9 ms·

“Android is reaching EOL in the next 4-5 years”

84 points by mmastrac 8y ago

robotbikes 8y ago
Android will lose its corporate sponsor but it being an open source project will continue as long as people continue to develop it.
- josteink 8y ago
  But it’s mostly shipped on corporately made, marketed and sold phones. Without shipments, it’s just yet another obsolete mobile OS.
  - robotbikes 8y ago
    Well I'm not aware of any nonprofit phone development cooperatives so without Google driving it is is likely to become less popular but there will probably also be other corporations that continue to develop an ecosystem for it. There are still OS/2 derivatives being developed. I'm also just saying people will continue to use it and something along the lines of LineageOS will be even more important for people to be able to use their existing phones. For most people who continuously discard their phones after a few years to get the latest greatest it may end up being supplanted by whatever fuschia based phones are developed. I'm convinced that fuschia is partially driven by a desire to escape the GPL so with a MIT based licensed manufacturers won't even need to pretend to release the source code for their hackish drivers and kernel mods.
Waterluvian 8y ago
What's the context? Maybe knowing who this individual is would help me? Edit: ah an Android OS dev. I imagine that's a primary party to Android and therefore this individual is kind of an authority.
- stupidthrottle 8y ago
  Google is eradicating all GPL from their mobile offering. Fuschia will let them release a fully closed down platform.
  - rooam-dev 8y ago
    So, closed source with tracking enabled. Can it get worse?
    - snazz 8y ago
      Google Play Services is already closed-source and that’s where the tracking happens. The fact that the base OS is technically open source is usually irrelevant if you have any proprietary Google junk on top of it. But your baseband is allowing you to be tracked too (regardless of the software on the application processor), so it’s hardly possible (certainly not easy) to have any privacy with a cell phone in your possession.
  - brianpgordon 8y ago
    Fuchsia is permissively licensed. I swear, copyleft people have the weirdest definition of freedom. How does using a license that lets you do anything with the code, including using it to compete commercially with Google, automatically indicate some nefarious plan to lock down the new platform? If they wanted to do that, why would they release Fuchsia under a permissive license in the first place?
    - ocdtrekkie 8y ago
      The main difference is that copyleft currently requires some components of all new phones to be released as open source. With a permissive license, many Android vendors will not release anything open source. So you might have a much harder time figuring out how to flash the OS on them or get the drivers to work with them. Obviously some manufacturers will probably still do so, but they won't be required to as they are now. Which is to say Fuchsia may not be closed source, but a lot of devices built on it probably will be.
- tacomonstrous 8y ago
  >ah an Android OS dev She is in the wide sense of the term: she has made some contributions to AOSP. But only Google has actual knowledge of the future of their OS, and she doesn't work for them.
EGreg 8y ago
Why would Google abandon it?
- luckydata 8y ago
  because they have probably something better to replace it with?
  - MRD85 8y ago
    Something without open source licence to replace it with.
- holtalanm 8y ago
  it is going to be replaced with Fuschia OS (i'm sure i probably butchered the name) My understanding is that it will be a pretty much transparent switch for users going from an Android phone to a Fuschia phone -- not sure though.
  - stupidthrottle 8y ago
    Android was associated with the GPL via Linux, forcing them to keep it partially open source. Fuschia is the OS and kernel nobody asked for which is licensed so that Google and partners can make locked down, closed source phones.
    - dekhn 8y ago
      The reason is more that the binary blobs that make every modern phone work couldn't be updated to the kernel ABIs every time they changed. The whole point is to make it easier to deploy new hardware with custom bits.
    - shortformblog 8y ago
      This explanation ignores the incredibly valid technical reason for why Google is working on Fuschia. Android uses a monolithic kernel via Linux, and as a result has weaknesses that have surfaced over time due to ecosystem and compatibility bloat. Long story short: Android upgrades are often dependent on the manufacturer distributing updates that account for their unique devices. And that's both difficult to manage and shortens the lives of the phones people use. Hence why so many Android phones stop getting updated after only a couple of years. (Apple doesn't have this problem because it controls the ecosystem of devices.) Fuschia, on the other hand, is based on a microkernel, which simplifies the stack, making it easier to push the phone's underlying operating system to a newer version while allowing the complexities that come with there being dozens of phones (and laptops and tablets) to support. Everything is a service in a microkernel. Given the complexity of having to support so many different kinds of devices in the current ecosystem, moving everything to a service makes a lot of sense as it would remove the compatibility complications. Google taking its mobile operating systems and pushing them into a monolithic kernel, licensing concerns aside, helps solve a big ecosystem problem that has only grown for Android over the years. It limits functionality in older phones and when developers fail to support these devices, it creates unnecessary electronic waste. This approach would conceivably separate the underlying OS from vendor support. That is something a widely used mobile OS would benefit from.
