Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Design Principles Behind Firefox OS Explained

Unknown Lamer posted about 2 years ago | from the surprsingly-logical dept.

Mozilla 69

At MozCamp Warsaw, a presentation was given on the design principles behind the core Firefox OS experience. Layering of applications (if you're wondering why the Firefox mobile interface has that weird curve by the tab control, you'll find answers here), an emphasis on content over visual frills for their own sake, consistent iconography, and clean typography dominate.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Nice... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41464927)

I like!

Re:Nice... (0)

jellomizer (103300) | about 2 years ago | (#41465299)

However Mozilla, has a tendancy of loosing focus. Ok we come out with a good design, then over time things get added and then you get a bigger and bigger pile. Becuase they don't know when to stop.

A lot of the design seems to be taked from Windows 8 land. And the real devil is beyond screen shots when things are running in real time. Fat fingers will just mean something is too small. Or the particular effect just cannot be optimes to run smothly enough.

Re:Nice... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41466111)

A lot of the design seems to be taked from

Taked? WTF... Just what the fuck is `taked'?

Look, sticking `ed' on the end of random English words is terrible. Please stop doing that. The correct form is `taken.'

A lot of the design seems to be taken from

See? Now you don't sound like an Indian call center monkey.

That goes for getted, putted, inputted (some of which, sadly, have been legitimised by multi-culty linguists) and all the other nonsense you people come up with.

Re:Nice... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41466557)

Maybe English is not their first language? For example, your first language seems to be Douchbag.

Re:Nice... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41468097)

I think you mean Douchebag.

Re:Nice... (-1, Flamebait)

farble1670 (803356) | about 2 years ago | (#41469517)

it's "douchEbag" you moron.

Re:Nice... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41470919)

Your first language seems to be douchEbag as well.

Re:Nice... (-1, Offtopic)

farble1670 (803356) | about 2 years ago | (#41470959)

and your first language is clearly not english, as the concept of satire is lost on you.

Unhip Philosophy Haiku (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41464975)

Squares inside of Squares
Even the clock is a Square
So many Squares there

Hip Philosophy Haiku (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41465239)

Round soft corners so
our users don't hurt themselves
So rich but stupid

Re:Hip Philosophy Haiku (1)

jmcvetta (153563) | about 2 years ago | (#41480847)

Oh, to have mod points...

it's squares all the way down, smartass (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41466067)

Squares inside of Squares
Even the clock is a Square
So many Squares there

This looks 'shooped, I can tell from the pixels an' stuff...

ARRRRRRRRGHGHGHGHGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!! (0, Troll)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | about 2 years ago | (#41465009)

My phone just zaxpped at me the balls! I blame iApple!!!! AYAYAYAYAYYAYAYAYAAY!!!!oww!

Re:ARRRRRRRRGHGHGHGHGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!! (0)

EmagGeek (574360) | about 2 years ago | (#41465221)

You're holding it wrong. If you hold it right, that won't happen.

But, (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41465061)

can you run Chrome on it?

I'm guessing the main principle... (5, Funny)

unitron (5733) | about 2 years ago | (#41465065)

I'm guessing the main principle is to find ways to annoy people who liked the previous versions and to hide stuff from them.

How very Microsoft of them.

Re:I'm guessing the main principle... (2)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 2 years ago | (#41465121)

Just wait to you use the new GNOMEphone!

Re:I'm guessing the main principle... (5, Funny)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 2 years ago | (#41465829)

GNOMEphone, eh? I can see it now.

In the name of simplifications they'll remove some or all of the numbers from the keypad, because an internal user study told them that all 10 digits is simply too complex.

Then someone will write into the forum to complain.

"I frequently need the digits 5 to 9 (inclusive) to call a wide variety of my contacts. These are vital to my workflow"

"WONTFIX. Our dicision is final."

"FUCK YOU I NEEDED 9 BECAUSE A FIRE STARTED MY HOUSE BURNED DOWN"

"Please take your unhelpful comments elsewhere"

Re:I'm guessing the main principle... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41466863)

Meh. You only need 4 buttons to dial up to 0xE.

