| |||||||||||||
Improving Ubuntu's application upload processImproving Ubuntu's application upload processPosted Sep 6, 2012 7:12 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)In reply to: Improving Ubuntu's application upload process by iabervon Parent article: Improving Ubuntu's application upload process
I am not saying that it will run the desktop inside a VM, but I aldo don't see touchscreen software being run on a 30" non-touchscreen monitor well.
If you have a Linux base, there's nothing (conceptually) preventing you from running libreoffice and thunderbird when docked, but then suspend/checkpoint that software when you undock, using touch-friendly Android apps on the small screen. You may have some 'mobile' apps running in small windows on your big screen (no need to have two weather apps for example)
Yes, right now Android and Linux have completely different userspace libraries, but are they really that different in their functionality and API? or could you have one libc that will work for both?
I'm a bit puzzled that nobody has created the ability to run android apps on a full Linux box yet (I think we're getting very close on the kernel capabilities side, but Android hasn't taken advantage of all the recent mainstream developments yet).
Once you have the ability to access the android app store and run regular Linux apps, I expect that something like the Transformer phone/laptop will start to appear, with normal Linux apps when docked and limited to android apps when undocked.
I don't expect such things to first show up from the "big boys", they will be trying to do the all singing all dancing single solution to everything. Instead I expect that some of the low-end "knock-off" companies will throw something like this together and start selling it with it working well enough that others will then jump on the bandwagon
(Log in to post comments)
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 6, 2012 7:22 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
>If you have a Linux base, there's nothing (conceptually) preventing you from running libreoffice and thunderbird when docked, but then suspend/checkpoint that software when you undock, using touch-friendly Android apps on the small screen.
Apparently, Ubuntu has done exactly this. It haven't went anywhere.
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 6, 2012 7:40 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
I heard that they announced that they were going to, not that they had done so.
If they have done so, the reason it hasn't gone anywhere is that nobody knows about it. I run ubuntu but have no idea how I would install and android app.
There are a couple android apps I'd really like to have, the webex app for one (since Webex has chosen not to support running on 64 bit linux under any conditions, but has a working android app)
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 6, 2012 7:49 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
They've demoed it this winter. I think there was even an article on LWN about it. They haven't released a public version of it, unfortunately.
Anyway, I think that's a dead end. Interface switching between ugly OpenOffice and some slick Android app would be too jarring. Far more likely, that Android apps would be modified to work in full "desktop" mode.
So imagine this: you plug in your phone into a dock station, Android apps are snapshotted and then migrated to the dock's CPU (already possible with CRIU or OpenVZ). It can be animated on screen by "expanding" application window from phone size to classic desktop size. All smooth, no jarring switches between eye candy and fugly apps.
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 6, 2012 8:07 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
well, if they haven't released it, it seems a bit early to say 'mobody cared'. And as for their demo, did it really implement everything? or just enough to give examples? If they include it in 12.10, publicise it, and then nobody cares I'll start to believe you.
docking units don't have CPUs.
Plus you have this amazing assumption that people who write small android apps can scale them up to full features apps without a problem.
your attitude that the current apps and android apps cannot co-exist, all existing software must be thrown out and re-written is exactly what I expect from the "big boys" I mentioned above.
I expect that the reality is going to be that the convenience of having your entire system with you is going to overcome a lot of the 'opposition' to the continued use of existing 'ugly' apps.
but once people actually have the options we'll see what happens with it.
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 6, 2012 10:28 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] Plus you have this amazing assumption that people who write small android apps can scale them up to full features apps without a problem. Where have you seen this assumption? Yes, people who write Android apps today may not be able to write the full-blown desktop apps. But they work in the same company as the people who write the full-blown desktop apps! They can easily coopt code and people from today's big apps. This is similar to UNIX-to-Windows switch which happend with such big apps 10-15 years ago. Sure it was painful back then and it will be painful tomorrow, but apps follow the money. And money are in Android and iOS apps, not in the Ubuntu apps. your attitude that the current apps and android apps cannot co-exist, all existing software must be thrown out and re-written is exactly what I expect from the "big boys" I mentioned above. Where have you seen such an attitude? It didn't happen last time, why will it happen this time? Yes, unimportant parts (things like support for X Window system or Win32 API) will be ripped out, but core will be kept up. It'll be quite painful for the people who tied up the core to Win32 API, but there will be some adapters, etc. The transition already happend not once, but twice or in some cases trice (from big iron to VMS, then to UNIX and finally to Windows), it'll hapen yet another time.
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 6, 2012 14:36 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
>well, if they haven't released it, it seems a bit early to say 'mobody cared'. And as for their demo, did it really implement everything? or just enough to give examples? If they include it in 12.10, publicise it, and then nobody cares I'll start to believe you.
They've implemented it enough to be useful. Still, nobody of large OEMs cared.
