Android Will Surpass Windows By 2016, Say Gartner Stats

An anonymous reader writes "Google's Android operating system will be used on more computing devices than Microsoft's Windows within four years, data from research firm Gartner showed on Wednesday, underlining the massive shift in the technology sector. At the end of 2016, there will be 2.3 billion computers, tablets and smartphones using Android software, compared with 2.28 billion Windows devices, Gartner data showed." The comparison would make less sense if Android was strictly for phones, and Windows was strictly for desktops-with-keyboards, but gets interesting as the devices on which each system runs overlap ever more.

Comments

Extrapolating

[w_dragon]

Is this how they're getting their predictions?

Re:Extrapolating

[cod3r_]

Damn you and your windows posting faster than my android.

Re:Extrapolating

[CodeheadUK]

Every HP networking webinar I see manages to crowbar the Magic Quadrant slide in somewhere. Someone must believe the hype.

Re:Extrapolating

[ruir]

They dont need to extrapolate squat. They professional bullshiters, they have long been presenting the present as the future. I still wonder why people quote tem.

Re:Extrapolating

[geekoid]

Becasue Gartner is really good. They take good data, and create conclusion for that fixed data.

They arn't perfect, but the are pretty damn accurate. I listen to people from Garter, and they know their math. and they general have great methodologies.

WTF?

[Cyberax]

What are they smoking? Android devices will surpass the number of PCs the next year. Probably, it's already the most widely used OS.

Re:WTF?

[geekoid]

No. Right now.
608 million android device.
1.68 BILLION windows devices.

devices being defined as " computers, tablets and smartphones"

SO, maybe you should put down the pipe and actually read the article.

x86 port

[etash]

If google provided with an official x86 port ( 64bit only ) we would already see pcs with android ( yes i know of http://www.android-x86.org/ )

Re:x86 port

[Synerg1y]

*facepalm* It's called linux, Android is based off it. Also you can run Android OS via an emulator just about anywhere.

Re:x86 port

[mlts]

Splitting hairs here, Linux is the kernel, and if one really wants to be technical about it, Android can be considered a really modified Linux distribution.

The issue with Android making the jump to the desktop hinges around one issue: User support. Android uses UIDs to separate apps. How would it keep users separate, which is a must on a desktop box.

The only way I can see that happening would be a hypervisor based system with each user on their own VM, and the core filesystem everything sits on having deduplication built in (so each user's environment only saves what the user's changes are.) Then, have a system where users have one mounted filesystem for sharing between everything.

It can be done, but it would take a lot of work for it to be decently elegant. However, it done right, it would be decently secure unless an app is able to get out of the hypervisor.

Other than the fact that Android is a single-user OS, it would not be too bad on the desktop. The permission model is solid enough that a compromised Web browser wouldn't mean the whole user or machine is nailed.

Re:x86 port

[AuMatar]

Android does exist on x86. They officially support it in the NDK, and several OEMs have released products on it.

Re:x86 port

[blind biker]

Simple- it wouldn't. Android on a desktop box would work just like Android on a phone. It wouldn't keep separate users. Why would it? It's not a multi-user system. You seem to want a new feature to Android for a desktop box. Since desktop isn't their goal, I doubt they'd add it.

Your claim is easy and quick to dispute, amigo.

But don't worry; pompousness and self-confidence will get you far in life!

Re:x86 port

[dmbasso]

For the record- I don't see why you'd want Android on a desktop, it would be a bad experience. But nothing is stopping you right now, x86 support is out.

Isn't what Windows 8 is all about? I mean, the bad experience.

Re:x86 port

[JDG1980]

*facepalm* It's called linux, Android is based off it.

Android is based on the Linux kernel. And the reason it's been successful (aside from Google's marketing muscle, which is a not inconsiderable factor) is that it blasted away the 20 layers of worthless legacy shit that sits on top of the kernel on desktops, and replaced it with a new stack that (to borrow an Apple term) "just works". Well, at least for most users, most of the time – but that's more than can be said about [spit] desktop Linux.

Re:x86 port

[JDG1980]

I would wager that Android on the desktop would suffer from the same problems that other distributions suffer from.. drivers for one. All Android would be is a distro that updates infrequently and has an integrated app store.

The app store is a really big deal... one of the major reasons people don't use desktop Linux is the fact that it doesn't run many of the programs they want to use. There are probably more apps for Android by now than for desktop Linux, and certainly more apps that the average person would be interested in using.

Drivers are a chicken-and-egg problem... a lot of vendors don't bother with drivers for Linux because it's a small market, and it remains a small market in part because driver support sucks. But Android, by solving some of the other barriers to Linux-kernel adoption, could help break that logjam.

Re:x86 port

[Sparrowhawk7]

Android already had partial multi user support built in, and this will be complete soon, maybe even as early as 4.2 Remember the underlying OS kernel and filesystem support is linux. a quick google search https://www.google.com.au/search?q=android+multiuser returns over 2.5 M matches. The x86 support is already surprisingly complete and functional, and is being given direct development assistance from Intel itself.

