Slashdot Mirror
Android is About To Eclipse Windows as the World's Most-Used Operating System (cnet.com)
John Falcone, writing for CNET: Android is poised to overtake Windows as the world's most-used operating system. That's the word from web analytics service StatCounter, which monitors worldwide web traffic with an eye towards device operating systems. The firm found that 37.4 percent of devices online were Android -- just a hair behind Windows at 38.6 percent. Perhaps the bigger concern for Microsoft are the trend lines, however: Windows is on a steady march down from 82 percent in 2012, while Android is mirroring it upward from 2.2 percent in the same 5-year period.
All hail Linus, creator of Linux! May he live long, and may he father many more kernel releases to come!
Comparing apples and oranges makes a whole lot more sense than comparing two distinct OSes which run two distinct classes of devices.
Six posts in and still no "netcraft confirms" joke?
They sure seemed to rely on Data much more than their ship's onboard computer. One would think they would either upgrade the ship's computer to how Data was configured or just plug Data into the ship.
Despite the number of windows on the Enterprise, they still relied on an Android.
IDEs are for girls
No - though the Linux desktop "OS" has truly become thought of as being called "Linux" (despite containing a lot of other software - though even I can't possibly be bothered to call it GNU/Linux), in this case Linux truly is just the kernel, and Android is the OS.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
So Windows is finally going to be replaced by something much worse? (Both in terms of usability and openness)
Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
Two different operating systems that have virtually no overlap. This isn't telling anyone anything.
First of all Android is based on Linux. Second - if you compare desktop to devices you have skipped all IoT devices that most of the time run Linux. So here we have it - 2017 a year of Linux!
The difference in a typical Linux distro (as opposed to Linux proper, which is just the kernel) versus Android is the userland. Different libraries, etc. For example, on Android, usually a form of Busybox is often the shell, because it is a statically linked executable and requires nothing else to be installed.
Android and its security model isn't bad, although it would be nice if it were designed from the ground up with "ask on first use" permissions, as opposed to having them strapped on in a recent rev of the OS.
I'd love to see some additional container and virtualization aspects for Android. It would be nice to be able to keep multiple userlands, all separate from each other, on a phone or tablet. That way, if home stuff is compromised, work stuff is still OK. Bonus if the hypervisor's FS has deduplication built in, so each userland would have relatively low overhead.
What in the heck are you doing with your android?
I've never had an issue with my Note4 which is 4 years old now. Not once. Now I haven't jail broken it but run the stock OS from my carrier or run anything but well known and respected applications. I have one free "Malware scanner" but it's never caught anything. Everything works just fine.
If you are constantly having issues with your Android, I figure you are not applying due diligence about security for your activities. I suggest you figure out why your daily activities cause you so much trouble. Downloading Porn applications? Jail break your phone? Running a malware ridden custom firmware load? What is it you do to cause this?
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
All of the people commenting that these 2 operating systems use 2 different types of devices are, of course, correct. The link at the bottom of the article about who is actually making money on mobile operating systems seems particularly relevant also. However, hasn't the idea been endlessly rehashed that the people are changing in the way they use devices and services? What if there are dramatic changes in technology that make mobile devices even more attractive for productivity? Also, are entrepreneurs (who live in manure) interested in starting companies and targeting markets more interested in a blue line that is trending downwards, or a green one trending upwards?
FreeBSD is a Unix type Kernel, Darwin too. Unix != Linux http://www.thegeekstuff.com/20...
I take issue with the suggestion that "jail breaking" (I don't know if you mean rooting or unlocking the boot loader) is inconsistent with good security practice. But perhaps that is not what you meant.
Really? You downloaded "the latest Android"? Which version is that? Which repository did you use?
If you've come to expect a bitchfest after every update, why are you updating?
Another big problem with the Android userland is that from the start through Android 6 "Marshmallow", stock Android supported only one application on the screen at once, as opposed to the tiling or floating window management policies that X11 window managers for GNU/Linux support. Got your phone plugged into a 1080p monitor? You can't view a web browser or PDF reader in half or your notetaking app in the other half. Using a 10" tablet? Enjoy your 10" full-screen calculator app. Android 7 "Nougat" finally fixes this, but existing devices are unlikely to get an official update to Nougat.