kingkool68 8y ago
They've said this before https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/1119344110270406656 https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/111934411027040665...
- ocdtrekkie 8y ago
  They've never made an official statement or confirmation of what Fuchsia is intended to be used for, if anything. An Android OS dev making this statement is, in fact, significant news.
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    I don't think this is an official statement either...
  - Someone1234 8y ago
    I don't believe she works at Google. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Edit more: From my research she is someone who has legitimately worked on an Android OS derivative, but it was at another company (Sky TV?). So she's both an Android OS Dev and a non-Google employee. Her source for Android's EOL is the articles she links in the twitter conversation. She has done nothing wrong but many people seem to have misinterpreted this as a Googler saying Android is EOL.
    - ac29 8y ago
      She doesn't work at Google, she "know[s] a lot of people from Google and/or OEMs" [0]. I'm going to have to file this under "my uncle who works at Nintendo". [0] https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/1119349584071929857 https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/111934958407192985...
  - tytso 8y ago
    AlexandraSalvaterra's github page shows that she is not a member of the Github Google organization. So I don't believe she is an Android OS Dev working for Google, or that this should be considered an official statement. The articles that she linked to were old ones which have a note saying that Google denied that the speculations were true. And herself said in a later tweet that she was "putting things together" and that "5 years is a long time". And also, "Also, do keep in mind how Google sometimes randomly kills projects, and starts new ones, nothing is set in stone with Google."[1] [1] https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/1119346324867043328 https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/111934632486704332... Sounds like a poseur trolling for Twitter followers to me....
pastor_elm 8y ago
does this mean Android won't be trademarked anymore by Google? I really hate that such a wonderful word was ruined by Google.
- pkaye 8y ago
  Kind of like how Apple ruined "apple".
rocky1138 8y ago
As a tech community, we should really rally around a libre/free mobile OS and soon. Being beholden to corporations for our operating systems is antithetical to freedom.
- idlewords 8y ago
  And we can have the handsets run on biodiesel and little windmills.
- qznc 8y ago
  There is https://postmarketos.org/ https://postmarketos.org/
  - neilv 8y ago
    PostmarketOS is the closest I've seen to the right idea for sustainability and openness: mainline Linux kernel, no closed drivers, and a userland that lets various current and future environments be layered (and can run the existing wealth of GNU/Linux software immediately, modulo the small touchscreens). A word of warning is that still developer-only, not ready for real use. (Even my Replicant devices are much more functional than my PostmarketOS ones, at the moment, but PostmarketOS is a much better idea.)
- _bxg1 8y ago
  It's so much harder to do on mobile, for multiple reasons: - Hardware is not very modular (mainly because of size constraints), meaning you have to purpose-build libre hardware if you can't/don't want to run on tech-giant devices (you can right now if you're forking Android; you probably won't be able to once it's replaced with Fuschia). - Developers' needs have always been a bastion for keeping desktop OSes flexible and open. No matter how closed-down software gets, someone somewhere has to be able to muck with it so as to build and improve it in the first place. This doesn't apply to mobile OSes; people don't use them for development. Not that it's impossible for these things to be overcome, but it's a much steeper uphill battle.
  - _bxg1 8y ago
meruru 8y ago
Would be bizarre if Google went proprietary with Android and Microsoft were the ones to carry the AOSP torch.
- guscost 8y ago
  Chromium might be trending in this direction too, with Electron/VSCode and the new Edge.
m0zg 8y ago
This is lunacy. Nothing is going to replace Android but the next version of Android, for the same reason why Microsoft will forever continue developing Windows: there are (hunrders of?) billions of lines of code written for it, and: 1. Users just want to run their software, 2. Developers just want to sell their software, and nobody is going to give a shit about principled OS design or whatever. If Google doesn't understand this, they're about to learn a hard, and expensive, lesson.
- ocdtrekkie 8y ago
  Google has already made Android apps run on Chrome OS, and I think are at least planning to do with Fuchsia. Which is to say, Google could kill the Android OS as long as they preserve the Android app platform. See also: Windows has actually replaced their Win32 app model with UWP which is nearly a whole different app platform, but they still support Win32 apps and have made it increasingly easier to deploy Win32 apps on UWP-based platforms.
