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

381–390 of 561 posts

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#381

Post by GTP »

pjmlp wrote: post #286
michaelmrose wrote: post #249

It was unfortunately obvious that the writer had insufficient tech chops when use the phrase "a post-API programming model" But pressing on how somehow manages to blame the lack of updates to android phones on the modularity of the Linux kernel. The joke of course being that linux is monolithic and googles new OS is a microkernel ergo more modular. The quote is "...however. I also have to imagine the Android update p…

> The only way they can get more of your money is to sell you a new phone which they hope to do between 1-2 years from now. The thing is, this only works on countries similar to US where most people are on contracts. In the rest of the world, where people are on pre-paid, we use our phones until they either die or get stolen, which is way more than just 1-2 years.

Not really. There's a considerable amout of people that regulary change their phone every 1 or 2 years because they like to have the last model even if they don't really need it.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#382

Post by zerebubuth »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #303
pjmlp wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only way they can get more of your money is to sell you a new phone which they hope to do between 1-2 years from now. The thing is, this only works on countries similar to US where most people are on contracts. In the rest of the world, where people are on pre-paid, we use our phones until they either die or get stolen, which is way more than just 1-2 years.

Bump it to 3-4 years then. Bloated manufacturer updates combine with bloat in most popular applications and the regular web bloat to make the phone unusably slow after few years. Between that and fragility of smartphones (mechanical damage, water damage), most people are bound to replace theirs every few years anyway.

Given the shift toward streaming services and away from relying on phone-local storage, do you think it's possible that phones could move from an ownership model to a rental model?

If so, then there might be greater pressure from phone rental agencies on the manufacturers to stabilise and fix bugs so that they can extract maximum value from the hardware.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#383

Post by afsina »

netheril96 wrote: post #277
throwawaydbfif wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

If Dart ever became the real thing, it must be supported in not just Google Chrome, but also Firefox, Edge, Safari, etc. At that point Google will lose its control.

Google has decided not to put Dart VM in Chrome long ago. Of course Dart tools has very strong web development support and JS conversion.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#384

Post by pjmlp »

GTP wrote: post #381
pjmlp wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only way they can get more of your money is to sell you a new phone which they hope to do between 1-2 years from now. The thing is, this only works on countries similar to US where most people are on contracts. In the rest of the world, where people are on pre-paid, we use our phones until they either die or get stolen, which is way more than just 1-2 years.

Not really. There's a considerable amout of people that regulary change their phone every 1 or 2 years because they like to have the last model even if they don't really need it.

Is there any research on how many do that across Europe, including new devices versus 2nd hand ones?

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#385

Post by pjmlp »

flukus wrote: post #357
pjmlp wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bump it to 3-4 years then. Bloated manufacturer updates combine with bloat in most popular applications and the regular web bloat to make the phone unusably slow after few years. My S3 is 4 years old now, and it is works perfectly fine. When it dies, I will most likely adopt one of my Lumia devices as main one, or will buy a 2nd hand Android device, instead of giving money to support bad OEMs

> My S3 is 4 years old now, and it is works perfectly fine. Is it still getting security patches? If not then it's not running perfectly fine.

No and I don't care, because even Google doesn't care about us.

2 years update + 1 security for mobiles that cost more than a computer is not something I am willing to pay a premium for.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#387

Post by pjmlp »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #373
pjmlp wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bump it to 3-4 years then. Bloated manufacturer updates combine with bloat in most popular applications and the regular web bloat to make the phone unusably slow after few years. My S3 is 4 years old now, and it is works perfectly fine. When it dies, I will most likely adopt one of my Lumia devices as main one, or will buy a 2nd hand Android device, instead of giving money to support bad OEMs

My SO's S3 is of more-less the same age and it's so slow that it's barely usable now. Still can't track down why - she is not a power user, she wasn't installing apps beyond the few things I installed her and the OS updates. My old S4, currently used by my brother, suffered the same fate, being slow even after a factory reset. I wonder where this comes from?

I had some performance issues, but they got sorted out when swapped the battery for a new one.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#388

Post by endorphone »

Conjecture is fun, but the linked piece takes some enormous liberties with crossing massive chasms effortlessly. Not only is Fushia not Andromeda (a project), the needs of IoT is massively different from the needs of Android. And the net investment in Android is absolutely colossal, and making some new APIs or a microkernel does not a replacement make.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#389

Post by pjmlp »

iwintermute wrote: post #221
bitmapbrother wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of additional code required to support Android apps on the Chrome browser would be far too great. No one wants to download a 500MB+ browser.

My Realtek sound drivers for PC were around 450 MB (!!!). Nvidia drivers are around 350 MB and update quite frequently. That's insane. And Chrome has great update mechanism.

Yeah, but you were also downloading the whole "Experience Apps" on top of the drivers.

Re: Google’s not-so-secret new OS

#390

Post by pjmlp »

linuxkerneldev wrote: post #219
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…

> The Linux kernel is at the very heart of Android's update problem - not because of "modularity" but because it lacks a stable ABI. What are you referring to when you say the Linux kernel ABI is not stable? I ask because the A in ABI means application, and Linux has maintained a consistent ABI for decades. I have a suspicion that you're trying to suggest that in-kernel interfaces be kept rigid and unchanging to sati…

The Linux on a standard distribution and Linux on an Android device aren't the same thing.

The one on the Android device is a fork with quite a few APIs trimmed off, like for example UNIX V IPC.

Post reply on HN