Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google’s not-so-secret new OS

techspecs.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 561 posts

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#191

Post by sangnoir »

paulfurtado wrote: post #168
sangnoir wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I seriously doubt the Linux kernel is anything but a minor contributor to Android's update problem The Linux kernel is at the very heart of Android's update problem - not because of "modularity" but because it lacks a stable ABI. Because of this, Android requires handset makers and SoC manufacturers like Qualcomm to provide updated drivers; these parties are perversely disincentivized to do so as they would rather…

Just like RHEL/CentOS, couldn't Google maintain a stable kernel ABI throughout a given android major release such that manufacturers could write a driver once, and have it continue working for the lifetime of that major android release?

I'm sure they could. Although it seems they would much rather move away from the Linux kernel altogether. Who knows what sort of ABI stability timescales they are aiming for in the replacement kernel.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#192

Post by piyush_soni »

username223 wrote: post #157
MarkMc wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Write once, mediocre everywhere" was a problem with Sun's implementation, not with the concept of cross platform code. There are tons of webapps which are very successful, despite being written 'once'. In any case, Google doesn't need to be as strict as Sun was. It is free to implement "write 90% of your code once and 10% customised for each platform".

Webapps in the sense of "fancy JavaScript" are no better than Applets. Google has the infrastructure, money, and business model to put most of the code on their servers and write native clients. Modulo privacy issues, they have found a solution.

Oh I bet they are! Like, anything is better than those slow, buggy and annoying Java Applets and I'm so thankful to god they're over. Did anyone ever notice how slow they were not only to 'run', but to initiate and start doing just about anything. I always knew it was a java applet even before it started anything because of its characteristic loading behavior.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#193

Post by Sanddancer »

pier25 wrote: post #9

We definitely need a universal OS for all our devices and I really believe Google is in a great position to get us there. It would really surprise me if Apple got there first. Tim lacks vision and will keep on milking iOS even if the iPad Pro is a failure as a laptop replacement. Windows is still king in the desktop space, at least as far a user base goes, but it's terrible on tablets and phones. MS has all the tech…

We don't need a universal OS. I'd go as far to say that a universal OS is bad. A universal OS leaves no place for experimentation, no place for different UI concepts, no place for people to customize things to the way they want. Would you really want every shirt to look the same? Every refrigerator, every door? Style is important.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#194

Post by pjmlp »

thinkloop wrote: post #110

Why can't the pure web replace apps and programs? All the pieces are almost there: hardware acceleration, service workers, notifications, responsive design... I currently "add to home screen" for most things. I edit my images online, and develop code using cloud9 ide, etc. There are few things I need apps/programs for right now, and that's improving day by day. iPhone is dropping heavily in world wide market share, b…

Because it just sucks, browsers were designed for interactive documents, not applications.

No HTML5 UI/UX comes close to what is possible to achieve with native APIs in any platform.

For old dogs like myself, it always seems that younger web dev generations are rediscovering patterns and features we were already doing in native applications during the 90's.

Also solutions like service workers look like some sort of kluge to sort out the problem to do offline applications in browsers.

WebOS, ChromeOS (barely used outside US) and FirefoxOS are all proofs that the experience is substandard.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#195

Post by MichaelMoser123 »

The article says it's a microkernel, I wonder if it will be a more secure general purpose OS, well windows NT started as microkernel but they changed that wit NT 4,let's see if it will be different. I also wonder about driver support and battery consumption. Good luck to Google.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#196

Post by flukus »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #189
flukus wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are tons of webapps which are very successful, despite being written 'once'. Actually they suffer from most of the same problems, only computers have gotten faster (masking performance issues) and our expectations have lowered. How many of these web apps obey the native OS themeing for instance?

> Actually they suffer from most of the same problems, only computers have gotten faster (masking performance issues) If an issue no longer affects anyone in any way, is it still an "issue"? Odds are that all the code you've ever written would have been considered criminally bloated at some era of computing history, but it hardly matters now.

> If an issue no longer affects anyone in any way, is it still an "issue"?

I said it was masked, not gone. It still causes a lot of issues for people on resource constrained machines.

> Odds are that all the code you've ever written would have been considered criminally bloated at some era of computing history, but it hardly matters now.

For much of computing history where were making clear gains with newer hardware. Up to the 90's software was getting more bloated but it was doing more. Most apps today really aren't doing much/any more than we were doing in the 90's but require vastly more powerful machines.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#197

Post by ori_b »

e12e wrote: post #182
goldenchrome wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Phones and desktops are completely different form factors with different constraints. Running an Android app on Windows would be a horrible experience.

I don't know. I think many "tablet" apps would work fine on the Surface 4 (if they got scaling right). I still think touch screens is the future - also on desktops (there either in tablet form or "drafting table" form). I think editors more like acme and less like vim might rise up. Along with new input types like the power bar and surface wheel.

> I think editors more like acme and less like vim might rise up.

Acme, and anything like it, would be completely horrendous on a touch interface. I use it regularly (although I find that I prefer Sam).

Edit: Then again, I have touchscreeens on many of my laptops. I don't find them useful. With the exception of drawing art, I wouldn't miss them if they disappeared.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#199

Post by RyanZAG »

xiaoma wrote: post #86
vii wrote: post #53

It's awesome that Google is doing this and in public too https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/ Unfortunately, the hard part of an operating system isn't in a cool API and a rendering demo. It's in integrating the fickle whims of myriad hardware devices with amazingly high expectations of reliability and performance consistency under diverse workloads. People don't like dropped frames when they plug in USB :) Writing devi…

Given that it's Google, I wonder if it will support the languages favored by bootstrappers and small startups—Obj C, Ruby, JavaScript and more recently Swift and Elixir. I get the distinct impression that they're heavily optimizing large team productivity and aren't a fan of functional or highly expressive languages. It's too bad, given how much nicer their app approval process, etc is than Apple's that the Android d…

Well going off common sense, it seems likely that Obj C and Swift definitely would not be supported on purpose.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#200

Post by innocentoldguy »

throwawaydbfif wrote: post #56
resoluteteeth wrote: post #12

Is this an actual plan of Google as a company, or is this some sort of Microsoft-style war between divisions where the Chrome team has just decided on its own that the future is based on Chrome and Dart? Also, considering the way that the ARC runtime for Chromebooks was a failure and had to be replaced by a system that apparently essentially runs Android in a container, will it really be possible for a completely dif…

I would say that Google is trying to replace JavaScript with dart in any way they possibly can. The reason is simple, JavaScript is an open standard, dart is owned by google. Their reasons that "dart is better" is the typical google koolaid before they attempt a market takeover. As we've seen over and over with Android, chrome, and AMP especially. Google loves to make glass house open source projects you can't touch.…

JavaScript sucks because it has a weak standard library, ugly syntax, and its monopoly in web development has the industry stuck in a state of mediocrity, in my opinion. I have a VERY hard time believing that the apex of engineering intelligence and ingenuity is found in JavaScript. Also, as much as I love Elm, for instance, languages that transpile to JavaScript are just lipstick on a pig, and do little to solve the underlying problem. I'm not a fan of Dart either, but at least Google made an attempt to solve the JavaScript issue in the best way possible with Dart; by aiming to get rid of it.
Post reply on HN