Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

'SPURV' Project Brings Windowed Android Apps To Desktop Linux (androidpolice.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the two-in-one dept.

mfilion shares a report from Android Police: A new "experimental containerized Android environment" from a company called Collabora allows Android apps to run in floating windows alongside native applications on desktop Linux. You can read all the technical details at the source link, but put simply, 'SPURV' creates a virtual Android device on your Linux computer, much like Bluestacks and other similar tools. There are various components of SPURV that allow the Android environment to play audio, connect to networks, and display hardware-accelerated graphics through the underlying Linux system.

The most interesting part is 'SPURV HWComposer,' which renders Android applications in windows, alongside the windows from native Linux applications. This is what sets SPURV apart from (most) other methods of running Android on a computer. For this to work, the Linux desktop has to be using the Wayland display server (some Linux-based OSes use X11). Pre-built binaries for SPURV are not currently available -- you have to build it yourself from the source code. Still, it's an interesting proof-of-concept, and hopefully someone turns it into a full-featured product.

30 of 52 comments (clear)

  1. Hmmm by markdavis · · Score: 4, Interesting

    >"A new "experimental containerized Android environment" from a company called Collabora allows Android apps to run in floating windows alongside native applications on desktop Linux."

    I have heard this kind of thing many times before and tried many of them with limited success. Something always seems to be wrong or broken or missing. AndroVM, Virtualbox, Archron, Android-X86, Genymotion, Anbox, I keep holding out hope.

    >"For this to work, the Linux desktop has to be using the Wayland display server"

    Yuck. Oh well, guess this one uninteresting.

    1. Re: Hmmm by ogl_codemonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yuck from me since it doesn't work with nvidia binary drivers, which I need to get decent performance out of my GPU.

      Yuck, binary drivers.

    2. Re:Hmmm by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It depends on the app and how well the developer built it. Some apps work fine on a Chromebook, for example.

      We are slowly headed for realizing the old Java dream of running the same app everywhere. There are already a number of frameworks that let you run the same code on Android, iOS and desktop. This is coming from the other direction, adding an Android compatibility layer to other systems.

      Good news for lazy developers I guess.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Hmmm by TeknoHog · · Score: 2

      >"A new "experimental containerized Android environment" from a company called Collabora allows Android apps to run in floating windows alongside native applications on desktop Linux."

      I have heard this kind of thing many times before and tried many of them with limited success. Something always seems to be wrong or broken or missing. AndroVM, Virtualbox, Archron, Android-X86, Genymotion, Anbox, I keep holding out hope.

      I have used Android-x86 under QEMU to post videos on Instagram, though I now prefer Android-x86 natively. It's not perfect in either case but it does the job. I have no other need for a dedicated Android device.

      However, it all seems rather backwards. GNU/Linux has worked great as an all-around OS since the 1990s, ranging from supercomputers to phones. To me, Android seems like a closed toy system, an abomination that just takes advantage of Linux (so it's not unlike Andy Rubin himself). Why make an incompatible version of Linux and then run it on top of Linux proper? (Though I wouldn't trust any Android apps on my system natively, so I guess some virtualization is in order anyway.)

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    4. Re: Hmmm by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"Why yuck Wayland? I personally feel odd about Wayland without great reasons,"

      I have lots of great reasons, especially since I actually use X for everything. Effective remote access, Xterminals, all my apps are X. Nothing I do needs or requires Wayland, and I don't want the extra complexity and problems of trying to run X "under" Wayland. For me, it is a solution looking for a problem.

    5. Re:Hmmm by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Yeah I've yet to find anything that won't work on a Chromebook. A good 2 in 1 Chromebook is definitely a better Android tablet than an Android tablet right now.

      It also has the benefit that it's encouraging Google to put in officially supported APIs for resizable apps. Everyone else's implementation is pretty much a hack.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    6. Re:Hmmm by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      To me, Android seems like a closed toy system, an abomination that just takes advantage of Linux

      To me, Android is a missed opportunity in the OSS community. There ought to be an Android/Linux distribution that merges Android and Linux out of the box, with the ability to flip between the Android GUI, a full Linux GUI, and console text mode, if not to integrate Android apps with Linux apps. If you have a rooted Android device you can already use Linux Deploy (or similar) to install a full Linux userland on Android. (On an unrooted device, you can get the ultra-light version by installing Termux, which is at least better than nothing.)

      Why would anyone want this? Because Android is Linux underneath, but on top it's candy-coated, and we all know how nerds love candy. It's got all the power you know and love, plus the convenience of a prepackaged OS with sandboxed applications. You can fiddle around on the top, or you can dig as deeply as you want into the guts, because Android is Linux. Android security is based on selinux. Android boot is based on init. Android shell access is just a normal shell. Why complain? Embrace.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Hmmm by tepples · · Score: 1

      Does installing GNURoot Debian (or Termux) and XServer XSDL apps from Google Play Store give a user experience anywhere near what you suggest?

    8. Re:Hmmm by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Does installing GNURoot Debian (or Termux) and XServer XSDL apps from Google Play Store give a user experience anywhere near what you suggest?

