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

Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

blog.quarkslab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 285 posts

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#161

Post by m463 »

apozem wrote: post #69
cletus wrote: post #31

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,…

Bloomberg, 2018: > One person who has spoken to Fuchsia staff described the effort simply: "It’s a senior-engineer retention project." https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-19/google-te... Fuchsia’s greatest value is letting senior devs solve fun puzzles without the burden of shipping anything customers want.

Sounds like unix during the period when bell labs was prohibited from entering the computer market by the consent decree.

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#162

Post by themacguffinman »

moron4hire wrote: post #130
RivieraKid wrote: post #57

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…

You just described UWP apps on Windows 10. Developers flat out rejected it because of the smartphone-like sandboxing.

I don't think that's very true. Smartphone-like sandboxing is widely praised for its security and stability benefits, UWP failed due to a lot of other factors (eg. Windows 10 Store, lack of Windows 7 support, etc.)

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#163

Post by gvjddbnvdrbv »

mav3rick wrote: post #90
ForHackernews wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really doubt Google has any interest in building a "great open-source desktop OS". Everything they've done with Android suggests they'll throw releases over the wall, but keep any interesting or useful bits proprietary & closely tied to Google cloud services.

All of Chrome OS is open.

Android was a lot more open at first.

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#164

Post by sly010 »

RivieraKid wrote: post #57

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…

> There is a clearly defined platform / SDK, like in Android or iOS. If it works in your development environment, it's guaranteed to work everywhere.

Are iOS/Android SDKs good examples of stable platforms? They are just as much a moving target as anything else and the only thing certain about them is that they _will_ require maintenance.

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#165

Post by ocdtrekkie »

logicprog wrote: post #42
mrep wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A monopoly is the sole supplier of a product or service and the fact that bing exists makes search not a monopoly. In the concept of antitrust, the United States Department of Justice does not use that term directly and instead talks about power and the Supreme Court has defined market power as "the ability to raise prices above those that would be charged in a competitive market," and monopoly power as "the power to…

I don't understand why people think monopoly means "big company," especially when size is contingent on continuing to serve customers better than competitors.

This is fundamentally untrue. Monopoly has nothing to do with product or service quality. This is proven by Google, which both has bad products and terrible service. Monopoly is built by using network effects and illegal business arrangements to gut competitors such that a better product cannot win in the market.

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#166

Post by zerkten »

sly010 wrote: post #164
RivieraKid wrote: post #57

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…

> There is a clearly defined platform / SDK, like in Android or iOS. If it works in your development environment, it's guaranteed to work everywhere. Are iOS/Android SDKs good examples of stable platforms? They are just as much a moving target as anything else and the only thing certain about them is that they _will_ require maintenance.

I think the poster means consistent, rather than stable, or backwards compatible.

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#167

Post by rakoo »

cletus wrote: post #31

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,…

What was the market for Linux when it came out ? The thing was a copy of an existing OS, made by a guy in his spare time.

What was the market for php when it came out ? It was just a few helpers to write web pages, simpler to use than perl that already existed at the time

What was the market for go when it came out ? Yes, it did have a few modern things built-in, but there were already tons of widely deployed languages.

And yet here we are. I don't need to tell you how successful each of those is today. I don't mean to say that Fuchsia will definitely be useful or deployed in any large fashion; just that "there is no market" is not a valid counterpoint to the development of a new project.

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#168

Post by notyourday »

RivieraKid wrote: post #57

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…

Has Google ever created any non-web product that it supported for more than a token amount of time, that it continued to re-iterate on for years that was not linked to Google properties?

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#169

Post by WanderPanda »

RivieraKid wrote: post #97
krn wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe Linux (Beta) for ChromeOS[1] should eliminate most of these limitations. There is also Fedora Silverblue[2], which is an immutable desktop OS. [1] https://support.google.com/chromebook/answer/9145439?hl=en [2] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-silverblue/

But that would basically make it an awkward Linux distribution that doesn't have much benefits over the existing ones. It seems like an afterthought, a second class citizen. Where's the documentation for Chrome OS SDK (for native apps)?

What about battery life? This seems to be a big disadvantage for most Linux distros

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#170

Post by close04 »

CountSessine wrote: post #148
close04 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe they will move all their devices to their own superior OS Tizen. Or maybe they tried and it did not turn out very well. Google (via the Open Handset Alliance) managed to enforce the current status quo. Manufacturers can't simultaneously ship their own OS like forked versions of Android, or presumably Tizen, and still be allowed to use Google Play Services. It's all-Google or nothing. I don't know whether Tize…

Samsung has 20% of the market and a lot more of the high end market. Going with "not Google" means a lot of users no longer using Google Play Store and services. It most certainly would "affect" Google. It’s a game of chicken and one Samsung can’t win, but Google probably doesn’t want to inflict on them. Look at how well Huawei is doing outside China without google services (they’re dead in the water). Samsung doesn’…

> It’s a game of chicken and one Samsung can’t win

Indeed, they most likely can't (easily) make Tizen a commercial success to rival Android, and even using an Android fork would still be far from ideal without Google's Play Services.

But Google probably can't legally sustain this position for long and hold OEMs hostage, especially with all the antitrust scrutiny they are facing now. Conditioning access to the Play Services on using exclusively Google on every device sounds like something that could be considered anti-competitive.

Post reply on HN