What's the point?
Posted Mar 1, 2012 6:33 UTC (Thu) by khim
In reply to: What's the point?
Parent article: Mozilla announces HTML5-based phone
Ohkay… I'll try again…
One point is that this would be the only mobile OS whose development platform uses standard-based APIs.
Well, I'll concede: this is a point. But a hugely negative one at that! When I've asked “what's the point” I kind of expected to see positive point of the whole exercise.
With iOS and Android, you can't even transfer apps between them. That's good for developers (sell apps more easily to more people) and users (move apps around).
I don't even know: to laugh or to cry.
1. You can create iOS app and sell it to [potentially] 250 millions of users.
2. You can create Android app and sell it to [potentially] 150 millions of users.
3. Or you can create "standards-based app" and sell it to [may be] 20 millions of users on desktop, tablets and mobiles.
Do you really believe developers will be excited by the prospect of creating application which covers more platforms and reaches less users? Somehow I doubt it.
Yes, there are better (in various senses of the term) development platforms.
Yup. That's my point. No matter what you choose if you choose anything besides the B2G you'll get more choices! Since B2G only runs standards-based application these applications can be run on other platforms, too (or else how can we say these are standards?) but they can run their native apps in addition to these!
But we do need to keep some choice open in the market, if the whole mobile market is native apps on iOS and Android, we are in a bad situation.
You again got it backwards: I'm not arguing that it's good situation. I'm arguing that it's inevitable situation. If you have no good positive selling points then your platform will fly like a lead balloon (see Windows Phone 7 - but at least Microsoft is trying to attach enough helium to it for a last year and half). And if you have only negative points (like B2G have) then it's not lead balloon anymore. It's balloon made from uranium and if what you are saying is true then Mozilla actively tries to make it more like iridium balloon. This is not a way to win, sorry.
You remind me of Esperantists: they like to preach “bright feature” where everyone will speak Esperanto yet somehow utterly fail to explain just how can we actually reach it. Why will anyone (except few zealots) actually learn it if it'll not help them to do anything “here and now”? “You'll get a lot of advantages if everyone else will do X” is not an argument to do X - it's an argument to skip doing X till “everyone else” will do it. And if most people are not doing X then X will never happen.
to post comments)