4 ms·

> If they require kernel X, and a manufacturer doesn't support it, they'll either get their shit together, or they'll get left behind. This leaves Google with

by _pmf_ 9y ago

> If they require kernel X, and a manufacturer doesn't support it, they'll either get their shit together, or they'll get left behind. This leaves Google with a version of Android that does not run on anything. There are less than a handful of relevant SoM manufacturers that are capable of delivering consumer grade SoMs capable of running hardware accelerated Android; Google can not alienate these.

pjmlp 9y ago
For sure Google can do it, what would they do, sell handsets with their own OS, based on a fork from GNU/Linux? It has worked quite well for those that tried.
- majewsky 9y ago
  What would they do? Sell handsets with a years-old Android, of course. Experience shows that the average customer doesn't give a shit about Android versions.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    Which in such scenario wouldn't be able to talk to Google Play Service servers any longer, if Google was actually serious about doing it.
yahna 9y ago
It also leaves those manufacturers without anything to put on their hardware. I would think they would start to take things more seriously at that point.
- _pmf_ 9y ago
  I'm insure about who has the upper hand, but I feel like SoM manufacturers know what they are doing and are where they are based on merit whereas Android is there because it was available when it mattered and gained momentum, not because of any technical merit. Android as a developer ecosystem is a train wreck. I have better tooling for deeply embedded bare metal platforms than I have for Android userspace applications.
kelnos 9y ago
Apple seems to have no problem keeping drivers/blobs for their hardware working when they release new versions of iOS. Sure, they do have the advantage of tight control over their hardware and core software, and a vastly smaller number of pieces of hardware to target, but in that way they're not that much different than any random Android vendor, hardware-wise. Sony (for example) is perfectly capable of only choosing vendors that can keep up with kernel versions, or at least vendors that will be open enough with them (not even with the public, just Sony) so that Sony can hire a software team to keep things up to date. But they don't care enough about this sort of thing (unlike Apple), and no one (such as Google) is forcing them, so it won't get done unless they see an economic upside.

by _pmf_ 9y ago

pjmlp 9y ago

For sure Google can do it, what would they do, sell handsets with their own OS, based on a fork from GNU/Linux? It has worked quite well for those that tried.

majewsky 9y ago
What would they do? Sell handsets with a years-old Android, of course. Experience shows that the average customer doesn't give a shit about Android versions.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  Which in such scenario wouldn't be able to talk to Google Play Service servers any longer, if Google was actually serious about doing it.

yahna 9y ago

It also leaves those manufacturers without anything to put on their hardware. I would think they would start to take things more seriously at that point.

_pmf_ 9y ago
I'm insure about who has the upper hand, but I feel like SoM manufacturers know what they are doing and are where they are based on merit whereas Android is there because it was available when it mattered and gained momentum, not because of any technical merit. Android as a developer ecosystem is a train wreck. I have better tooling for deeply embedded bare metal platforms than I have for Android userspace applications.

kelnos 9y ago

Apple seems to have no problem keeping drivers/blobs for their hardware working when they release new versions of iOS. Sure, they do have the advantage of tight control over their hardware and core software, and a vastly smaller number of pieces of hardware to target, but in that way they're not that much different than any random Android vendor, hardware-wise. Sony (for example) is perfectly capable of only choosing vendors that can keep up with kernel versions, or at least vendors that will be open enough with them (not even with the public, just Sony) so that Sony can hire a software team to keep things up to date. But they don't care enough about this sort of thing (unlike Apple), and no one (such as Google) is forcing them, so it won't get done unless they see an economic upside.