
“Android is reaching EOL in the next 4-5 years” - mmastrac
https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/1119207230782550017
======
rocky1138
As a tech community, we should really rally around a libre/free mobile OS and
soon. Being beholden to corporations for our operating systems is antithetical
to freedom.

~~~
_bxg1
It's so much harder to do on mobile, for multiple reasons:

\- Hardware is not very modular (mainly because of size constraints), meaning
you have to purpose-build libre hardware if you can't/don't want to run on
tech-giant devices (you can right now if you're forking Android; you probably
won't be able to once it's replaced with Fuschia).

\- Developers' needs have always been a bastion for keeping desktop OSes
flexible and open. No matter how closed-down software gets, someone somewhere
has to be able to muck with it so as to build and improve it in the first
place. This doesn't apply to mobile OSes; people don't use them for
development.

Not that it's impossible for these things to be overcome, but it's a much
steeper uphill battle.

~~~
_bxg1
Also, perhaps even more importantly, you'd be starting from scratch in terms
of app ecosystem, which is even more important today (and especially on
mobile) than it used to be in the PC era. You could get some mileage out of
the web- but first you'd have to build or port a browser. Chromium certainly
won't target your open OS, and with its 75% market share, it now strongarms
the direction that web standards take. And many app makers don't even have
mobile web apps these days (or their web apps are crippled versions of their
"real apps"). Good luck getting Slack and Favor, or your bank, to build apps
for your new OS. Or even Dropbox and Evernote. Forget about Netflix and
YouTube.

Maybe you're okay with going back to the iPhone 1.0 days where a smartphone
was just for phone calls, texting, email, a calendar, listening to music,
looking up directions, and searching the web. But while you might get an mp3
player app, many people no longer own copies of their music and you won't get
Pandora or Spotify. You certainly won't have a decent maps app - maps are one
of the most heavily monopolized core features of today's phones, mainly
because of the sheer size of the task of mapping the world. OpenStreetMap
exists, but it's honestly not very good.

You start to see the problem.

I used an Android fork for about a year without any Google services before I
gave up. I was able to grab a few crucial apps from APKMirror, but not many. I
tried using OsmAnd for maps; it was awful. I once bought a pair of headphones
I literally couldn't use without the app - available only on the App Store and
Play Store. I used web apps to fill in some of the gaps; they were spotty and
many were ugly and/or slow and/or didn't hook into APIs like push
notifications. At least I had a fully up-to-date Chrome fork to use as my
browser.

Maybe after the death of Android there would be greater momentum behind
building and sustaining this kind of ecosystem. That would help bolster not
only app development, but possibly even the value of the open web, and maybe
even the contributions to (and therefore quality of) things like
OpenStreetMap. It's hard to say.

~~~
dingaling
So your complaints are that you couldn't use your preferred commercial
services on an open platform. But if you zoom out to Smartphone Global Scale,
the vast majority of people don't use those services anyhow. Netflix has 155
million total subscribers globally, which means it _doesn 't_ have about 3,745
million other Internet users.

Smartphones are far, far more about communication and collaboration than
passive content consumption. 'Functioning' in our digital society isn't about
everyone individually watching the same movies on a 5" screen on the bus. Most
people use their phones as a glossier smartphone with navigation capability
and that's just fine.

~~~
_bxg1
"the vast majority of people don't use those services anyhow."

