Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

We Didn't Need Google's Schmidt To Tell Us Android and Chrome Wouldn't Merge

Posted by samzenpus on from the keep-em-seperated dept.

First time accepted submitter Steve Patterson writes "Thankfully, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt has announced that 'Android and Chrome will remain separate.' Rumors that the products would be combined emerged last week when leadership of Android and Chrome were consolidated under Google Senior Vice President Sundar Pichai. Schmidt stated the obvious, but if you are a developer and you took the bait and thought the rumors might be true, you already read enough of Google Chrome or Google Android documentation before Schmidt's clarification and confirmed that consolidating the two products would be, well, stupid."

76 of 107 comments (clear)

  1. Forced convergence is all the rage. by symbolset · · Score: 5, Funny

    Obviously they're crazy. Putting the same mobile touch-based user interface on every phone, tablet, laptop, desktop, watch, games console, server and small appliance is the wave of the future.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
    1. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by jhoegl · · Score: 2

      Son, Ballmer don't tell us Schmidt!

    2. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by slashmydots · · Score: 1

      I don't want to touch my server and you can't make me.

    3. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's because he's not just an ordinary man, man. He's my idol. He has powers of perception so far beyond what mere mortals have, man, that other people just can't see what he can see - that most people don't think are even there. The whole of space and time is just a vector field to him, man - a dancing dynamic vortex of brilliant paisley colors and he can SEE in it the way forward clear as day where all anybody else can see is dancing babies and "blonde, brunette, redhead". People who question him, man, they aren't the devil. They're just confused man. Confused by the cacophony of all the distractions of everyday demands and petty wants of customers because they don't have his clarity to see that making everybody take what you want to give them is the proper social order, man.

    4. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by bhcompy · · Score: 1

      Which is why it's not unbelievable that people would believe it, joke or not. It simply is the unfortunate wave of the stupid tech corporate overlord future.

    5. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by symbolset · · Score: 1

      People are not as stupid as you need them to be to put this over.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    6. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which is frankly bumming me the hell out, this is the first time since i got into tech in the late 70s that I have thought the future is actually gonna be shittier than what we have now. before things always got better, systems got faster, prices went lower, the generations were just better and better...now? Its fucking game consoles man, that is ALL it is, fucking locked down game consoles in phone or tablet or whatever form and the public eats that shit up because it means they don't have to think because there is no thought involved with a game console, mommy corp takes care of everything so don't you worry your pretty little head none. They'll tell you what to buy, when to buy a new one, it'll all be controlled and as user friendly as a TV remote and just as worthless for anything not approved by corporate.

      Its fucking depressing man, you got Google building DBs on everybody that would make the Stasi jealous, you got Apple seeing how locked down they can make a device and still get the public to buy, and you got MSFT being Apple's bitch and copying every bad feature of Apple without any good, the whole thing fucking stinks.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    7. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by symbolset · · Score: 1

      Hairy, Sell mobile devices, skins and accessories. You'll be fine.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    8. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by Snospar · · Score: 2

      I mostly agree with you and yes, it is depressing but I think there is another reason pushing people onto these locked down devices and it's simply that Microsoft still haven't worked out how to protect their systems from malware & viruses. Now before everyone jumps in and says this isn't just a MS problem, malware attacks 3rd party software too - I know that and I'll gladly put Java and Adobe in the same sin bin.

      Let's say that Average Joe buys a nice shiny Windows laptop for $2000 - it's his machine, he can install whatever software he likes and there's no lock down right? But even on day one there is crapware installed by the laptop vendor that has started to slow his machine down (preinstalled AV "trials", desktop gadgets, Troubleshooting "assistants" and of course add-on toolbars). Now lets move on 6 months, the shiny laptop that was pretty fast on day one is now crawling - he's probably got a virus or some other malware by this stage (possibly because his OS updates didn't force 3rd party updates) and to combat this he's now got 2 or 3 always active anti-virus/anti-malware scanners running. It's possible he's also got malware masquerading as Antivirus running too and all these applications are fighting with the system and each other for resources.

      But look over there, someone with a crappy netbook isn't having these problems because it's running Linux, or there's someone else with an Apple iThing (which they religiously keep updated and haven't been hit by any unfortunate 0-day exploits) and finally there's someone with a Chromebook who again have no need for multiple AV programs.

