Slashdot Mirror
Drawing the Line Between Android and Linux
jfruhlinger writes "The relationship between Linux and Android is on a technical level not hard to grasp — there's a shared kernel, but the application and interface layers are quite different. But, as Brian Proffitt points out, there are differences of philosophy and of community — which hasn't stopped Adobe from touting its Android dev tools as proof of its devotion to Linux."
KERNEL.DLL and MS-Windows are also the same thing!
android didn't do anything good for linux, if anything it just made another incompatible implementation of the same platform. wake me up when i can run android app on my linux desktop without needing to run it in some virtual machine.
adobe i don't even wanna comment about. i avoid them more carefully than entrance to hell.
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
When will I be able to run Android on my desktop?
Adobe isn't moving away from the Linux community. Rather, the company is refocusing its efforts into the emerging Linux-based space found in mobile products.
So you're going to market Dreamweaver and Illustrator/Photoshop as the latest greatest dev tool for building apps? Why do I get the feeling academia would really embrace that...
sysadmins and parents of newborns get the same amount of sleep.
"The relationship between Linux and Android is on a technical level not hard to grasp — there's a shared kernel...
Most Linux Distros -> GNU/Linux.
Linux is the kernel. Shared kernel means it's Linux.
Period. end of story.
, but the application and interface layers are quite different.
That could be said for any Linux distro.
Android is a Linux distro.
The main point of the article is about Adobe's development tools for Adobe Air. Is anybody actually using Adobe Air? The only thing I can recall having seen done using Adobe Air is help for recent versions of Adobe products, and this makes it so slow compared with any other help system that it makes a hugely negative ad for Air.
Ok, so I copied the update.zip to the SD card, and ran it from clockwork.
What was supposed to be hard about that?
I don't understand why so many companies refuse to support linux. Yes the market is small comapred to Windows BUT its not that small and its a big niche market which lets you charge more for the software/hardware as most Linux users will undderstand that a company might have to sell at higher margings since the user base numbers are smaller. Mabe its the short term profit mantality that is causing this but wouldn't you as a company want to make customers for life?
I'm just an average Linux user who has all computers in the house running Mint but I don't get into the software and hardware setup anymore yet I'm willing to pay a little more to have the software hardware compatabiliy in Linux even at 20% of whats available on windows.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
No problem! The Android SDK is in the repository for every major distro. Just push out the ROM, and reboot into recovery and flash it.
As I understand it, AIR is pretty much the same environment as Flash, except run outside of a browser.
The kernel is not shared, it is derived and has never _really_ attempted to minimise it's changes from it's upstream so really it is an incompatible fork. So not only is Android not GNU/Linux (or X/Linux or posix/Linux or BSD/Linux) it's not even Linux.
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
So the GNU/Linux arguments start making a lot more sense now, aren't they? Cause if you just call it Linux, Android seems perfectly "Linux" to me.
All the other programs running on top comprise the OS. Why can't people get this straight? There isn't just a "Linux" community, there's a GNU community, an X community, a Debian community, a GCC community, an Android community, etc. Some parts overlap and some parts don't. But to say that all of these communities is Linux is a little misleading.
Why are you posting anonymously, Richard?
You do realize that android apps run in dalvik right?
One common pattern is a Java front-end made especially for Android that runs in Dalvik, combined with a C++ back-end shared with other platforms that runs in the NDK. In MVC terms, this corresponds to a C++ model and a Java view.
There's a difference between being cheap (trying to minimize costs), having an entitlement complex (believing that you deserve everything for free), and wanting the source code available (software freedom). I'm not saying that they don't intersect, but there are differences. It's easy to confuse people who call for software freedom with the people who pirate software, because they're both using the word "free", but in different contexts, and they both have an aversion to paying for commercial software, whereas the cheap user might be virtually immune to spending their money on luxury brands, like Apple or Sony, that offer little real return for the extra money spent.