Re:I'm guessing the main principle... (1)

funwithBSD (245349) | about 2 years ago | (#41465177)

The daily quote on ./ was right on target today:

The truth about a man lies first and foremost in what he hides. -- Andre Malraux

Re:I'm guessing the main principle... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41465327)

Firefox started it first.

Well, Chrome start it first. Firefox copied Chrome.

Re:I'm guessing the main principle... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41465445)

You forgot upgrading the OS every hour or didn't you know that FF OS 39 is already in beta and will be available in 2 hours.

Re:I'm guessing the main principle... (0)

Celarent Darii (1561999) | about 2 years ago | (#41466227)

Actually Gnome 3 did the same. What is wrong with OS designers these days?

Design principles? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41465073)

Eat memory. Devote half the code to allow the user interface to run in javascript and xml. Eat more memory. Devote the other half to second-guess webauthors (who didn't know what they were doing themselves in the first place) and call it a "renderer". Miss the bleeding obvious. Eat more memory. And so on.

Of course, the rest does that too. But just take a look at the code, I dare you. The "design" is stone-age reinventing of the wheel.

If their design . . . (1, Troll)

smooth wombat (796938) | about 2 years ago | (#41465081)

is anything like their punctuation, grammar or spell-check, I see bad things in the future.

Rounded corners have nothing on this... (1)

HerculesMO (693085) | about 2 years ago | (#41465111)

It's almost a tit for tat copy of Windows Phone, in so many ways.

Re:Rounded corners have nothing on this... (1)

CaptSlaq (1491233) | about 2 years ago | (#41465725)

It's almost a tit for tat copy of Windows Phone, in so many ways.

I was thinking the exact same thing: There's a lot of Metro those mockups.

Re:Rounded corners have nothing on this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41467205)

The principles are very similar, but there are some key differences. Recalling the design principles of Metro:

Typography. Type is beautiful. Not only is it attractive to the eye, but it can also be functional. The right balance of weight and positioning can create a visual hierarchy. Additionally, well placed type can help lead you to more content.

Motion is what brings the interface to life. Transitions are just as important as graphical design. By developing a consistent set of motions or animations, a system is created that provides context for usability, extra dimension and depth and improves the perceived performance of the whole interface.

Content not Chrome is one of the more unique principles of Metro. By removing all notions of extra chrome in the UI, the content becomes the main focus. This is especially relevant due to the smaller screen size and gesture-based interactions.

Honesty. Design explicitly for the form factor of a hand held device using touch, a high resolution screen and simplified and expedited forms of interaction. In other words, be “authentically digital”.

And the design themes for Firefox OS:

Shapes which are Bold, Geometric but with hints of organic softness.
UI that communicates a sense of handcrafted design.
Design that is minimal, effective and intuitive but doesn’t feel soulless; has warmth.

Metro explicitly states typography and content is king, but clearly (especially if you read the rest of the article) these are key elements for Firefox OS as well. In my reading the two key differences relate to the honesty point and how the user is drawn in to the UI. Metro uses honesty as a design principle, with the outcomes being "authentically digital" using "fierce reduction". Firefox OS is more prescriptive on bold geometric shapes and minimal, effective and intuitive design. These are very similar (especially compared to the greater bling of Android or the skeuomorphism of iOS), but the Metro approach is a bit more extreme on these. This is related to how the UI draws the user in. Firefox OS uses handcrafted design, warmth, and organic softness, presumably to make the UI more approachable and draw the user in. Metro rejects these and relies on motion to draw the user in. A simple example of this is the live tiles in WP versus icons (or even thumbnails). WP icons are typically very minimal, and a screenful of WP icons is actually ugly. The icons or thumbnails of Firefox OS are attractive and much more approachable. WP only really becomes attractive when the tiles are live and there is motion to catch your eye and consume the large flat areas.

Despite the similarities, and the fact that Firefox OS was obviously heavily inspired by Metro, I find it quite interesting to see how a set of design themes or principles actually translates into software features.

Use Moar Memory. (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41465113)

Cache everything 40 times.
Use MB sized buffers for chunks of data less than a kB.
Cache all traffic in memory.
Cache all images in memory multiple times, especially large ones.
Cache all ads in memory.
Pre-load all links and cache in memory to give the illusion of speed.
Multiply all memory allocation sizes by 100.