      I hate that people opt for locked down systems over Linux but I think I hate more being called out to try and fix the crappy mess that Windows has left someone with when they mistakenly clicked that dodgy link on the web.

      --
      Moore's law is not a law. Theory, yes; Predictable trend, certainly; Law, no.
    9. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by wed128 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'll have what he's having.

    10. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Apple's devices are locked down? Compared to what? I can install anything I want on a macbook, for instance, so that entire line is out. As for iPhones / iPads you can install other stuff, most people just choose not too, as the real value in both of those devices is access to Apple's marketplace.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    11. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      FUCK THAT. Seriously fuck that bullshit. You ever try to get parts for any of that shit? Can't do it, doesn't matter if the fucking thing is $700 they expect you to throw it away. there is exactly one dude in town that will deal with that shit and when i asked him how he leads me out back and he has like a 4 car fucking garage filled with NOTHING but dead mobile devices for parts...fuck that, fuck that locked down fucking garbage, I'll go back to playing behind God damned chicken wire before I be a party to that customer fucking horseshit.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    12. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      Bullshit its become a status thing. Hell my fricking dad asked about getting an iPhone, he can't even work the stuff he has on his Android phone and frankly hates smartphones so why would he want an iPhone? Because the other big wigs has one so he has the urge to keep up with the Joneses, that's all. I saw a girl struggling like hell to juggle her purse and a shopping cart because she was using a damned iPad for a fricking grocery list. The dirty look when I said "Trying to justify shelling out all that money huh?" told me all I needed to know, she had no real use for the thing, it was ALL about status but now that she had the thing she couldn't think of enough ways to be seen with it to justify the expense.

      That is one thing I always gave Jobs credit for, he could take what should be a boring device and make it into a Rolex watch, something that the wealthy have and the poor want, even if they have no fucking real use for the thing and something half the price would do just as well...like a Rolex watch actually. Its all about the illusion of status and classism, of making those around think you are better than you are, and it fricking stinks. Its no different than those $300 Jordan sneakers, is there any. single. thing. that makes a Jordan somehow "better" other than the price tag? Nope made in the same Chinese sweatshops where you get cheaper sneakers from but BECAUSE it costs $300 it is therefor better. It reminds me of the hostage situation on Robocop "I want a 6000 SUX that goes really fast and gets really shitty gas mileage" because in the commercials built into Robocop the fact you could afford to drive such a gas hog was its entire appeal, it showed money meant nothing to you which is why all the execs in that movie were in 6000 SUXs.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    13. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by bhcompy · · Score: 1

      To be fair, you can infer iProduct from "Apple devices" simply because of sales numbers. Macbooks are a tiny sliver of the Apple retail pie

    14. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by pnutjam · · Score: 2

      Maybe there is a market for a business class of device that can be repaired. I think it's afew years off, but I just heard the other day a news report saying how all the hardware specs are boring and don't really mean anything. It's the software that matters on new phones. Commodization can't be too far off and then it gets down to durability and fix-ability.

      --
      Cheap storage VM.
    15. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by SpectreBlofeld · · Score: 2

      Software isn't the only reason for slowdowns. The thermal paste on processors also gets old and brittle after a few years, causing the CPUs to overheat. The CPUs then self-throttle in order to keep the heat down, which slows the machine down. This is why even a machine that is well-maintained in software will get slower over the years than it was when it was new. This is especially true for laptops that have desktop-class processors in them. Re-applying thermal paste and cleaning out all the gunk from the cooling system can help.

      Your ARM netbooks and mobile devices don't generally have this problem because the processors don't run as hot.

    16. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      "Tiny sliver"? 4M Macs vs 17M iPad vs 26M iPhones Q3 2012 because it was the first result that showed numbers. It's in the same order of magnitude in numbers, and in dollars, you'll note that iPhone/iPad numbers include related services, while the Mac ones do not and it's still 20% of the pie. If that's your definition of a "tiny sliver", then I'm sure you don't mind sending me $5B a quarter. My wallet will appreciate it.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    17. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Now THAT I would jump on in a heartbeat, the reason I don't have to advertise anymore is my customers have spread the word that you get a system from me and the thing 1.-Lasts a good long time and 2.- Has plenty of upgrade paths, so that would be right up their alley.