But, in the end, you're just trolling, and I'm simply bored; so I'm responding to your troll. I'm sure someone else will mention the Humble Indie Bundle, because it's turning into an annoyingly cliched (though true) counter-example to this common troll.
First, it's called Java and it runs android apps on linux (amoung others), just like Linux runs any other app. Android doesn't make kernel bound, machine compiled apps for the very good reason that they need as many apps to run on as many phones without separate compilers. Phones are still running completely different chipsets than PCs, or are you not aware that you can't run amd64.deb on a 32bit PC, etc. etc. If so, you aren't very educated about the issue at all.
If you want to take some code, make some native applications compile to it, I'm sure you could get some command line tools that work on both platforms, compiling separately on each. Mainstream users don't CARE if they can run it on their computers. Frankly, not many geeks care either. That's a pretty minority of a minority view. At best, people would like to run Linux desktop apps on Android, not the other way around.
And the problem isn't Android, it's XWindows. When you get XWindows and Gnome/KDE to run efficiently on ARM, you let me know and THEN we'll talk about portability. Until then, NON ISSUE QED.
And even then, you'd still need a type of virtual machine, regardless of whether the code ran or not. Apps are built for.. wait for it... phones and tablets! It's pointy-multi-touchy, not lefty-righty-clicky.
The fact is that Android is the first, and only, real main stream Linux OS that rivals every single one of its competitors. What did Android do for Linux? That's like asking what Apache has done for Linux. Without Apache, Linux wouldn't have the server market cornered. Android did for linux on phones what Apache did for linux on servers. And if you don't get that analogy, you just don't get it the topic at all.
I8-D
As Linux is only the kernel and not the applications, GUI, C libraries nor any of the other things that make a complete OS then Adobe's claim is completely valid.
There is no line to draw Android uses the Linux kernel the same as Ubuntu and every other GNU/Linux distro.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
With OSS you don't pay for the software, you pay for the service.
I understand. But there are some kinds of software that don't need much service, such as video games that aren't massively multiplayer.
filled with users who demand the right and ability to hire anyone to fix defects in the software
I'm amazed and horrified you think that's a bad thing.
I think it's a good thing. I'm just describing conditions in the market where a lot of major software publishers think it's a bad thing, or at least not enough of a good thing to offset the competition that would occur.
on the desktop you're right - us linux users will look for the free, open source way every time.
This is because FOSS products end up being more capable, over time.
A lot of prominent applications that run in the Adobe runtime are games such as FarmVille. Do games also "end up being more capable, over time" if distributed as free software?
So if you get pedantic, sure, 'Linux' means/meant the kernel and only the kernel.
In *practice*, Linux has come to describe the distributions that all use glibc, xorg, kernel, gtk, qt, etc. As far as application developers go, the kernel underneath it all is interacted with rarely if at all. Adobe in *particular* has no reason to be making Linux *kernel* specific calls, so it *is* disingenuous to hold up Android work as their 'Linux' support. Adobe hasn't done anything to support the specific kernel of any other platform, so trying to say 'Linux means kernel, so Adobe is fine to say that' is just not right.
In truth, the *closest* to a mainstream 'Linux' has been WebOS, but it's fringe and skips the Xorg/GTK/QT part of the equation (though they do use SDL).
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
I wonder if think the main thing the stats prove is that the vulns in Linux server platforms are better understood and publicly documented than those in other platforms because most people use Linux.
Korma: Good
How Offensive WTF is "entitlement complex" lets be fair you made that up. I do not have an unlimited supply of money, and that which I do I work hard for. What I am an "informed consumer with limited income", and that means I choose "best value" . I suspect that is why many Linux users paid more the "Humble Bundle Deal". It could be why many linux users (although I see no evidence of this) do not need the reassurance of large brand names to assess quality as they can read a specification sheet, often a supermarket brand or an unknown developing world country branded device will do more for less. Its not an Item of clothing. The only similarity between pirating and open source is the price of software. I believe more and more more that the model of maximising profits by changing large amounts for artificial scarcity is simply a bad model made worse by DRM etc, fortunately the digital age is killing of the old middlemen, and hopefully will bring affordable good content for everyone. Untill then I buy games from second hand stores. I'm not cheap thats what I can afford, and I'm better off than most.
