spent on having a nice API design and features than on speed or bug-freedom. Its best if both features and API design come in first, and optimisation and bug fixing later. Otherwise you spend lots of time on getting something bug free and optimal in speed and you realize that you want to add a feature, which you then patch somehow to the API, but its not proper at all.

      a rather awful standard library

      I've found it more cleanly organized than the C++ standard library, and by far more featureful.

      and a questionable community that's highly focused on codes of conduct and censorship in the name of "tolerance" and "diversity".

      They waste their time with this, I agree.

      Servo, which is written in Rust, is abysmal in my experience. I tried it last week, and I think I'd get better results using IE 3 today. Hell, Servo wouldn't even render any page for me for more than a minute before it crashed! Despite all of the hype around it, it fails to deliver even a 1990s browser experience.

      Its a WIP project, and they themselves say Servo is not ready yet. Its open source, not developed behind close walls. People criticise google for not doing this with android.

      In my opinion, things are looking extraordinarily bleak for Mozilla

      I really hope that Mozilla keeps relevant. Its just great to see a company so devoted to open source and user freedom.

    2. Re:GOD FUCKING DAMN IT, MOZILLA! by Zedrick · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's wrong with modding up posts one agrees with? FF was once a great browser, but started going downhill with the introduction of the "awesome bar", and is by now almost useless. If Mozilla fixes Firefox and makes it usable again, perhaps people will stop modding up rants about hos much it sucks, which it does. Not that complicated?

    3. Re:GOD FUCKING DAMN IT, MOZILLA! by KGIII · · Score: 2

      I don't think it's quite copypasta. They seem to mix up the verbiage now and again. You can go into any Firefox thread from the past six months or so, CTRL + F, and search for "caniuse" and find it, nearly verbatim, in all of them. Well, you might not be able to - you may need an account for it to show the domain name. If that's the case then I think "seriously losing market share" might be in most of them?

      So, I don't think it's quite copypasta and I don't disagree with the moderation of the post. Not at all... I do disagree with how they moderated narcc's post.

      Let me go look, I've got a free minute...

      Here one that appears to be verbatim:
      http://yro.slashdot.org/story/...

      That's just the first one I opened from the tag search. I'm pretty sure I've seen it before. For a while, it was worded a little differently and shorter. I'm not sure how long they've been using this one but I'm pretty sure it's copypasta.

      I'd go look for more but I have to be busy again today. This being busy thing is not acceptable but the rewards should be worth it. Still, I'm retired. Busy is for those who still have to do stuff. Feel free to look for more. I just used the 'caniuse' search. Hopefully someone notices and fixes narcc's moderation - if they actually care about it. I tend to see negative moderation as a badge of honor or as an indicator that I did not articulate well enough so I don't really give a shit. Then again, I'm not even sure if it's possible for me to have a bad karma? I had one guy claim he was going to fix that for me but he gave up.

      At any rate, copypasta has a place and can be topical. Who here hasn't quoted some famous quote or something? Most of us have, from Franklin to the Simpsons. So, I don't mind that. This is also one of the reasons why I refuse to moderate.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  4. Ooh shiny by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

    This is the worst kind of open source flaw. Developers are going to scratch their itch...and what they want has nothing to do with what users want. It's a damn shame to see things end up this way. They're just chasing the latest trend, late to the game as usual, and will end up making a terrible mess of things.

    However the resumes of the people involved will be enhanced, and that's what it's all about. Sadly.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  5. We don't want to be negative about Mozilla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We don't want to have to be negative about Mozilla. We love the concept of Mozilla. We love what Mozilla once was, years ago. We loved them when they produced the best web browser around. But then they went and threw it all away.

    They turned Firefox into a really shitty imitation of Chrome. Each new release somehow manages to be worse than the last.

    They pretty much gave up on Thunderbird.

    They've failed with one stupid idea after another. I mean, Firefox OS?! Really?! How the fuck did they ever hope to succeed with a slow, shitty mobile OS that was more primitive than even the initial versions of Android and iOS were, years before?!

    Servo is going nowhere. Seriously, try it out if you haven't already. It's nowhere near usable.

    Rust is pathetic. It has the worst programming language community I've ever experienced. They have a goddamn moderation team, for crying out loud! No other programming language community has its own Staatssicherheit like Rust has.