      The problem is you have the king of commodity OSes trying their damnedest to kill off anything commodity because Steve "I work at Cupertino herpa derp" Ballmer thinks he can throw a paintjob on a Pinto and sell it for Porsche money and its NEVER gonna happen. it took 10+ years for Steve Jobs to convince the world that Apple was an upscale brand and with Ballmer shitting money chasing one fad after another they can't afford to sit a decade out.

      But ya know what pisses me off the most? Before Win 8 came and shit all over the UI there was nothing wrong with the desktop and in fact that was the reason WHY desktop sales have slowed down, it has finally become a rock solid reliable machine! Hell the LOW END builds I sell are Athlon triples with 4GB of RAM, these are powerful enough I have an engineer customer doing his robotics models on one and is VERY happy with its performance so he simply sees no need to replace, not that he would have to as I make sure that all my systems can take a bare minimum of a quad and most can go hexacore or octocore and 8-32GB of RAM limits so plenty of upgrade room.

      Frankly it wouldn't be hard at all to make a tablet or smartphone that was easily fixable and used commodity parts but the problem is companies like Apple and MSFT have gotten spoiled on those 2-3 year upgrade cycles and don't want to face the fact that most people? just don't need that much power. It is THIS reason why I hate the rise of the game console so damned much, because its becoming obvious that when they can't force the user to buy because the hardware is better (which like X86 before it ARM is about to slam into the thermal wall too) they are gonna force them with software. "Oh you want to run the latest browser? Sorry but that requires Win 9 or iPad 7 so you'll just have to buy a new system" because they can simply change the APIs enough that new software won't run on the older units and that's that and it fricking stinks. this isn't like before where Intel and AMD were making such leaps in design that a 3 year old PC was several times slower than the latest model, nope this is all about greed and keeping wall street happy by making sure there is turnover whether its needed or not.

      This is why I think the future is gonna suck, they are gonna get it set up so by the time a device is out of contract you'll have to throw it away, not because it won't have the power to run what you want but because corporate won't LET it run what you want. And for all those that went "Poo poo, M$ is evil, Apple is good" take a good damned look because you are gonna get to see what an Apple led future looks like and its gonna blow worse chunks than before, mark my words.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    18. Re:Forced convergence is all the rage. by nobodie · · Score: 1

      Agreed, I took my wife's laptop, which had slowed considerably, noticeably, and took off the cpu fan, cleaned it, blew out the cruft from the sinks and the fan and the air conduits, re-applied paste and put it back together. She was so happy that she doesn't want a new one (and this one was a 2007 purchase) which makes me happy too!

      --
      Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.
  2. The OS should match the hardware by xyzio · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Chrome and Android are very different OS. Chrome is designed to run off the web on lightweight hardware using a keyboard/mouse while Android has a touch interface and runs on essentially mini-computers and needs to be able run offline. Combining them is going to give you something like Win 8 - neither one nor the other but a giant mess.

    --
    Just because it's hard doesn't mean you shouldn't try, it means you should try harder!
    1. Re:The OS should match the hardware by c0lo · · Score: 2

      It is possible to somewhat merge the products in an intelligent way, while retaining their advantages for the hardware they work on.

      You wish! Unfortunately, better chances are in having the progeny as ugly as the one parent and as stupid as the other.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    2. Re:The OS should match the hardware by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      having fw for both on the same device wouldn't be too bad - and then a way to run android apps in chrome(the other way doesn't matter as much).
      why? well, for starters there would be a standard for devices that slide into another shell, like a phone into a laptop.

      it's all the same hw anyways.

      but I suppose google would rather have you move everything through google drive than let you keep everything on-device..

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:The OS should match the hardware by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      having fw for both on the same device wouldn't be too bad - and then a way to run android apps in chrome(the other way doesn't matter as much).

      Surely the other way round is trivial -- isn't the Android browser based on the main Chrome codebase?

      Personally I think Chrome OS is redundant, and that Google should have made a non-touch UI patch for Android. I would love to "converge" my desktop and mobile experience... as long as it was based on a sensible UI, and not effing Metro....

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    4. Re:The OS should match the hardware by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Chrome and Android are very different OS.

      Chrome is a browser, and Android is an operating system. Linux is a kernel, and it is the basis for both Android, and ChromeOS, a lightweight Linux distribution intended to present an interface to the user only through the Chrome browser.

      Chrome is designed to run off the web on lightweight hardware using a keyboard/mouse while Android has a touch interface and runs on essentially mini-computers and needs to be able run offline.