You use Netflix as a stand-in for all "commercial services". The majority of
smartphone users in the world may not have Netflix on their phones, but the
majority of Americans - the largest market by value - do. And more
importantly, I guarantee you that the vast majority of smartphone users
worldwide regularly use Facebook and/or WhatsApp. Those are commercial
services. I personally have trouble staying in the loop at work without Slack
on my phone. That's a commercial service. Plenty of mobile, commercial
services are truly essential to modern life. Singling out Netflix is a straw-
man.

~~~
feanaro
> The majority of smartphone users in the world may not have Netflix on their
> phones, but the majority of Americans - the largest market by value - do.

Maybe Americans are the largest market by value. Are they larger than the sum
of all other markets, though? Will they be in 5 years? What about 10?

Regarding WhatsApp and Facebook, let's just remind ourselves they did not
exist ~10 years ago. Any argument based on their size should only serve to
remind us that such a dramatic change is possible over a period of 10 years.

------
oflannabhra
My previous guess for a roadmap [0]:

1) Pixels move to Fuchsia, native apps are in Dart/Flutter, compatibility
layer for Android. Fuchsia becomes a distinguishing feature of Googles
hardware, and allows Google to differentiate vs Android competitors.

2) Google continues to support Android, but only as it affects their business
interests (as a funnel for search).

3) Google migrates some service level functionality away from Android and
Pixels become a first-class citizen in Google's ecosystem. In my mind, Fuchsia
is a direct result of Google's newfound interest in hardware (as a business).
I imagine the following:

\- Google sees voice (and maybe AR) as the next frontier, which is actually an
existential threat for them--they are harder to monetize via ads.

\- Google decides to start making hardware (for profit), to monetize their
services (a la Apple). That is, their Voice Assistant is now differentiated
from Android, and to use that service, you have to buy their hardware. Now,
they don't need to make money on ads for voice searches.

\- Google will continue to roll out more ML-driven services that are exclusive
to their hardware, and eventually, exclusive to Fuchsia. This will allow them
to both a) further differentiate their hardware from other Android
manufacturers, b) better monetize their services (effectively through HW
purchases), and c) steal market share of the most valuable customers from
Apple.

[0] -
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16568275#16569138](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16568275#16569138)

------
meruru
Would be bizarre if Google went proprietary with Android and Microsoft were
the ones to carry the AOSP torch.

~~~
guscost
Chromium might be trending in this direction too, with Electron/VSCode and the
new Edge.

------
ignoramous
This isn't an official statement from Google. If you're interested in
Android's OS update story (keywords: Project Treble, APEX [0],
GenericSystemImages [1]), then the thread [2] has some interesting pointers.

\--

[0] [https://www.xda-developers.com/android-q-apex-biggest-
thing-...](https://www.xda-developers.com/android-q-apex-biggest-thing-since-
project-treble)

[1] [https://developer.android.com/preview/gsi-release-
notes](https://developer.android.com/preview/gsi-release-notes)

[2] mirror:
[https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1119206658423558144.html](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1119206658423558144.html)

~~~
tyingq
_" This isn't an official statement from Google"_

Yep, he follows on with:

 _" About Fuchsia replacing Android, it's not a secret I leaked lol"_

then...

 _" Also, do keep in mind how Google sometimes randomly kills projects, and
starts new ones, nothing is set in stone with Google."_

------
kingkool68
They've said this before
[https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/111934411027040665...](https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/1119344110270406656)

~~~
ocdtrekkie
They've never made an official statement or confirmation of what Fuchsia is
intended to be used for, if anything. An Android OS dev making this statement
is, in fact, significant news.

~~~
tytso
AlexandraSalvaterra's github page shows that she is not a member of the Github
Google organization. So I don't believe she is an Android OS Dev working for
Google, or that this should be considered an official statement.

The articles that she linked to were old ones which have a note saying that
Google denied that the speculations were true. And herself said in a later
tweet that she was "putting things together" and that "5 years is a long
time".

And also, "Also, do keep in mind how Google sometimes randomly kills projects,
and starts new ones, nothing is set in stone with Google."[1]

[1]
[https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/111934632486704332...](https://twitter.com/DroidAlexandra/status/1119346324867043328)

Sounds like a poseur trolling for Twitter followers to me....

~~~
anoncareer0212
You're right, it was bizarre to say the least. The entire thread is full of
well-sourced, accurate info, and then this tweet was thrown in, then
immediately after it was accurately disclaimed.

Anyone who works at a BigCo knows there's no way in hell anyone's made a
decision about something 5 years out. There's a lot of risky dev between here
and there

I think they meant to suggest Fuchsia could replace the Linux kernel in that
timeframe

~~~
emn13
I mean, I know you're suggesting the claim has no merit because the poster
doesn't know what they're talking about; but you know, even if the poster were
a genius with intimate knowledge of the project, a claim like this is bogus.

If somebody with a modicum of common sense and software experience says some
software of this kind of complexity that they're working on "can" be good
enough in 5 years that basically means: it's a herculean task, and they have
no clue whatsoever as to how long it's actually going to take. Also, they
probably don't really know what they're really trying to do, only general
aims, not actually how they're achievable.

There's no way in hell anybody can plan something that novel and hugely
complex, with that many people involved in an ecosystem that's constantly
changing not to mention a business that's not known for its long term
perseverance, with any kind of accuracy for 1 year. 5 years is a complete
joke.

Who knows - it might happen. It might in just 1 year. Or maybe 50. Or more
likely, never. But I cannot believe that estimate to have any kind of sane
grounding.

The only way they're actually going to follow through on a schedule that long
term is by giving up on scope and quality, which is to say - sure, _something_
will be delivered, but perhaps nothing resembling today's expectations.

