
 Android-x86 Project – Run Android on Your PC - cblte
http://www.android-x86.org/
======
ypcx
If you are one of those die-hard Linux fans who, like me, have been eagerly
expecting each new Linux video driver release from AMD and/or nVidia, to be
able to finally show our employer and everyone else that we _can_ use Linux as
our main machine, then these times are like living in a dream. (I don't really
care that this Linux is labelled "Android" and has a Java "GUI", and I like
many of the design decisions, e.g. for creating Apps.)

Needless to say, while the old proverbial "elephant in the room" (in the form
of absolutely needing Microsoft Office on your Linux machine, or another
Windows-only program) has been defeated[1], the new elephant in the room seems
to be the necessity to be able to create native iOS apps on your machine,
which is only practically possible on a true Mac system. I wonder if this is
something that we tackle along the way as well.

[1]It is not entirely clear to me whether the Microsoft Office "tax" went away
more because of the advent of Google Docs, or because people started to
migrate their tasks to specialized web apps.

~~~
smitherfield
Personally, I've been scratching my head for a while at why Google is so dead-
set on their "Chromebook" idea when they would have a great chance at killing
off Microsoft for good if they put in some effort to create a great desktop
version of Android.

~~~
nextos
I got the impression is an internal thing of Google. ChromeOS seems to have
won many political battles there.

As a Linux fan I prefer they stick to ChromeOS. It's just a custom Gentoo.
Many of their devices support Coreboot, which makes them excellent machines to
run my favorite Linux distro.

------
listic
Doesn't Android itself support x86? There are phones [1] and tablets [2] base
on Intel chips, after all, and they run Android.

[1]
[http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/smartphones/smartphon...](http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/smartphones/smartphones.html)

[2] [http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/tablets/shop-
tablets....](http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/tablets/shop-tablets.html)

~~~
yohui
Intel officially supports Android on x86 (for development, not daily use) via
Android-IA: [https://01.org/android-ia](https://01.org/android-ia)

They used to have an FAQ which acknowledged the unofficial Android-x86
project:
[https://web.archive.org/web/20140331192152/https://01.org/an...](https://web.archive.org/web/20140331192152/https://01.org/android-
ia/documentation/faq)

------
srikz
ConsoleOS[1], a similar solution, got successfully funded on Kickstarter[2]
last year.

[1]: [http://consoleos.com](http://consoleos.com) [2]:
[https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mmv/console-os-dual-
boo...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mmv/console-os-dual-boot-android-
remastered-for-the-pc/description)

~~~
codemogul
Or Remix, "the first true android PC" which just finished its run at
Kickstarter 2 days ago. I went in for 1 for testing, they deliver in Oct 2015:
[http://www.jide.com/en/mini](http://www.jide.com/en/mini)
[https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1123481999/remix-
mini-t...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1123481999/remix-mini-the-
worlds-first-true-android-pc)

~~~
srikz
Yes, I got to know about it from a comment below. The price point is super
tempting! How much of their software customisations are currently implemented
in the os (anyone using their ultratablet or nex9 rom?)

But, I think both ConsoleOS and Remix have their place (if at all this space
picks up). One is trying to leverage the desktop hardware to run more powerful
Android apps and the other is interested in using cheap and affordable
hardware (lower end arm chips) to give an experience / solution as close to a
desktop as possible

------
johnchristopher
Note that the project focuses on eee-pc. Latest 4.4 release still works on
mine but the landscape/portrait mode is unnerving at time.

It's way faster than any ARM flagship tablet of the day though, except for HD
video. I don't think it's brings enough on the table when compared to a `real'
desktop OS such as Windows or Debian because it's not designed for keyboard at
all.

------
seanzieapples
This seemed pointless to me until I saw that they tested on this platform:

"ASUS Eee PCs/Laptops"

This reminded me that I have a 5 year old Eee laptop that I haven't used in
years and throwing Android on there could be a fun weekend-afternoon project.

------
ianlevesque
I thought mainline Android had x86 support? What am I missing?

~~~
dogma1138
This is the AOSP version for x86, there are commercial builds for x86 like
there are builds for any other platform but if you want to have your own
android is you gotta build it from the AOSP source which might lack quite a
few things such as drivers for example.

------
augustl
Perhaps Android in a VM will replace wine for running unported stuff on a
Linux desktop.

~~~
mtgx
If only Google considered Android for its desktop OS. It could be something
like this (or better, if they are actually serious about it):

[http://www.jide.com/en/remixos](http://www.jide.com/en/remixos)

But as long as Google and now Sundar Pichai consider ChromeOS to be the one
and only Google desktop OS ever, unfortunately that won't happen. Of course
such a desktop OS would also have to be more like Android Wear than "AOSP" \-
as in only Google would ever control the interface and only Google would be in
charge of updates.

~~~
bobajeff
That's really pretty. I like it.