Re:x86 port

[rtb61]

Obviously M$ believes it because that is exactly what they are trying to force a tablet and phone based interface onto PC users. Putting in a cheap upgrade path and are going to become real dicks when it comes to fucking up windows 7 on purpose. They are trying to force everyone to become used to their interface in order to do an end run around android appearing on the desk. Instead they will end up really pissing off their customers at the most risky time, this dependent upon how much they purposefully screw up windows 7, you can already see it with no service pack 2 for windows 7 and that will just be the start of Uncle Fester douche baggery.

Oblig

[oodaloop]

2016: Year of the Linux desktop? Or something?

Re:Oblig

[Arancaytar]

Sure, if your desktop device is a phone. I suppose it's possible.

Different interaction method required for desktops

[CodeheadUK]

If you've run the Android VM that was knocking about a while back, you'll know that using a mouse to interact with an Android device is horrible.
The long press and gesture method works fine for fingers, but when you've got a mouse in your hand, certain things happen without the concious mind getting in the way.
TFA may be talking about mobile devices, but if any mobile OS is to take on the desktops, it needs to support traditional input methods.

gartner!

[MickyTheIdiot]

Since Gartner is reporting anti-Windows news, count on it happening in 2 1/2 years!

Getting real

[Beat The Odds]

1) No, Android is not for the destkop... that's called Linux

2) No, Gartner is just comparing the number of apples with the number of oranges.

Move along...

Re:First

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course that means further demise of the desktop.

I'll stand on the sidewalk and wave as the desktop heads outta town, providing the apps I need work reasonably on tablets.

And what happens when they don't, and then tablets move in and start shitting on your kitchen counter and demanding you fork more money into them every year because last year's model isn't supported anymore, while your desktop chugged along happily for years on end?

That's an awfully big "provided" clause you've got there. But, provided Jesus comes back and everyone gets candy and happiness in solid, tangible form, all wars and conflicts end, and we all live in permanent euphoria forever and ever, I guess that'll be all right!

Re:Different interaction method required for deskt

[oh_my_080980980]

Yeah 'cuz it's not like Microsoft is pushing tablet behavior on the desktop...oh wait....

This is huge!

[Just Some Guy]

First, this means that Gartner is admitting that people might like something other than Windows. Second, now it means that it won't actually happen.

Microsoft isn't the only one to be worried

[sl4shd0rk]

M$ should be worried. Along with Apple and anyone else trying to keep their proprietary little death-grip on their market share. Android is turning up everywhere. It's becoming ubiquitous. You can find it on everything from smartphones to Televisions[0] to Refrigerators[1]. Why do you think Apple is going 'thermo nuclear' on Android? It's not just due to 'Rounded corners and rectangular design' it's because Android can be made to run on just about any home appliance imaginable -- and guess who makes a lot of home appliances (TVs, fridges, washing machines, etc) as well as smartphones? Now guess who doesn't?

Apple and Microsoft PAY people extraordinary salaries to forecast market trends. They know where the industry is trending. And it ain't trending into Cupertino or Redmond at the moment -- at least not in the world outside of the US.

[0] - http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/android-powered-pocket-tv-turns-any-television-into-a-smart-tv/

[1] - http://www.technologyreview.com/view/425210/do-we-really-need-an-android-powered-fridge/

Android most popular Linux distro

[Runesabre]

For years we've been talking about "The Year for Linux on the Desktop". As veteran game developer, it's always boggled me how Linux, despite it's power, is so shortsighted when it comes to 3rd party support and distribution. 3rd part support and easy distribution along with backwards and forwards compatibility is what made Windows so dominate over the past 20 years. The typical solution bandied about by Linux users is "you can always distribute the source and recompile". Yes, that's what the average computer wants to do; fiddle around recompiling source code on their personal micro-flavor of Linux out of a sea of 100s of distros only to have it break again with the next 0.0.0.1 release of the underlying OS.

What's telling to me is that now when you ask "What's the most popular Linux distro", you can arguably say "Android" and the reason Android has become so popular is because it easily supports 3rd party apps like a reasonable OS is expected. No fuss no muss. Just like Windows.

Congratulations, Google, for finally taking Linux in the right direction.

Re:Android most popular Linux distro

[Anonymous Coward]

Except android isn't really like any other linux distribution. Android uses the Linux kernel, but it doesn't use the gnu libraries, x-windows, and all the other supporting infra-structure of a typical linux distribution.

Android is largely a linux kernel to support the hardware and multi-tasking, with a modified Java VM running the apps. That's quite different from what most would consider Linux. I still think it's great, and a wonderful alternative to the Windows stack, but grouping it with the other linux distributions is really misleading. It's really like a totally re-imagined Linux, killing off much of the Unix roots.

Re:Android most popular Linux distro

[grcumb]

For years we've been talking about "The Year for Linux on the Desktop". As veteran game developer, it's always boggled me how Linux, despite it's power, is so shortsighted when it comes to 3rd party support and distribution. 3rd part support and easy distribution along with backwards and forwards compatibility is what made Windows so dominate over the past 20 years.