~~~
anoncareer0212
You seem to be vigorously agreeing with me beyond the first paragraph, but I
must be reading you wrong?

~~~
emn13
Nope, totally agreeing with you!

:-)

~~~
anoncareer0212
Doh, the poster != me, it's the person whose posts we're discussing :)

~~~
emn13
oh yeah, sorry - that's indeed what I meant.

------
Waterluvian
What's the context? Maybe knowing who this individual is would help me?

Edit: ah an Android OS dev. I imagine that's a primary party to Android and
therefore this individual is kind of an authority.

~~~
stupidthrottle
Google is eradicating all GPL from their mobile offering.

Fuschia will let them release a fully closed down platform.

~~~
brianpgordon
Fuchsia is permissively licensed. I swear, copyleft people have the weirdest
definition of freedom. How does using a license that lets you do anything with
the code, including using it to compete commercially with Google,
automatically indicate some nefarious plan to lock down the new platform? If
they wanted to do that, why would they release Fuchsia under a permissive
license in the first place?

~~~
ocdtrekkie
The main difference is that copyleft currently requires some components of all
new phones to be released as open source. With a permissive license, many
Android vendors will not release anything open source. So you might have a
much harder time figuring out how to flash the OS on them or get the drivers
to work with them. Obviously some manufacturers will probably still do so, but
they won't be required to as they are now.

Which is to say Fuchsia may not be closed source, but a lot of devices built
on it probably will be.

~~~
_bxg1
Yeah- this is the only reason there's any openness at all in the mobile space
right now. Android forks couldn't exist at all - much less postmarketOS - if
the underlying hardware and drivers weren't open and available.

~~~
viraptor
The underlay hardware and drivers are currently mostly closed and unavailable.
Especially the radios. That doesn't stop postmarketOS.

~~~
_bxg1
Surely it still relies on some of the same mechanisms that allow you to flash
custom bootloaders and ROMs?

~~~
viraptor
A lot of bootloading / unlocking has been figured out by reverse engineering
closed systems. It turns out Google is one of the few ones providing easy
tools to do this on nexus / pixel phones, even though they didn't have to.

They still provide the binary drivers/firmware from upstream because there's
no replacement for those.

------
m0zg
This is lunacy. Nothing is going to replace Android but the next version of
Android, for the same reason why Microsoft will forever continue developing
Windows: there are (hunrders of?) billions of lines of code written for it,
and: 1. Users just want to run their software, 2. Developers just want to sell
their software, and nobody is going to give a shit about principled OS design
or whatever. If Google doesn't understand this, they're about to learn a hard,
and expensive, lesson.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
Google has already made Android apps run on Chrome OS, and I think are at
least planning to do with Fuchsia. Which is to say, Google could kill the
Android OS as long as they preserve the Android app platform.

See also: Windows has actually replaced their Win32 app model with UWP which
is nearly a whole different app platform, but they still support Win32 apps
and have made it increasingly easier to deploy Win32 apps on UWP-based
platforms.

~~~
asveikau
> Windows has actually replaced their Win32 app model with UWP

This is wishful thinking on Microsoft's part.

> they still support Win32 apps

Because it is despite their best efforts more popular and more important. So
it cannot be said that they "replaced" it.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
The main hold up to new development being UWP is the lack of compatibility
with Windows 7, which is going out of support in January. Enterprises will
most all have switched by then, and it will be considered pretty safe to
develop ew software with UWP over legacy APIs.

~~~
asveikau
That works, except for:

1\. The large body of win32 code already written, maybe exceeds the quantity
of future UWP apps.

2\. The quality gap between what you can write with new and old stuff.

Maybe they have closed 2, I stopped paying attention a few years ago. But last
I knew there was a bit of a chicken-egg problem where nothing substantial was
being written with the new thing, thus no means for it to be validated and
improve.

Also there is the general problem that 21st century Microsoft cannot compete
with Windows NT. Can a new UI framework from Microsoft ever outdo the old
stuff? Debatable. There have been several attempts.

~~~
m0zg
I actually looked at UWP a couple of years back. To my shock and amazement, at
the time the C++ API did not contain anything that would allow you to resize
bitmaps. You could resize them for display, no problem, but there was nothing
like Core Image available. How this is possible in this day and age on the
world's premier desktop OS, I don't know.