Did I mention to cache everything in memory? I did mean everything.

Re:Use Moar Memory. (1)

larry bagina (561269) | about 2 years ago | (#41465533)

Heh. Anybody else remember when resizing a Netscape window would do a full page reload? Look ma, no cache!

They're like an asshole that does a line of coke at a party and turns into a raging cokehead, stealing from friends, sucking dick for drug money, etc. Then they turns to Jesus and insists on telling everyone about it. Moderation people! Do a couple lines of coke on Friday and Saturday night. Go to church on Sunday.

Re:Use Moar Memory. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41470589)

Anybody else remember when resizing a Netscape window would do a full page reload?

Shit was so cache.

Re:Use Moar Memory. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41465699)

You forgot caching all of the OTHER installed browsers' disk caches in memory, and in its own disk cache, effectively making a copy of the 1048576 1kb files that IE uses for its default 1GB disk cache.

Deja vu (2)

ebh (116526) | about 2 years ago | (#41465359)

EmacsM-^H Firefox would be a great OS if only it had a decent text editorM-^HM-^H web browser.

Re:Deja vu (1)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | about 2 years ago | (#41466831)

Amazing, I didn't know what M^H does until today, and I'm using Emacs for 4 years now...

Re:Deja vu (1)

psyclone (187154) | about 2 years ago | (#41479415)

Do you 'set -o vi' on the command line? Emacs style keystrokes (set -o emacs) rock in Bash.

Try: M-b and M-F to move by word. (alt+b, alt+f, alt+backspace = M-^H for other readers)

Smoking crack (5, Interesting)

onyxruby (118189) | about 2 years ago | (#41465693)

Designing an OS? Are you serious? Have you ever looked at the documentation on Firefox beyond the user stuff? Mozilla's support for using Firefox on more than one computer at a time is so bad that the web is littered with abandoned effort after abandoned effort from end user to do it for them!

How on earth do they think they are going to support an operating system which /requires/ management when they can't even support a browser that requires management? You shouldn't have to go dozens of web sites to track down the settings and troll developer forums to get the settings needed to mass deploy an application.

Mozilla, you really, really need to spend some time talking to people in the enterprise and learning what their needs our for managing fleets of computers. I've been on more than one meeting where Firefox was axed from deployment - even though every single person in the room personally used it, preferred it, acknowledged it was more secure - strictly because it is completely unmanageable for an enterprise. Don't get me start on their administrative toolkit either. It isn't close to usable and doesn't begin to cover what is needed.

I'm sorry, until you can get your act up to speed for a single application support at least somewhere to the level of say, Microsoft, Adobe, Oracle, your simply being absurd. It's not about the technical capabilities of your applications, it's about the ability to use and administer it on an enterprise scale.

I'm sorry, the enterprise experience with trying to manage Firefox is so bad that the idea of a Firefox Operating System is going to cost the poor person who suggests it their reputation at best.

Re:Smoking crack (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41466035)

What are you talking about??

Did you not get the.memo that Firefox now updates itself?

Re:Smoking crack (4, Insightful)

onyxruby (118189) | about 2 years ago | (#41466989)

lockPref("app.update.mode", 0);
lockPref("app.update.service.enabled", true);
lockPref("app.update.enabled", true);
lockPref("app.update.interval", 14400);
lockPref("app.update.auto", true);
lockPref("app.update.autoUpdateEnabled", true);
pref("toolkit.telemetry.prompted", 2);
pref("toolkit.telemetry.rejected", true);
pref("toolkit.telemetry.enabled", false);

Yeah, I think I got that memo. Now, I want you to find a single source me on their website that explains all of those settings, what they do, their values, what file you put them in, their context and how to implement them for all users at an enterprise level.

For enterprise deployments, your need to be able to set your configuration for any number of settings with ease. You can't do that with Firefox in the enterprise, I'm sorry but you just can't. I might need to configure any number of well over a thousand some settings, of which auto update is only one of them.

