4 ms·

Interestingly we’re coming full circle back to the 2007 approach to mobile, when each vendor was trying to build their own Linux variant. There was Nokia with

by pavlov 3y ago

Interestingly we’re coming full circle back to the 2007 approach to mobile, when each vendor was trying to build their own Linux variant. There was Nokia with Maemo; the Japanese corporation Access was building the “next generation of PalmOS” on Linux [1]; and many others besides. Android killed them all. Now companies like Amazon who have invested heavily into customized Android are finding that their interests are so diverged from the Google-managed mainline that it might be easier to switch to a custom Linux. Something similar happened with Huawei (aka Honor) and their Harmony OS, though with extra geopolitical pressures. This kind of “cycle of reincarnation” is common in the tech industry, as specialization and generalization alternate between occasional disruptions. It’s often fascinating to watch. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_Linux_Platform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_Linux_Platform

synergy20 3y ago
Huawei did it due to sanctions though
andsoitis 3y ago
Embedded devices shine brighter when they run software that is much more memory and performance conscious than Android.
hospitalJail 3y ago
>Amazon who have invested heavily into customized Android are finding that their interests are so diverged from the Google-managed mainline What exactly is that? Given everyone from the US military to cars use Android, I'm not sure what sort of OS control they aren't getting. Can you imagine not working around the issue and deciding to fork your own? I'd be dying to know what it is. (Just going to guess the software guys aren't happy, but the executives think it gives them strategy. If its software based, I'd guess its communications/signals)
- smoofles 3y ago
  If they create their own SoC with their own IP having their own system will make it easier to move forward, as they won’t need to share development concerns with a larger group (e.g. they want feature X to go into one direction, and Android takes it in a different one, meaning they would end up with a fork). This is not a huge issue with smaller/trivial features, but can get really cumbersome with bigger ones, and even more so if the forks start diverging more. As for control, see Apple & getting a modern GPU API that works on mobile and desktop and can be iterated quickly. For a large number of industries Android makes more sense because they depend on certain development processes (security, hardware support, regulated environment certification, etc), but for multimedia consumption a lot of those are not needed. Last, but not least, vanity can be a big part of such decisions, too. Engineers love to build stuff, even if it means reinventing the wheel for the Nth time.
- g-b-r 3y ago
  On Android you're completely subjected to the whims of Google, the ideas of openness and collaboration among vendors on Android are a sham (https://www.theverge.com/2011/05/12/google-android-skyhook-lawsuit-motorola-samsung https://www.theverge.com/2011/05/12/google-android-skyhook-l... , https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on... )
kramerger 3y ago
Alternative take: Nokia was before is time

by pavlov 3y ago

synergy20 3y ago

Huawei did it due to sanctions though

andsoitis 3y ago

Embedded devices shine brighter when they run software that is much more memory and performance conscious than Android.

hospitalJail 3y ago

>Amazon who have invested heavily into customized Android are finding that their interests are so diverged from the Google-managed mainline What exactly is that? Given everyone from the US military to cars use Android, I'm not sure what sort of OS control they aren't getting. Can you imagine not working around the issue and deciding to fork your own? I'd be dying to know what it is. (Just going to guess the software guys aren't happy, but the executives think it gives them strategy. If its software based, I'd guess its communications/signals)

smoofles 3y ago
If they create their own SoC with their own IP having their own system will make it easier to move forward, as they won’t need to share development concerns with a larger group (e.g. they want feature X to go into one direction, and Android takes it in a different one, meaning they would end up with a fork). This is not a huge issue with smaller/trivial features, but can get really cumbersome with bigger ones, and even more so if the forks start diverging more. As for control, see Apple & getting a modern GPU API that works on mobile and desktop and can be iterated quickly. For a large number of industries Android makes more sense because they depend on certain development processes (security, hardware support, regulated environment certification, etc), but for multimedia consumption a lot of those are not needed. Last, but not least, vanity can be a big part of such decisions, too. Engineers love to build stuff, even if it means reinventing the wheel for the Nth time.
g-b-r 3y ago
On Android you're completely subjected to the whims of Google, the ideas of openness and collaboration among vendors on Android are a sham (https://www.theverge.com/2011/05/12/google-android-skyhook-lawsuit-motorola-samsung https://www.theverge.com/2011/05/12/google-android-skyhook-l... , https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on... )

kramerger 3y ago

Alternative take: Nokia was before is time