      Haven't tried it on Android-x86 so I'm not sure. On a typical Android ARM device yes, but most of them don't have much RAM. I haven't explored Termux to that extent, but I have installed a userland for Linux (maybe Ubuntu, I forget) on an Android stick, and used it with an X server.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. Re:But, really, why? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    The ads. Think of the ads on another OS in the OS.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  3. Spurv? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Spurv? Does it use Spurving bearings?

    1. Re:Spurv? by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      It also sounds like it might use modern GPU shaders.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  4. Weston can host Wayland clients by tepples · · Score: 4, Informative

    Weston, the reference compositor for Wayland, has a special feature where you can use it to run Wayland clients under X.

  5. Virtualbox? by DogDude · · Score: 1

    What's wrong with Virtualbox? I use it every day.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:Virtualbox? by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"What's wrong with Virtualbox? I use it every day."

      Nothing wrong with Virtualbox, it just doesn't work right with any Android image I have tried with it- rotation issues, relative cursor problems, sometimes slow video. It is mostly issues with the Android implementation run under it.

    2. Re:Virtualbox? by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Huh? You're trying to run Virtualbox on a phone? Really?

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    3. Re:Virtualbox? by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"Huh? You're trying to run Virtualbox on a phone? Really?"

      No, of course not. Running an Android image as a guest in a VB hosted under Linux on a desktop.

  6. Uncontainerized / Unwindowed Android Apps by fatp · · Score: 1

    Seems all attempt to run Android Apps Windowed Android Apps To Desktop Linux are containerized and windowed. I would like to see uncontainerized or unwindowed ones.

    1. Re:Uncontainerized / Unwindowed Android Apps by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Unwindowed would mean fullscreen.
      Do you really want to use an app built for a 5" or 9" display in full screen on a 30" monitor?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    2. Re:Uncontainerized / Unwindowed Android Apps by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      I would like to see uncontainerized

      I found this great Russian-made app for managing all your social media contacts. Would you like to run it natively on your main workstation?

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    3. Re:Uncontainerized / Unwindowed Android Apps by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Seems all attempt to run Android Apps Windowed Android Apps To Desktop Linux are containerized and windowed. I would like to see uncontainerized or unwindowed ones.

      Put Android-x86 in a VM, done. Or use the Android Device Simulator with the official SDK if you want ARM, done. What you want already exists. Seems like you haven't bothered to look.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  7. "some Linux-based OSes use X11" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    OK, right. Just like "some cars don't use Telsa chargers".
    Is there some agenda to inverting the tried-and-true and the new-but-woefully-incomplete-and-incompatible here?

  8. Re:Yuk by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    Last time I looked, about 10 years ago, Psi had all of those features and many more. I tried Conversation a couple of years ago and found it somewhat lacking in comparison to the features that desktop X11 XMPP clients had had a decade earlier.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  9. Re:But, really, why? by 91degrees · · Score: 2

    As an android developer, I can see this is potentially quicker for testing than an emulator or a connected phone.

    It's a bit of a niche use, but it's a use.

  10. Lies! by Shark · · Score: 2

    A windowed app in 2019? That's heresy! Everything must run full screen and tabbed to waste as many pixels as possible. Multi-tasking confuses users and windows? No... Those can move and then you become overwhelmed and lost. The ideal interface should be a large button in the middle of the screen labeled: "Do what you think I want, I'm the product, not the user."

    --
    Mind the frickin' laser...
  11. Re:But, really, why? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    As an android developer, I can see this is potentially quicker for testing than an emulator or a connected phone.

    It's scarcely faster, and you still have to test in the emulator, if not on an actual phone. You can't count on the emulator providing accurate results, let alone something like this.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  12. Re:But, really, why? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    I'm not talking about detailed testing. Just running and checking during develop. It takes long enough to upload to a device that the wait becomes tedious. And generally I just want to do a few basic checks when I develop. Are the UI components in the right place and the right colour? If I press a button does it do what I expect it to? Does it crash in a simple use-case?

  13. Viewing distance compensation by tepples · · Score: 1

    Perceived size of an application's display is proportional to the ratio between the screen size and the viewing distance. If I'm sitting 3.3 times as far from a 30" TV as I'd put my eyes from a 9" tablet, the display on the two will project to the same size on my retinas. This is why CSS's px unit is defined as 1/2688 of the viewing distance (based on a 96 dpi display 28 inches away), not as literal pixels.

    But you're correct that the desktop use case doesn't put the 30" quite that far away. Phone apps on a tablet have the same problem.

  14. How to know an article sucks right away by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

    > For this to work, the Linux desktop has to be using the Wayland display server (some Linux-based OSes use X11)

    MOST Linux-based OSes *still* use XOrg, and Wayland is still considered beta quality software that lacks support for remote access. FAIL.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    .
    == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  15. Re: But, really, why? by jazzoslav · · Score: 1

    Hm.. so hard to guess. Lets try something outlandish. How about because there are usefull apps on android? But, really, why do you have to ask?