5 ms·

> Google develop 3+ different OS's? It wont. From what I understand this new OS will replace others over time. Also it is way better than existing options.

willtim 5y ago
Better than all existing options? I'm skeptical that a kernel written in C++ is likely to be better than e.g. a formally verified microkernel such as seL4. If they ever rewrite it in Rust, then it might be more interesting.
- StreamBright 5y ago
  Parts of it is already in Rust and formal verification could be done for this project as well. At that stage would you be ok with it?
  - willtim 5y ago
    If it improves the security of the device and means that Google will keep updating it, then that will be good. However, personally I have given up buying Google-branded devices. They only gave me security updates for my Pixel C for three years (2016-2019).
paxys 5y ago
That's a wild leap with zero evidence. Fuchsia runs on one unimportant production device and has basically zero usage. Saying it will replace all of Android and ChromeOS is...optimistic to say the least.
- tristanj 5y ago
  Project ‘Fuchsia’: Google Is Quietly Working on a Successor to Android https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-19/google-team-is-said-to-plot-android-successor-draw-skepticism https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-19/google-te... > For more than two years, a small and stealthy group of engineers within Google has been working on software that they hope will eventually replace Android. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19702968 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19702968 > "And while Android is reaching EOL in the next 4-5 years, most of this work will be carried on in Fuchsia OS, which is set to eventually replace Android"
  - nicetryguy 5y ago
    > "And while Android is reaching EOL in the next 4-5 years" I wouldn't bet on it. Sounds like IBM OS2 all over again.
    - tristanj 5y ago
      Check the context. The person I replied to is claiming there's "zero evidence" Fuchsia will replace other Google OSs which is obviously wrong.
    - KorematsuFred 5y ago
      May be. We have not seen future. But that is not the point and a person who is claiming there is "zero evidence" is mistaking absence of evidence to evidence of absence. Arsetechnica has published several articles on this topic in past and are available to read on Wikiepedia page for the OS. General information suggests this is one of those long term things if successful would be massively game changing.
chasil 5y ago
I am not a microkernel expert, but why is Zircon better than QNX as used in the final Blackberry handset? QNX appears to already be in every market where Fuchsia wants to go. Google could have bought Blackberry and used QNX in Android 5, rolling it up to Chromebooks. Why was this not the path they chose?
- drivebycomment 5y ago
  This seems like a good question, and I also hope someone with good knowledge/experience around this to give some good comparison. I have given only very cursory look into QNX and Fuchsia/Zircon and it seems that one of the main difference is the capabilities-based architecture in Fuchsia. It's a big change in the API/conceptual model, but we'll have to see if that actually translates into a meaningful difference at the application level - e.g. whether it allows building new types of applications, or allows building meaningfully more secure/fast/reliable applications.

willtim 5y ago

Better than all existing options? I'm skeptical that a kernel written in C++ is likely to be better than e.g. a formally verified microkernel such as seL4. If they ever rewrite it in Rust, then it might be more interesting.

StreamBright 5y ago
Parts of it is already in Rust and formal verification could be done for this project as well. At that stage would you be ok with it?
- willtim 5y ago
  If it improves the security of the device and means that Google will keep updating it, then that will be good. However, personally I have given up buying Google-branded devices. They only gave me security updates for my Pixel C for three years (2016-2019).

paxys 5y ago

That's a wild leap with zero evidence. Fuchsia runs on one unimportant production device and has basically zero usage. Saying it will replace all of Android and ChromeOS is...optimistic to say the least.

tristanj 5y ago
Project ‘Fuchsia’: Google Is Quietly Working on a Successor to Android https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-19/google-team-is-said-to-plot-android-successor-draw-skepticism https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-19/google-te... > For more than two years, a small and stealthy group of engineers within Google has been working on software that they hope will eventually replace Android. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19702968 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19702968 > "And while Android is reaching EOL in the next 4-5 years, most of this work will be carried on in Fuchsia OS, which is set to eventually replace Android"
- nicetryguy 5y ago
  > "And while Android is reaching EOL in the next 4-5 years" I wouldn't bet on it. Sounds like IBM OS2 all over again.
  - tristanj 5y ago
    Check the context. The person I replied to is claiming there's "zero evidence" Fuchsia will replace other Google OSs which is obviously wrong.
  - KorematsuFred 5y ago
    May be. We have not seen future. But that is not the point and a person who is claiming there is "zero evidence" is mistaking absence of evidence to evidence of absence. Arsetechnica has published several articles on this topic in past and are available to read on Wikiepedia page for the OS. General information suggests this is one of those long term things if successful would be massively game changing.

chasil 5y ago

I am not a microkernel expert, but why is Zircon better than QNX as used in the final Blackberry handset? QNX appears to already be in every market where Fuchsia wants to go. Google could have bought Blackberry and used QNX in Android 5, rolling it up to Chromebooks. Why was this not the path they chose?

drivebycomment 5y ago
This seems like a good question, and I also hope someone with good knowledge/experience around this to give some good comparison. I have given only very cursory look into QNX and Fuchsia/Zircon and it seems that one of the main difference is the capabilities-based architecture in Fuchsia. It's a big change in the API/conceptual model, but we'll have to see if that actually translates into a meaningful difference at the application level - e.g. whether it allows building new types of applications, or allows building meaningfully more secure/fast/reliable applications.