4 ms·

It will go down the Windows model of having a stable kernel ABI (I assume). And suffer/enjoy the same trade-offs as Microsoft. That model is not perfect, but

It will go down the Windows model of having a stable kernel ABI (I assume). And suffer/enjoy the same trade-offs as Microsoft. That model is not perfect, but it worked for MS -- and Google is in a similar enough position.

greenhouse_gas 10y ago
Just because there's a stable API doesn't mean the manufacturers will actually upgrade. Unless there's some legal requirement, it's going to be the same fragmentation
- amaranth 10y ago
  If they have a stable driver ABI Google can be responsible for the upgrading. They just have to require the OEMs allow them to do so.
pjmlp 10y ago
Not only Windows, the majority of operating systems are like that, even the old time commercial UNIXEs, only GNU/Linux forces an unstable driver ABI on developers.
- the_why_of_y 10y ago
  Linux and *BSD. FreeBSD will break ABI every major version, roughly every 2 years. https://wiki.freebsd.org/VendorInformation https://wiki.freebsd.org/VendorInformation OpenBSD even goes so far as to break the user-space libc ABI in minor releases: http://www.openbsd.org/papers/eurobsdcon_2013_time_t/ http://www.openbsd.org/papers/eurobsdcon_2013_time_t/
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    Ah ok, I though the *BSDs followed the UNIX old school of stable ABIs. Besides toying around with FreeBSD in the late 90's, I never used it properly.
- Arizhel 10y ago
  Except that the "stable ABI" thing doesn't work in practice. Look at all the people who have to throw away perfectly good hardware every time a new Windows version comes out, because the hardware maker doesn't care about updating their drivers and just tells customers to buy a new version.
  - nickpsecurity 10y ago
    It works if it's architecturally designed to work. Mainframes and AS/400 does that. On System/38 (AS/400 predecessor), apps compiled down to a microcode against standardized interfaces. These got converted by special compilers to actual hardware. That's why apps written decades ago still run. You also got modern stuff as updates came in. https://homes.cs.washington.edu/~levy/capabook/Chapter8.pdf https://homes.cs.washington.edu/~levy/capabook/Chapter8.pdf OpenVMS gave customers binary translation tools plus let clusters run with multiple, CPU architectures. That migration wasn't as painless but at least happened. Microsoft eventually applied this strategy at application level combined with OpenVMS's cross-language programming in the form of .NET CLR. It can work at much lower level as IBM showed in the 70's or 80's, though.

greenhouse_gas 10y ago

Just because there's a stable API doesn't mean the manufacturers will actually upgrade. Unless there's some legal requirement, it's going to be the same fragmentation

amaranth 10y ago
If they have a stable driver ABI Google can be responsible for the upgrading. They just have to require the OEMs allow them to do so.

pjmlp 10y ago

Not only Windows, the majority of operating systems are like that, even the old time commercial UNIXEs, only GNU/Linux forces an unstable driver ABI on developers.

the_why_of_y 10y ago
Linux and *BSD. FreeBSD will break ABI every major version, roughly every 2 years. https://wiki.freebsd.org/VendorInformation https://wiki.freebsd.org/VendorInformation OpenBSD even goes so far as to break the user-space libc ABI in minor releases: http://www.openbsd.org/papers/eurobsdcon_2013_time_t/ http://www.openbsd.org/papers/eurobsdcon_2013_time_t/
- pjmlp 10y ago
  Ah ok, I though the *BSDs followed the UNIX old school of stable ABIs. Besides toying around with FreeBSD in the late 90's, I never used it properly.
Arizhel 10y ago
Except that the "stable ABI" thing doesn't work in practice. Look at all the people who have to throw away perfectly good hardware every time a new Windows version comes out, because the hardware maker doesn't care about updating their drivers and just tells customers to buy a new version.
- nickpsecurity 10y ago
  It works if it's architecturally designed to work. Mainframes and AS/400 does that. On System/38 (AS/400 predecessor), apps compiled down to a microcode against standardized interfaces. These got converted by special compilers to actual hardware. That's why apps written decades ago still run. You also got modern stuff as updates came in. https://homes.cs.washington.edu/~levy/capabook/Chapter8.pdf https://homes.cs.washington.edu/~levy/capabook/Chapter8.pdf OpenVMS gave customers binary translation tools plus let clusters run with multiple, CPU architectures. That migration wasn't as painless but at least happened. Microsoft eventually applied this strategy at application level combined with OpenVMS's cross-language programming in the form of .NET CLR. It can work at much lower level as IBM showed in the 70's or 80's, though.