      You do not even know what a minicomputer is, so please don't use that word again until you consult a computing dictionary. Android does not run on minicomputers, and it barely runs on microcomputers. It's intended to run on handheld computing platforms, but one day it should be a dandy operating system for microcomputers as well. (Right now, the hardware support is lacking.) It has no problems supporting a mouse and keyboard interface, which has been true since Gingerbread at the latest — which was delivered with the Acer Aspire One AOD250 netbook, which is an example of a microcomputer.

      Combining them is going to give you something like Win 8 - neither one nor the other but a giant mess.

      Chrome for Android already exists, which permits you to combine Chrome with Android by installing an APK. It is crap compared to the version of Chrome for microcomputers, which is why ChromeOS even exists. Otherwise, it would make absolutely no sense for Google to maintain two Linux-based operating systems (Android and ChromeOS) due to duplication of effort. When and if Chrome for Android reaches feature-parity with Chrome for ChromeOS, then not only will there be no further reason for ChromeOS to exist, but we will also be able to say that Google has "merged" Android and ChromeOS, since the entire interface of ChromeOS is the Chrome browser.

      I admit that for there to be no reason for ChromeOS to exist any longer, that Android will have to be able to run on the equivalent of the highest-end Chromebook shipping at the time, but almost regardless of the details that will be a minor implementation hurdle compared to bringing Chrome for Android up to speed.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:The OS should match the hardware by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Tell that to... well, every major OS, since they still don't seem to grasp that Tablets and Desktops are different hardware.

      That's what made it so believable. "Stupid" is the order of the day.

    6. Re:The OS should match the hardware by Sabah+Arif · · Score: 1

      Is Google targeting the PDP-11 now?

    7. Re:The OS should match the hardware by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

      I hate to break it to you, but *no one* has called PC's microcomputers since 1991. People are calling very small computers minicomputers, even though that name used to mean a computer that was housed in one cabinet. Time changes, terminology gets reused. Adapt for the sake of your own sanity.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    8. Re:The OS should match the hardware by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      People are calling very small computers minicomputers

      Ignorant people who wish to appear knowledgeable, yes.

      If they become educated, then they can appear knowledgeable to people who actually know something. Which is why I am providing correction. If I were in some other venue and the term came up, odds are I'd let it slide unless it were particularly useful to appear to be the nerdliest dork in the room. Around here, I don't worry so much about hurting someone's feelings when they misuse a term, because they really ought to know better. If you can figure out how to use Slashdot, then you surely can use Google; if all that is wanting is wanting, then I'm even less worried about hurting their feelings. Lack of fucks to be given will not improve Slashdot.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:The OS should match the hardware by richalger · · Score: 1

      +1, Insightful

  3. All Google products are very ethereal by fustakrakich · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They pop up and disappear like toadstools. Google is everything but stagnant.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  4. Tell it to Mozillla by colfer · · Score: 4, Informative

    Tell it to Mozilla. All resources seem to be going to the OS project. Thunderbird lost funding.

    1. Re:Tell it to Mozillla by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

      Thunderbird is pretty stable though, and to their credit they don't suffer from a severe degree of featuritus.

    2. Re:Tell it to Mozillla by caspy7 · · Score: 2

      Thunderbird's Address Book is being replaced and made pluggable (easily connecting to various contact providers).
      So not all development has stopped.
      Work from Thunderbird has fed into Firefox OS and I believe vice versa.

    3. Re:Tell it to Mozillla by loufoque · · Score: 1

      Thunderbird still has major problems with performance, disk usage and connectivity...

    4. Re:Tell it to Mozillla by MancunianMaskMan · · Score: 1

      maybe, but then again I switched to Thunderbird from Evolution, and performance and connectivity improved by orders of magnitude. Performance is always relative...

    5. Re:Tell it to Mozillla by ProzacPatient · · Score: 1

      I used to use Thunderbird but then I got a job. I'd happily switch back to Thunderbird if they'd add in Exchange support like every other mail client on the planet. :(

    6. Re:Tell it to Mozillla by Tarlus · · Score: 1

      You can still make it work using IMAP, Lightning and the Lightning Exchange connector. It's not as fully-featured as Outlook as far as being an Exchange client, but it covers the basics. OWA can cover the rest (out of office reminders, etc) when needed. I used it for the better part of a year before deciding that Outlook 2010 isn't so bad.