  - asveikau 8y ago
    > Windows has actually replaced their Win32 app model with UWP This is wishful thinking on Microsoft's part. > they still support Win32 apps Because it is despite their best efforts more popular and more important. So it cannot be said that they "replaced" it.
    - ocdtrekkie 8y ago
      The main hold up to new development being UWP is the lack of compatibility with Windows 7, which is going out of support in January. Enterprises will most all have switched by then, and it will be considered pretty safe to develop ew software with UWP over legacy APIs.
      - asveikau 8y ago
        That works, except for: 1. The large body of win32 code already written, maybe exceeds the quantity of future UWP apps. 2. The quality gap between what you can write with new and old stuff. Maybe they have closed 2, I stopped paying attention a few years ago. But last I knew there was a bit of a chicken-egg problem where nothing substantial was being written with the new thing, thus no means for it to be validated and improve. Also there is the general problem that 21st century Microsoft cannot compete with Windows NT. Can a new UI framework from Microsoft ever outdo the old stuff? Debatable. There have been several attempts.
agumonkey 8y ago
got an OS for you: have no phone
- sdenton4 8y ago
  Tell me, Mr Anderson... What good is an open OS... if you have no phone? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWBntJAvTmY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWBntJAvTmY
- kuzimoto 8y ago
  Is that really the best solution? I realize that might be sarcasm, but it seems phones are fairly critical for many people. Obviously it's not a necessity, like food/water/shelter, but even some homeless people with nothing else have cellphones.
  - agumonkey 8y ago
    it was only half sarcasm (and thanks for not firing at me for being overly laconic in my previous comment) I feel going back to very tech light, very local might be a very plausible future. Maybe phones but not as a platform for life through digital pipe metaphor different and deeper education, more trustworthy next door social tissue, slower pace
    - kuzimoto 8y ago
      Haha no problem, I figured there was more to it than just that ;) I do agree with you that we would be better off with less tech, but it would be hard for me at least since I love it so much. Although I do stay away from social media (unless you count the occasional HN post) which I think does more bad than good.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
kgersen75 8y ago
why is that on top of HN ?!
marc3842h 8y ago
I don't see how Fuchsia can pull this off without having at least compatibility with existing Android apps. Even if they do: I could see a ton of smartphone brands continuing to maintain it for their own smart phones (the Chinese have been big on that front!) or even making their own OS like Samsung with their Tizen OS.
- bob1029 8y ago
  All they need to do is offer the legacy API in addition to the new one, and write an internal translation layer. Obviously, that legacy API is at huge risk of being deprecated, so you should expect it to be considering. Any app out there that isn't rewritten for the new API will eventually stop working, just like most of Google's products. I am sure they would enjoy seeing this 'cleansing' of less-popular and niche apps.
- fmajid 8y ago
  Fuchsia is just a kernel, if Google reimplements the Android stack on top of it as a replacement for Linux, the only apps that would be impacted would be those few that use NDK native code.
oflannabhra 8y ago
My previous guess for a roadmap [0]: 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. [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16568275#16569138 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16568275#16569138
ignoramous 8y ago
This isn't an official statement from Google. If you're interested in Android's OS update story (keywords: Project Treble, APEX [0], GenericSystemImages [1]), then the thread [2] has some interesting pointers. -- [0] https://www.xda-developers.com/android-q-apex-biggest-thing-since-project-treble https://www.xda-developers.com/android-q-apex-biggest-thing-... [1] https://developer.android.com/preview/gsi-release-notes https://developer.android.com/preview/gsi-release-notes [2] mirror: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1119206658423558144.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1119206658423558144.html
- tyingq 8y ago
  "This isn't an official statement from Google" Yep, he follows on with: "About Fuchsia replacing Android, it's not a secret I leaked lol" then... "Also, do keep in mind how Google sometimes randomly kills projects, and starts new ones, nothing is set in stone with Google."
ykevinator 8y ago
Who is the speaker?
ykevinator 8y ago
I really wish that Ubuntu project took off
usermac 8y ago
Android EOL was after I tried it for the third and last time a few years ago. It is just crap.
usermac 8y ago
I truly liked webOS and even Windows Phone. I wish there was something new.
dejaime 8y ago
Can't access the link anymore, "Sorry, that page doesn’t exist!" Can anyone still access? Can anyone throw this in the WayBack Machine?
- cristaloleg 8y ago
  https://archive.is/ly67p https://archive.is/ly67p