You appear to be under the impression that Android is free software, and therefore, the royalty for putting Android on a device is zero. AOSP is free software, but Google Play Store and Google Play Services are not. Furthermore, makers of Android devices with a microSD slot that supports SDXC have to pay an exFAT patent royalty to Microsoft.
Windows is a desktop operating system with its install base there, Android is a tablet/phone OS with all of its install base there. It's like saying coffee makers are about to eclipse ovens as the most used appliance....ok? Still need the oven for its purpose.
You are right that usage behaviors are shifting but Android is not a desktop operating system so comparing the two is just silly. We know they both are trying to break into the other market but that ship has sailed, so yes the on 15$ tablets at Walmart is going to have a much bigger footprint than the one that is on 300-3000$ machines.
Yes, we've won the desktop wars. Even if we had to cheat by slipping into mobile some 10 years ago and waiting for mobile devices to become nearly as capable as desktops.
PS - My first Linux portable was an Agenda VR3 (a 64-bit MIPS) some 15+ years ago.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Linux is not an adjective you can attach on everything.
In short: the World Domination that our Great Leader predicted some twenty years ago, has come true...
Paai
though the Linux desktop "OS" has truly become thought of as being called "Linux" ... in this case Linux truly is just the kernel, and Android is the OS.
Not so. Android is an OS only according to marketers and those who believe them. For anybody who will trouble themselves to understand the textbook definition, Linux is the OS (e.g., it schedules, manages virtual memory and devices, enforces security) and Android is a platform, not an OS (e.g., Android does not schedule, does not manage virtual memory, does not implement device drivers and does not provide the base security mechanism).
Now, I would not be surprised at all to see this post modded down once again by some morally challenged Google or Apple employee with too much time on their hands and too much skin in the game.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
I think you are grossly overestimating the cross functionality between tablets/phones and desktop/laptop devices, sure they kind of both *do* the same things but they are used for very different things. Yes people are using their phones/tablets more but they are using them more for the trivial things like angry birds or facebook. The moment they need to work on something serious like photo editing or an excel sheet etc they realize they need a desktop/laptop computer.
So yes, if Android OS starts gaining a foothold on the PC market then that is big news. This news just means android is on a *lot* of devices and that's completely not news because it's a free OS on every cheap device out there.
All that said windows/desktops are a relatively stagnant market because trivial us/gaming is on phones and consoles, but they aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Like I said upthread it's like comparing the toaster to the oven.
I'm just amazed this wasn't already the case years ago.
It seems hard to believe that until now that there really are more PCs running windows out there than all the people with android phones in the world.
I wonder if they've still been counting windows licences for PCs that have actually been disposed of/recycled years ago, and those running Linux and other OS's just because they actually got sold with a windows licence?
on Android, usually a form of Busybox is often the shell, because it is a statically linked executable and requires nothing else to be installed.
No, Android uses Bionic, which is a libc workalike, like Busybox, but is not Busybox. Google uses Bionic for Android in part because it is somewhat more compact, but mainly to escape the GPL. These inaccuracies make me wonder about the accuracy of your other claim:
Android and its security model isn't bad
Really? In truth, the Linux security model is pretty good, but the crap that Android piles on top is hastily conceived, leaky and widely exploited.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
"Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect."
- NYTimes article, Questions for Linus Torvalds by David Diamond (at the end)
Bill, Steve, and Satya have probably discussed this at some length. To be a fly on the wall...
The article headline is crap. Android/Linux total users passed Windows in long ago. The article should have said that, those users now create nearly the same amount of web traffic as Windows PCs.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Especially if the two OS/devices are used for the same thing... chat, email, web browsing, videos...
Twinstiq, game news
I'm thinking about getting SU to root. It is a common security practice to avoid having things running with root privileges when ever possible. In nearly all cases there is zero real reason to have root on an Android device for the average user. I know folks that bypass this protection in the system in an attitude of defiance (Hey it's MY device and if I want root, I'm entitled to it!), which from a security prospective is stupid, even if it makes you feel like you are in control.