    Then there's all the social justice nonsense. Their former CEO lost his job merely because of his views about marriage, for crying out loud! Nobody should lose their job over something like that, especially when it comes to an organization that's supposedly so about "openness" and "tolerance" and "diversity".

    We want the old Mozilla back. We want the pre-hipster Mozilla back. We want the Mozilla that produced a highly usable and very extensible web browser that worked well for beginners and power users alike. We want the Mozilla that produced one of the better email clients. We want the Mozilla that made us happy with each new release of their software. We want the real Mozilla back!

    1. Re:We don't want to be negative about Mozilla. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've been working at Mozilla for many years, from peak to decline. I can tell you exactly what's wrong with it. Nobody will tell you in their right mind though, and I'm tired to not communicating this, so here goes:

      Mozilla has quickly been identified by a few as a way to make a quick buck. You see, it does not have share holders, no shares to give out, so execs gets really high salary in exchange with a 40% bonus every quarter that is almost guaranteed (everyone gets it, but 40% of 100k is +40k/y. 40% of 500k is 200k. that's 700k/year). Easy, when you get 400mi+USD and don't need much money to operate.

      The problem is that they don't give a rats ass if Mozilla is successful, their metric is not financial (because its +- been assured to come every month through the single revenue stream: search deal), and it's not market share (because they have nobody to answer to except the employees and they tell us, I quote "market share does not matter much stop looking at it") (Fucking really Chris? REALLY?).
      They also set their salaries, by the way. So basically they do random things they think are cool, with little to no data or idea of what matter or does not matter. Do you know half of them use Chrome as their main browser? How is that not telling?

      We keep getting ridiculous thing after ridiculous thing. A lot of people opposed FirefoxOS vs getting back to the roots and attempting to do something about the web. FirefoxOS sounds like a nice concept, but everyone with a bit of a brain knew we had ZERO technical AND market chance.
      Then, when it sounded like we're ok killing that and doing things well again BOOM IoT. Same mistake only even worse!

      Oh as for when Brendan Eich got fired, yes, it was also ridiculous. But Psst. Mr Eich got the CEO position and a lot of execs were unhappy about that. He wanted to make Firefox the focus and make it a kick-ass browser. He started by changing everything we were doing. Sounded great! BOOM FIRED.

      Mr Eich is now making the Brave web browser (based on Webkit by the way) which is arguably one of the most promising new browsers right now. Go figure.
      Did I tell you about the story of our marketing and legal teams that did not want Firefox to ship with tracking protection? It took a long fight to get it in .. private browsing only. What about copying the stuff Chrome does well instead of copying Chrome UI? Like, you know, Sandbox, profiles, etc. Oooh nope not a priority. Adding ads (directory tiles) in the user's face THATS the priority (which got eventually killed because that did not even bring any money back, we only lost users to it).

      TLDR most execs are corrupted pos, answer only to themselves, thus it's nearly non-savable and it will eventually die or be forked again as in the good old days (Rust+Servo anyone? These are THE good Mozilla projects around right now.)

      RIP Mozilla.

      - a long time employee and contributor

    2. Re: We don't want to be negative about Mozilla. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Wow, how depressing. So people at Mozilla *do* know how to fix the company but they're shut out of the decision-making process and the loonies are running it into the ground. That's even worse than nobody knowing what's going on.

      Wow, it's time to fork MoFo, apparently. Who can fund this? Really, a year of focused development on Electrolysis, memory, mobile performance, and the plugin ecosystem, with fewer than a dozen new hires to those teams, ought to yield a privacy-focused browser with enough usability to retain/gain users (and therefore become self-sustaining).