      --
      /* No Comment */
  5. It's not as crazy as you think... by supersat · · Score: 2

    Parts of Chrome and Android have always shared code (namely WebKit and some glue), but now Android is shipping Chrome as the default browser. The weird overlap is between Chrome OS and Android. Chrome OS is just Linux and Chrome... both of which are part of Android.

    1. Re:It's not as crazy as you think... by kllrnohj · · Score: 2

      Which is *exactly* why it's crazy/stupid to merge them. The entire point of ChromeOS is that it's just a browser. If you merge anything with it, all you've done is killed ChromeOS. And there's nothing to merge from ChromeOS into other OSes - it's just the Chrome browser, which Android already has.

    2. Re:It's not as crazy as you think... by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      I was always confused why chrome wasn't the default preinstalled browser on android. Google developed the same thing twice?

    3. Re:It's not as crazy as you think... by jaxxa · · Score: 2

      Google Chrome does not Run on older versions of Android.

    4. Re:It's not as crazy as you think... by kllrnohj · · Score: 4, Informative

      I was always confused why chrome wasn't the default preinstalled browser on android. Google developed the same thing twice?

      You seem to have forgotten your history here. Chrome and Android launched around the same time. Hell, Chrome on Linux didn't show up until 2010 - that's *AFTER* the Motorola Droid had launched. It's obvious *NOW* that Chrome should run on Android. But 3-4 years ago both Chrome *and* Android were far from proven, and both were focused on establishing themselves first.

      Also, how you build a browser on a desktop is very different from how you build one on mobile. And the vast majority of the work is bringing webkit up on a new platform. WebKit by itself doesn't do much - it's basically "just" HTML parsing + DOM management + JavaScript. Graphics, audio, video, etc... is all platform-specific, and when Android was starting out webkit didn't support touch either.

    5. Re:It's not as crazy as you think... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The entire point of ChromeOS is that it's just a browser.

      Delete everything but the browser from your chromebook, and let me know how well it works.

      And there's nothing to merge from ChromeOS into other OSes - it's just the Chrome browser, which Android already has.

      ChromeOS is a lightweight linux which delivers the Chrome browser. Android is a lightweight linux which delivers the Chrome browser. See the problem here? Maintaining a product line which provides a subset of another product line but which isn't simply a compile/build system flag away is a wasteful duplication of effort. ChromeOS only exists because Chrome on Android isn't as good as Chrome on ChromeOS. When this is no longer true it will make more sense to simply ditch ChromeOS, and put Android behind Chrome, possibly without other apps save for perhaps config and so on. It's not there yet, so it's not going to happen yet.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:It's not as crazy as you think... by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Also, how you build a browser on a desktop is very different from how you build one on mobile.

      Not particularly. Android on something like the Asus Transformer series shows what kind of an OS it would be on a full desktop/laptop. Which is to say, it isn't perfect, because a developed-for-desktop OS would probably be more powerful and a bit less clunky, but it is certainly usable and not inconvenient at all.

      The paradigms are not all that different. For starters, the app listing on the iPhone and Android is merely a smaller version of the desktop. The home button is just a glorified start button. And the pop-up keyboard is merely a real physical keyboard that's not going to take up screen space. The only difference is in the number of drivers that a desktop might need, and possibly aspect ratio support.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    7. Re:It's not as crazy as you think... by snadrus · · Score: 1

      Each needs to support a browser that does graphics, audio, video, etc. So I'd push for similarity: Kernels & platform components. That reduces code duplication (thereby reducing bugs & freeing dev time).

      Then Chrome OS gets reliability benefits from Android's user base (public bug testing), and Android gets great native (non-Dalvik) components for better performance.

      --
      Science & open-source build trust from peer review. Learn systems you can trust.
    8. Re:It's not as crazy as you think... by MikeBritton · · Score: 1

      Every Android Activity can use a chromeClient object to listen for openFileChooser and onProgressChanged events from the webkit-based WebView. This is where a new API needs to allow scripting access.

