To Mozilla HQ: It’s about time to launch a Firefox OS Project

I’ve talked about Firefox OS during several offline occasion; some people find the concept hard to understand, some, agreed with me, suggested that I should put everything together in written so people at large would know about it. Here are the reasons why I believe Mozilla should start working on an operating system based on Firefox.

1. To enrich the add-on ecosystem

Before Apple’s iTunes Apps Store for iPhone, and iPod or iPad later, Mozilla Add-ons was one of the largest collections of web software. The add-ons does from simply help people to access content to development tools. However, after 5 years of introduction of Firefox and it’s extension framework, people find it hard to formulate a business model with it – Mozilla try to cope the problem with donation system incorporated within the add-on site, however, with the proven model from the competitors, developers had shift their focus to these new platforms. Echofon, once called TwitterFox, would not be able to deliver a paid “pro” version successfully if it had not reach other platforms.

By developing an Firefox OS, Mozilla could make proof to developers in the ecosystem that Firefox is more than a browser, and their hard work is more than browser add-ons. I am not saying turning Firefox into an OS would immediately make add-ons development profitable – however, it might not never be if there is no OS.

2. To provide an alternative browser OS

When I talked about Firefox OS, people often compare my imaginary OS with Chrome OS. It’s comparable, yet, the Google’s approach might not be the best way. For instance, Google intend to copy Apple’s business model, creating an centralized Chrome Web Store, defeat the purpose that web should be a platform without a controlling vendor.

Should Mozilla had working on a Firefox OS, it not only provide an alternative to Chrome OS, but it also give users valuable choices on browser OS front. Alternative is not about playing the RMS card – that every software should have a libre alternative – instead, the existence of the strong enough alternative is the key to drive innovation.

(Don’t believe me? Think about IE6.)

3. To deliver better user experience in Firefox

The recent development of Firefox 4 bring exciting UI changes that align with many modern browsers, like Application Tabs or TabCandy, later known as Panorama, which enables user new innovate ways to organize information and works.

These powerful features, nevertheless, doesn’t work within an application as tiny as a browser sometimes. Before Panorama, I usually group my works in different browser windows, so I could switch between them on Windows taskbar. After trying Panorama, along with Application Tab, I don’t think it works as well as Exposé in Mac OS X, or even what I did. For example, app tabs are always visible no matter what Panorama work space you selected, yet in Panorama view app tabs actually belongs to a group – this results confusion. What’s worse, click in any app tab in another work group immediately brings you to that group, with no fast way to switching back.

Another example would be the UI change decision about bringing tabs on top of the toolbar. I agreed with the decision to bring tabs to top; but when I pressed F11 to make my Firefox window go full screen, I found the close window button (the X) was not on the top-right corner of the screen (which, according to Fitt’s law, is a hot spot for cursor aiming, and, according to the logic of Windows OS, should be always the place to close a maximized window).

These examples might be just tiny issues that come with a beta version of Firefox; I believe most of them will be fixed by talent people at Mozilla before the final version releases. Nonetheless, these are the evidence that how messy it would be to ask an browser within an operating system to manage it’s own tasks – We should definitely work on these user experience innovation, however a Firefox browser will always be a constraint for these interaction innovations – A Firefox OS will not. By developing a Firefox OS with these innovations, Mozilla will certainly have a better chance to polish them before they were brought to the browser.

Ever since Windows 95, binding between tasks in browser window and tasks in client applications has always been a key issue. Windows 7 introduced jump list; IE9 users will be able to pin websites on their Windows task bar. A Firefox OS will help Mozilla developers come up with even better interaction, instead of endlessly implement what Windows, or other OS APIs enables applications (browsers) to do.

4. To defend the Open Web

Mozilla is a foundation with limited resource. Everything it does has to be somehow connect to its mission. A Firefox OS project will undeniably connect to the cause. Here is one of the reasons why: Today, users prefer mobile apps than [mobile] web.

I twitted the link sometimes ago. The sad inconvenient truth is, if people access information mainly from apps but not the through the browser, the browser itself will be irrelevant. Eventually, the web itself will be irrelevant, along with the promises of the Open Web that Mozilla holds true. Yet, this is exactly what is happening right now on the mobile front.

(Stilling thinking about bring a full Firefox to iOS is important? IMO it brings more buzz than piratical use.)

Firefox OS has the potential to become not just browser OS for web platform but also a truly open platform. Think about a slightly exaggerated future, where desktops, OSes, and applications on it seize to exist. People would access information on the Internet without going through the Web (and HTTP) but using devices and site-specific applications using socket connections. In that future, there are better be a vendor that continue express interests of openness through technologies and end-user products, and let that vendor be Mozilla, even though the Web as we know it seize to exist. Firefox OS could be that end-user product, just like Firefox 1.0 did to the web almost 6 years ago. Firefox OS could ultimately transform itself beyond browser, or browser OS, but first Mozilla need to make a browser OS.

Thus, to Mozilla HQ: It’s about time to launch a Firefox OS Project.

對一件事的看法不等於這個人的全部

pingooo:

我不知道別人怎麼看,我只會把文章當作格主對一件事的個人意見,人是複雜的,對一件事的看法[不等於]這個人的全部;如果台灣的 open source 界對你會有這種不能講真心話的同儕壓力,真是 open source 的悲哀。也是不尊重個人意見的表現。

via.

這個 Blog 不怎麼有名,至今也沒發生什麼大事情。不過不讓我在這裡暢所欲言的阻力的確是這個。回去翻翻那些我寫的欲言又止的文章吧。

如果台灣所有人都有葉平教授的胸襟就好了 —— 反過來說,如果部落格無法成為理想的公民媒體與民主深化的力量,大概就是因為這個。

漫畫《死亡預告》

死亡預告》是一部前幾個星期在看的漫畫。它的背景是:國家為了使國民體認生命的價值,進而增進國家的繁榮所以實施了《國家繁榮法》,每個人在進入小學時接受國繁預防接種,其中 0.1% 的疫苗混入了奈米膠囊。膠囊在該國民 18-24 歲之間會破裂而奪去死者的生命。在死亡前 24 小時,死者會收到區公所的配送員送來的「死亡預告證」,簡稱逝紙。

每個章節紀錄了一名「國繁死」死者的過程。故事環繞在死者,和死者週邊的親人、朋友會如何接受與轉化這個事實。有些死者會在生命的最後 24 小時去尋仇,有些則是會做一些過去來不及做的事情,彌補一些來不及處理的關係。「國繁死」是一個值得尊敬的事;「國繁思想」必須要維護,反對國繁的人會被指為「思想頹廢者」,會被國繁警察逮捕,甚至是被注入膠囊。漫畫也描述了國繁制度的歷史背景,與許多人們對這個制度的掙扎和抵抗,以及接受。

對我來說,這個作品是很震撼的。如果有一個制度必須殺掉千分之一的國民以維繫國家的繁榮,它是怎麼產生的?更震撼的是,它是怎麼被社會接受的?它如何型塑社會,使它所代表的觀點與理念變成社會整體的價值觀,甚至是文化、「民族性」?

雖說故事的背景牽涉到了一個可以在人體中存活幾十年然後準時破裂的奈米裝置,但我實在不知這部作品是否屬於科幻。而故事描述的社會如此熟悉,卻又如此扭曲,如同科幻或是其他另類歷史的作品一樣。

我試著憋住呼吸,保持看完連載進度的勇氣。若不能接受那樣的時代,或許也無力忍受現實。