Android Apps Now Unofficially Able To Run On Any Major Desktop OS

An anonymous reader writes A developer who goes by the handle Vladikoff has tweaked Google's App Runtime for Chrome (ARC) to allow any Android app to run on any major desktop operating system, not just the handful announced last week which were also limited to Chrome OS. His tweaked version of ARC is re-packaged as ARChon. The install isn't very straightforward, and you have to be in developer mode on Chrome. But there's a support forum on reddit. The extension will work on any OS running the desktop version of Chrome 37 and up as long as the user also installs chromeos-apk, which converts raw Android app packages (APKs) to a Chrome extension. Ars Technica reports that apps run this way are buggy, fast, and crash often but expresses optimism for when Google officially "opens the floodgates on the Play Store, putting 1.3 million Android apps onto nearly every platform."

Comments

Please make this thing useful for development

[Anonymous Coward]

I could not care less if somebody else runs my Android app on his PC; it is not designed for mouse so the result is a complete user frustration. But could this thingie be useful on development, debugging or running unit tests? The emulator is so *king slow, and debugging with real device is even slower. Perhaps this really could help on it by removing at least one layer of HW abstraction between the debugger and the application.

Re: Please make this thing useful for development

[loufoque]

Just run Android for x86 if you don't want the overhead of emulating ARM...

Re: Please make this thing useful for development

[drinkypoo]

android-x86 is a bit of a dog's breakfast. They only kick out a release image every now and again, everything never works, lots of crashes. The latest 4.4 image is way less stable than the last 4.0 image they put out, and they stopped building nightlies and so did everyone else. It's really quite useless and always has been, because they never actually finish a release. Google kicks out a new version, they say "Ooh, shiny!" and they move on before they actually get the system working reliably or properly. Then you get to deal with all the apps that won't work right on x86 on top of that. It makes far more sense at this point to go ahead and run the emulator.

Re:Please make this thing useful for development

[maccodemonkey]

Don't forget the "nearly every platform" comment from TFA. Apps aren't currently designed for use with a mouse, but it doesn't have to stay that way. The Android app format is coming close to being the fabled "universal binary", finally giving developers the long-promised write once, run anywhere ability.

Heh. The dream of the 90s is alive on Slashdot.

It wouldn't be the first. Java and HTML/JavaScript long beat Android to the punch. In fact, HTML/JavaScript does it better. OpenGL ES on Android isn't exactly platform neutral (my Mac doesn't have an ES driver for it's Nvidia/Intel hardware so the best it can do is software rendering, while WebGL is abstracted so it can render it perfectly.)

We can use the lessons from it's forebearers to tell why it won't be adopted in the marketplace as a universal app solution. Both Java and HTML/CSS make universal app deployment technically a reality. For the past 20-ish years I've been able to write a Java app and deploy it on any platform. HTML/CSS run well on both desktop mobile devices as well.

The usability problem that is always run into is that by pretending all platforms are the same, the usability strengths of each platform are ignored. A mouse and pointer is a really really basic example that both iOS and Android can handle, but what about security models? The Android security model, OS X security model, iOS security model, and Windows security models are entirely different. Apple platforms like to give capability access capability by capability, at the time they are accessed. Android doesn't work like that at all, it wants everything up front. So an Android app trying to access my Address Book doesn't at all have the API to do so on my Mac.

