8 ms·

No one tech-savvy wants this. We are already sick of Google's Android lockdowns on mobile phones, and now coming after laptops and desktops? What's that going

No one tech-savvy wants this. We are already sick of Google's Android lockdowns on mobile phones, and now coming after laptops and desktops? What's that going to be like? Will developers have to beg to have control over devices they own? Will we be locked down on the store and have to manually install "unverified" software? Will I be able to take screenshots at will on MY computer, or get a black screen because Google decides so? The list can go on and on ad nauseam. Given what Google has done on the mobile space I have zero interest in having the same autocratic experience to be replicated on the last type of devices (PCs and laptops) where we can really have true open choices and alternatives. Screw them.

matejdro 11mo ago
I guess this is more meant as an replacement for Chrome OS? That one is already pretty locked down, so switching to Android does not change much.
- thiht 11mo ago
  I always assumed Chrome OS was some kind of Android build anyway, but apparently not
  - exasperaited 11mo ago
    ChromeOS has been converging on Android for a while but never quite gets there. They are asymptotic ;-) It rather looks like Aluminium OS is the intended solution. I don't see any problem with it being "locked down", in the sense that it doesn't sound any worse than Chrome OS or Android. The open question is whether any open source release will happen worth a damn.
    - Zak 11mo ago
      > I don't see any problem with it being "locked down", in the sense that it doesn't sound any worse than Chrome OS or Android. I think the problem is that it further normalizes computers where users don't have the final say. The more normarized systems like that are, the more likely app developers (and even websites, if something like web environment integrity were to be normalized) are to lock out users on systems that aren't so restricted. I wish I didn't have to care what kind of computers most people use, but in reality, it matters what's popular.
- happosai 11mo ago
  ChromeOS is much more close to regular Linux systems than Android. The vendors had support Linux properly to get into ChromeOS. This allowed google go support ChromeOS laptops for very long period. Also, a a side-effect Chrome OS contractors got to contribute a lot into mainline Linux. Android Otoh let's vendors get away with shipping binaries that work once on one Android version, making upgrades pain. And thus Android devices are generally stuck with the build they released with. The Google decision to drop ChromeOS in favour of Android is going is going to be a huge disaster for Linux ecosystem.
carlosjobim 11mo ago
[flagged]
- jfoster 11mo ago
  The market for operating systems naturally falls into oligopolies. It's usually not financially feasible for third-party applications to support more than a few of them. Users tend to have strong preferences toward operating systems that have lots of applications built for them.
  - carlosjobim 11mo ago
    But here we're talking about developers. They will have other platforms they can use. And I don't believe for a moment that Google will have any success with this new project. They simply aren't capable anymore of making projects such as these work. MacOS, Windows and Linux will stick around long after this project is abandoned.
    - jacquesm 11mo ago
      Here's to hoping that's the case. But the GGGP was arguing about that other case, where in fact Google manages to lock down the desktop to the point that you have to ask their permission in order to be able to ship a piece of software. And since we've already seen two other players take that exact stance thinking that the third (who is already doing similar stuff on their mobile platform) is going to do the same thing is not just a theoretical risk.
  - tomrod 11mo ago
    Standards fill this gap, allowing for interoperation. When was the last time you had to write custom logic for your browser to access 99% of the domains you access?
    - Zak 11mo ago
      I've certainly run into websites that were doing something nonstandard and my browser of choice didn't work as intended. Sometimes when I've complained to the site operator, they've told me that browser isn't supported. I can (and have) told them they should build to web standards rather than specific browsers, but they're only motivated to care if it impacts a large enough percentage of users. So markets determine the outcome even when standards exist.
snarfy 11mo ago
I want the equivalent of wine/proton, nothing more.
- saubeidl 11mo ago
  That already exists: https://waydro.id/ https://waydro.id/
sofixa 11mo ago
> Will I be able to take screenshots at will on MY computer, or get a black screen because Google decides so? It's not Google, it's the application vendor that decides so. And as annoying as I find it when I want to screenshot something from my bank app, the reasons behind that feature being available are pretty good. > Given what Google has done on the mobile space You seem to be missing the nuance that as annoying as some of those Google provided Android hoops are, they are necessary for the wider security posture of the average user (and there are more average users than techies that need to install random .apks) and, very very importantly, Google allow you to skip most of them if you know what you're doing. Considering the competition in the mobile space, it really isn't even close in terms of openness.
- kasabali 11mo ago
  "it's application vendors who hanged the users, google just gave them the rope" isn't the good excuse you think it is
  - sofixa 11mo ago
    Are we really comparing bank applications forbidding screenshots and controls of their apps to lower the risk of certain types of exploits/attacks with hanging people?
    - rjknight 11mo ago
      No, we are using this thing called a metaphor. What's being compared is the relationship between the hangman and the ropemaker, and the relationship between the app developer and the OS vendor. There is no comparison between taking screenshots and hanging people.
- hulitu 11mo ago
  > they are necessary for the wider security posture of the average user who's security will be raped as soon as another app is installed (hello Meta).
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
rayiner 11mo ago
The era of "tech-savvy" adults is going to have been limited to later Gen X and millenials. My zoomer brother and sister in law are no more tech-savvy than my boomer parents. It's all locked down, for their own good.
- goku12 11mo ago
  > It's all locked down, for their own good. Even while neglecting how silly it is to judge two entire generations as incompetent, I assure you that 'they' here aren't your zoomer brother and SIL or your boomer parents. If you think that someone is benevolently locking all these devices and platforms down to protect your kin from themselves, you are painfully behind in your understanding of capitalism. Please find a new dead horse to beat instead of this thoroughly refuted justification. I don't understand why people fail to recognize these patterns of exploitation and do something about it, despite the repeated abuse they endure. Is it Stockholm syndrome?
knowitnone3 11mo ago
The question is who is more evil. Microsoft or Google and my pick is Microsoft.
- goku12 11mo ago
  PC is one of the last remaining platforms where you don't have to choose one evil or the other. There are multiple other fair options which all are honestly better at this point, despite the incessant complaints by those who are never satisfied by them. The only thing needed to lose that refuge as well is for the consumers to simply ignore all those options and concede the market to a new overlord. Soon, we will have another locked down platform under a duopoly. This is the utterly predictable path it's going to go down, if the consumers continue to behave like this. Yet, some people are very uncomfortable when this is mentioned. I wonder who's so excited about yet another walled platform.
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
iknowstuff 11mo ago
GNu/Linux will never gain adoption on desktop because its fundamentally flawed: no stable abi, too many window manager/distro/libc/various dependency version targets, and also insufficient security model for random apps. If you want a mainstream open source desktop OS, it will be Android.