  6. Linked article has little to say on the issue by grouchomarxist · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The only bit of substance this article has is the quote from Eric Schmidt which is a partial quote which leaves out a very important bit. The fuller quote is: "Chrome and Android operating systems will remain separate products but could have more overlap ". When the article discusses Chrome it seems to be focused on Chrome the browser, not Chrome OS, which the linked Reuter's article properly does. The original article discusses the differences between Chrome and Android, but none of these differences preclude merging or otherwise combining the OSes. In particular, it is very possible that Google at some time will support running Android apps on Chrome OS or running Chrome OS apps on Android.

    1. Re:Linked article has little to say on the issue by roc97007 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More overlap is fine. The back end could be virtually identical (probably is already very similar) and developers would benefit. As long as they don't try to force us to use the android touch interface on non-touch chromebooks, we're golden.

      Google appears to understand that presentation is a layer atop a collection of resources. Presentation is not the OS

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    2. Re:Linked article has little to say on the issue by samkass · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Is the summary really implying Sergey Brin, Google's co-founder, is stupid for suggesting that the two OS's will probably merge someday?

      --
      E pluribus unum
    3. Re:Linked article has little to say on the issue by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Even Android doesn't force you to use the Android touch interface. Have you ever installed Android-x86? I wouldn't suggest you depend on it for anything, but it should be an eye-opener. But beyond that, you can plug a mouse into a modern Android device with host mode and get a pointer...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Linked article has little to say on the issue by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > Have you ever installed Android-x86?

      I have not, but I might soon. Daughter has a touch screen laptop with Win8 Pro, and we're both very unhappy with it. We have it on the network and talking to the printers, and I've figured out the registry change to get the apps to display, but the aspect ratio is still wrong, ACPI still doesn't work correctly and neither of us like the interface. Once I learn enough to deal with inevitable customer Win8 issues, this thing will get reimaged with something. Android might be a good choice.

      So no, I don't know what Android x86 is like. I assumed it was Android, but, you know, on x86. If it's truly different, I should learn more about it.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    5. Re:Linked article has little to say on the issue by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      So no, I don't know what Android x86 is like. I assumed it was Android, but, you know, on x86. If it's truly different, I should learn more about it.

      It is Android, but, you know, on x86. And yet simply by dicking with the build.prop you get a system which behaves substantially differently from a phone. On the other hand, unless someone has gone the extra mile to get your particular hardware working, it typically won't work even a little bit.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  7. Duh! by mordejai · · Score: 3, Funny

    Of course they won't MERGE. 3 years from now, tops, Chrome OS will be more dead than Google Reader.

    1. Re:Duh! by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Chrome OS will be more dead than Google Reader.

      Is that mostly dead, or all dead?

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
  8. Agree by roc97007 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Of course Android and Chrome won't merge. No company would be suicidal enough to try to create a single GUI paradigm intended to run on both a laptop and a touch screen appliance.

    Wait...

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    1. Re:Agree by sconeu · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or to make the browser an integral part of the OS....

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    2. Re:Agree by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      Oooh. Good point!

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  9. Browser by markdavis · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think Chrome and Android have already merged. Chrome is the default browser in Android Linux, now.

    Oh, perhaps they meant "Chrome OS" Linux?

    1. Re:Browser by MarkCollette · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps they meant Chrome OS Gnu / Linux?

  10. Really? by __aatgod8309 · · Score: 1

    Since when did "stupid" stop anyone?

  11. Consolidated Failure by CuteSteveJobs · · Score: 1

    > Schmidt's clarification confirmed that consolidating the two products would be, well, stupid.
    That consolidation was exactly what Microsoft did with Windows and Explorer, and later with Vista and DirectX. Now look at Windows declining marketshare with fewer Windows applications. Too stupid to learn from their mistakes Microsoft are repeating the Vista disaster by withholding DirectX 11 from Windows 7, thinking if they keep DirectX 11 from it then everyone will upgrade to Windows 8. They haven't. OpenGL is the graphics system used on Android and iPhones. It has replaced DirectX as the future of graphics. Microsoft arrogantly consolidated platforms and paid the price when consumers wouldn't take their baggage. Google is wise to let each platform live or die on its own merits.

  12. Schizo summary by mattr · · Score: 2

    Is Slashdot berating Schmidt or thanking him?

    "We Didn't Need Google's Schmidt To Tell Us Android and Chrome Wouldn't Merge"
    "Thankfully, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt has announced"

    1. Re:Schizo summary by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      Slashdot has become a little bit schizophrenic recently. Yes, we have.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    2. Re:Schizo summary by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Schmidt is either a liar or or doesn't actually know what's happening in his own company.
      http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57575626-37/apple-google-google-now-not-submitted-to-app-store/

    3. Re:Schizo summary by tigonliger · · Score: 1

      Schmidtzophrenic?

