3 ms·
Good point, I would like Google using QNX for their mobile OS, too, because of the Hard Real-Time OS feature. Or keep using Linux, but putting more effort on it
by faragon 4y ago
Good point, I would like Google using QNX for their mobile OS, too, because of the Hard Real-Time OS feature. Or keep using Linux, but putting more effort on it, e.g. adding better NDK support, without relying in Java at all, a la iOS.
- WastingMyTime89 4y ago> Good point, I would like Google using QNX for their mobile OS, too, because of the Hard Real-Time OS feature. Why? Everything which needs hard-real time in a phone already does that at the firmware level. I fail to see what is that latency sensible in the rest. If what you want is a faster phone, a hard-real time kernel is not going to give you that. Hard real-time just means you have strong garanties on time of execution (either through return or through failure) it does not necessary means these times are short. Java on Android is not slow anyway.
- freemint 4y agoUser interaction is latency sensitive. In particular on cheaper phones it could make a huge difference.
- rvz 4y ago> Or keep using Linux, but putting more effort on it, e.g. adding better NDK support, without relying in Java at all, a la iOS. Or maybe a clean slate from the mistakes of existing legacy devices and not inheriting the old cruft found in kernels like Linux or in full OSes like QNX that are not designed or optimised for use cases such as smart-devices, IoT, desktops, etc. It seems like Google has had enough of tolerating the giant contraption that has strangled them for years with using Linux in Android, and ChromeOS and would want to purse a new approach similar to Windows, and macOS with Fuchsia and creating an ecosystem of apps written in Dart, and using Flutter.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]