84 points by mmastrac 8y ago

Android will lose its corporate sponsor but it being an open source project will continue as long as people continue to develop it.

josteink 8y ago
But it’s mostly shipped on corporately made, marketed and sold phones. Without shipments, it’s just yet another obsolete mobile OS.
- robotbikes 8y ago
  Well I'm not aware of any nonprofit phone development cooperatives so without Google driving it is is likely to become less popular but there will probably also be other corporations that continue to develop an ecosystem for it. There are still OS/2 derivatives being developed. I'm also just saying people will continue to use it and something along the lines of LineageOS will be even more important for people to be able to use their existing phones. For most people who continuously discard their phones after a few years to get the latest greatest it may end up being supplanted by whatever fuschia based phones are developed. I'm convinced that fuschia is partially driven by a desire to escape the GPL so with a MIT based licensed manufacturers won't even need to pretend to release the source code for their hackish drivers and kernel mods.

Waterluvian 8y ago

What's the context? Maybe knowing who this individual is would help me? Edit: ah an Android OS dev. I imagine that's a primary party to Android and therefore this individual is kind of an authority.

stupidthrottle 8y ago
Google is eradicating all GPL from their mobile offering. Fuschia will let them release a fully closed down platform.
- rooam-dev 8y ago
  So, closed source with tracking enabled. Can it get worse?
  - snazz 8y ago
    Google Play Services is already closed-source and that’s where the tracking happens. The fact that the base OS is technically open source is usually irrelevant if you have any proprietary Google junk on top of it. But your baseband is allowing you to be tracked too (regardless of the software on the application processor), so it’s hardly possible (certainly not easy) to have any privacy with a cell phone in your possession.
- brianpgordon 8y ago
  Fuchsia is permissively licensed. I swear, copyleft people have the weirdest definition of freedom. How does using a license that lets you do anything with the code, including using it to compete commercially with Google, automatically indicate some nefarious plan to lock down the new platform? If they wanted to do that, why would they release Fuchsia under a permissive license in the first place?
  - ocdtrekkie 8y ago
    The main difference is that copyleft currently requires some components of all new phones to be released as open source. With a permissive license, many Android vendors will not release anything open source. So you might have a much harder time figuring out how to flash the OS on them or get the drivers to work with them. Obviously some manufacturers will probably still do so, but they won't be required to as they are now. Which is to say Fuchsia may not be closed source, but a lot of devices built on it probably will be.
tacomonstrous 8y ago
>ah an Android OS dev She is in the wide sense of the term: she has made some contributions to AOSP. But only Google has actual knowledge of the future of their OS, and she doesn't work for them.

EGreg 8y ago

Why would Google abandon it?

luckydata 8y ago
because they have probably something better to replace it with?
- MRD85 8y ago
  Something without open source licence to replace it with.
holtalanm 8y ago
it is going to be replaced with Fuschia OS (i'm sure i probably butchered the name) My understanding is that it will be a pretty much transparent switch for users going from an Android phone to a Fuschia phone -- not sure though.
- stupidthrottle 8y ago
  Android was associated with the GPL via Linux, forcing them to keep it partially open source. Fuschia is the OS and kernel nobody asked for which is licensed so that Google and partners can make locked down, closed source phones.
  - dekhn 8y ago
    The reason is more that the binary blobs that make every modern phone work couldn't be updated to the kernel ABIs every time they changed. The whole point is to make it easier to deploy new hardware with custom bits.
  - shortformblog 8y ago
    This explanation ignores the incredibly valid technical reason for why Google is working on Fuschia. Android uses a monolithic kernel via Linux, and as a result has weaknesses that have surfaced over time due to ecosystem and compatibility bloat. Long story short: Android upgrades are often dependent on the manufacturer distributing updates that account for their unique devices. And that's both difficult to manage and shortens the lives of the phones people use. Hence why so many Android phones stop getting updated after only a couple of years. (Apple doesn't have this problem because it controls the ecosystem of devices.) Fuschia, on the other hand, is based on a microkernel, which simplifies the stack, making it easier to push the phone's underlying operating system to a newer version while allowing the complexities that come with there being dozens of phones (and laptops and tablets) to support. Everything is a service in a microkernel. Given the complexity of having to support so many different kinds of devices in the current ecosystem, moving everything to a service makes a lot of sense as it would remove the compatibility complications. Google taking its mobile operating systems and pushing them into a monolithic kernel, licensing concerns aside, helps solve a big ecosystem problem that has only grown for Android over the years. It limits functionality in older phones and when developers fail to support these devices, it creates unnecessary electronic waste. This approach would conceivably separate the underlying OS from vendor support. That is something a widely used mobile OS would benefit from.