Whats most worrying about your post is its frighteningly misinformed, you are insulting people who don't buy products from companies (Apple/Sony) that not only cost more, are behind the curve technically/artificially restricted/proprietary technology incompatible with standards.In fact all they have going for them is the BRAND. At least use Samsung/Google/LG/Red Hat software/hardware etc. companies that are cutting edge/open standards....well more so anyway ;)
Linux users respect the developer and their choices. This is inherent in the whole GPL thing.
I see a product and I am willing to pay a fair price for it. I won't make excuses meant to make things cheaper for me.
No. In truth it's Windows users that are the real "freetards". Their numbers just help diffuse this problem somewhat In truth, Windows users are a den of theives that have no problem pirating anything they might want or need. This is the reality that the results of the Humble bundles reflects.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
They're not very up to date, it's true.
So I guess we agree that non-free games rereleased as free software "end up being more capable, over time" in the sense that they end up more capable than they were when first published, but they don't end up more capable than the latest non-free games at any given moment. For example, I haven't seen a game based on ioquake3 or any other Free engine that would compete in production values with my cousin's favorite video game (Call of Duty: Black Ops).
After reading the various comments from some who know more about this than I do, I think I can safely say there is not much agreement. Most arguments have valid points, but perhaps that is where we are with the GNU community, a bunch of ideas that share a similar philosophy, but no one particular direction. Much like the rest of the human race.
Though the physical price (via currency aka Dollar Bill, Euro, Yen, etc) may not be used as much, but the concept of physical and mental cost is still there.
Just because you don't pay in one way, you will still pay in another way. It is called equivalent exchange. you pay one way or another, but you will still pay.
Sorry I still don't understand what any of this has to do with pravda. It seems like you just repeated that the vulnerabilities in open source software are better known and more publicly documented than the MS stack.
Korma: Good
Because there are Apps that would work in either environment just fine. Just because you can think of a case that won't work doesn't mean that all cases don't work.
And that doesn't mean that *your* case is the general case either. Besides, why would people want to develop apps that run on both Android and Linux on a desktop? The majority of the linux user base is either in the mobile arena (via Android) or in the server arena. The desktop arena is irrelevant and provides no business case to develop for it.
The android platform, not your PC, is the Linux desktop. Period.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22entitlement+complex%22
FC Closer
I don't think you have have any idea of what you're talking about and buying into the
X Windows is what makes linux sucks crap !
That statement makes no sense. If 20% of the people want to use Android Apps on the desktop, that isn't the general case, but it would be ridiculous to say that it shouldn't be done because the other 80% don't care. Using that logic, virtually no software should be written.
Using the "Desktop Linux is too small of a market" is equally silly. There are tons of Linux desktop apps. Your argument is that none of those should exist either. It isn't even on the radar for a statement that can be taken seriously.
Finally, Android is not the Linux desktop. It may be one day, but it isn't today, and it may never be. By claiming that Android is the Linux desktop, you are acknowledging that there are Android applications that people want to run on the desktop. Thus contradicting your first statement, and showing that integrating an Android VM into the Linux desktop makes sense.
I think he must mean reflashing it over USB. I'm not brilliant with terminology but I mean the first time you do it to enable recovery. I do not know of a way to do it with Linux. Of course you can transfer an update.zip to your SD card then run it in recovery but you can do that with any OS that supports file transfers and USB.
I care not for your karma and your mod points.
