4 ms·

You have a point, (except there is no Java on Android, only Dalvik bytecode ), but that's not the whole story. The experience that people have with their Androi

by jbuzbee 14y ago

You have a point, (except there is no Java on Android, only Dalvik bytecode ), but that's not the whole story. The experience that people have with their Android devices is very much due to the underlying Linux kernel and utilities: Device drivers, interrupt handling, multi-tasking, memory management, power-management, file systems, privileges, etc. And you can bypass the Dalvik VM with your apps if you wish.

TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
That's true to an extent, but I seriously doubt Android's Java stack (and it is a Java stack, although it runs on Google's Dalvik) couldn't work fine on another underlying OS.
- vetinari 14y ago
  Google actually made quite significant changes to Linux kernel (Binder, ashmem, alarm timers, wake-locks, adb gadget support, userspace gpio, paranoid networking, etc) to make it work. So yes, it could run on another kernel, provided they would be allowed to make such changes on it too.
  - jbuzbee 14y ago
    And that's the great thing about Linux. Companies can optimize for their use and then bring their changes back into the mainline where everyone can benefit: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/android-and-linux-re-merge-into-one-operating-system/10625 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/android-and-linux-re-m...
  - KirinDave 14y ago
    It should be noted that the alarm timers and wake-locks were the big showstoppers, and the most recent kernel release[0] offered a more generic implementation which is a superset of Android's current functionality: [0] http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.5#head-e04ea6fe9005ea057124123d7834624cd445e124 http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.5#head-e04ea6fe9005ea057124...
- jkn 14y ago
  The funny thing is that the same can be said of Linux distributions. If you discard the huge driver support and some cool technologies that underlie some things we expect both from Android and Linux distributions, the kernel becomes irrelevant. The official port of Debian to the FreeBSD kernel[1] proves this. [1] http://www.debian.org/ports/index.en.html http://www.debian.org/ports/index.en.html
  - benatkin 14y ago
    Indeed. In college the fans of "Linux" agonized over which Linux distribution or BSD distribution to use. Which goes to show that the idea of "Linux" on the desktop is very different from Android using a Linux kernel. Since more than 90% were using a Linux kernel it was only occasionally that someone would say UN*X or 'nix. If not for the trademark that probably would have happened more often.
- jbuzbee 14y ago
  Regarding Java on Android, I think that Oracle made the same argument in court and lost big-time :-) And yeah, it is obviously possible that Dalvik could run on other operaring systems, but I don't think that the user-experience of Dalvik on WIN CE would pass muster with very many consumers :-)
  - ConstantineXVI 14y ago
    What makes you think that? A Windows CE based Android would be nearly indistinguishable to end users from the Linux version save for an extra logo in the About screen somewhere. With the branding stripped off, the average person would never know Windows Mobile and Windows Phone (7) are both CE-based.
    - jbuzbee 14y ago
      I was referring to Linux's superior network stack, memory management, multi-core CPU handling, etc. The user-experience of Dalvik on a Linux kernel would be superior to a Dalvik instance running on a WIN CE kernel.
      - ConstantineXVI 14y ago
        Care to back that up with evidence? Can you prove Linux would actually have enough of an edge over WinCE that a user would be able to perceive a difference, given identical hardware?
        jbuzbee 14y ago
        Well we've diverged a bit from the thread, but I'll make a final comment. I'm not aware of any apples to apples comparisons between Linux/Dalvik and the equivalent under a WIN CE combo. So the above is my opinion based on years of painful experiences dealing with clunky Windows embedded devices. Ultimately, the market will decide if customers will put up with a WIN CE device and right now, it's not looking good for Microsoft.
- KirinDave 14y ago
  Does that matter? What matters is that it runs on a version of the Linux kernel that is converging with the current release. It could run on a molecule of DNA, and that'd be super-cool, but it is Linux that is in desperate need of a good interface layer.

by jbuzbee 14y ago

TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago

That's true to an extent, but I seriously doubt Android's Java stack (and it is a Java stack, although it runs on Google's Dalvik) couldn't work fine on another underlying OS.

vetinari 14y ago
Google actually made quite significant changes to Linux kernel (Binder, ashmem, alarm timers, wake-locks, adb gadget support, userspace gpio, paranoid networking, etc) to make it work. So yes, it could run on another kernel, provided they would be allowed to make such changes on it too.
- jbuzbee 14y ago
  And that's the great thing about Linux. Companies can optimize for their use and then bring their changes back into the mainline where everyone can benefit: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/android-and-linux-re-merge-into-one-operating-system/10625 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/android-and-linux-re-m...
- KirinDave 14y ago
  It should be noted that the alarm timers and wake-locks were the big showstoppers, and the most recent kernel release[0] offered a more generic implementation which is a superset of Android's current functionality: [0] http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.5#head-e04ea6fe9005ea057124123d7834624cd445e124 http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.5#head-e04ea6fe9005ea057124...
jkn 14y ago
The funny thing is that the same can be said of Linux distributions. If you discard the huge driver support and some cool technologies that underlie some things we expect both from Android and Linux distributions, the kernel becomes irrelevant. The official port of Debian to the FreeBSD kernel[1] proves this. [1] http://www.debian.org/ports/index.en.html http://www.debian.org/ports/index.en.html
- benatkin 14y ago
  Indeed. In college the fans of "Linux" agonized over which Linux distribution or BSD distribution to use. Which goes to show that the idea of "Linux" on the desktop is very different from Android using a Linux kernel. Since more than 90% were using a Linux kernel it was only occasionally that someone would say UN*X or 'nix. If not for the trademark that probably would have happened more often.
jbuzbee 14y ago
Regarding Java on Android, I think that Oracle made the same argument in court and lost big-time :-) And yeah, it is obviously possible that Dalvik could run on other operaring systems, but I don't think that the user-experience of Dalvik on WIN CE would pass muster with very many consumers :-)
- ConstantineXVI 14y ago
  What makes you think that? A Windows CE based Android would be nearly indistinguishable to end users from the Linux version save for an extra logo in the About screen somewhere. With the branding stripped off, the average person would never know Windows Mobile and Windows Phone (7) are both CE-based.
  - jbuzbee 14y ago
    I was referring to Linux's superior network stack, memory management, multi-core CPU handling, etc. The user-experience of Dalvik on a Linux kernel would be superior to a Dalvik instance running on a WIN CE kernel.
    - ConstantineXVI 14y ago
      Care to back that up with evidence? Can you prove Linux would actually have enough of an edge over WinCE that a user would be able to perceive a difference, given identical hardware?
      - jbuzbee 14y ago
        Well we've diverged a bit from the thread, but I'll make a final comment. I'm not aware of any apples to apples comparisons between Linux/Dalvik and the equivalent under a WIN CE combo. So the above is my opinion based on years of painful experiences dealing with clunky Windows embedded devices. Ultimately, the market will decide if customers will put up with a WIN CE device and right now, it's not looking good for Microsoft.
KirinDave 14y ago
Does that matter? What matters is that it runs on a version of the Linux kernel that is converging with the current release. It could run on a molecule of DNA, and that'd be super-cool, but it is Linux that is in desperate need of a good interface layer.