Android is already routinely emulated on PCs for purposes of development. As it's open source, it's certainly easier to develop a compatibility layer for it than for Windows (if such a thing doesn't already exist).

We used to say the same thing about Windows. Then smartphones and tablets caught on and we saw: actually, we can port apps to new operating systems and develop new ones for them.

I still don't get why doesn't Linux Foundation and someone else come together to fork AOSP to strip out Google stuff and make it a real Linux distro.

ATL (Android Translation Layer) and Waydroid.

I am still upset about the Canva acquisition.

I hate the incentive system shipping a free creative suite creates, the pay for major updates system was fine.

Probably would work better if everyone knew what that is:

Powerful, precise, and free forever. Discover Affinity — the next generation of professional photo, design, and layout software built for creative freedom.

https://www.affinity.studio/

Sounds good, tbh

Good thing it's a blog, not an article

Building an app in python reliant on pyqt is simplicity itself, vibecoding or not. If you have a Linux phone you can run these simple boiler plate apps. For Android you need a build chain & everything is just more complicated, including testing. (as far as I understand it anyway)

Suddenly it occurred to me that perhaps my LineageOS phone needs some sort of a Linux runetime, Vm whatever to run my weather app..

1. Therr is no doubt in your mind that Linux couldn't be great? I guess you meant it could?

2. The way you're talking sounds like younthink Linux is just starting with some basic security. Linux has pretty much been on the forefront security wise, I wouldn't trust any other OS over it (BSD type, maybe)

Sorry to be pedantic, but seeking clarification:

Theres no doubt in my mind that Linux phones couldn't be great

You meant that you have no doubt that they could be great, right? Your next few sentences make it sound like you're saying that there's still hope, but this first sentence essentially states, "even if all of my doubts were removed, Linux phones still couldn't be great."

If I'm misunderstanding, then I'd really like to know why you doubt Linux mobile as a platform in general.

It's hard enough getting some companies to develop Android apps (not to mention the Android watch OS has barely anything) as much as I'd like to see a Linux phone OS catch on, unless there is some kind of Proton-layer for Android thing I just don't see any companies making apps for it.

Yes, a little more time should have been spent structuring and formatting. Important message but hard to read and follow.

I thought that big wall of text you scrolled past explained it pretty well...

Mine will die after 2 or 3 days of suspend.

Just takes a weekend.

That article feels all over the place.

palata wrote on Hacker News: ... – We’ll probably want the security model, with the nice sandboxing and I would argue the verified boot.

Many of these commentators aren’t grasping the advantages to developing mobile Linux as an independent operating system that can’t be controlled by any single company. They aren’t seeing the advantages that mobile Linux offers over AOSP, nor are they accounting for the difficulties of modifying AOSP to respect its users, compared to developing mobile Linux.

Off the jump, not responding to the concerns of security implementations is a bit disingenuous and I stopped reading there. For Linux to seriously compete in the phone ecosystem, security needs to be there.

We're just now getting there on desktop with things like Wayland, Flatpak, and some distros having tbe ability to enable measured boot via TPM (usually its a process that requires a lot of research even when its supported.)

Theres no doubt in my mind that Linux phones couldn't be great, and a lot of the work done for desktop can be copied over to mobile. Until the day where Linux mobile security is at the very least good enough for the everyday person though (Proper sandboxing, permissions, encryption and verified boot) I dont see it being viable, as much as I would like it to be.

I have a laptop I use sometimes every day, sometimes not for a week. Hibernate on critical battery would save the things that get lost when it batteries out on suspend

1. It's slow
2. People don't understand the difference between suspend and hibernate, so fuck the people who do
3. It's incompatible with secure boot

Yeah I lose mlre than that jf I tirn it off. My battery is kinda fucked

What do you mean bringing hibernation back? Why the fuck was it gone?

Yeah same for me in Asahi Linux. Its the only thing I miss about macOS.

Most don't have hibernate enabled because you'd need a swap or swapfile large enough to hold the full memory state. And with the larger ram sizes and sleep being good enough, at least until everything became s2idle only, no one wanted to set up a huge chunk of unusable disk for it.

Good timing, this should be helpful until I get a replacement for my laptop’s dead battery.

Why does this article keep doing verbal loop-de-loops? It repeats the same main points a few times. AI?

Wait what? When was Mint killed by Ubuntu?

Mine loses about 1% per hour.