Android On the Desktop 247
puddingebola writes "John Morris at CNET offers a brief review of PC Android devices, many of them hybrids running Windows 8 and Android. From the article, 'Microsoft has spent a lot of time and effort trying to get Windows onto smartphones and tablets — so far without a whole lot to show for it. Now several PC companies are trying the opposite approach, taking the Android operating system and porting it to PCs.' The article reviews the recent releases from HP, Acer, Asus, and Samsung. Does Android creeping onto desktop or 'traditional' PC devices have any kind of possible long term consequences? Could this be a way for Android and Google to develop a larger presence in corporate IT, or could Android ever really supplant the Windows foothold?"
Isn't this done already? (Score:2, Interesting)
I have been seeing and reading about Android computers the size of a USB flash drive which can clip on a LCD monitor, and gets power from a USB cable.
I think in China and a lot of other countries, Android is a desktop OS, but other than a few models winding up on this side of the pond, I've not seen that many of these Android devices.
Various thin client applications (Score:5, Interesting)
Android will be a good alternative for customer service call centers where you only want to use a browser and possibly one or two additional applications.
I can imagine a lot of thin client type applications that will have similar requirements.
It will save a fortune on licensing and hardware requirements.
Re:And off we go! (Score:3, Interesting)
Games have next to nothing to do with selling desktops. Even every single Steam combined user barely represents 3-4% of all PC users worldwide.
It's a step in the right direction (Score:4, Interesting)
Already happening (Score:5, Interesting)
I still use my laptop for "srs bizness" but recently, when I did some server upgrades where I would normally log in via the laptop intermittently to perform admin functions, I found myself using my folding bluetooth keyboard and my Android phone instead.
It was surprisingly productive and, being much smaller, was actually far more convenient than pulling out what felt like "big iron" to do a simple shell task.
My Android 4.1 phone (Moto Razr Maxx HD and I love it!) is already my go-to device for casual browsing.
Re:I would use Gnome 3 instead (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I would use Gnome 3 instead (Score:5, Interesting)
The current gnome and kde offerings are so awful I find myself preferring to use my Android phone, despite the tiny screen, awful keyboard, and limited functionality. It's just plain easier to use.
Why? No one is forcing you into using GNOME 3 on Linux. I sure as hell won't touch it and I've been a Linux user since 2006 (maybe a year or two more if you consider dual-boot configurations and my learning period...).
Still trying to find a Linux environment I like. I got by for some years on Fedora 10 and Windows XP, but those have pretty much reached the end of their life. The Mint stuff seems promising; but MATE and XFCE had some bugs, and lacked configurability. I think with maturity these may improve. It's sad when Windows is more configurable and less buggy than Linux. But right now it is true. I lost track of how many Linux distros I've installed in the last year.
That's another point entirely; first GNOME 3 kept you off Linux, now you're saying no desktop on it is good enough. Which one really is it? Either way, I'm pretty sure Windows has its own share of bugs and lacks things the others don't have, so really, it all evens out in the end.
I don't want to have to be a beardy sysadmin just to get a system running and keep it up. I hacked it for years and you know what? I've decided I have better things to do with my sparse free time. I want something that just works, out of the box, without a silly learning curve, without having to use google as a user manual just to do basic stuff that takes one or two clicks on Windows. If I hack I want to do it for fun, not necessity.
I'm not a hacker; hell, I don't even know how to code--and I can run Linux just fine. And maintenance? What maintenance? I have had to do very, very little maintenance on my machines since switching to Linux. No defragging, no regular clean-up to keep the system running fast, no anti-virus/spyware/adware/trojan/worm/you-name-it software to suck up resources and have to keep updated. System update? Just download and burn the latest ISO, nuke the old / partition and install there. When the system is installed, that's about it; it's ready to go with all user settings intact. Maintaining Linux has been a dream compared to Windows.
Re:Isn't this done already? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Various thin client applications (Score:4, Interesting)
It wouldn't surprise me if it's already used that way. Many call centers already use thin clients which provide exactly a web browser and some sort of remote desktop client (VMware View or Citrix). The major remote desktop clients are already usable on Android - I've used my phone that way in a pinch.
I'd be amazed if there weren't already thin clients that were Android inside. My favorite thin client form factor is a wall socket - it goes in the wall, and has sockets for USB and HMDI - just plug in a keyboard/mouse and monitor and go.
Re:Isn't this done already? (Score:3, Interesting)
All that needs to happen is a way to host chroot-like gnome/kde environments and HW-accelerated integrated X11 server.
Bah, not even that. I just tried out the android-x86 4.2.2 ISO just a few days ago, and I'd be happy if it just saw the NTFS partition on the HD. (plus Printing support, there's a app for my printer, but it sucks bad)
VLC works fine, mozilla was snappy, and the play store knew what apps would work!
I think that android would be awesome as a primary OS option, I don't even miss minimizing stuff, they have a task switcher that works fast enough.
Re:Isn't this done already? (Score:5, Interesting)
Usurper? Seriously? Firstly, Android is by many people's definitions more free than regular desktop Linux because it's licensed under a more permissive license.
Secondly, Android is actually a "desktop" Linux done right, by people who know what they're doing. As a disclaimer, I worked on desktop Linux related projects for years, about a decade ago. I wrote patches for GNOME, for ALSA, for Wine, and I also built an entire packaging and installer framework that tried to abstract out the differences between distributions so people could distribute their own applications without getting stuck into the swamp of distributor packaging (which was and always will be a shit idea). Many other things that I've forgotten about.
It was all a waste of time. Fundamentally, desktop Linux was not designed or built, it evolved organically. Any attempt to bring people together who might have some skill in OS design resulted in endless stupid flamewars and politics (does anyone remember the ridiculous KDE vs freedesktop wars?). The moment the community needed to move beyond the design laid out by the original creators of UNIX it all fell apart and became a mess.
Android is the best of all worlds - it's Free as in Freedom, it's managed centrally by a highly experienced team of computer scientists and OS designers (some of whom came from working on BeOS), the basic design decisions in it are correct - there's no crap whereby every phone manufacturer has to package every end user application. Heck you can see how popular with users it is just to have them distributing the core OS, you can imagine the disaster zone that'd occur if they used the Debian model. There's one audio API, that works. There's one graphics API, that works. It's standardised on one reasonably modern language, which works. No "we have to rewrite this from C++ into C for political reasons" garbage there.
Frankly it's a breath of fresh air and if it eventually wipes out traditional desktop Linux distros, you won't see me shed a tear despite all the work I did.