The Humble Bundle proves that people that are fans of open source will pay more for open source games than people that don't give a fuck if it's proprietary or not. It's like using the sales of a Metallica album to prove that Metallica fans are more willing to pay for music than other fans. Fans that were told "please show how much you support us" while the rest were told "please check out our games". Big surprise that a lot of Windows users did download it for nothing or next to nothing to check it our, almost like a free demo while many Linux users took it as a donation run. You can look at Steam and see lots of people spending lots of money on games every day, a single sale there often being more than any OS' users gave for the Humble Bundle. That this somehow proves this is all wrong and that it's the Linux users that are willing to pay and the Windows users that are not, well let's just say it takes a certain kind of zealotry to reach that conclusion.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I could write arguments about why it's not, but...
But, you don't, because you can't. Because every argument you have against it being Linux would either be plain wrong, or could be used to say that distro x, y, or z isn't Linux. Is Gnome linux or KDE? Is .deb linux or is .rpm? Once you hit the application layer, the argument turns to dust, and that's the only argument one could really have. You mention patents. I hate to tell you this, but Linux is still Linux even if on top of it, it is running proprietary, patented, closed source, copyrighted binaries.
The fact is, Android is Linux. You can claim that it is a fork, or a massive fork, or whatever you want. If you could make the argument, you would. If you want to argue that it's not GNU, or it's not fully GPL, or something like that then you have some ground. But no argument takes away from the fact that Android is Linux anymore than arguing that LAMP isn't Linux because Apache uses it's own Apache License, and that's not "real" GPL, or some other RMS rubbish like that.
I thought this junk went away with the arguments over the LGPL.
I8-D
I agree with you.
I can imagine an Android application being the standard format for small 'widget' like applications that run on GNOME and KDE or any other desktop environment.
They would replace the proprietary plasmoids and applets of DE and become standardized. I figure it makes sense because Android supports 'fragments' which are designed to scale up to larger interface.
It also comes with a permission system for free. Many Android APIs could be mapped to a Linux compatibility layer, a daemon called. androidd. Phone call Apps would be using standard Android APIs but integrate with the VOIP software configured by the layer, your contacts with your address book, Wifi with your LAN and so on.
Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
Is there an advantage to the non-adb methods?
They are doing everything in their power to damage Linux in the marketplace.
They are threating manufacturers actively using litigation to increase the cost of deploying Linux on a device/computer above that of Windows. This is a sleazy tactic but Microsoft is proving itself to be one of the sleaziest companies in tech right now.
The racket goes like this. Microsoft enters your store/shop/company :-O
Microsoft: "You know, Its a dangerous neighborhood around here. You need some protection."
You: "Protection? From who?"
Microsoft: "Well.. from us mainly... IF you fail to get protection from us then you will feel the full wrath of our boys in our legal department."
Microsoft: "Oh and by the way. The specifics of our protection deal is under NDA. You cannot talk about it got it?
You:
Linux on openmoko phones can be reflashed over USB using dfu-util.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Did X kick your dog or something? If you don't like it feel free to not use it.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Instead of: "each copy costs $X", say, "to fund the development of that software we need $X"
The trouble is that for some kinds of software, especially software intended for home use, there's no single buyer who can front the entire $X. Say someone has posted the first complete draft of a design document for a video game and asked you to help fund the implementation of that design document. Would you donate? Or would you wait for the finished game to see if the game is worth your while first? How should the developer make the deal more attractive to potential donors?
Have cheap ass users who don't want to pay for anything.
In fairness, if I had an iPhone or a Blackberry or something, I'd still be a cheap ass user who didn't want to pay for anything.
When I want/need an app for my Android phone, I start with the free stuff first. It seems like it's not the best software out there, but it's free, and there's plenty of it. So far I haven't actually paid for anything at all. I really am too cheap to spend $2 for something; especially when you can't just charge it to your phone account, but have to set up some kind of payment account thing at the app store; or at least it looks that way at a glance. Meh. Too much trouble. I'm cheap and lazy.
The android platform, not your PC, is the Linux desktop. Period.
Guess I need to erase the last 10 or so years of my life then.