X
Нажмите здесь, чтобы перейти на мобильную версию сайта.

Форум поддержки

Why doesn't Mozilla provide official builds for phones?

Размещено

I've got an Alcatel OneTouch Fire with a 2.5 3rd party build I found on the Internet. It's really bad.

Everytime I switch from an app to the main screen, the app icons and text take almost 10 seconds to load. Browsing the web while listening to music causes the music to stutter, as if the CPU was hogged.

Those were the findings after less than 5 minutes of usage.

Before this update, I used a 2.4 3rd party build which worked much better, but also had lots of bugs (e.g. the next music on the playlist would most of the time not play, but sometimes it would just fine).

The only official build for this phone is a vendor build of Firefox OS 1.4 or something.

I'm wondering, why is Mozilla following the Google / Android path of upgrade hell and planned obsolescence? It's not like this device isn't powerful enough, I'm pretty sure it's just a bad build, because 2.4 works mostly fine.

What I expected from Mozilla was a website where I would select my phone model and would receive official instructions as to what I can do to keep it in top shape.

I understand that devices may require special builds and there are too many devices out there, but isn't there a way to make an abstraction layer of sorts that would allow Mozilla to focus on a few builds of similar phones? I'm pretty sure that's possible.

I know you're hard at work at lots of things, but you're letting users down. I expected to have much more freedom with my phone. I expected to be able to edit a couple JavaScript files and change Gaia and other apps without a hassle, but apparently I need gigabytes worth of source codes and toolchains.

I'm pretty sure none of this is necessary. What went wrong? I thought Firefox's fat toolchain were there due to a decade of legacy, but it's starting to look like this is just Mozilla's culture. Maybe you're not as technically competent as I thought. This is a very sad realization to me. I know you have smart people on board, but something must be wrong with your team. You should incorporate some more Unix culture. Well, a lot more.

I've got an Alcatel OneTouch Fire with a 2.5 3rd party build I found on the Internet. It's really bad. Everytime I switch from an app to the main screen, the app icons and text take almost 10 seconds to load. Browsing the web while listening to music causes the music to stutter, as if the CPU was hogged. Those were the findings after less than 5 minutes of usage. Before this update, I used a 2.4 3rd party build which worked much better, but also had lots of bugs (e.g. the next music on the playlist would most of the time not play, but sometimes it would just fine). The only official build for this phone is a vendor build of Firefox OS 1.4 or something. I'm wondering, why is Mozilla following the Google / Android path of upgrade hell and planned obsolescence? It's not like this device isn't powerful enough, I'm pretty sure it's just a bad build, because 2.4 works mostly fine. What I expected from Mozilla was a website where I would select my phone model and would receive official instructions as to what I can do to keep it in top shape. I understand that devices may require special builds and there are too many devices out there, but isn't there a way to make an abstraction layer of sorts that would allow Mozilla to focus on a few builds of similar phones? I'm pretty sure that's possible. I know you're hard at work at lots of things, but you're letting users down. I expected to have much more freedom with my phone. I expected to be able to edit a couple JavaScript files and change Gaia and other apps without a hassle, but apparently I need gigabytes worth of source codes and toolchains. I'm pretty sure none of this is necessary. What went wrong? I thought Firefox's fat toolchain were there due to a decade of legacy, but it's starting to look like this is just Mozilla's culture. Maybe you're not as technically competent as I thought. This is a very sad realization to me. I know you have smart people on board, but something must be wrong with your team. You should incorporate some more Unix culture. Well, a lot more.

Изменено n2liquid

Выбранное решение

As far as I know, the mobile environment is a lot more closed than PCs, evety constructor does not develop drivers and things like that for everyone, often only for iOS and Android. And furthermore there is less people working on implementing new architecture for FirefoxOS than Linux does for PCs (and this one has 30 years old, FirefoxOS not). But there is some work on this idea to provide more builds for new mobiles and connected devices. Check https://firefoxos.mozilla.community for more infos about this :)

Прочитайте этот ответ в контексте 0

Дополнительные сведения о системе

Приложение

  • User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:44.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/44.0

Дополнительная информация

jgw96 2 решений 13 ответов
Размещено

Полезный ответ

Mozilla does provide official builds for some devices, such as the Flame. Unfortunately it would be almost impossible to provide official builds for every different device as each device has different hardware. Hope this answers your question!

Mozilla does provide official builds for some devices, such as the Flame. Unfortunately it would be almost impossible to provide official builds for every different device as each device has different hardware. Hope this answers your question!
Размещено

Задавший вопрос

I know that's commonly alleged of mobile devices. I don't buy it, though. Really. What's so different about smart phones and PCs?

Granted, their hardware is pretty different, but PC hardware also comes in wide range, with thousands of different permutations, in fact much more than mobile devices, considering that you don't have replaceable cards on mobile devices as with PCs, and Linux has no problem supporting all of them pretty well.

Linux supports dozens of different CPU architectures, too. Mobile devices are mostly just ARMs.

So where does that come from, really? What makes mobile devices such unique snowflakes that prevents us from treating them like the damn mere computers they are? If there's actually a good reason for that, I'd love to know.

I know that's commonly alleged of mobile devices. I don't buy it, though. Really. What's so different about smart phones and PCs? Granted, their hardware is pretty different, but PC hardware also comes in wide range, with thousands of different permutations, in fact much more than mobile devices, considering that you don't have replaceable cards on mobile devices as with PCs, and Linux has no problem supporting all of them pretty well. Linux supports dozens of different CPU architectures, too. Mobile devices are mostly just ARMs. So where does that come from, really? What makes mobile devices such unique snowflakes that prevents us from treating them like the damn mere computers they are? If there's actually a good reason for that, I'd love to know.
Ilphrin 1 решений 16 ответов
Размещено

Выбранное решение

As far as I know, the mobile environment is a lot more closed than PCs, evety constructor does not develop drivers and things like that for everyone, often only for iOS and Android. And furthermore there is less people working on implementing new architecture for FirefoxOS than Linux does for PCs (and this one has 30 years old, FirefoxOS not). But there is some work on this idea to provide more builds for new mobiles and connected devices. Check https://firefoxos.mozilla.community for more infos about this :)

As far as I know, the mobile environment is a lot more closed than PCs, evety constructor does not develop drivers and things like that for everyone, often only for iOS and Android. And furthermore there is less people working on implementing new architecture for FirefoxOS than Linux does for PCs (and this one has 30 years old, FirefoxOS not). But there is some work on this idea to provide more builds for new mobiles and connected devices. Check https://firefoxos.mozilla.community for more infos about this :)