[HN Gopher] Microsoft is bringing Android apps to Windows 11
___________________________________________________________________
Microsoft is bringing Android apps to Windows 11
Author : ArchUser2255
Score : 310 points
Date : 2021-06-24 15:40 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theverge.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theverge.com)
| NelsonMinar wrote:
| The article says this relies on "Intel Bridge Technology". Anyone
| know more about it? All I could find easily was
| https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/docs/discre...
|
| Want to highlight one paragraph from that description: "Intel
| Bridge Technology is run-time post compiler that can be
| integrated into Android-in-Container to enable certain Android
| apps - those not written in Java or compiled to run natively on
| Intel-based devices - to run on those devices."
|
| How many Android apps out there are not written in Java? I'm
| guessing Kotlin isn't supported either. For that matter how many
| apps are targeting Android devices with Intel CPUs anymore?
|
| I was expecting a full VM / emulator, but this doesn't sound like
| that.
| fulafel wrote:
| Probably the same binary translation tech that was used in
| Intel based android phones back when Intel made a push for
| that.
| pcapca wrote:
| My guess is that apps written in java/kotlin are easy to run in
| a x86 compatible android runtime.
|
| The difficulty is for native code, the arm libraries embedded
| in many apps. Actually most Android app depends on native libs.
| For image processing for example. Nearly all games are using
| native arm binaries.
|
| The sentence you quoted is probably related to native code
| only, which is the difficult part. It looks like they have some
| magic tricks to make them work on x86 architecture with having
| to recompile the libs.
|
| Intel used the same tricks in their x86 android devices a few
| years ago, you could run arm native code on their x86 android
| versions transparently.
| NelsonMinar wrote:
| oh this makes more sense: JVM apps run in Windows with some
| simple JVM container. Intel Bridge Technology is only needed
| for the apps that have compiled native code.
| tadfisher wrote:
| Android apps don't ship with JVM bytecode, though; they are
| compiled to the DEX format[1], which is the format used by
| the Android Runtime (ART), which is generally why these
| Android-in-container projects ship the whole bionic-based
| userland and pipe I/O through a bridge service.
|
| [1] https://source.android.com/devices/tech/dalvik/dex-
| format
| naikrovek wrote:
| > some simple JVM container
|
| no, there's a new NT subsystem to support this: Windows
| Subsystem for Android, and as you could guess from the
| name, it is somewhat related to WSL.
|
| the NT kernel was always designed to accommodate multiple
| subsystems running at once. Until WSL, there was only ever
| the Windows subsystem itself. soon there will be a third
| subsystem one can install.
|
| this is neat, to me.
| jlawer wrote:
| There was a posix subsystem as well in the early days,
| however it lacked functionality and was used as a "check
| that box" for procurement rather then functionality
| glhaynes wrote:
| Also OS/2 (1.x).
| sudosensei wrote:
| Intel used to call this Houdini. It was also used in
| Android-x86. Last I looked at the Android-x86 sources, binfmt
| was used to configure certain types of binaries to be
| translated on-the-fly by Houdini before running the
| translated x86.
| jbverschoor wrote:
| Houdini.. I hope it doesn't escape its locked sandbox
| notriddle wrote:
| I would expect Android apps that are written in Java would also
| run, but they wouldn't use "Intel Bridge" to do it.
| polar wrote:
| https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/newsroom/news/intel-...
| bitwize wrote:
| > How many Android apps out there are not written in Java?
|
| A fair few games are developed in C++ and run through the
| Android native interface. Unity games, often written in C#, run
| on Unity's native runtime which has been ported to Android.
|
| Intel Bridge Technology is, presumably, a way to get ARM
| binaries running on x86 by AOT compiling them. It is not
| necessary for Java or Kotlin apps or native x86 apps, so those
| will run without IBT.
| rpeden wrote:
| Also apps that use React Native, as the RN runtime is written
| in C++ and uses the NDK on Android.
| 015a wrote:
| I think that statement from Intel has to be taken in context;
| that technology is for enabling Android applications which are
| not _otherwise_ executable on Intel CPUs to successfully run on
| Intel devices. Its not an assertion that Java-based Android
| apps won 't be available in the app store; its just saying
| "these apps which are generally really hard to get running on
| x86, we've got those covered too".
| johnnyapol wrote:
| This was my interpretation of the statement too. Specifically
| what comes to mind is apps that depend on native/shared
| libraries that only have an ARM build and not a x86 build
| shipped.
| anfilt wrote:
| There is the android NDK (Native Development Kit) it's mainly
| games or CPU intensive apps trying to get as much performance
| or software that was ported and whose code base was primarily a
| compiled language like C.
| embeddTrway690 wrote:
| > How many Android apps out there are not written in Java?
|
| Lot of apps use natively compiled libraries through NDK.
| tyleo wrote:
| I'm hoping to get an AMD PC sometime in the future. I hope this
| works on more than just Intel processors.
| anfilt wrote:
| If microsoft is working on it I bet they would want it to
| work on AMD CPUs as well.
