[Info-vax] Taking a break - Open Source on OpenVMS Conference Calls Resume in the FALL of 2022...

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 7/3/2022 10:14 AM, seasoned_geek wrote:
> On Sunday, June 19, 2022 at 1:50:47 PM UTC-5, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 6/19/2022 10:37 AM, seasoned_geek wrote:
>>> On Saturday, June 18, 2022 at 5:49:30 PM UTC-5, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> On 6/18/2022 11:53 AM, seasoned_geek wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, June 17, 2022 at 10:32:21 AM UTC-5, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/17/2022 11:00 AM, Chris Townley wrote:
>>>>>>> On 17/06/2022 14:33, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> Not nonsense, where they are headed. It just takes the tiny x86 minds at Microsoft a while to get there.
>>>
>>> There are huge legal reasons for Microsoft to move in that direction
>>> especially now with all of the privacy and liability laws being enacted
>>> globally. When there is a security breach in the Linux TCP/IP stack or
>>> some other Linux kernel/component there is nobody to hold liable. When
>>> the same thing happens with Windows, Microsoft can now be held liable.
>>>
>>> If Windows becomes "just another desktop" on top of the Linux kernel, Microsoft can only be held accountable for its portion.
>> No MS is accountable for what they sell to customers.
> 
> This shows just how little you know.
> 
> The __purchased__ item is the Windows desktop and it runs on the free Linux distro of your choice. Microsoft and Windows are no longer liable for any network breaches because 100% of the network code is OpenSource Linux which they have no control over per the license agreement.

If MS sell an installable product with a Linux kernel and a
Windows desktop then they may be able to sell it because
their customer do not care whether it has a NT kernel or
a Linux kernel, but they would still be responsible for
the product.

If MS tell customers to buy or download a Unix distro,
install it and get it running on their PC and then buy
and install a Windows desktop, then they would not be
responsible for the Linux pieces, but they would not get
any customers - as that is not what Windows users expect.

>>>> They could probably do it. If Android SDK,
>>>> Android NDK and Play Services are available, then
>>>> practically everything should work identical whether
>>>> it is Linux or Fuchsia below.
>>>
>>> No. Android is being EOL in its entirety. Android cannot be fixed.
>>> The Fuchsia phone Samsung is actively developing is pure Fuchsia using DART
>>> for the primary app language. No Android anything. No Java support
>>> what-so-ever.
>>>
>>> https://screenrant.com/future-samsung-smartphones-might-ship-with-fuchsia-os-instead-of-android/
>>>
>>> There are a lot more companies than Samsung adopting Fuchsia now.
>>> It's had a pretty successful pilot run on the smart speakers.
>> If you actually read the article then you can see that it is just
>> speculation.
>>
>> There are always someone on the internet willing to make some
>> weird predictions.
>>
>> A total switch from Android is very unlikely to happen.
>>
>> The smartphone platform market is extremely difficult to enter.
>> People will not buy a smartphone without the apps they
>> use. And the app creators will not supply their apps for a
>> platform without users.
> 
> That's exactly what people who know nothing said about Apple each and
> every time it completely abandoned a platform.
And why Apple jumped through hoops to make the new platforms
compatible with the old.

> So far, everyone I know that does phone apps and used to use QT has
> jumped to Dart. They are writing their apps using Dart on Fuchsia.
> The legacy Android platform has some Dart support so the apps kind of
> run there. To counter your point, there already is a large supply of
> Fuchsia apps, they are simply waiting on the Samsung phone and a
> Fuchsia specific "store"
Most phone developers are busy writing apps for existing
phones not for phones that may show up in the future.

Arne