I'm a Mozilla fan and wanted a privacy respecting, libre thin-client that kept advertising money coming into Mozilla's coffers so they can continue their mission.
Focusing on that and Firefox was the way. Unfortunately, Mozilla is a little lost.
I have to trust them as much as the closed source native applications on my computer, and I know which ones I would prefer.
You don't need hindsight to realise that competing in the phone markplace is the wrong place to start. You start with the desktop and then make gradual adaptions that allow your operating environment work well on tablets, phones and laptops.
Until recently, the highest marketshare desktop OS, Windows, was a utility and not a content-monetizing platform, but Windows 10 brought it up to the level that was long standard on mobile. Google Search, Chrome the Browser, Chrome OS and Chromebooks are Google's progressively vertical takes on inviting a user into the Google data ecosystem in a non-mobile form factor, proving that Windows's weakness was that Google could monetize these users without having to control the hardware, but getting cheap first-party hardware into the hands of people is always a plus.
In all likelihood, the same would've happened to Firefox OS anyway if it had become successful -- the celebrated 'open' mobile OS would be just another entry point into the same exact platforms that managed to rise to prominence on Windows -- a proprietary but laissez-faire ecosystem where anyone could run an application to do just about anything. Over time, a few players bubbled to the top, and now they're shipping their own hardware to cut out the middleman.
[1] http://www.smartinsights.com/mobile-marketing/mobile-marketi... [2] http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/29/technology-device-owne...
The penetration Chromebooks have made in education is huge. And even if it were an entirely no-profit/break-even situation, the idea of millions of students and public library patrons doing work on a "Firebook", and that it would be a serious contender to Windows-based PCs in a number of IT departments, is so perfectly aligned with Mozilla's ideals that it makes me sick to think about, especially juxtaposed with the hundreds of millions that Mozilla Corp has thrown away in the go-nowhere endeavors that it did pursue.
When we do happen to see one, if it is a store we visit regularly, what we see is the same device on display being discounted to death until the store finally manages to get rid of it.
I must have seen around 5 like that, so I don't get where Gartner is getting their values from.
So where are those units that Gartner states were sold over here?
If you say what you've just said right now, you'll be told you have the benefit of hindsight working in your favor.
On the other hand, if you had the ability to go back in time to make your argument back then, even with perfect omniscience about how things would turn out, then you would have been subjected to claims that there is no market for such a thing, that you're trying to satisfy your own nerd niche itch, and whatever post hoc rationale that the Firefox product team could have (and regularly did) come up with to reassure themselves that their track is the right one.