This is what Firefox needs to be able to stand a chance in hell of making it in the enterprise. Understand that the enterprise /wants/ to use Firefox - badly.
1. Enterprises need a single file that they can easily manipulate to change as needed for all users. Mozilla.cfg sort of handles this, but only in a limited capacity.
2. Central sources for documentation. Why does about:config only have some entries defined? I shouldn't have to troll developer forums or bug reports to find out how to manipulate something.
3. Easier support. The fact that it's open source is meaningless when programmers are not the ones supporting and distributing Firefox into production. IT professionals who are /not/ programmers need to be able to readily research and configure Firefox the way they want it.
4. Don't make judgement calls for my organization. You feel wonderful about browser rights, that's nice. I'm not confusing 75,000 users with a prompt about their 'browser rights' and crap-flooding the helpdesk. I should be able to easily disable this kind of thing without spending a lot of time trying to find the right setting.
5. Whoever came up with a six week release schedule needs to be placed into a monastery where they measure time by the seasons to gain some perspective. This places a heavy burden on enterprises and is a support burden. No other software product has this kind of release schedule and it goes against industry best practice.

Re:Smoking crack (1)

Waccoon (1186667) | about 2 years ago | (#41468873)

It doesn't help that some settings disappear for no reason after an update. A lot of good those tweaks will do by next version... which will take all of a week.

Re:Smoking crack (2)

Gordo_1 (256312) | about 2 years ago | (#41468891)

[rant...]
5. Whoever came up with a six week release schedule needs to be placed into a monastery where they measure time by the seasons to gain some perspective. This places a heavy burden on enterprises and is a support burden. No other software product has this kind of release schedule and it goes against industry best practice.

Simmer down and go here:
http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all.html [mozilla.org]

Re:Smoking crack (1)

Xest (935314) | about 2 years ago | (#41475531)

That and when you point out issues to them i.e. memory leaks in Firefox they deny they exist. Then they finally admit to them when they fix them a couple of years later they deny ever denying they existed and basically try and troll you over it.

Between that sort of attitude, a concern I have that at least one of their devs didn't seem to grasp basic modular extensible software design, and things like the do not track debacle where they came up with some nonsensical reason as to why not to enable it by default (which again, has now proven to be nonsensical now the ad companies refuse to honour it anyway) I'm not convinced these are the sorts of folks I want going anywhere near my OS right now.

Firefox was great, it really was, but it steadily lost it's way and lost it's focus. It's developers I've encountered seem to have an attitude of the customer is always wrong, and they're always right, about everything, ever - the issues you cite are emblamatic of this exact attitude. It's marketshare decline has been evidence that it's not simply me that thinks the browser isn't as good as it used to be a lot of people clearly feel it's been outcompeted. Mozilla needs to engage constructively with it's users much more effectively than it has, simply telling them they're wrong about everything clearly isn't effective.

Honestly, Mozilla needs to take a massive step back, look at itself, reevaluate it's goals and check it is still following them, consider where they went wrong to cause people to start walking away from them, and learn a basic bit about dealing with users in a constructive manner before it embarks on this sort of thing. I'd actually like to see this succeed as competition is always good, but it needs a real step change in so many areas and so many ways at Mozilla if it's to go anywhere.

Memory is Cheap (-1, Troll)

EmagGeek (574360) | about 2 years ago | (#41465729)

16GB of memory is $79 at newegg.

Why are we still complaining about how much memory ANYTHING takes up anymore?

Signed,

Your friendly neighborhood software development manager.

Re:Memory is Cheap (1)

Celarent Darii (1561999) | about 2 years ago | (#41466247)

You sound more like a memory chip salesman than a software developer actually.

Re:Memory is Cheap (2)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 2 years ago | (#41466277)

Why are we still complaining about how much memory ANYTHING takes up anymore?

How much will it take to replace my 1GB Eee900 (with 1G and almost impossible to upgrade to 2) with something which isn't any heavier? A lot more than $79, that's for sure.

Also, how do I plug that $79 DIMM into my android phone?

Your friendly neighborhood software development manager.

Ah, so you're personally responsible for the bloated monstrosities that pass a programs these days.

Please, PLEASE quit your job.

Re:Memory is Cheap (1)

EmagGeek (574360) | about 2 years ago | (#41476021)

Obviously, humor is not your strong suit.

Re:Memory is Cheap (3, Insightful)

partyguerrilla (1597357) | about 2 years ago | (#41467345)

This is a mobile OS.

Where's the d@mn home button? (1)

DougInNavarre (2736877) | about 2 years ago | (#41465875)

I started to dislike Firefox's layout when they moved the "Home" button to the right side...away from the tabs and menu where my mouse would normally be.

Re:Where's the d@mn home button? (1)

doom (14564) | about 2 years ago | (#41466425)

"Oh but the home button on the right is a far more logical layout when you consider the importance of grouping by global functionality to keep similar things near their point of action -- " Just kidding.

The "Alt + Home" keyboard command will jump you straight to your home page, without mousing around.

I've started disliking the "firefox experience" since everything has become flashed up... a page with a flash window always steals the keyboard controls, so I can't, for example, kill it with a control W.

Re:Where's the d@mn home button? (1)

RaceProUK (1137575) | about 2 years ago | (#41476571)

a page with a flash window always steals the keyboard controls

Not quite - it's more Flash refusing to free they keyboard unless you force focus to a textbox or something. Then Flash finally relinquishes control to the browser.

Re:Where's the d@mn home button? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41466741)

Wow, someone who actually uses the home button.

Re:Where's the d@mn home button? (2)

allo (1728082) | about 2 years ago | (#41467391)

you know, that you can move the buttons in any way you want? right click the menubar, then select customize. now you can move buttons.

Re:Where's the d@mn home button? (1)

DougInNavarre (2736877) | about 2 years ago | (#41469049)

lol...TBH I didn't know or pay attention during FF's many version upgrades. Now the "Home' button is at the top left where it should be and with FF just under full screen all most used desktop icons are a simple roll off the page away. thnx

Re:Where's the d@mn home button? (1)

allo (1728082) | about 2 years ago | (#41475243)

just customize it ...
i am using no googletoolbar (because of web-shortcuts, gg is google) and the buttons left of the urlbar. the next/prev buttons are not shown when disabled via userchrome and with status4evar i even have an oldschool statusbar.
firefox might be quite unusable with its current defaults, but you can make it look like an old good version with some efford.

Looking more appealing than Android at the moment (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 2 years ago | (#41465927)

Visually it looks really nice and it's not being developed by an advertising agency so that's a huge bonus. I'm definitely going to give it a try.

So? (1)

CarsonChittom (2025388) | about 2 years ago | (#41466009)

And we care about their design principles why, exactly? My understanding is that nobody has plans—even theoretical plans—to ship any actual device with FirefoxOS. It's not like, say, Haiku, which is a niche project but which you can at least install on real, extant hardware. FirefoxOS looks neat—though for full disclosure I say it as someone who genuinely like Windows Phone 7—but if no manufacturer is shipping it, no manufacturer will ship it, and (to the best of my knowledge) you can't install it on the hardware you do have, what's the point?

Re:So? (2)

Lennie (16154) | about 2 years ago | (#41466255)

Why would you say that ? It can run on an Android Linux kernel or even the less obvious choice of running it on the Raspberry Pi:

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Boot_to_Gecko/B2G_build_prerequisites [mozilla.org]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Firefox-OS-Mozilla-Raspberry-Pi,16883.html [tomshardware.com]

You did not read Slashdot yesterday ?:

http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/12/07/06/1551237/telefonica-shows-prototype-firefox-os-phone [slashdot.org]

The plan is to release a phone early next year:
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/mobiles/firefox-os-will-be-on-zte-phones-early-next-year-50009258/ [cnet.co.uk]

Re:So? (1)

CarsonChittom (2025388) | about 2 years ago | (#41466489)

No, I did not read Slashdot yesterday. And I (clearly) didn't know it could run on Android—I'd assumed it was simply another phone OS. I stand corrected; thank you for the correction.

