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

251–260 of 285 posts

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#251

Post by sudosysgen »

csomar wrote: post #126
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…

A good functioning Desktop experience for Linux is impossible. - It requires a massive centralized investment. Microsoft/Apple/Google can do that. But Linux is run by amateurs (not talking about skills but rather guys who are not on a payroll). - Linux is for people who have rather weird setups. Apple uses limited hardware (ie: You have few Macbook Pros, etc...). Windows is supported by manufactures because it is the…

And yet a good functioning desktop experience for Linux is possible. I haven't looked back once I switched to KDE on my work computer.

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#253

Post by Abishek_Muthian »

sudosysgen wrote: post #250
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…

KDE does most of what you're talking about. Qt is a stable, established SDK, KDE Connect offers seamless integration, Plasma has a very good UX, and so on. Only thing missing is market share and a flagship distro.

More over, plasma is for smartphone is getting better. So using same environment on desktop and on mobile with private sync can soon be a reality.

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#254

Post by sudosysgen »

logicprog wrote: post #200
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Network effects aren't part of the quality of the product? Seems to me like they are. Interestingly as well, the most network-effect-ridden sectors of the internet, namely social media platforms, also seem to be the most diverse. There are a heck of a lot of social media platforms out there! Furthermore, what about Google Search allows it to take advantage of a network effect? It's a product designed to be used by a…

If you include network effects as part of the quality of a product you torpedo any argument that would posit that the free market is optimal for all parties in products where the network effect is similar, because that means that you will always end up with a monopoly in all but name and that you will refuse to call it a monopoly, which leads to bad outcomes for the vast majority of actors.

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#255

Post by Abishek_Muthian »

jpab wrote: post #74
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…

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…

ChromeOS does solve many of criteria listed by the GP, if one doesn't mind Google ecosystem; then a Chromebook is a good computing device at lower-medium price range[1].

Btw, people are already doing some interesting projects with Fuchsia like this desktop shell written in Flutter for a Fuchsia fork[2].

[1]https://abishekmuthian.com/reviewing-the-chromebook-google-s...

[2]https://github.com/dahlia-os/pangolin-desktop

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#256

Post by ripley12 »

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.

It wasn't _just_ the sandboxing. It took an unreasonably long time for MS to loosen restrictions on "sideloading" (read: distributing sandboxed apps outside of the Microsoft Store), and the deployment story for line-of-business applications was abysmal for years.

I'm not saying the AppContainer sandbox is perfect, but I suspect it would have gone over a lot better if the early distribution story for UWP had been less of a disaster.

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#257

Post by m463 »

noobermin wrote: post #235
m463 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

You're going to compare that to Fuchsia, an OS that will compete in an already occupied space?

No i'm comparing it to "os engineers hooked up to a pipeline of infinite money" :)

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#258

Post by pjmlp »

sterlind wrote: post #109
dlojudice wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the idea behind could be the same for Mindori project inside Microsoft years ago: "Midori was a research/incubation project to explore ways of innovating throughout Microsoft’s software stack. This spanned all aspects, including the programming language, compilers, OS, its services, applications, and the overall programming models. We had a heavy bias towards cloud, concurrency, and safety. The project incl…

It never shipped. A lot of beautiful code and proven concepts, and it just got tossed in the dustbin. Hopefully Fuchsia doesn't succumb to the same second-system effect.

The OS itself no.

However async/await, span, ref returns, ref structs, safe stackalloc, .NET Native, TPL have their genesis on Midori

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#259

Post by pjmlp »

ripley12 wrote: post #256
moron4hire wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It wasn't _just_ the sandboxing. It took an unreasonably long time for MS to loosen restrictions on "sideloading" (read: distributing sandboxed apps outside of the Microsoft Store), and the deployment story for line-of-business applications was abysmal for years. I'm not saying the AppContainer sandbox is perfect, but I suspect it would have gone over a lot better if the early distribution story for UWP had been less…

It has been available since 2018.

Re: Playing around with the Fuchsia operating system

#260

Post by pjmlp »

philistine wrote: post #206
LudwigNagasena wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it has little to nothing to do with sandboxing.

If you believe in such a thing as a Windows way, then UWP was absolutely not the Windows way of doing things. Windows developers, used to the Windows way, had only one reasonable answer.

So they thought, hence why Project Reunion is making clear what was already slowly happening since 2018, exposing UWP model in Win32, including sandboxing.

In a couple of years every Win32 app will think it still owns the OS, while they are actually playing on their little virtualized OS, using the same pico process model as WSL.

Post reply on HN