the origin

why did we create firefox os?

tale of 2 incumbents

Two companies were creating two monolithic silos trying to tie the users to them.

Once inside them, is really difficult to move away.

many tries to beat them failed before

... and many of them had huge Operator and/or OEM support

If you try to beat an incumbent from the scratch, you need to provide something significally better

THE SOLUTION

FOSTER AN ALTERNATIVE THAT ALREADy EXISTED

THE WEB

other INITIATIVES

1. DESIGN BY COMMITTEE
2. CLOSED
3. NO CONTENT
4. HUGE OWNERSHIP COST

THE WEB

1. STANDARD DRIVEN
2. OPEN
3. ALL WEB CONTENT
4. SHARED COST

WHY THE WEB CAN SUCCEED WHERE OTHERS FAILED?

PROBLEM

TWO COMPANIES ARE CONTROLLING MOBILE WEB, GUESS WHICH ONES?

THAT's WHY FIREFOX OS EXISTS

A TACTICAL MOVEMENT TO BREAK MOBILE WEB DUOPOLY

FIREFOX OS

THE GOOD PARTS

PUES ESO, TODO LO qUE HEMOS LOGRADO

• Tiempos
• Mercados
• Devices
• Y poner lo que otros no han logrado

FIREFOX OS

THE BAD PARTS

1. Restricted: Devs need to register, pay, use specific tools/OS...
2. Rules: App stores create arbitrary rules, e.g. No flash, no porn...
3. Revenue Share: BizModel and payment methods dictacted by the Stores
4. Unbalanced: No alternative stores are allowed

1. Universal: Any one can create a Web and Publish it
2. Open: Devs are free to decide what to include or which technologies to use
3. BizModel: Any model is possible and devs are free to choose the payment method 
4. Balanced: Multiple Browsers with balanced penetration, users can chose browser to use
   

THE WEB

APP STORE MODEL

vs.

THE WEB ECOSYSTEM SHOULD BE THE WAY TO COMMODITIZE APP STORE MODELS:

"IF THE APPS ARE ALL WEB BASED HAVING AN APPSTORE IS NOT AN ADVANTAGE ANYMORE"

1. Universal: Any one can create a Web and Publish it
2. Open: Devs are free to decide what to include or which technologies to use
3. BizModel: Any model is possible and devs are free to choose the payment method 
4. Balanced: Multiple Browsers with balanced penetration, users can chose browser to use
   

Devs can create web sites that can be installed but without access to many APIs

Payment solution is FFOS exclusive and not attractive for developers

Only 1 App Store is allowed

No restrictions on what can be or cannot be published

IS FIREFOX OS MEETING THIS TARGET?

IN THE RUSH TO HIT THE MARKET, WE FORGOT THAT THE TARGET WAS NOT FIREFOX OS TO SUCCEED...

... BUT THE WEB TO DO IT

Title Text

• Bullet One
• Bullet Two
• Bullet Three

CLOSED APP MODELS

THE CLOSED APP MODEL IN DETAIL

1. CLOSED: Devs need to register, pay, use specific tools/OS...
2. CONSTRAINED: App stores create arbitrary rules, e.g. No flash, no porn...
3. RESTRICTED REVENUE OPPORTUNITIES: BizModel and payment methods dictacted by the Stores
4. EXCLUSIVE: No alternative stores are allowed

CLOSED aPP MODELS ARE NOT AN END BUT JUST MEANS TO LOCK USERS TO A SPECIFIC SILO

"IT'S EXTREMELY EASY TO MOVE INSIDE THE SILO AND EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO DO IT OUTSIDE"

Your digital life is portable within the vertical solution

COMMODITIZING CLOSED APP MODELS

WHAT IF WE MAKE ALL THE APPS UNIVERSALLY ACCESSIBLE?

"All the Apps I am using are available everywhere so I don't care about which platform/mobile device I am using"

IF WE MAKE THIS HAPPEN, THE APP STORES WILL JUST BECOME A COMMODITY: THERE IS NO DIFFERENTIAL FACTOR IN HAVING AN APP STORE

THE WEB AS THE WAY TO COMMODITIZE APP STORES

1. OPEN: Anyone can publish and there are no mandatory tools/technologies
2. NO CONSTRAINS: No rules to publish a website, is your website and you decide about content and technologies
3. UNRESTRICTED REVENUE OPPORTUNITIES: Dev choses payment mechanisms and business model
4. UNIVERSAL: The web site can be accessed via any browser and discovered via multiple search engines

THE WEB ALLOWS DEVS TO CREATE AND PUBLISH APPS UNIVERSALLY DISCOVERABLE AND ACCESIBLE

"Any service/app you are accessing via your browser can be also used in a different device/browser with zero friction: Gmail, Facebook, Twitter..."

IF ALL YOUR DIGITAL LIFE IS WEB BASED, ALL YOUR DIGITAL LIFE IS PORTABLE

FIREFOX OS IS NOT THE WEB

HOW IS FIREFOX OS FAILING TO MEET THE WEB PROMISES

1. OPEN?  NO, only a limited set of APIs are available
2. NO CONSTRAINS? OK!
3. UNRESTRICTED REVENUE OPPORTUNITIES? NO, Limited options for developer and focused on marketplace only
4. UNIVERSAL? NO, there is just one marketplace and creating an alternative one is not enabled

AS OF TODAY, FIREFOX OS IS FOSTERING ANOTHER SILO BUT BASED ON WEB TECHNOLOGIES

"Using Web Technologies is irrelevant unless it brings to users the advantages of the Web"

IN THE RUSH TO hit the market, TOUGH DECISIONS WERE MADE THAT MADE FFOS TO DIVERGE FROM THE WEB: PACK APPs, RESTRICT APIs, ONLY 1 MARKETPLACE, PAYMENTS...

FIREFOX OS REBORN

ThREE MAIN TARGETS

1. BE OPEN:  WEB CONTENT SHOULD JUST WORK WITH ZERO EFFORT BY DEVS AND A WIDE RANGE OF APIS SHOULD BE AVAILABE
2. BE UNIVERSAL: APP DISCOVERY BASED ON WEB MODEL AND NOT IN THE APPSTORE ONE
3. EASE ANY BIZ MODEL: ALLOW DEVS TO MONETIZE THEIR EASILY

BE OPEN

FirefoxOS Track

• Expand APIs to Hosted Apps
  
• Web Compatibility
  
• FFOS Apps move to Hosted (don't cheat)
  

Dev Track:

Cacheator, 1 web, 1 web app,