Not at all. You'd still need a chroot for cleanly package / test.

And no, nobody is switching to x86. Stop fabricating. I'm pretty sure your N810 will be on its way to recycling when x86 is mainstream in phones, if it ever is.

On the topic of weather or not Android is Linux:

Ok.. So here it is: android's not linux, android is a distribution including many parts one of which is the Linux Kernel. That's why they have different names, and were they equal, should android cease to exist this afternoon Linux would also disappear because they'd be the same. However this is clearly not the case. 'Linux' has existed before, and will continue to exist after Android.

But by the same criteria Maemo is not linux either! Maemo is a distribution containing the Linux Kernel as a component. In fact the same can be said about any distribution that's released. In fact, you could theoretically replace the kernel with something other than Linux and not need to give up the Maemo designation. Maemo and Linux are very different things.

The directory structure (/usr, /bin, /etc, etc..) is not Linux. While traditional Linux-based distros use this structure, so does Solaris, and Solaris is not Linux.

QT's not linux. They have different names and different code bases. If you write an app for QT, you're using a monolithic API that seeks to put a layer between the OS and the app for code portability. If you write an app for QT you're writing a QT app. Dare I say, the only 'Linux' apps are the low level libraries and executables that call the kernel directly and exclusively. The rest is just code; that is to say that I can be compiled anywhere and run assuming the dependencies are met.

This can go on...

In fact the only commonality between Linux-based OS's are the fact that they're linux based. That is to say that they use the Linux Kernel as that running code that sits between the hardware and the non-kernel code.

So here it is: Currently Maemo is a linux-based OS. Currently Android is a Linux-based OS. Linux code lies at the very base of these distributions. But neither Maemo nor Android are linux.

As I see it, the problem with this thread's ongoing argument is
1) clear lack of final definition of terms
2) the attempt to assert validity against arguably true, but non-relevant points.

There it is, a glimpse of the world as I see it.

}:^)~

On the write-once run anywhere android strategy

I do believe that as an overall strategy the one-binary-runs-on-all-platforms is a very wise strategy, especially the Android implementation of this. You trade performance for higher productivity and lower maintenance (unified api, single compiles, etc). This is true considering that most apps simply don't *need* the added performance.

Interestingly, all one has to do is look at the O3D google project to understand that you can still be behind a slow interpreter, and have outstanding performance. This is true if the interpreter can call native code which handles the heavy-lifting. For those that don't know, O3D is 3D in the browser as defined by Javascript, and it runs damn well. You can even define well-performing shaders using Javascript.

Even slow interpreters can be optimized in a myriad of ways to get higher performance. Look at the V8 javascript engine (+ video). It actually compiles dynamic Javascript to native assembly for great performance. I suspect there's room to optimize Dalvik further if it ever becomes a concern. I proposed a method of 'caching' a natively compiled binary from Dalvik Bytecode some time ago which would give the language the same speed advantages as C++, while maintaining the other advantages bytecode has at the cost of a bit more storage and a slower first-time run.

Fourth point is this. As processors become faster, memory becomes larger, and storage increases, performance becomes less of a concern. Consider that Javascript and Flash are more than adequate for a great number of apps, and with the proliferation of HTML 5 this will only increase. Eg. People have implemented 3D using flashes software renderer, and while not adequate for games, is more than sufficient for 3D visualizations.

Android is an open OS. So while it is very much an island in terms of development, the apps can live beyond the life of the distro. This may not have as easily been done by non-free development environments that would require emulators to extend the lives of the apps.

I *like* the idea of sandboxing for apps. Depending upon the app run (non-rooted apps), it provides a clear line of influence for untrusted apps and effectively limits their access beyond user-based permissions. This is the same way the web runs, and why you can visit pages without worry. The browser provides very limited access to your system, so you need not worry that the site you visit will have access to your system if you're using a secure browser. Imagine if the browser had access to your system? Or the files under your user account? Do you think the web would be as large as it is today?

}:^)~

Back on the thread topic

Have you seen the latest vid of the N1?
http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/30/n...h-res-photosh/

It's looking pretty slick! What do you think?

}:^)~

No.. that's not it at all. We're not discussing a 1==1 and so 0==0 here. This is entirely circular here:

The vast majority of all linux OS's are heavily based on the GNU userspace and libraries. Android is not. GNU and the FSF have been trying for years to get mainstream linux called GNU/Linux because they wanted credit. The majority of people never did, including Linus Torvalds himself, who said that while everyone deserves credit where due, he won't call it GNU/Linux until GNU actually makes it's own "distro", such as Debian or Red Hat Linux.