matejdro 11mo ago

I guess this is more meant as an replacement for Chrome OS? That one is already pretty locked down, so switching to Android does not change much.

thiht 11mo ago
I always assumed Chrome OS was some kind of Android build anyway, but apparently not
- exasperaited 11mo ago
  ChromeOS has been converging on Android for a while but never quite gets there. They are asymptotic ;-) It rather looks like Aluminium OS is the intended solution. I don't see any problem with it being "locked down", in the sense that it doesn't sound any worse than Chrome OS or Android. The open question is whether any open source release will happen worth a damn.
  - Zak 11mo ago
    > I don't see any problem with it being "locked down", in the sense that it doesn't sound any worse than Chrome OS or Android. I think the problem is that it further normalizes computers where users don't have the final say. The more normarized systems like that are, the more likely app developers (and even websites, if something like web environment integrity were to be normalized) are to lock out users on systems that aren't so restricted. I wish I didn't have to care what kind of computers most people use, but in reality, it matters what's popular.
happosai 11mo ago
ChromeOS is much more close to regular Linux systems than Android. The vendors had support Linux properly to get into ChromeOS. This allowed google go support ChromeOS laptops for very long period. Also, a a side-effect Chrome OS contractors got to contribute a lot into mainline Linux. Android Otoh let's vendors get away with shipping binaries that work once on one Android version, making upgrades pain. And thus Android devices are generally stuck with the build they released with. The Google decision to drop ChromeOS in favour of Android is going is going to be a huge disaster for Linux ecosystem.