      We need a Mozilla[historical] organization to advocate for the free web, but the bozos in charge are squandering this very crucial role. I wonder who cares about Internet freedom enough to ensure this happens.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    3. Re:We don't want to be negative about Mozilla. by Chryana · · Score: 2

      Your comment confirms what I have been suspecting for a long time. Now, you may disagree with most of what I am about to say. The thing is... I don't think Firefox was ever all that great. It's strongest asset is that it came out at the right time: Internet Explorer was stagnant, Netscape was all but dead: there was simply no competition. Most of their successes came from copying features from Opera, and releasing them for free. I remember seeing Opera users raving about their browser, but I stayed on Firefox: it was free, and I didn't want to pay. Another sign that Firefox is not all that it's hyped up to be is that nobody ever seems to fork its code or develop something based on its technology. When Apple decided to develop a browser, they picked KHTML, not Gecko. XUL went nowhere. The few projects to develop an alternative Qt interface to Firefox died on the vine. But Mozilla didn't need to excel: the sponsorship deal with Google brought in ludicrous amounts of money, I heard the amount 300 millions a year at some point. Now you have to wonder: you much does it costs to develop a browser? The answer is, no matter how hard you try, it can't cost 300 millions. It just can't. Thus, the purpose of all the side projects the Mozilla foundation is running is to be able to spend the money they were raking in (and to justify the compensations of their management).
      Now, the situation is of course quite different. Google figured out it would be a lot cheaper to develop their own browser than to keep sending a check to Mozilla, and the way things are going, there won't be enough people left using their browser for them to be able to carry on the development of Firefox. I don't think the future is very bright for Mozilla. Hopefully Firefox will live on, maybe under a different brand name.

    4. Re: We don't want to be negative about Mozilla. by jez9999 · · Score: 2

      It's been forked into Pale Moon, with the Goanna rendering engine. Help that project and you're basically helping the fork of Mozilla.

    5. Re: We don't want to be negative about Mozilla. by Bandwidth_ · · Score: 2

      What a load of FUD. I've found the Pale Moon people, on IRC and otherwise, to be extremely helpful. I use Pale Moon on linux exclusively and it is well supported.

      As for being "frozen" in the past, have you used Pale Moon recently? Just because the version number doesn't increase at the rate of Chrome or Firefox doesn't mean they aren't making improvements from sub version to sub version. It's noticeable.

      And what do you mean by "all the HTML 5 features"? Do you mean they refuse to implement the digital rights management extensions that were forced into Firefox? All the better. The Pale Moon team is consistently on the side of the user.

      Firefox has added DRM, removed about:config options, added unremoveable bloatware (ie, Pocket), and they intend to abandon the vast majority of the existing XUL based add-on/extension ecosystem.

      Pale Moon's future is as bright as Mozilla Firefox's is dark.

  6. The esp8266 will bring iot to the masses by mmiscool · · Score: 2

    The internet of this will be run by cheap micros like the esp8266. WiFi, 32 bit CPU and more for less than 2$ a piece.

  7. who cares about obsolete junk like FF anyways? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    SJW's need a new project to infect.

  8. Mozilla should by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 3, Informative

    Or a Thunderbird local server unified messaging platform using Firefox as the client (my proposal): http://pdfernhout.net/thunderb...

    Mozilla rejected my application to do that project the very next day after I sent it. The rejected a related proposal by me a couple years earlier to improve Thunderbird desktop. From an earlier poster who works at Mozilla, I now understand that situation better. I had not realized how dysfunctional the organization had become.

    That Thunderbird server project is currently on hiatus as I just started a new job, but I still hope I can do some bits and pieces of that idea of a FOSS messaging platform now and then that might someday add up to it.

    Meanwhile, a proprietary Slack is eating the free/standard messaging sphere: http://pdfernhout.net/reasons-...

    One year of Mozilla's revenues is about the same as all the VC money that has gone into Slack. Meanwhile the Mozilla CEO says essentially that FOSS messaging tools like Thunderbird do not matter any more and kisses off Thunderbird. To my mind, at this point, Thunderbird is the more viable concept compared to Firefox (let alone any of the other ill-considered projects) -- as the success of Slack shows.

    I can be thankful for Mattermost and Matrix.org as free Slack alternatives.
    http://www.mattermost.org/
    http://matrix.org/

    But imagine what such FOSS messaging software could be like with hundreds of millions of dollars a year behind it to fund a team of thousands of full-time developers.

    Bottom line: Mozilla is pissing away hundreds of millions of dollars a year of money (and thousands of developer years) that should be earmarked for essential FOSS (like communications tools) on projects with near zero chance of success(a new mobile OS?) or that are unneeded (yet another programming language?) -- while paying huge executive salaries.

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.