The current message when surfing around the market about "This app is unavailable for your platform." is confusing and not in line with the whole "the web is the platform" messaging we give out - it feels not better than the iOS store or Google Play. At the very least we should explain why the app will not run on Firefox Desktop or that the developer chose only to make it available to Firefox OS. If the app is a hosted app that also has a web page that runs across browsers, we should also link to that one showing that HTML5 is cross-platform and at the heart of the open web apps idea.
Explaining that some APIs are on nightly but aren't in the stable browser yet doesn't sound like useful information to the casual user. I'll flag it uiwanted though and let UX give their input.
How is the detection done?
(In reply to Wil Clouser [:clouserw] from comment #1) > Explaining that some APIs are on nightly but aren't in the stable browser > yet doesn't sound like useful information to the casual user. I'll flag it > uiwanted though and let UX give their input. I read the description not as a Nightly vs Release issue but as this app doesn't work on Firefox desktop altogether.
Yes, this is not about Nightly or APIs. Right now we tell people surfing on Firefox _on the web_ that we don't support this platform. Which platform? Firefox? The Web? A better message would be to say that this application is optimised for mobile and Firefox OS. But in many cases there are even web versions of the app, too, so we could link to that one.
(In reply to Christian Heilmann from comment #4) > A better message would be to say that this application is optimised for > mobile and Firefox OS. But in many cases there are even web versions of the > app, too, so we could link to that one. That's not strictly true. It's possible for the app to require features that aren't available on a phone but are available on desktop. This is also the same message that's displayed if you visit in Chrome or any other non-Firefox browser, so even if the app is desktop-ready we don't want the user being told that it's optimized for mobile.
Created attachment 826108 [details] feature-supported.png (In reply to Matt Basta [:basta] from comment #5) > That's not strictly true. It's possible for the app to require features that > aren't available on a phone but are available on desktop. So here we are talking about features and not products or devices. :) What about doing something a bit like this screenshot. Where it is explained what it needs to be working.
This is something for UX to take care of, but ultimately telling the user "You need a browser that supports navigator.mozApps.install, navigator.getUserMedia, and WebActivities" is really unfriendly and not at all useful for 99.9% of users. We'd be better off giving a call to action, but the only call to action we can give is "Go download Firefox", which is a crappy thing to say. Kevin has working on a banner that did just that, which is separate from this bug.
We'll take a look at it, probably as part of finishing up the bucketing project.
we are using the [contribute] flag now
I tend to agree with basta here. What if we say: “Unfortunately, this app uses features that are only available for the Beta/Aurora/Nightly version of Firefox. You can do two things: 1. Download Firefox version x. Your browser may be less stable, but you’ll get to run this app. 2. Tell the app’s developer to make their app compatible with the current version of Firefox. 3. Stay on the stable version of Firefox and wait until the change from Beta makes it to this versions (it takes 6 weeks), but you won’t get to run this app.” Can we think of a better alternative message?
Please... rather than "This app is unavailable for your platform.", just tell us what it *is* compatible with. People might not understand "navigator.getUserMedia", but they do understand versions and platforms. Here are some suggestions: "This application requires Firefox 28 or newer." "This application requires features only available in the mobile version of Firefox." "This application is specifically targeted towards mobile device." tl;dr tell people what they can do rather than this "I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave"-esque thing I had to Google that landed me here. Thanks.
In the spirit of comment 12, using the data that we have currently available to us, the "unavailable" message should be replaced with: "Try this app on Firefox OS" for Firefox OS only apps "Try this app on Android" for android only apps "Try this app on Windows/OS X/Linux" for desktop only apps
Is this bug exist ? can i fix it ?
The app store is https://marketplace.firefox.com/. Google turned that up with a poorly worded search for "firefoxos app store", first hit. Try it. You don't need more information. You have everything you need, right here. "Needs info" on something easily testable (more easily testable than it would be for people to delete your message) is obstructionism. Here's one example: https://marketplace.firefox.com/app/jongla-im?src=branded-editorial-element I'm out. Ya'll have fun.
There are lots of suggestion. But which will I take ?
Go for it. Take the route that makes the most sense for you.
Atique, there hasn't been any activity on this bug for a while. Are you still working on it?
Sorry for the inactivity, i had have looked at this earlier, will working on it from tomorrow :) Thanks for the ping :)
Great, thank for letting us know!
Hi, Apology for working late on this. Well, I have created a solution & give a pr in fireplace; Here- https://github.com/mozilla/fireplace/pull/1491 Just need to write some tests. Here is the logic I followed: 1) If the app is only available for desktop, then it will say- "try this app on Firefox Browser" 2) If the app is only available for android mobile or android tablet, then it will say- "try this app on Firefox Android" 3) If the app is only available for Firefox OS, then it will say- "try this app on Firefox OS" 4) If the app is available for Desktop & Android, then it will say- "try this app on Firefox Browser / Firefox Android" 5) If the app is available for Desktop & Firefox OS, then it say- "try this app on Firefox Browser / Firefox OS" 6) If the app is available for Firefox OS & Android, then it will say- "try this app on Firefox OS / Firefox Android" 7) If the app is available for Desktop, Android & Firefox OS, then it will say- "try this app on Firefox Browser" If you have any suggestion regarding the strings, please feel to say :) I will be writing the tests soon.
**feel free to say :)
This is a morass. This bug started out as "confusing messaging" and effectively turned into "let's identify the... platform... on which the app *would* work." We have no UX resources, and adding (even very specific, accurate) messaging about platform compatibility increases code bloat for no gain. Tony's point (#c13) is great, but only identifies singleton scenarios. Christian's point (#c4) is also good, but illustrates why this is an unsolvable problem. The platform is *supposed* to be The Web. However, that was split into FxOS and Android and The Web. Add websites and it gets even worse. Add TV and it gets even worse. Add feature compatibility (and detection, which we do) and the fact is that there are any number of reasons something won't work on the given platform: could be the platform, could be some API, could be some hardware feature, etc. Getting into a scenario where we try and identify that exactly is great if we still need to support all of these things. But seeing as we're decreasing emphasis on Desktop and Android (because goodbye Runtime), and we're looking at adding Websites, and FxOS add-ons (and homescreens, and other FxOS -specific stuff), the reality is that Marketplace -- as it is -- is focused on FxOS. In light of that and the pile of other things we have to work on, I would say that the poor wording we currently have is sufficient -- though admittedly not optimal -- and we WONTFIX this bug.