Personally, I have access to root on hundreds of boxes so the lure of being "in total control" of yet another system has no appeal to me. There is literally *nothing* I need to do to my phone that requires root. Where I understand that some need to feel like they are in control and having access to root fulfills that need, it also opens you up to a compromised device.
However, Unlocking the boot loader is just about as bad...
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Stop being so Linuxy.
Linux scales to far larger systems than does Windows. Microsoft does not run on the top 500 machines.
Microsoft has been squarely beaten in mobile and enterprise systems. Microsoft is now the "OS of the gap" and is being crushed in the vice of Linux market share.
I haven't had a real desktop, or desk for that matter, in over a decade but have been using linux continually in one form or another since 1993.
Apples to something less healthy, like Nougat/Lollipops?
Seriously, I thought Android had already eclipsed Windows simply on the number of units installed since there are already billions of Android devices out there, while Windows has yet to reach or just gone past the billion dollar mark on the more costly desktop.laptop platforms. In the third world you can buy a cheap smart phone running some old unsupported possibly malware infested version of Android for a fraction the price of the least expensive netbook.
Still no.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
Same reason OS X isn't considered just a GUI while it sits on top of BSD?
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
Google Play is "free as in beer".
The article "The hidden costs of building an Android device" by Charles Arthur and Samuel Gibbs states that as of three years ago, the compliance testing to qualify for a Google Play license cost tens of thousands of dollars, or on the order of $1 per device. Even though the article states that the amount is payable to approved "third party testing facilities," not directly to Google, the article does not mention how much Google charges said facilities to become approved.
The article "Why Microsoft Makes $5 to $15 From Every Android Device Sold" by Chris Hoffman states that as of three years ago, Microsoft was collecting several dollars in patent royalties for each Android device for the use of patented processes, such as those essential to the FAT file system.
What has changed in the past three years, other than the replacement of a license for the VFAT patent(s) with one for the exFAT patent(s) after the expiry of the former and enshrinement of the latter in the SDXC specification?
stock Android supported only one application on the screen at once
My G3 came with Android 5 and supported running two apps side by side
That was a manufacturer customization, not stock Android. Some Samsung devices received a similar customization. Usually it involved zooming out, so as to maintain a requirement in the Android 5 "Lollipop" Compatibility Definition Document (CDD) that the screen size presented to the application not change after installation. But zooming out had the downside of often making text unreadably small. Some implementations, such as Samsung's, additionally allowed applications to opt into a tiling window management by specifying a Samsung-specific tag in the application's manifest file. But any application whose manifest did not specify so could run only in the full screen or zoomed out. In any case, it was not a standard feature of the Android operating system until Android 7 "Nougat".
so you are a liar.
Insults are uncalled for.
While you're technically right, the common meaning of an operating system includes its libraries, shell (including graphical) and usually basic utilities. Even your link at the top of the page (4th paragraph) says,
Note that the article differentiates between Linux and Android.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
No.
Android really is a Linux-based OS, just as much as your Fedora desktop or Raspbian data logger. Just because it's no longer GNU/Linux doesn't make it not Linux.
Take *that*, Richard Stallman.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
I'm thinking about getting SU to root. It is a common security practice to avoid having things running with root privileges when ever possible.
When you root your phone, it doesn't just run everything with root privileges. If an app needs elevated privileges it asks the user for approval and the user can approve or deny the request. The OS will not grant access to anything requiring root without going through the approval process.
I fully understand that, but why on earth does an app need root on a device?
Unless you are messing around with the hardware in the device in ways the manufacturer didn't intend or trying to hack a service you carrier usually charges for what does an app need with root? Nothing that I've heard of was worth given root to an app so why open up the path to give something root? It must makes your device more easily hacked. Take it from this ole' Unix admin with decades of experience, don't use root to run anything if you can help it. NO user app should need root on Unix, just about the only need for root is installing some kinds of software, which, even then, root isn't usually required. If your user application simply MUST have root to run, you are either an idiot, a newbie or a hacker who doesn't care about security.