    4. Re:Schizo summary by fa2k · · Score: 1

      Of course we needed Schmidt to tell us that. It's easy to say we "knew" these things in hindsight. It would be like saying we didn't need the LHC because we knew the Higgs was there.

  13. Re:something something something HOST file by darthdavid · · Score: 1

    Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

  14. Dice /. team are you listening? by symbolset · · Score: 1

    You know when I said you should market the fuck out of /. to get profits and keep the lights on? How you could put ads over the top, down the side and over the foot and I was good with that? I was sincere about that. The previous owners didn't make the most of what they had. You're entitled to make money and there's a lot of opportunity here. I pay to be a member and then let the ads show up anyway. When the ads are pertinent to my interests I click on them, and sometimes I spend money.

    But if you guys want to put popovers on here, or floating ads that obscure the content, then fuck you. We're not going to put up with that. You need to fix this shit post haste.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
    1. Re:Dice /. team are you listening? by turp182 · · Score: 1

      Start running Ghostery. Yeah, it will block the ads (which I have also clicked on in the past, but no more), but it also prevents most popups as well as cross site tracking in general.

      Sometimes issues such as these must be addressed by the Individual, not the Organization (or Corporation). The Organization will do as it pleases, and so will the Individuals. So it goes...

      For the record, I've never seen a popover ad on Slashdot.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
  15. Call me stupid by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

    Schmidt stated the obvious, but if you are a developer and you took the bait and thought the rumors might be true, you already read enough of Google Chrome or Google Android documentation before Schmidt's clarification and confirmed that consolidating the two products would be, well, stupid.

    As a developer, obviously I've read both the Chrome and Android documentation, as well as the Windows, OS-X, Linux, i-OS, FireFox and Safari documentation. It's a wonder I get any development done at all.
    So to me it just seems incredibly obvious the utter and total stupidity of consolidating an OS, one of whose primary purposes it is to display websites with a webbrowser, whose primary purpose it is to display websites.
    It's almost as stupid as Windows trying to integrate Internet Explorer or OS-X integrating Safari.
    What's next? integrating web technology into the desktop? Don't be silly!

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  16. Kies anyone? by nbgm · · Score: 1

    Have you noticed Samsung Kies app installed on all models (except Google phones)? It has disable keylock permission and cannot be uninstalled. Apparently if you have Kies installed on your PC you can unlock any Samsung phone that has Kies over USB without having to know the screen lock or the Google password.

  17. Developer view vs. manger view by drolli · · Score: 1

    Schmidt stated the obvious, but if you are a developer and you took the bait and thought the rumors might be true, you already read enough of Google Chrome or Google Android documentation before Schmidt's clarification and confirmed that consolidating the two products would be, well, stupid."

    Yes. Developers who read documentaiton may have known it. Mangers however may get excited on the idea that they understand the world know that everything is open source and linux.

    1. Re:Developer view vs. manger view by WinstonWolfIT · · Score: 1

      Mary?

  18. More stuff we didn't need to know by coldsalmon · · Score: 1

    We didn't need Slashdot to tell us We Didn't Need Google's Schmidt To Tell Us Android and Chrome Wouldn't Merge

  19. Chrome OS as security playground for Android by daboochmeister · · Score: 1

    Android has taken it on the chin from a security perspective, even though most of that relates to poor user choices. Chrome OS has some interesting and significant security-related architecture and implementation in place. I'm very sure that one fertile area of cross-pollination will be to port the kernel and configuration changes in Chrome OS into the Android environment.

    Cross-pollination in the opposite direction? Harder to see, other than the ability to run Android apps on Chrome OS (which isn't really a merging of features).

    --
    "Ahh! I see you're in that indeterminate Schrodinger state where - oh, uh ... never mind." Dave Bucci
  20. who cares what Schmidt says? by stenvar · · Score: 1

    Android and Chrome teams: "We think it would be good to merge our two codebases. It would make development easier, Android is almost a superset of Chrome already anyway, and would give us a larger base of apps and app developers."

    Schmidt: "No, you can't do that! I PROMISED people that the two wouldn't get merged."

    Yeah, right.