Re:So? (1)

BZ (40346) | about 2 years ago | (#41484901)

I think your understanding is wrong. See https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2012/07/02/firefox-mobile-os/ [mozilla.org] (yes, it's basically a press release, but it's a convenient one-stop shop for a list of people who have plans, theoretical or not, to ship Firefox OS devices).

HTML5 is HTML5 is HTML5? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41466073)

So are you saying my HTML5 app will only work well on one mobile platform?

Will all those nice design principles be applicable directly to Android, iOS and WP?

Design Summary (1, Flamebait)

Merk42 (1906718) | about 2 years ago | (#41466479)

Here is the entire design document in one sentence:
Make the app look like an Android app, make the home screen look like iOS (but circles instead of rounded squares).

Re:Design Summary (1)

drkstr1 (2072368) | about 2 years ago | (#41474177)

Here is the entire design document in one sentence: Make the app look like an Android app, make the home screen look like iOS (but circles instead of rounded squares).

This one has my vote. :-)

Looks promising (1)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | about 2 years ago | (#41466975)

However it definitely seems a blend of Windows Phone meets iPhone with a little Android thrown in (just kidding).

Even if this fails as a product, it is important to get Apple aware that there are competitive forces out there creating better UI paradigms then "just a grid of app icons".

Mozilla should take great care however because a circle is just a rounded rectangle with corner radius = 1/2 height of rectangle.

First Chrome. Now Firefox. (1)

slapout (93640) | about 2 years ago | (#41469075)

We used to say that all programs evolve until they can send email.

Are we going to need a new saying: "Every web browser grows until it becomes an operating system."

Re:First Chrome. Now Firefox. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41470133)

Not always. I know of 2 operating systems that appear to be growing into web browsers (windows, osx).

Re:First Chrome. Now Firefox. (1)

pr0nbot (313417) | about 2 years ago | (#41470701)

Looking forward to IE6OS... *shudder*

Firefox OS memory management (0)

mrprogrammerman (2736973) | about 2 years ago | (#41471127)

I hope they didn't use the same implementation of malloc/free as the browser:

void free(void *p)
{
}

These are not design principles. (4, Insightful)

lennier (44736) | about 2 years ago | (#41471209)

These are styling principles.

Yes, I know the entire commercial world in 2012 has decided to remap the dictionary and call "design" what the world of commerce in 1982 would have called "style", and "architecture" and "engineering" what the world of 1982 would have called "design". And product designers no longer actually design things but just draw sketches of what the colouring of the pictures on the skin of the 3D printer will look like, while the product architects, who don't have architecture degrees, build flowcharts for the engineers, who don't hold engineering degrees, to build.

But darnit, I still remember when "design" meant how a product works at a technical level, and that's what I came to the article expecting to read, and that's the opposite of what I got.

Get off my perfectly manicured ironically Le Corbusier-inspired post-post-postmodernist lawn.

Once you go Native, you never go back! (1)

lbenes (2737085) | about 2 years ago | (#41475065)

As someone who switched from a browser based OS, WebOS, to iPhone 3GS, and now to Android, I can tell you I will never go back to another laggy HTML based OS. If anything, I'd like to see Android move away from its VM based apps to something like Apple's native apps. Many apps ran better on my 3GS than they do on my much more powerful S3. Mozilla is going the wrong direction on this one. Native > Java > JavaScript

The whole idea of using HTML, CCS, and JavaScript as the back end technology for a low-end smartphone is nuts. Even the best HTML rendering engines are CPU and memory hogs. CSS was never designed for and is nearly impossible to hardware accelerate, and JavaScript is notoriously difficult to optimize and even the best VMs like V8 run orders of magnitude slower then Native code, while the VM itself takes up a massive amount of memory.

I get that Mozilla wants to put Firefox on a phone. Fine, but first, focus one building a competitive browser. At the end of the day, I want a responsive fast phone, like the iPhone or Galaxy S3, not some dog slow HTML monstrosity.

Mozilla please just invest your limited resources on making a lean browser that can compete with Chrome!

This is my favourite bit (1)

SirNorris (185284) | about 2 years ago | (#41475159)

Limited, if any skeuomorphic textures and graphic effects as they are deemed a distraction

Thank Jebus for that...

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?