Besides, this is roughly the same thing Windows used to do with that crazy popup warning about giving a program administrator privileges... How well did that work out? Not very. Folks got accustomed to just hitting OK to get about their business or simply shut that annoyance off with a registry hack. Virus infections LOVE that kind of foolishness...
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
No, he means we're standing on a planet of Windows and Android is going to temporarily block the sun's light by passing between us and the sun.
Android, a popular mobile operating system based on a modified version of the Linux kernel
[table] Operating system - Android [table]
Android was first (currently not replicated by others, in a single year) operating system
from your textbook
Android (stylized as android) is a mobile operating system developed by Google
from another page of the same damn textbook
From the wiki 'textbook',
Linux is an OS, Android also an OS, Windows also an OS, and MacOS also an OS.
Linux kernel is the kernel. Android uses Linux kernel. Windows uses NT. MacOS uses Unix.
In my book, Linux is a fat bird and Android is an edible robot. your augment is invalid.
Unless you are messing around with the hardware in the device in ways the manufacturer didn't intend or trying to hack a service you carrier usually charges for what does an app need with root?
1. What's wrong with messing around in ways the manufacturer or carrier didn't intend (short of violating contracts)?
2. other reasons:
- disable or uninstall apps that came with the device
- some ad blocking services require root
- automation and system control (e.g. Tasker)
- over or underclock CPU
- better backups
If your user application simply MUST have root to run, you are either an idiot, a newbie or a hacker who doesn't care about security.
Well, I'm sure you know better than the developers of (paid) Android apps with millions of downloads.
Besides, this is roughly the same thing Windows used to do with that crazy popup warning about giving a program administrator privileges... How well did that work out?
Except that very, very few people root their devices, and the ones who do are almost exclusively tech savvy people who know what they're doing. The comparison to Windows works better when applied to normal non-root apps asking for permissions. The old system was pretty useless, but with the new permission system introduced with Marshmallow, I think it's great.
Consider the following two statements:
1) A dog is a kind of animal.
2) Android is a kind of Linux.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Better is,
1) A dog is a kind of Canine
2) Android is a kind of Linux
Wolf, Coyote, Fox, Dog, all similar at the low level, can even interbreed
GNU/Linux, X/Linux, BSD/Linux, Android, all similar at the low level, I have Debian, including X, running on my Android phone in a chroot. Sorta like interbreeding.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Sure, but BSD/Linux, what is that? Did you mean GNU/kFreeBSD?
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Linux is the kernel. It's not a SYSTEM. The entire thing, that lets you DO stuff, is a SYSTEM
Oh, you mean like a Linux distribution? Android is a kind of Linux distribution, nothing more and nothing less. And therefore a kind of Linux.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
As for textbook definitions, they're no more than the opinion of whatever person or persons wrote or edited the textbook.
Sorry, no. These textbooks are the textbooks of the people who built the operating system. I suppose you want to call a math textbook just a matter of opinion of the author as well? Maybe so, but the math itself is not an opinion.
Whatever THEY think, try running the Linux kernel by itself. Put the kernel on a disc of some kind ALONE, no LILO, no GRUB, no Chainloader, nothing, JUST the kernel, and try to boot from it.
Every heard of initrd? It's part of Linux, includes a complete user space. That is enough to boot Linux.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Ok, I'll chalk you up to the "I need root because it's MY device" crowd... Which is fine... But my point here is you are taking a security risk when you do this stuff.
Seriously, I don't care what you do with your device, but if you do this to your phone, don't complain to me that Android is now subject to malware and other problems. It's not. If you don't take unnecessary risks your chances of having a security issue with Android is pretty slim.
Personally, I don't do this stuff to my PHONE. Why take the added risks. I just want my phone to work when I need it and I don't want to bother with it when I don't. I don't want to be responsible to administer yet again another Unix box in my life. I'm guessing you don't need root either, but if it floats your boat to have it, I don't care.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
I was thinking Linux kernel with BSD user land instead of GNU. Not sure if anyone actually ships such a distribution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Android is open source. ( Mostly)
It is what you want to do with it.
You want to do a surveillance tool ? Go ahead.
aaaaaaa