I suspect Google actually wants Android to be more like Chrome OS. But they
know Android's too important and popular to risk by outright replacing it with
Chrome OS. That's why they are slowing mixing them together.

Chrome on Android is now integrated in the taskbar while they are pushing
things like Web Manifests, Web Workers and Web Push Notifications. On the
other hand it is now possible to run Android apps on Chrome OS via App Runtime
for Chrome (ARC).

------
joelhaasnoot
If this is what you want - Android on your PC, you might as well use
Genymotion ([https://www.genymotion.com/](https://www.genymotion.com/)) -
essentially a well packaged version that uses VirtualBox. Free for non-
commercial use, $100/year for commercial use. Have new OS versions fast and
easy to install Google apps/services on.

~~~
btzll
Genymotion's free edition has too many limitations. It's not just free for
non-commercial usage. Some examples are: multi-touch and accelerometer, which
are not supported in the free edition.

Comparison can be found here:
[https://www.genymotion.com/#!/store](https://www.genymotion.com/#!/store)

~~~
joelhaasnoot
Sure, if you develop some sort of special app or specific game, or want to
play something specific it won't work. But for 90% of use cases, Genymotion
will work better than barebones Android-x86.

------
scintill76
I've been thinking about trying something like this as my main system, with
Linux chroot and possibly X11 server to fill in the gaps in apps. I like the
idea of sandboxing everything like Android does. Some of the things that have
held me back are lack of time to tinker and wondering if I would end up using
a terminal emulator and GNU/Linux command line tools for everything, which
sort of nullifies the sandbox. Maybe it's still worth it if, e.g., a browser
compromise can't access the emails from my email client (which is possible on
my current desktop with both running under the same uid and no special access
controls.)

~~~
LoSboccacc
if you want a secure sandboxed OS android is the wrong place to look

~~~
scintill76
Well, I know it's not uber-secure, but if I wanted that I would set up SELinux
or something. I'm looking for something I'm familiar with and will offer
better sandboxing than I have now without much work. Why won't Android do
that? Is it Android's permissions system for apps? I would revoke unneeded
permissions. Do you know of unpatched sandbox escape bugs that would allow a
compromised browser to upload other apps' data?

------
cblte
I think it is in an early stage. My test inside a VirtualBox was not really
satisfying. Slow and not really smooth. maybe on dedicated hardware it might
run better.

~~~
rodgerd
I've run it on an old Centrino laptop. It runs quite well, all things
considered (wireless and so on and so forth.

~~~
cblte
sounds quite nice. I am still running around looking for my power supply for
my old lifebook here. I have a MacbOk G4 and a PowerBook G4 lying around. Not
quite sure if I can install it on those machines.

~~~
wila
No you cannot as this is an x86 version of Android, not a powerpc one.

Sounds like the lifebook might work though.

I installed this image about a month ago on a VMware virtual machine. Not sure
if I did something wrong, but didn't really get far and after a couple of
tries to install it, eventually I gave up and figured to spent my time on
something else.

------
616c
So they are still working on 4.4.3. I assume this is a daunting task, but are
they always playing catch up?

I do not say that dismissively. It is mind-blowing to me that they can port
this to x86 (whether or not the toolchain supports it at this stage) and iron
everything out with every major and minor release.

I see no mention of Lollipop or Marshmallow, but I am really curious.

~~~
yohui
No, it's 4.4.4:

[http://www.android-x86.org/releases/releasenote-4-4-r3](http://www.android-x86.org/releases/releasenote-4-4-r3)

> _The 4.4-r3 release is based on the Android 4.4.4_r2.0.1 (KTU84Q) release._

Their "What is new?" section on the front page says development on the
Lollipop branch had started by 2014-11-06 (just two days after Google released
the source) and that lollipop-x86 was updated to 5.1 on 2015-03-18.

I'm guessing part of the reason there isn't a stable Lollipop build yet is the
switch from Dalvik to ART.

------
benbojangles
I will be really happy when other Linux Distros can run APK files. I mean,
really really happy. It would be like Christmas.

------
throwawayaway
Is this faster than the android emulator set to use intel instructions?

------
rplnt
But android is horrible, HORRIBLE, OS. Why would you want it on your PC. Only
reason I can see is to run it in VM for development purposes. Should be faster
than emulation.

~~~
fla
It's pretty good for a phone, but definately bad for a desktop.

By the way, x86 VMs for development have been there for many years. It runs
way better than their ARM counter-parts of course.

------
seivan
Would be cool if anyone tried this with Cocos2d-X :)

------
aosmith
Great, let's introduce java-esq vulnerabilities to my desktop.

~~~
StavrosK
Because there are so many on the mobile, huh?

~~~
LoSboccacc
it's not like android has been a paragon of os security

~~~
bitmapbrother
And iOS is? Or how about Windows? And then there's Linux. Let me guess - your
paragon of OS security are those OS's that no one uses, right?