kingkool68 8y ago

They've said this before https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/1119344110270406656 https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/111934411027040665...

ocdtrekkie 8y ago
They've never made an official statement or confirmation of what Fuchsia is intended to be used for, if anything. An Android OS dev making this statement is, in fact, significant news.
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  I don't think this is an official statement either...
- Someone1234 8y ago
  I don't believe she works at Google. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Edit more: From my research she is someone who has legitimately worked on an Android OS derivative, but it was at another company (Sky TV?). So she's both an Android OS Dev and a non-Google employee. Her source for Android's EOL is the articles she links in the twitter conversation. She has done nothing wrong but many people seem to have misinterpreted this as a Googler saying Android is EOL.
  - ac29 8y ago
    She doesn't work at Google, she "know[s] a lot of people from Google and/or OEMs" [0]. I'm going to have to file this under "my uncle who works at Nintendo". [0] https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/1119349584071929857 https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/111934958407192985...
- tytso 8y ago
  AlexandraSalvaterra's github page shows that she is not a member of the Github Google organization. So I don't believe she is an Android OS Dev working for Google, or that this should be considered an official statement. The articles that she linked to were old ones which have a note saying that Google denied that the speculations were true. And herself said in a later tweet that she was "putting things together" and that "5 years is a long time". And also, "Also, do keep in mind how Google sometimes randomly kills projects, and starts new ones, nothing is set in stone with Google."[1] [1] https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/1119346324867043328 https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/111934632486704332... Sounds like a poseur trolling for Twitter followers to me....

pastor_elm 8y ago

does this mean Android won't be trademarked anymore by Google? I really hate that such a wonderful word was ruined by Google.

pkaye 8y ago
Kind of like how Apple ruined "apple".

rocky1138 8y ago

As a tech community, we should really rally around a libre/free mobile OS and soon. Being beholden to corporations for our operating systems is antithetical to freedom.

idlewords 8y ago
And we can have the handsets run on biodiesel and little windmills.
qznc 8y ago
There is https://postmarketos.org/ https://postmarketos.org/
- neilv 8y ago
  PostmarketOS is the closest I've seen to the right idea for sustainability and openness: mainline Linux kernel, no closed drivers, and a userland that lets various current and future environments be layered (and can run the existing wealth of GNU/Linux software immediately, modulo the small touchscreens). A word of warning is that still developer-only, not ready for real use. (Even my Replicant devices are much more functional than my PostmarketOS ones, at the moment, but PostmarketOS is a much better idea.)
_bxg1 8y ago
It's so much harder to do on mobile, for multiple reasons: - Hardware is not very modular (mainly because of size constraints), meaning you have to purpose-build libre hardware if you can't/don't want to run on tech-giant devices (you can right now if you're forking Android; you probably won't be able to once it's replaced with Fuschia). - Developers' needs have always been a bastion for keeping desktop OSes flexible and open. No matter how closed-down software gets, someone somewhere has to be able to muck with it so as to build and improve it in the first place. This doesn't apply to mobile OSes; people don't use them for development. Not that it's impossible for these things to be overcome, but it's a much steeper uphill battle.
- _bxg1 8y ago

meruru 8y ago

Would be bizarre if Google went proprietary with Android and Microsoft were the ones to carry the AOSP torch.

guscost 8y ago
Chromium might be trending in this direction too, with Electron/VSCode and the new Edge.

m0zg 8y ago

This is lunacy. Nothing is going to replace Android but the next version of Android, for the same reason why Microsoft will forever continue developing Windows: there are (hunrders of?) billions of lines of code written for it, and: 1. Users just want to run their software, 2. Developers just want to sell their software, and nobody is going to give a shit about principled OS design or whatever. If Google doesn't understand this, they're about to learn a hard, and expensive, lesson.

