261–270 of 285 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's as simple as "Turn On Linux" in your Settings menu
Let me guess, the user cannot "Turn on Linux" in developer mode, the user must "sign in" with Google.
Ah, Fuchsia... another of Google's solutions looking for a problem. I remember hearing about it and immediately asking "what is the market for this?" and not being satisfied with the answer. On the one side you have Samsung, who are unhappy enough with their dependence on Google that they'll not likely eat the cost of moving from Android to something else that has no strategic benefit to them (as far as I could tell,…
> Sundar came from Chrome. Fuchsia didn't. Fuchsia appears to be really close to Chrome/Chrome OS - they even share the build system and many components.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. I remember choosing Linux in '93 because it had a huge momentum behind it (the hacker literally asked me "Linux or BSD" before handing me 4 floppies). I didn't really understand the technical or legal differences at the time, but it was clear that BSD wasn't as "hot". In retrospect I really liked BSD for a lot of the ways it did things (more stable, excellent long-term backwards compatibility).
If I recall correctly, at the time, BSD was stuck in a lawsuit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_Laboratories,_Inc.... . I'm wondering if it had a detrimental effect on adoption of *BSD, and thus increased Linux popularity at this early and critical time.
Linus has said as much[1]: "If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm really enjoying ChromeOS for software dev. The Linux container is tightly integrated with the rest of the OS. On top of that I can run all my favorite Android apps as well, making it an excellent OS for personal use. One interesting example is that if I have a file I want to open, it doesn't matter if it's Chrome, Android, or Linux that has the executable to open it. I just click the file and it opens in the righ…
Ok, but the Linux container is completely at odds with Google's ChromeOS pitch. Google says that ChromeOS has "simple setup" - but not the Linux parts. They say you can "search anything on your Chromebook" - but not Linux. They talk about "Chrome sync" - doesn't apply to Linux. Etc. I think that ChromeOS has value as a web-browser host, and also as a development machine for vim-jockeys. What's missing is the middle p…
You can search linux files and apps as usual.
As for sync, feel free to look at open bugs and features and see the work being done.
I'm more excited about the possibility of a high quality desktop OS rather than the kernel. The Linux kernel is great but a great open-source desktop OS doesn't exist today. Specifically, this product doesn't exist today: - Desktop environment that matches or surpasses Mac OS in quality, performance and UX design. - It includes seamless synchronization between devices. - Apps are sandboxed, similarly to Android or iO…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let me guess, the user cannot "Turn on Linux" in developer mode, the user must "sign in" with Google.
? You don't know what dev mode is. Yes you can of course turn it on in dev mode lol. I liked how you've been rebutted on every post in this thread.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you mean Chrome OS? Google is a web company; they want people to use the web. They made a laptop/desktop operating system built around their web browser, because they want everything to be on the web. It does most of the things you list, including synchronizing between devices since your data is all "in the Cloud". As for market share, I'm not sure what power you think Google has, but getting 10% of the desktop OS…
No. I mean a full-fledged alternative to the major operating systems. Do people in charge of Chrome OS say "In 5 years, we want developers, designers and project managers at Google use this OS"? I don't think so - it's not their ambition to compete with Mac OS or Linux.
I'm both very excited someone is taking a shot at trying something new on kernel side. But i can't help wonder about what would a future look like where 90% of hardware run on a Google-owned operating system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder what the ratio of C:C++ is. Sounds like they're using C as a restricted C++ anyway, which is interesting.
I know what it means to use C++ as a nicer C, but what does it mean to use C as a restricted C++?