31–40 of 109 posts
Aside from control, what does this provide over Linux? IMO, the Linux desktop problem is due partially to relying on the antiquated X Windows system, but mostly a lack of funding a good vision, e.g. Unity. After growing up with OpenLook, then Motif, the plethora of Linux window managers, and unhappy years with Windows, I noticed most of the elegant apps were being written for OSX. I’m not sure how much of this is due…
I wish Google was more outspoken about their plans for Fuchsia. So far, all we have is a lot of speculation.
It’s entirely open source (including development and roadmap documents). Do you mean their product vision? If so, why does it matter when it already exists?
Aside from control, what does this provide over Linux? IMO, the Linux desktop problem is due partially to relying on the antiquated X Windows system, but mostly a lack of funding a good vision, e.g. Unity. After growing up with OpenLook, then Motif, the plethora of Linux window managers, and unhappy years with Windows, I noticed most of the elegant apps were being written for OSX. I’m not sure how much of this is due…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. That is part of the idea. So the vulnerability is isolated and does not automatically compromise the entire system.
Who cares? In consumer devices, userspace is the entire system.
For example, I have an app that has a vulnerability (let's say my alarm app accidentally runs unauthorized code). What can it do? Nothing. It can't read from my banking app, it can't get my SSH keys, it may not even be able to read from my SD card.
But what happens when my Linux kernel is also compromised? Any app can get root.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One feature that differentiates Linux from other systems is the sheer amount of choice that you get. For example, with Linux I can choose GNOME, KDE, a selection of other desktop environments, or I can choose a simple window manager like twm and sort of roll my own environment. Or maybe I could set my system up so that it runs without a window manager and just gives me a full-screen emacs environment. With Mac OS, fo…
This wide choice is actually putting Linux at disadvantage: instead of consolidating efforts to create one decent desktop environment we have half a dozen of half-assed ones. God, I've just recently have to downgrade to Gnome 3.24, because the latest 3.26 version kept crashing with the segfault error few times a day.
Closely related to desktop environments are the two major UI toolkits. Why does Kate have a different file picker than Gimp? Why does LibreOffice give me yet another file picker? On MacOS and Windows, the file picker is a solved problem.
Init systems, until fairly recently when most distributions consolidated around systemd, were in a similar state.
The current Wayland vs X situation is another example - some distributions prefer Wayland and its quirks, whereas others use X and its quirks. In this case, it seems pretty clear that Wayland is the winner and we're just waiting for everything else to catch up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they don't know themselves what will become of it. It's more a research project similarly to Midori.
Yes, and there are tons of research OSs. Most of them suffer from a lack of Hardware support. I'd be ready to switch to OpenBSD/Solaris/QNX/other fancy OS tomorrow if all my HW components were supported. I doubt anything non-Linux based is ever becoming popular within the next 100 years. ;)
Getting a new OS to run on a new cellphone, or laptop is a surmountable task.
Aside from control, what does this provide over Linux? IMO, the Linux desktop problem is due partially to relying on the antiquated X Windows system, but mostly a lack of funding a good vision, e.g. Unity. After growing up with OpenLook, then Motif, the plethora of Linux window managers, and unhappy years with Windows, I noticed most of the elegant apps were being written for OSX. I’m not sure how much of this is due…
More software (eventually) for end users? And maybe since it's a RTOS, perhaps this is also to be used by Waymo?
OK so why not Google Chrome web browser on top of Fuchsia, instead of Linux kernel and the usual user space stuff? Google can call that retrofit anything they want, so it could still be Chrome OS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s entirely open source (including development and roadmap documents). Do you mean their product vision? If so, why does it matter when it already exists?
It matters hugely. If Fuchsia is a research project, then I'd keep an eye on it for engineering inspiration. But if Google's leaders plan to promote it as a serious replacement for Chrome and Android, then businesses might want to invest in Fuchsia app development.
For Chrome and Android apps, that's just a bunch of user space APIs/ABIs so it doesn't really matter what the kernel is if the abstraction has been really rigorous from the outset (in Chrome and Android).
Aside from control, what does this provide over Linux? IMO, the Linux desktop problem is due partially to relying on the antiquated X Windows system, but mostly a lack of funding a good vision, e.g. Unity. After growing up with OpenLook, then Motif, the plethora of Linux window managers, and unhappy years with Windows, I noticed most of the elegant apps were being written for OSX. I’m not sure how much of this is due…
>The solution I want is a Linux OS, a WM with a good, cohesive, long term vision, and an easy way to build apps within at vision — something like a native Electron minus the memory and CPU overhead. I believe Google could do this. This is literally MacOS/Cocoa/AppKit minus Linux plus BSD