Android overtakes Windows as the internet’s most used operating system

Post by E6300 » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 4:39 PM UTC

digi_owl wrote: post #29

sowbug wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Developers seem to be willing to support two competitive platforms, but when there are three or more, they throw up their hands and support just the top one, or maybe the top two. Source: my own intuition.

It depends on there being strong cross-platform development tools or not. Back in the early days of the micro-computer, many games used a virtual machine of sorts. The game logic was implemented in VM bytecode and then the VM engine was the only thing that needed porting between systems. This was to a greater or lesser degree aided by the limited hardware of the time, and that said computers were single task more oft…

Post by s73ver » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 4:41 PM UTC

digi_owl wrote: post #10

JBReefer wrote: post #2

On one hand, this is a truly incredible accomplishment for Google, and in so little time! On the other, it's sort of amazing this hadn't happened already - so, so many people in the developing world are entirely reliant on mobile, and mostly use low-end Android phones. I use a Moto G4 and the experience is shockingly good for a device that costs less than a bar tab. It's no wonder that low-end Android's are winning,…

AOSP may be open, but on its own it is a skeleton of a OS. Most of the magic in Android today is housed in Play Services, one of two things Google can push an update for (the other being the Play store app) without any dialog or concent from the device user.

Post by s73ver » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 4:42 PM UTC

iainmerrick wrote: post #38

rtkwe wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's kind of a demon of necessity though. Originally they did things more in the base OS but getting manufacturers to actually push updates was horrible. Now they can do bug, (minor) security and feature updates through a side channel that bypasses the carriers who don't want to update their older phones when people might go buy new ones instead.

There's no technical necessity for it to be closed source, though. That's a business decision.

Post by pjmlp » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 4:43 PM UTC

E6300 wrote: post #61

digi_owl wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on there being strong cross-platform development tools or not. Back in the early days of the micro-computer, many games used a virtual machine of sorts. The game logic was implemented in VM bytecode and then the VM engine was the only thing that needed porting between systems. This was to a greater or lesser degree aided by the limited hardware of the time, and that said computers were single task more oft…

This intrigues me, as it clashes with everything I know about how classic game software was designed. Around what decade are we talking about? Can you name one or two examples of games that were designed like this?

Post by pjmlp » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 4:47 PM UTC

_wmd wrote: post #48

JoshTriplett wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference being that you can install or upgrade Windows on a system without buying a new laptop or requiring support from the vendor; the vendor doesn't lock down laptops to prevent upgrades and force people to buy a new device instead.

Is that our problem or Google's? You can point fingers at 50 different companies in the ecosystem, or you can collectively point the finger at the root cause. By the topic of this article, they're no longer the underdog when it comes to dictating terms to device vendors, they're the biggest shop in town and there's no reason the vulns-frozen-for-life-of-device model should continue to be adhered to.