Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Firefox Handhelds Mozilla Windows

No More Firefox For Windows Mobile 226

Posted by timothy
from the no-room-at-the-ecosystem dept.
angry tapir writes "Mozilla has decided to stop development of a version of its Firefox mobile Web browser for phones running Windows Mobile. The reason is that Microsoft has closed the door to native applications on smartphones running its new Windows Phone 7 Series software. More reasoning can be found in a blog post by Stuart Parmenter, director of Mobile Engineering at Mozilla."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

No More Firefox For Windows Mobile

Comments Filter:
  • Preemptive Strike (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SuperKendall (25149) on Tuesday March 23, 2010 @08:51PM (#31592160)

    Given that Microsoft has a closed app store model for Windows 7 (just like the iPhone) the chances are good Microsoft would not allow Mozilla to run anyway, even if they wanted to make a nice Silverlight based browser...

    That was an interesting choice on Microsoft's part, I can't believe they are not trying to grasp a lot of C# developers that have shifted to the iPhone just to move where the marketshare is. Now those guys have no reason to switch back anytime soon.

  • Shame on me, RTFA. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by headkase (533448) on Tuesday March 23, 2010 @09:13PM (#31592360)
    So the reason Microsoft is not allowing native applications is because they are requiring apps to run in either Silverlight or XNA. This is a classic strike against for-profit closed-source: their priorities do not always line up with their users. Remove the profit-motive and all of a sudden you are following your users not trying to make your own tech the standard of the day. I like my software bottom-up please, not top-down.
  • ROFL! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jmorris42 (1458) * <jmorris.beau@org> on Tuesday March 23, 2010 @09:38PM (#31592600)

    Good grief, just how stupid can these guys get!

    Just about the ONLY nice thing people say about Windows on a phone is that it is an open platform for all the corporate junk. Now it is a closed clone of the iPhone complete with app store. All the evil with none of the hipster kewl artsy metrosexual buzz.

    Without a monopoly Microsoft couldn't sell icewater in hell.

  • Windows 7 Immobile (Score:2, Interesting)

    by syousef (465911) on Tuesday March 23, 2010 @09:41PM (#31592638) Journal

    Bone heads. Apple's partially closed approach has been a PR disaster. Despite having a slick phone, there are plenty who'll avoid it like the plague. Only the fact that it was first to market has saved it So MS, who's anything but first to market with advanced smartphones, decides to go one better and close development to everything except CNA and Silverlight? (while Ironically Apple won't support Flash). It's like watching Dumb and Dumber.

  • Re:So basically (Score:3, Interesting)

    by shutdown -p now (807394) on Tuesday March 23, 2010 @09:43PM (#31592660) Journal

    I mean seriously, it's like they're taking everything that I like about owning a WinMo phone and throwing it away. I *like* having a file browser on my phone. I *like* having native applications. I *like* HTC's SenseUI. I *like* being able to use my phone as USB mass storage. I *like* being able to HardSPL my phone and use a custom ROM from HTCpedia or xda-developers. I *like* being able to tether my phone using a standard data plan. I *like* Opera Mobile. These are all features that WinMo had and the iPhone didn't.

    I wholeheartedly agree. I was actually waiting for WinPhone 7 MIX announcement to decide which smartphone will be my next. That decision was made next day after the announcement, and the phone is Nexus One...

    It seems that Android now is everything that WinMo used to be - open in terms of what you can install on it, both native and managed applications allowed, great RAD development tools, decent documentation.

    Sadly, I can understand why WinPhone was made that way - no-one can deny Apple's access with iPhone, and that makes it abundantly clear that most casual users don't care about openness of platform for developers - or even understand the concept - even if it still does affect them indirectly. So copying iPhone's model is the obvious choice so long as $$$ are involved.

    Still... what happened to "developers, developers, developers"?

  • by koko (66015) on Tuesday March 23, 2010 @11:01PM (#31593294)

    Wait -- then MS's OS/3?

    And it's not that bad, really, it's not. It's not popular in the west; I could count the WiMos I've come across the past few years. Head East and it's still popular.

    Skype? Gone. FF? Gone. Is Opera next?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @12:10AM (#31593776)

    iPhone = locked / appstore
    Andriod = crappy java unless you root
    WM7 = see iPhone
    Blackberry = blah

    I don't know what other choices we have? There is mobile java spec that works on the masses of handsets.

    Was really looking forward to having firefox on the WM6 platform. This really sucks... and it seems like MS will continue to support WM6 for quite some time into the future because the products are so different and really have different target audiences. Unfortunately practically no handset vendor is going to want to ship 6.x when 7.x is available.

    At this point I'm likely never to go to WM7 because I hate the iPhone and everything it stands for. Whatever you might think about WM6 you at least had the freedom to do whatever the hell you wanted with it. I guess my next phone will be andriod :(

    I just want a single platform that allows us to write real applications using native code considering the lack of memory and CPU on handsets.

  • by jonaskoelker (922170) <jonaskoelker@gn u . org> on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @05:54AM (#31595158) Homepage

    The thing that really amuses me about the whole Windows vs. Mac thing

    For those of us who can't find large differences between an Apple laptop running Linux and an Dell laptop running Linux, thank you very much for not framing the debate as PC versus Mac.

    I can't tell you how badly I hate that choice of words. It pulls me in (because I use a computer that either is or isn't made by Apple) but then leaves me out (because I use software that both isn't made by Microsoft and isn't made by Apple).

    It's a relic of the past---from when PC meant IBM-compatible PC. The IBM PC business has died out as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC_compatible#The_declining_influence_of_IBM [wikipedia.org].

    The word (/abbrev.) PC means nothing having to do with being a personal thing and much more about being a consumer-affordable general purpose computer (i.e. my Wii/router/phone isn't a PC, nor is my Cray 1, but my Apple laptop is); at least that's the way I use it and hear it used, except maybe by people who need to distance themselves from the majority of people who run Windows on an Intel box.

    Get over yourself. Yes, I run something else too. I don't go around telling everybody about it any longer. I was a fan boy. Now I'm pretty chill about it. Linux is the set of trade-offs that works best for me; if you like something else that's fine with me. Heck if you prefer Blackbox to Fluxbox or vim to emacs, that's cool. Use what works for you. Even if it's made by a company I don't like.

    Just leave me out of your mud wrestling match between you and The Windows Sheeple. Maybe we can have a beer together when you get over it?

    Thanks. </rant>

To understand a program you must become both the machine and the program.

Working...