Or what about contextual menus? I expect those on a Mac but Android doesn't have them. Macs also draw differently. They expect scrollable content to slow under window sidebars and titlebars. Android doesn't expect that. You can't make an Android app act like it's running natively on a Mac without reflowing all the widgets in the window. And Android apps don't have multiple windows. I expect that on a Mac. Mac applications also have toolbars (as do Windows applications) but Android doesn't even have an API for that. All Mac applications have a re-arrangable toolbar, but Windows doesn't. Mac and Windows computers can have multiple GPUs, which means that Android would need an API to handle a window having to shuffle from one GPU context to another, and I don't think it has that... There are also font layout issues. Both Mac and Windows have different default fonts which could dramatically shift around line spacing, and what text fits where. Mac at least also has contextual definitions when you right click on a word. Will Android apps have that? My Mac apps support QuickLook in the Finder, but there isn't anything like QuickLook under Android to abstract into. I also like searching with Spotlight, but Android apps don't have any Spotlight vendors. Do Android apps ask for my user name and password to do secured operations? Again, Android apps don't have any idea of on demand security, and I really don't want to have to enter my admin username/password every time I launch an Android app. Same thing would apply to UAC.

If you hadn't stopped reading by now, you might be starting to get my point. The reason Java failed to take the desktop world by storm is that not all desktops are the same or even have the same capabilities. Yes, as you suggested, you can go down the road of adding a bunch of APIs to handle all these different scenarios. But then you're back to writing a bunch of code to support a bunch of different platforms. It's right back where you started. Java didn't end up saving time for multi-platform because the dream of writing once and running anywhere was unobtainable for desktop GUI applications, and it still is for the same reasons. It's technically possible, but the same user experience everywhere was unacceptable to users and unworkable. Even Microsoft wasn

But.... WHY?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would I want that ad-laden, spyware infested, functionally crippled crap on my desktop?

Re:Finally a universal binary standard

[guises]

But why would you want to? The interface is completely different.

Re:If this works, then Microsoft is doomed.

[BitZtream]

Hardly.

If this technology matures to the point that it's stable on every desktop OS, then the OS is reduced is reduced to simply being a platform for the chrome browser to run on to run Android Apps. That means

That means instead of the apps being written for the Win32/MFC/.NET runtime, they are written for the Android runtime ... how is that any different? Please explain how its different other than you're a fanboy for Chrome/Android rather than Microsoft.

1. Developers gear their software to run on Android since that's where all the software and market is.

Right, except no its not. If you want ad-ladened crap, Android is where its at. The 'market' is everywhere else. There may be a lot of apps there, but that doesn't mean anyone cares, which the stats have shown by the number of apps with exactly no downloads.

2. Microsoft becomes irrelevant as the things consumers want are the Android Apps, not the OS.

So basically, just like Windows now. People don't want 'windows' they want an environment they are used to and works well, and more importantly the apps they've been using for years. You've given no actual reason why people would want new android apps that work entirely differently over what they already have and are used to. On top of that, the end result for those people would be exactly the same as they already have, except now Google would be in Microsofts place.

Thats just stupid. With Microsoft, at least you are the customer and your data is yours. With Google, you're the product and your data is their data. The whole point is to push more advertising on you and manipulate you into spending more money. Awesome.

I don't think that means Microsoft will die completely, but I do think it means they become just another small player as there is no longer any vendor lock-in to their platform.

Awesome, so instead of being locked into desktop apps with 30 years of evolution and growing, we're locked into phone and tablet apps ... on the desktop ... which are still infants made mostly by random people who think installing Eclipse makes them a developer, awesome. Thats my favorite lock-in right there. Lock in and shitty apps made for tiny screens ... on my 27" inch displays.

There is nothing that magically makes this better than just using an OS and skipping the extra layer of crap added by running your tablet app on your desktop. Have you really thought about how silly this actually is? Turn off your fanboy for 15 minutes and think about it. Its a stupid idea that no one is actually going to use for anything other than some very rare instances.

Never before has someones OS runtime layer been a real product on someone elses OS. Java hasn't ruled the world, Android isn't going to magically make that so just because people use it on their phones. Adding another standard on top of existing standards never results in this magical silver bullet that revolutionizes the world and changes everything. Proper design from the bottom up does that.

Re:If this works, then Microsoft is doomed.

[swillden]

If this technology matures to the point that it's stable on every desktop OS, then the OS is reduced is reduced to simply being a platform

Java did that years ago. Notice how it destroyed Microsoft?