carlosjobim 11mo ago

[flagged]

jfoster 11mo ago
The market for operating systems naturally falls into oligopolies. It's usually not financially feasible for third-party applications to support more than a few of them. Users tend to have strong preferences toward operating systems that have lots of applications built for them.
- carlosjobim 11mo ago
  But here we're talking about developers. They will have other platforms they can use. And I don't believe for a moment that Google will have any success with this new project. They simply aren't capable anymore of making projects such as these work. MacOS, Windows and Linux will stick around long after this project is abandoned.
  - jacquesm 11mo ago
    Here's to hoping that's the case. But the GGGP was arguing about that other case, where in fact Google manages to lock down the desktop to the point that you have to ask their permission in order to be able to ship a piece of software. And since we've already seen two other players take that exact stance thinking that the third (who is already doing similar stuff on their mobile platform) is going to do the same thing is not just a theoretical risk.
- tomrod 11mo ago
  Standards fill this gap, allowing for interoperation. When was the last time you had to write custom logic for your browser to access 99% of the domains you access?
  - Zak 11mo ago
    I've certainly run into websites that were doing something nonstandard and my browser of choice didn't work as intended. Sometimes when I've complained to the site operator, they've told me that browser isn't supported. I can (and have) told them they should build to web standards rather than specific browsers, but they're only motivated to care if it impacts a large enough percentage of users. So markets determine the outcome even when standards exist.

snarfy 11mo ago

I want the equivalent of wine/proton, nothing more.

saubeidl 11mo ago
That already exists: https://waydro.id/ https://waydro.id/

sofixa 11mo ago

> Will I be able to take screenshots at will on MY computer, or get a black screen because Google decides so? It's not Google, it's the application vendor that decides so. And as annoying as I find it when I want to screenshot something from my bank app, the reasons behind that feature being available are pretty good. > Given what Google has done on the mobile space You seem to be missing the nuance that as annoying as some of those Google provided Android hoops are, they are necessary for the wider security posture of the average user (and there are more average users than techies that need to install random .apks) and, very very importantly, Google allow you to skip most of them if you know what you're doing. Considering the competition in the mobile space, it really isn't even close in terms of openness.

kasabali 11mo ago
"it's application vendors who hanged the users, google just gave them the rope" isn't the good excuse you think it is
- sofixa 11mo ago
  Are we really comparing bank applications forbidding screenshots and controls of their apps to lower the risk of certain types of exploits/attacks with hanging people?
  - rjknight 11mo ago
    No, we are using this thing called a metaphor. What's being compared is the relationship between the hangman and the ropemaker, and the relationship between the app developer and the OS vendor. There is no comparison between taking screenshots and hanging people.
hulitu 11mo ago
> they are necessary for the wider security posture of the average user who's security will be raped as soon as another app is installed (hello Meta).

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

rayiner 11mo ago

The era of "tech-savvy" adults is going to have been limited to later Gen X and millenials. My zoomer brother and sister in law are no more tech-savvy than my boomer parents. It's all locked down, for their own good.

goku12 11mo ago
> It's all locked down, for their own good. Even while neglecting how silly it is to judge two entire generations as incompetent, I assure you that 'they' here aren't your zoomer brother and SIL or your boomer parents. If you think that someone is benevolently locking all these devices and platforms down to protect your kin from themselves, you are painfully behind in your understanding of capitalism. Please find a new dead horse to beat instead of this thoroughly refuted justification. I don't understand why people fail to recognize these patterns of exploitation and do something about it, despite the repeated abuse they endure. Is it Stockholm syndrome?

knowitnone3 11mo ago

The question is who is more evil. Microsoft or Google and my pick is Microsoft.

goku12 11mo ago
PC is one of the last remaining platforms where you don't have to choose one evil or the other. There are multiple other fair options which all are honestly better at this point, despite the incessant complaints by those who are never satisfied by them. The only thing needed to lose that refuge as well is for the consumers to simply ignore all those options and concede the market to a new overlord. Soon, we will have another locked down platform under a duopoly. This is the utterly predictable path it's going to go down, if the consumers continue to behave like this. Yet, some people are very uncomfortable when this is mentioned. I wonder who's so excited about yet another walled platform.

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

iknowstuff 11mo ago

GNu/Linux will never gain adoption on desktop because its fundamentally flawed: no stable abi, too many window manager/distro/libc/various dependency version targets, and also insufficient security model for random apps. If you want a mainstream open source desktop OS, it will be Android.