4 ms·

> Ubuntu has a cloud offering for this: https://ubuntu.com/blog/canonical-introduces-anbox-cloud-scalable-android-in-the-cloud https://ubuntu.com/blog/canonical

> Ubuntu has a cloud offering for this: https://ubuntu.com/blog/canonical-introduces-anbox-cloud-scalable-android-in-the-cloud https://ubuntu.com/blog/canonical-introduces-anbox-cloud-sca... This isn't quite correct. From Simon Fels [0], we see that "Despite the nature of Anbox, Anbox Cloud is not open source and a commercial product. It is based on the same underlying ideas of Anbox but is a completely separate code base." > It is a valiant effort (lead by u/mrmorph) even if the open source version is limited and runs Android 7. I really hope that all distributions of Anbox for PureOS, postmarketOS, etc. will soon start distributing a newer system image. Nothing prevents this and it would make Anbox actually useful. [0] https://mm.gravedo.de/blog/posts/2020-01-21-taking-the-anbox-journey-to-the-next-level/ https://mm.gravedo.de/blog/posts/2020-01-21-taking-the-anbox...

kbumsik 6y ago
That is so weird. If they don't share the same codebase then why Canonical would want to use "Anbox" trademark?
- jeroenhd 6y ago
  It's probably a heavily modified fork that integrates more deeply into the operating system. It wouldn't make sense to completely redo all Anbox does for dispatching Java calls and emulating Android device behaviour, but to turn Anbox into a product that natively scales in the cloud probably requires extensive modification of the Anbox codebase.
  - srtjstjsj 6y ago
    The link says it's just a different product that licensed the trademark. Or maybe they are violating GPL but hiding it in their server code. That would take a lot of chutzpah though so I wouldn't allege that.
    - ignoramous 6y ago
      If I am not wrong, the creator of anbox, u/mrmorph, works for Canonical. GPL shouldn't be an issue then?
      - ibotty 6y ago
        Only if they are the only copyright holder.
- srtjstjsj 6y ago
  Because "Candroid" or whatever other name they might pick doesn't have the reputation that Anbox has that they want to exploit.
dafoex 6y ago
>start distributing a newer system image. Older system images would potentially be useful, too, if only for toying around with abandoned apps too old to run on new systems. I'm thinking similar to how Wine appears as different versions of windows to different apps.

kbumsik 6y ago

That is so weird. If they don't share the same codebase then why Canonical would want to use "Anbox" trademark?

jeroenhd 6y ago
It's probably a heavily modified fork that integrates more deeply into the operating system. It wouldn't make sense to completely redo all Anbox does for dispatching Java calls and emulating Android device behaviour, but to turn Anbox into a product that natively scales in the cloud probably requires extensive modification of the Anbox codebase.
- srtjstjsj 6y ago
  The link says it's just a different product that licensed the trademark. Or maybe they are violating GPL but hiding it in their server code. That would take a lot of chutzpah though so I wouldn't allege that.
  - ignoramous 6y ago
    If I am not wrong, the creator of anbox, u/mrmorph, works for Canonical. GPL shouldn't be an issue then?
    - ibotty 6y ago
      Only if they are the only copyright holder.
srtjstjsj 6y ago
Because "Candroid" or whatever other name they might pick doesn't have the reputation that Anbox has that they want to exploit.

dafoex 6y ago

>start distributing a newer system image. Older system images would potentially be useful, too, if only for toying around with abandoned apps too old to run on new systems. I'm thinking similar to how Wine appears as different versions of windows to different apps.