However, with the advent of Android this now changes... because that distinction has to be made at this point. By and large when someone says "linux" they mean *GNU*/Linux. How many times do you call Debian - Debian GNU/Linux? No one does.. and yet that's it's real name on the website.. because debian chose this terminology. But nobody says that.. they just say "Debian Linux". Red Hat however, only calls itself "Red Hat Linux" - even though it is also entirely based on the GNU userspace.

So in the sense of what everyone (except you two) *uses* the term, Android is not Linux because Android has nothing to do with the GNU userspace and libraries or utilities. It only microbially related to the mainstream linux in that they share a kernel. Every other aspect of it is different.

Even GoboLinux is GNU/Linux with it's completely FUBAR'd apple-wannabe filestructure. Even with how different GoboLinux is.. here's a quote from their page:

That is because nearly every linux distribution to date has been a GNU/Linux system. So - as I talk to the rest of the world I will continue to say Android is Not Linux. Or rather, what I said before - Android is linux, but it isn't. I believe the Google Engineer and myself are thinking on the same terms here - Android is not the Linux the world has come to know.

However, obviously, with people like Dan and I guess you Capt'n - who don't seem to want to apply widely accepted social vernacular's to their speech - and instead choose to get microscopically fundamental, I shall say Android is linux, but Android is not a GNU/Linux based operating environment.

We good?

Actually this isn't entirely accurate. On most windows systems, at least - up until Vista/7 (I'm not sure if they finally changed here..) the browser ran with the permissions of the executing user - and since the vast majority of users ran their systems as admin.. malicious code on websites (active-x, javascript, etc) have cause severe problems. You have trojans, worms, virus', etc... all that compromise the entire system. For example I pull up Task Manager right here on my XP desktop and go to the "firefox" task, the "User Name" next to it is my user account. This firefox has as much access to this system as I do, meaning that if I plugin a javascript code into my URL bar that echo's out a text file on my system - it will show it to me (assuming *I* have permissions to the file). This is why there is the options to disable Active-X and/or Javascript in nearly all modern browsers... it *is* a security risk.

In linux this hasn't been a large issue because very few people actually run their daily applications as root. Nearly all GNU/Linux and Android/Linux based systems will automatically create the root user, and a normal user with which the user is expected to run their software (except maybe gentoo.. where you kind of do everything yourself..). All other linux system are proprietary/firmware based that serve a specific function and nothing more.

Now.. on *servers*... the apache web server almost always runs as a locked down apache or httpd user separate from any other user on the system. IIS also had implemented this, but I think it still ran a good portion of it as System, so that when it was exploited system-level control as easy to obtain. I don't think it's done this for years though...

Definitely impressive...

Looks.... I dunno.... Apple-y?

No keyboard. Just another iPhone wanna be without all the great apps.

Needs a keyboard and Droid shows it can be done... Motorola just cocked their effort up by putting a poor d-pad (takes up KB space) and put the microsd card behind the battery. And no, this was not due to the design, but done that way on purpose, since the card was pre-installed and part of the features for media. Sholes was originally supposed to have 16gb built in AND a microsd slot.

N900 makes Nexus seem like a little girly phone No offense to girls, of course

Must admit I would retire my G1 if the Nexus did have a keyboard. Need it for the game emulators

Of course we're good! Trust me, I'm pretty soft spoken, but sadly that's not transmitted in the texts of a forum post.

Great points all around! I appreciate the clarification and insight into the way the world sees Linux.

I had hesitations about getting involved, but thought it would be fun to share my views. As before, I think it comes down to perspectives, widely accepted or otherwise.

The reasons for my 'microscopically fundamental' classification stems from a different (than I've observed) fundamental personal-philosophy but would make for a long, long post, that's entirely too off topic! It is however, not surprising that it's not the popular perspective.

}:^)~

That sounds intriguing .

Worry not.. I have used this "this is not this because 1==1" argument in the past... but in the debate between dan and I we weren't really arguing whether removing one removes the other.. because they are somehow a sort of symbiotic 100% reliant on eachother system set.

I'm sure we all understand.. even if you remove every linux distribution on the market in the world... the linux kernel will still exist and so technically "linux" will still exist. However, GNU/Linux may not. The idea would still exist.. a linux system derived from the GNU userspace.. but without any actual GNU/Linux systems it's not a *real* thing.

But.. that still doesn't get the 1==1 quite right, because that would assume that if I say Debian *is* GNU/Linux, then removing debian removes GNU/Linux.. which is incorrect.

But I think this is why mostly the "official" things will say "based on"... Debian is based on GNU/Linux, as with every other linux but android and specialty systems. This is also why I don't think you'll find on Google's website anywhere they actually say "Android is linux".. what they say, frequently, is that "Android is based on the linux kernel". Notice, that rarely, if ever, do they even say Android is based on linux.. they mostly, if not always, say based on the linux kernel. I don't think even Google wants to give off the impression that "Android is Linux".