I've read these sentences twice and see nothing even resembling insight in them.

Backwards and especially forwards compatibility are useful aspects of Windows, yes. When they work. But the DLL Hell of the late '90s was one of the main factors that drove me away from Windows. One of the other main factors that drove me away was finding bugs in commercial (proprietary) software, notifying the developers and being told, "Yeah, we'll take a look at that for the next release cycle. Thanks!" The next release cycle was usually months away, weeks at best.

Third party support was, by and large, absolute crippling shit. The straw that finally broke this particular camel's back was a memory leak somewhere in between IIS and a proprietary search product, for which the only available solution was to run a scheduled task every 24 hours to reboot the fucking server. No fix was ever promised by the vendor and Microsoft wasn't willing even to investigate. Unbelievable.

No, there are good reasons for Windows' dominance, not all of them to do with marketing. But claiming that it was ever, in any way, a more stable, predictable platform is just... wishful thinking.

The typical solution bandied about by Linux users is "you can always distribute the source and recompile".

You're using the wrong value of 'you'. If you had explored Linux distributions in any detail at all, you'd know that the 'you' who does the recompile is the package maintainer. This means that the actual developer can simply maintain a stable code base and leave it to others to handle dependency issues on their particular platform. Which is as it should be, because each distro knows its own requirements better than any third party software developer could ever be expected to.

Yes, Linux is a moving target. But let me see if I can find the right way to express this.... Bear with me, it might be a little subtle:

THAT'S THE FUCKING POINT.

Yes, it puts the onus on package maintainers to keep releasing new versions as the kernel moves underneath them and the libraries progress alongside. Maintaining a product on Linux requires that you fly in formation with others. But that's because it sees the computing ecosystem as a fundamentally dynamic environment, one that emergent and contingent, so it allows for division of labour in order to cope with requirements that change constantly. This makes it more responsive to people's individual needs. And that, perversely perhaps, makes it a more secure, stable and manageable platform for most organisations.

(And it would be dishonest of me to say that all distros manage change well. The constant eruption of petty, bothersome bugs is what made me recently swear off Ubuntu for good. But I had alternatives. Good ones. A vote against Ubuntu is NOT a criticism of Linux.)

Now, I'm not claiming there's no benefit to a predictable (albeit imperfect) environment with a vastly slower rate of change at the fundamental level. What I'm trying to say here is that this is hardly the solution to everything. Furthermore, to criticise Linux for being different from what you know exposes a fundamental disregard for the very things that have made it one of the most ubiquitous and versatile platforms in the world today.

Hence Windows 8

[fm6]

This is why 8 is so absurdly tablet-centric. If people are buying tablets instead of PCs, well, you can retain them as customers by shoehorning your PC OS into the new paradigm.

What this strategy misses is the fact that people are not replacing their PCs with tablets. They still use PCs, but they don't upgrade them very often. So Windows doesn't have any special advantage as a tablet OS, and is unlikely to rival Android or iOS.

Re:Hence Windows 8

[Kwyj1b0]

What this strategy misses is the fact that people are not replacing their PCs with tablets. They still use PCs, but they don't upgrade them very often. So Windows doesn't have any special advantage as a tablet OS, and is unlikely to rival Android or iOS.

I think what MS is counting on is interoperability. Sure, they have a tablet, and a desktop, and a phone. If you can make sure you can seamlessly (in an information sense) transition from one to another (desktop at home, tablet/phone on the road) and they all contain the same information (i.e. constant sync), then you would like it. Amazon does the same thing with its Kindle app - doesn't matter if I use a phone/PC/Kindle/Fire to read a book; they are all in sync.

While the idea is good, they want to make the experience seamless as well (putting a tablet UI on a desktop). That is where the issue gets interesting/depressing/irrelevant. On a dual monitor desktop, I found that the Windows 8 experience is great. I think I'd hate it on a single monitor setup (which most people use).

Most Androids sold are already in the landfil

[cockpitcomp]

Considering most phones last less than 2 years. How about comparing working devices?

Re:First

[roc97007]

Enh. If you have to attach a keyboard and mouse to a tablet in order to do real work, you've already lost. I would submit that this would *not* be the demise of the desktop. Rather, it's an admission that OS and app creators don't understand the touch paradigm.

Please make it so

[Sloppy]

The issue with Android making the jump to the desktop hinges around one issue: User support. Android uses UIDs to separate apps. How would it keep users separate, which is a must on a desktop box.
 
The only way I can see that happening would be a hypervisor based system with each user on their own VM, and the core filesystem everything sits on having deduplication built in (so each user's environment only saves what the user's changes are.) Then, have a system where users have one mounted filesystem for sharing between everything.

Forget desktops; even for single-user mobile devices, what you're describing sounds like an excellent idea anyway. "Excellent" maybe even understates it; I'd say something like this is necessary for phones to ever stop sucking.

It'd useful not just so that different users could use different VMs, but also to optionally hide one user's applications from one another. Something refuses to install unless I give it access to my address book? Ok, here, have .. um.. an address book.