~~~
asveikau
AFAIK a UWP app can use Windows Imaging Components (WIC) for that task, which
is a COM API introduced around the Vista era. Part of the great nebulousness
of defining UWP is that they can retroactively say a particular Win32 API is
"modern" enough to fit.

------
dejaime
Can't access the link anymore, "Sorry, that page doesn’t exist!"

Can anyone still access? Can anyone throw this in the WayBack Machine?

~~~
cristaloleg
[https://archive.is/ly67p](https://archive.is/ly67p)

------
marc3842h
I don't see how Fuchsia can pull this off without having at least
compatibility with existing Android apps.

Even if they do: I could see a ton of smartphone brands continuing to maintain
it for their own smart phones (the Chinese have been big on that front!) or
even making their own OS like Samsung with their Tizen OS.

~~~
bob1029
All they need to do is offer the legacy API in addition to the new one, and
write an internal translation layer. Obviously, that legacy API is at huge
risk of being deprecated, so you should expect it to be considering. Any app
out there that isn't rewritten for the new API will eventually stop working,
just like most of Google's products. I am sure they would enjoy seeing this
'cleansing' of less-popular and niche apps.

------
ykevinator
I really wish that Ubuntu project took off

------
robotbikes
Android will lose its corporate sponsor but it being an open source project
will continue as long as people continue to develop it.

~~~
josteink
But it’s mostly shipped on corporately made, marketed and sold phones.

Without shipments, it’s just yet another obsolete mobile OS.

~~~
robotbikes
Well I'm not aware of any nonprofit phone development cooperatives so without
Google driving it is is likely to become less popular but there will probably
also be other corporations that continue to develop an ecosystem for it. There
are still OS/2 derivatives being developed. I'm also just saying people will
continue to use it and something along the lines of LineageOS will be even
more important for people to be able to use their existing phones. For most
people who continuously discard their phones after a few years to get the
latest greatest it may end up being supplanted by whatever fuschia based
phones are developed. I'm convinced that fuschia is partially driven by a
desire to escape the GPL so with a MIT based licensed manufacturers won't even
need to pretend to release the source code for their hackish drivers and
kernel mods.

------
usermac
I truly liked webOS and even Windows Phone. I wish there was something new.

------
EGreg
Why would Google abandon it?

~~~
holtalanm
it is going to be replaced with Fuschia OS (i'm sure i probably butchered the
name)

My understanding is that it will be a pretty much transparent switch for users
going from an Android phone to a Fuschia phone -- not sure though.

~~~
intuitionist
The mnemonic I use for “fuchsia” is that it’s a flower named after a guy named
Fuchs.

It is a bit strange that a search engine company would choose a name that’s so
difficult to spell!

~~~
contingencies
In Chinese, the language of the largest mobile market in the world, it's a
good opening phoneme:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fu_(character)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fu_\(character\))

According to Wikipedia total Alphabet assets are around $232B, and Xiaomi's
are around $21.6B (ie. ~10% of Google's total net worth). Xiaomi was founded
in 2010. Google was founded in 1998.

------
ykevinator
Who is the speaker?

------
agumonkey
got an OS for you: have no phone

~~~
kuzimoto
Is that really the best solution? I realize that might be sarcasm, but it
seems phones are fairly critical for many people.

Obviously it's not a necessity, like food/water/shelter, but even some
homeless people with nothing else have cellphones.

~~~
agumonkey
it was only half sarcasm (and thanks for not firing at me for being overly
laconic in my previous comment)

I feel going back to very tech light, very local might be a very plausible
future. Maybe phones but not as a platform for life through digital pipe
metaphor

different and deeper education, more trustworthy next door social tissue,
slower pace

~~~
kuzimoto
Haha no problem, I figured there was more to it than just that ;)

I do agree with you that we would be better off with less tech, but it would
be hard for me at least since I love it so much. Although I do stay away from
social media (unless you count the occasional HN post) which I think does more
bad than good.

------
pastor_elm
does this mean Android won't be trademarked anymore by Google? I really hate
that such a wonderful word was ruined by Google.

~~~
pkaye
Kind of like how Apple ruined "apple".

------
usermac
Android EOL was after I tried it for the third and last time a few years ago.
It is just crap.