ocdtrekkie 8y ago
Google has already made Android apps run on Chrome OS, and I think are at least planning to do with Fuchsia. Which is to say, Google could kill the Android OS as long as they preserve the Android app platform. See also: Windows has actually replaced their Win32 app model with UWP which is nearly a whole different app platform, but they still support Win32 apps and have made it increasingly easier to deploy Win32 apps on UWP-based platforms.
- asveikau 8y ago
  > Windows has actually replaced their Win32 app model with UWP This is wishful thinking on Microsoft's part. > they still support Win32 apps Because it is despite their best efforts more popular and more important. So it cannot be said that they "replaced" it.
  - ocdtrekkie 8y ago
    The main hold up to new development being UWP is the lack of compatibility with Windows 7, which is going out of support in January. Enterprises will most all have switched by then, and it will be considered pretty safe to develop ew software with UWP over legacy APIs.
    - asveikau 8y ago
      That works, except for: 1. The large body of win32 code already written, maybe exceeds the quantity of future UWP apps. 2. The quality gap between what you can write with new and old stuff. Maybe they have closed 2, I stopped paying attention a few years ago. But last I knew there was a bit of a chicken-egg problem where nothing substantial was being written with the new thing, thus no means for it to be validated and improve. Also there is the general problem that 21st century Microsoft cannot compete with Windows NT. Can a new UI framework from Microsoft ever outdo the old stuff? Debatable. There have been several attempts.

agumonkey 8y ago

got an OS for you: have no phone

sdenton4 8y ago
Tell me, Mr Anderson... What good is an open OS... if you have no phone? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWBntJAvTmY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWBntJAvTmY
kuzimoto 8y ago
Is that really the best solution? I realize that might be sarcasm, but it seems phones are fairly critical for many people. Obviously it's not a necessity, like food/water/shelter, but even some homeless people with nothing else have cellphones.
- agumonkey 8y ago
  it was only half sarcasm (and thanks for not firing at me for being overly laconic in my previous comment) I feel going back to very tech light, very local might be a very plausible future. Maybe phones but not as a platform for life through digital pipe metaphor different and deeper education, more trustworthy next door social tissue, slower pace
  - kuzimoto 8y ago
    Haha no problem, I figured there was more to it than just that ;) I do agree with you that we would be better off with less tech, but it would be hard for me at least since I love it so much. Although I do stay away from social media (unless you count the occasional HN post) which I think does more bad than good.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

kgersen75 8y ago

why is that on top of HN ?!

marc3842h 8y ago

I don't see how Fuchsia can pull this off without having at least compatibility with existing Android apps. Even if they do: I could see a ton of smartphone brands continuing to maintain it for their own smart phones (the Chinese have been big on that front!) or even making their own OS like Samsung with their Tizen OS.

bob1029 8y ago
All they need to do is offer the legacy API in addition to the new one, and write an internal translation layer. Obviously, that legacy API is at huge risk of being deprecated, so you should expect it to be considering. Any app out there that isn't rewritten for the new API will eventually stop working, just like most of Google's products. I am sure they would enjoy seeing this 'cleansing' of less-popular and niche apps.
fmajid 8y ago
Fuchsia is just a kernel, if Google reimplements the Android stack on top of it as a replacement for Linux, the only apps that would be impacted would be those few that use NDK native code.

oflannabhra 8y ago

My previous guess for a roadmap [0]: 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. [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16568275#16569138 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16568275#16569138

ignoramous 8y ago

This isn't an official statement from Google. If you're interested in Android's OS update story (keywords: Project Treble, APEX [0], GenericSystemImages [1]), then the thread [2] has some interesting pointers. -- [0] https://www.xda-developers.com/android-q-apex-biggest-thing-since-project-treble https://www.xda-developers.com/android-q-apex-biggest-thing-... [1] https://developer.android.com/preview/gsi-release-notes https://developer.android.com/preview/gsi-release-notes [2] mirror: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1119206658423558144.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1119206658423558144.html

tyingq 8y ago
"This isn't an official statement from Google" Yep, he follows on with: "About Fuchsia replacing Android, it's not a secret I leaked lol" then... "Also, do keep in mind how Google sometimes randomly kills projects, and starts new ones, nothing is set in stone with Google."

ykevinator 8y ago

Who is the speaker?

ykevinator 8y ago

I really wish that Ubuntu project took off

usermac 8y ago

Android EOL was after I tried it for the third and last time a few years ago. It is just crap.

usermac 8y ago

I truly liked webOS and even Windows Phone. I wish there was something new.

dejaime 8y ago

Can't access the link anymore, "Sorry, that page doesn’t exist!" Can anyone still access? Can anyone throw this in the WayBack Machine?

cristaloleg 8y ago
https://archive.is/ly67p https://archive.is/ly67p