>docking units don't have CPUs.
But seriously, that's just a logical progression - simply add ability to easily offload apps from a tiny CPU in a phone to a real desktop CPU.
>Plus you have this amazing assumption that people who write small android apps can scale them up to full features apps without a problem.
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 6, 2012 19:07 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
connecting two CPUs together efficiently is hard, and not something that you are going to do with a docking station (the connector alone will be a large percentage of the size of the mobile device, you aren't just talking about a USB cable or something like that.
Also, a docking station with it's own CPU, memory, etc isn't cheap, but it also already exists (it's called a "desktop computer")
what you seem to be wanting is checkpoint/restore capability to move running applications from one server to another. with the appropriate emulation, the desktop doesn't need to have the same processor architecture that the mobile device has
docking stations are much simpler, they are little more than convienient ways to plug in several devices at once instead of having multiple wires.
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 6, 2012 19:10 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
> connecting two CPUs together efficiently is hard
You don't need to do it. Just migrate all running apps to the docked CPU.
>Also, a docking station with it's own CPU, memory, etc isn't cheap, but it also already exists (it's called a "desktop computer")
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 6, 2012 10:20 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] Once you have the ability to access the android app store Sorry to burst your bubble, but Android app store will not be available on this Frankenstein: it's only available on certified devices. You can create separate app store (like Amazon and Nook are doing), but this will require significant marketing to attract the developers to your store. I don't see anyone with deep enough pockets interested. I don't expect such things to first show up from the "big boys", they will be trying to do the all singing all dancing single solution to everything. Instead I expect that some of the low-end "knock-off" companies will throw something like this together and start selling it with it working well enough that others will then jump on the bandwagon. Yup. The only problem: when "big boys" will finally jump on this train they will probably throw away the "regular Linux userspace" to comply with certification requirements.
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 6, 2012 16:06 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
> You can create separate app store (like Amazon and Nook are doing), but this will require significant marketing to attract the developers to your store. I don't see anyone with deep enough pockets interested.
There are alternative app stores for Android. Have been since the beginning. And not just Amazon. There were others before that.
example:
...
The problem you are alluding to, of course, is that while Android is open source the Android apps are not. So Google has certification requirements for the platform before you can distribute their software at no-cost.
This is not a insurmountable barrier. I don't know what would be required for Ubuntu to make a 'frankenstein' OS, but it's something they will have to work with Google to do if they want people to have access to the Google applications they are familiar with.
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 6, 2012 17:42 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] There are alternative app stores for Android. Have been since the beginning. And not just Amazon. There were others before that. What devices they are selling? AFAICS this is just an app store for the Android. This is not what Amazon and Nook are doing and this is not what I'm talking about. The problem you are alluding to, of course, is that while Android is open source the Android apps are not. So Google has certification requirements for the platform before you can distribute their software at no-cost. Yup. Please read the requirements before you'll go any further. For example, though the Android source code could be ported to run on a phone that doesn't have a camera, the CDD requires that in order to be compatible, all phones must have a camera. This allows developers to rely on a consistent set of capabilities when writing their apps. "Certification" is not something you can do as afterthough: if you want to receive Google Play then you must design your device specifically for the Google's requirements. This is not a insurmountable barrier. I don't know what would be required for Ubuntu to make a 'frankenstein' OS, but it's something they will have to work with Google to do if they want people to have access to the Google applications they are familiar with. This is not about 'frankenstein' OS. This is about 'frankenstein' hardware. I doubt Google will want to certify any hardware which needs third-party platfrom to be fully usabled as "compatible device". This is what happened with tablets, for example: third-party tablets all lacked Google Play till Honeycomb. Because it was impossible to certify them. And if Android will be extended to effectively support mouse, keyboard and large monitor then why will you want to develop programs for Ubuntu? You'll develop them for Android instead - this will cover larger audience.
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 8, 2012 16:17 UTC (Sat) by cesarb (subscriber, #6266) [Link]
> the CDD requires that in order to be compatible, all phones must have a camera.
That FAQ seems to be outdated. Take a look at the current CDD (https://source.android.com/compatibility/4.1/android-4.1-...):
> Device implementations SHOULD include a rear-facing camera, and MAY include a front-facing camera.
That is a SHOULD, not a MUST.
Improving Ubuntu's application upload process Posted Sep 8, 2012 18:17 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] Yes, the requirements changed with Android 2.3. This is when MUST was replaced with SHOULD WRT camera. But I'm not talking about sepcifics here, I'm talking about the fact that to get Google Play you need to satisfy pretty long and detailed list of requirements. Want to create something new and exciting? Feel free: Android is FOSS, after all! Want to get hundreds of thousands applications and, perhaps, small percentage of sales (not sure if Google actually does this or not but this is logic approach)? Talk with Google first and see if they'll be interested in your creation enough to alter the CDD.
|
|||||||||||||