On 12/16/2015 09:34 AM, Wilson Page wrote: > Most of the use-cases you outline seem to suggest 'privacy' is the main > 'feature'. I think we should be careful running with this as the > **primary** user value proposition. As Ari said: *'users want candy, not > vegetables'*.
You're right, I'm a bit paranoid ;) But that doesn't mean that this is the only value of a that kind of platform. > 1. What 'candy' can we offer them that they cannot already get through > existing channels? User choice for once. Even if you're not that privacy oriented, having the possibility to choose who provides you processing. Direct consequence, this also opens the doors to an ecosystem of 3rd parties. We don't have to give all the candies ourselves, we can facilitate candy distribution. > 2. Can the underlying transports align with what FlyWeb is trying to do? I thought about that too (by having a "remote flyweb" discovery) but I'm not convinced that this would help that much because all services may not make sense as flyweb services. Maybe we could still expose the pure flyweb services remotely in addition - but no big deal for now. > --- > > IMO Mozilla could flourish in this space; we have two main tasks: > > 1. Create a safe, scalable, interoperable developer platform that > applies lessons learnt from the web (giving us a head start). > 2. Launch a shiny product that introduces the platform to consumers. > > --- > > Although, if the platform is **that** good, third-parties will want to > build on it and Mozilla might not have to launch any user-facing products :) That's my hope! -- Fabrice Desré b2g team Mozilla Corporation _______________________________________________ dev-fxos mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos
