4 ms·

I keep reading about Fuchsia. Maybe, that is Google's answer to the messy Android stack? I mean, why invest in cleaning up your stack or having a better cross-p

I keep reading about Fuchsia. Maybe, that is Google's answer to the messy Android stack? I mean, why invest in cleaning up your stack or having a better cross-platform dev environment, when you can just have a clean new OS?

ocdtrekkie 9y ago
Even I have high hopes for Fuchsia. It seems like it's doing a lot of things right from the ground level, particularly in terms of security. But from a business standpoint, it's a huge risk. If Google wants to get OEMs to switch from an established, widely popular platform to a new one, they're going to need one heck of a big carrot. It's likely Google would retain more control with Fuchsia, since giving OEMs control of experience, security, and updates is largely responsible for many of Android's woes, and OEMs will be resistant to that. Google may have a much easier time retaining it's control under Android than trying to push a platform switch, which could actually, lead to OEMs switching to a different company's platform instead.
- ethbro 9y ago
  To me, re-architecting the Google / OEM split benefits both (disclosure: I haven't followed exactly what they're aiming for with Fuchsia). If it becomes possible to update to new Android features and security patches without breaking OEM overware, then OEMs no longer have to dedicate teams to rewriting their crap codebases. Which means they can put all those developers on features instead. Which is what they've always been interested in and (arguably) better at in the first place.
kibwen 9y ago
I'm also intrigued by Fuchsia, but it doesn't look like it's intended as a smartphone OS. Even if it was, without access to the Android app store it'll be no more successful than Windows Phone or any of the other upstarts (and something like a hypothetical Android emulation layer sounds like murder for battery life).
- simmons 9y ago
  I don't think running an Android layer on Fuchsia would necessarily be a problem for battery life (it's not like you'd need to emulate a different CPU), although loading all the Android frameworks and services could be a RAM hit. And apps with native code excessively tied to Linux might be problematic on the Fuchsia kernel. Some Chromebooks can now run Android apps; I wonder how that works out for the user in practice. (I haven't tried myself.)
- pier25 9y ago
  The moment Google announces it's not going to update Android anymore everyone will start developing for Fuchsia with Dart, Go, or whatever. Also, considering Chrome OS has an Android layer in there why wouldn't fuchsia be able to do the same thing? It should be more than enough as a temporary solution.
SkyMarshal 9y ago
Is Fuchsia backwards compatible with Android apps?
- lern_too_spel 9y ago
  It supports Flutter, which is one of the potential Android disruptors Yegge mentions. They're both open source, so I wouldn't be surprised if someone built an Android server for Fuchsia though.
oflannabhra 9y ago
I tried to predict how Fuchsia + Flutter play into Google's overarching strategic vision in another comment here on HN, and got voted down into oblivion. My best guess is: 1) Pixels move to Fuchsia, native apps are in Dart/Flutter, compatibility layer for Android. Fuchsia becomes a distinguishing feature of Googles hardware, and allows Google to differentiate vs Android competitors. 2) Google continues to support Android, but only as it affects their business interests (as a funnel for search). 3) Google migrates some service level functionality away from Android and Pixels become a first-class citizen in Google's ecosystem. In my mind, Fuchsia is a direct result of Google's newfound interest in hardware (as a business). I imagine the following: - Google sees voice (and maybe AR) as the next frontier, which is actually an existential threat for them--they are harder to monetize via ads. - Google decides to start making hardware (for profit), to monetize their services (a la Apple). That is, their Voice Assistant is now differentiated from Android, and to use that service, you have to buy their hardware. Now, they don't need to make money on ads for voice searches. - Google will continue to roll out more ML-driven services that are exclusive to their hardware, and eventually, exclusive to Fuchsia. This will allow them to both a) further differentiate their hardware from other Android manufacturers, b) better monetize their services (effectively through HW purchases), and c) steal market share of the most valuable customers from Apple.
- Jasper_ 9y ago
  Your problem is thinking they have a cohesive roadmap for Fuschia. Google has shown time and time again they can't seem to make two teams talk to each other or think about integrating things at all, and they have no high-level long-term vision or product strategy. Fuschia won't replace Android or Chrome OS. It will just be the third OS product they make.
  - oflannabhra 9y ago
    That's fair, I might just be grasping at straws. I for sure don't have the contacts or insight that Yegge has. I agree with your point that Google's history has been to take a multifurcated (and sometimes conflicted) approach.
- 9y ago

ocdtrekkie 9y ago

Even I have high hopes for Fuchsia. It seems like it's doing a lot of things right from the ground level, particularly in terms of security. But from a business standpoint, it's a huge risk. If Google wants to get OEMs to switch from an established, widely popular platform to a new one, they're going to need one heck of a big carrot. It's likely Google would retain more control with Fuchsia, since giving OEMs control of experience, security, and updates is largely responsible for many of Android's woes, and OEMs will be resistant to that. Google may have a much easier time retaining it's control under Android than trying to push a platform switch, which could actually, lead to OEMs switching to a different company's platform instead.

ethbro 9y ago
To me, re-architecting the Google / OEM split benefits both (disclosure: I haven't followed exactly what they're aiming for with Fuchsia). If it becomes possible to update to new Android features and security patches without breaking OEM overware, then OEMs no longer have to dedicate teams to rewriting their crap codebases. Which means they can put all those developers on features instead. Which is what they've always been interested in and (arguably) better at in the first place.

kibwen 9y ago

I'm also intrigued by Fuchsia, but it doesn't look like it's intended as a smartphone OS. Even if it was, without access to the Android app store it'll be no more successful than Windows Phone or any of the other upstarts (and something like a hypothetical Android emulation layer sounds like murder for battery life).

simmons 9y ago
I don't think running an Android layer on Fuchsia would necessarily be a problem for battery life (it's not like you'd need to emulate a different CPU), although loading all the Android frameworks and services could be a RAM hit. And apps with native code excessively tied to Linux might be problematic on the Fuchsia kernel. Some Chromebooks can now run Android apps; I wonder how that works out for the user in practice. (I haven't tried myself.)
pier25 9y ago
The moment Google announces it's not going to update Android anymore everyone will start developing for Fuchsia with Dart, Go, or whatever. Also, considering Chrome OS has an Android layer in there why wouldn't fuchsia be able to do the same thing? It should be more than enough as a temporary solution.

SkyMarshal 9y ago

Is Fuchsia backwards compatible with Android apps?

lern_too_spel 9y ago
It supports Flutter, which is one of the potential Android disruptors Yegge mentions. They're both open source, so I wouldn't be surprised if someone built an Android server for Fuchsia though.

oflannabhra 9y ago

I tried to predict how Fuchsia + Flutter play into Google's overarching strategic vision in another comment here on HN, and got voted down into oblivion. My best guess is: 1) Pixels move to Fuchsia, native apps are in Dart/Flutter, compatibility layer for Android. Fuchsia becomes a distinguishing feature of Googles hardware, and allows Google to differentiate vs Android competitors. 2) Google continues to support Android, but only as it affects their business interests (as a funnel for search). 3) Google migrates some service level functionality away from Android and Pixels become a first-class citizen in Google's ecosystem. In my mind, Fuchsia is a direct result of Google's newfound interest in hardware (as a business). I imagine the following: - Google sees voice (and maybe AR) as the next frontier, which is actually an existential threat for them--they are harder to monetize via ads. - Google decides to start making hardware (for profit), to monetize their services (a la Apple). That is, their Voice Assistant is now differentiated from Android, and to use that service, you have to buy their hardware. Now, they don't need to make money on ads for voice searches. - Google will continue to roll out more ML-driven services that are exclusive to their hardware, and eventually, exclusive to Fuchsia. This will allow them to both a) further differentiate their hardware from other Android manufacturers, b) better monetize their services (effectively through HW purchases), and c) steal market share of the most valuable customers from Apple.

Jasper_ 9y ago
Your problem is thinking they have a cohesive roadmap for Fuschia. Google has shown time and time again they can't seem to make two teams talk to each other or think about integrating things at all, and they have no high-level long-term vision or product strategy. Fuschia won't replace Android or Chrome OS. It will just be the third OS product they make.
- oflannabhra 9y ago
  That's fair, I might just be grasping at straws. I for sure don't have the contacts or insight that Yegge has. I agree with your point that Google's history has been to take a multifurcated (and sometimes conflicted) approach.
9y ago