Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 8th May 2017 17:05 UTC
Google

Ars Technica has an article with screenshots about a new development in Fuchsia, Google's research (maybe?) operating system. The project has a very basic and barebones graphical user interface now.

The home screen is a giant vertically scrolling list. In the center you'll see a (placeholder) profile picture, the date, a city name, and a battery icon. Above the are "Story" cards - basically Recent Apps - and below it is a scrolling list of suggestions, sort of like a Google Now placeholder. Leave the main screen and you'll see a Fuchsia "home" button pop up on the bottom of the screen, which is just a single white circle.

The GUI is called Armadillo, and Hotfixit.net has instructions on how to build it, and a video of it in action.

Google still hasn't said anything about Fuchsia's purpose or intended goal, but Travis Geiselbrecht did state in IRC that it isn't a toy, and it isn't a 20% project. At this point, the safest bet is to just call it a research operating system, but of course, it's exciting to imagine this brand new open source operating system having a bigger role to play.

Thread beginning with comment 644033
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
oiaohm
Member since:
2009-05-30

Whoa man you're trying waaay too hard to disagree for no good reason. This is like the conflict between batman and superman. I'm going step back and say "Martha" ;)


QNX and VXWorks are running into the same problem.

So my point here: The idea that each hardware vendor individually can write the drivers for their hardware is in fact unworkable. is based on what has happened to other Closed source OSs.

Is based on costs.

The result of having the core drivers that are shared is slowly but surely being more expensive per unit to recover the price of driver production. So be less and less competitive.

Individual hardware vendors making drivers will not make Fuchsia a viable option. You need a core of hardware vendors sharing the development cost this is very hard to build and is required to bring the per unit cost down of the final product.

Death of Windows CE, reduced usage of QNX, reduced usage of vxworks. This is all writing on the wall. Ignore in your for-castings of the future at your forecasts at your own risks.

Reply Parent Score: 2

oiaohm Member since:
2009-05-30

The result of having the core drivers that are not shared is slowly but surely being more expensive per unit to recover the price of driver production. So be less and less competitive.

Sorry typo.

Reply Parent Score: 2