| an_opabinia wrote:
| There are few categories of apps this targets.
|
| "Clubhouse for Android" category: avant- grade apps that launch
| first on Android or define android platform. Nonexistent.
|
| "Median phone user ecosystem:" The TikTok Facebook, Instagram,
| WhatsApp, YouTube, Snapchat, China app ecosystem and India app
| ecosystem. The experience of all these is bad on Windows
| browsers or unavailable.
|
| "Games": hard to say, because Windows is a better platform for
| games than Android by 10x.
|
| This doesn't sound very strategy driven. If it's UX driven,
| hard to see how it competes with the median user getting an
| iPhone. This is the case with the consumer in China, where
| despite 30 Android app stores and lots of innovation /
| competition the iPhone is still preferred by those who can
| afford it.
| mike_d wrote:
| The strategy here for Microsoft is pretty obvious. Windows is
| becoming a tablet OS first and foremost. However it is at
| best a 3rd target for app developers, once they have finished
| their iOS and Android versions.
|
| Natively supporting an Android app store allows them to get
| apps so users will want to buy the hardware, which in turn
| generates market share that gets developers interested.
| 7952 wrote:
| There are some high quality creative apps on Android for
| things like photo editing, drawing, video editing etc. This
| could disrupt the space in which Adobe currently operates.
| Android could add a lot of diversity to windows in terms of
| productivity and creative apps.
|
| I think a possible advantage is also integration with Teams
| and OneDrive. Aandroid apps don't tend to use file stored in
| directory structures. You use the share menu instead and
| maybe some pickers for photos and downloads. This could
| integrate well into their cloud ecosystem. Save app data to
| OneDrive and have sharing menus work between the two. You
| could even have tabs in teams that show an Android app and
| store the data in the team. Corporate IT departments might
| prefer that to voluminous directory structures and vendor
| management.
| pimterry wrote:
| > "Games": hard to say, because Windows is a better platform
| for games than Android by 10x.
|
| Note that there are quite a few commercial "Android on PC"
| emulators already, e.g. https://www.memuplay.com/,
| https://www.bluestacks.com/ and https://www.bignox.com/.
|
| In terms of scale, Bluestacks claim they have 50 million
| monthly active users which makes them pretty substantial!
| From https://www.bluestacks.com/promote-your-game.html.
| Overall mobile gaming revenue is now larger than console
| gaming and more than 2x PC gaming, and rapidly growing
| (https://scaletech.medium.com/mobile-gaming-statistics-
| trends...). Android gaming is a much bigger market than you'd
| imagine, especially for the younger generation.
|
| > hard to see how it competes with the median user getting an
| iPhone
|
| > This is the case with the consumer in China, where ... the
| iPhone is still preferred by those who can afford it
|
| I think you're seriously overestimating how popular iPhones
| are, even to users who can afford them. Especially if you're
| looking at Windows users, Android is hugely dominant outside
| the US.
|
| In China for example, iOS market share is actually constant
| around 20% or maybe slightly declining over the last decade
| (https://www.statista.com/statistics/262176/market-share-
| held...) despite the huge increase in average purchasing
| power, which makes it seem unlikely that the only thing
| holding people in China back from them is the price.
|
| Globally, Android is at 70% of devices
| (https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide)
| even in relatively wealth areas like the EU. iOS is primarily
| popular in the USA (where it's about 60% of devices). I
| suspect iOS and Mac usage are fairly closely correlated, so
| the Android percentage goes up substantially if you're only
| looking at Windows users. I think Android integration
| actually makes a lot of sense for Microsoft!
| PaulHoule wrote:
| I use Bluestacks to run home automation programs.
|
| It subjects me to ads for third-rate games that I can't
| imagine people play. First-tier Android games like F/GO and
| Genshin Impact seem to be disabled on non-phone devices,
| particularly Bluestacks and Android TV. I see a huge amount
| of fan art from those games, but I wonder if gaming on
| Bluestacks is just a Potemkin Village.
| miohtama wrote:
| Freefire is one of the largest mobile first person
| shooters with more than 100M monthly active users. "Pro"
| players and streamers tend use to BlueStacks.
| sudosensei wrote:
| I'm guessing Intel Bridge Technology is related to what they
| used to call Houdini. Houdini is an ARM binary translator which
| translates ARM binary code into x86. I believe Android-x86
| (https://www.android-x86.org) makes use of it.
| pmarreck wrote:
| Based on the trends I'm seeing, they better be working on the
| opposite direction ;)
| axaxs wrote:
| Quite the contrary. Why would Intel want x86 on ARM? That
| would make migration even easier.
| lorlou wrote:
| Java performance is so terrible that most of the code of the
| majority of apps is written in native code. Java is only used
| for the UI of those apps.
| [deleted]
| sedatk wrote:
| I feel like that's Rosetta 2 for PCs.
| chx wrote:
| https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/24/22549303/windows-11-intel...
| reports it will work on AMD CPUs too.
|
| > According to Intel, Bridge itself is a run-time post compiler
| that translates applications that are compiled for non-x86
| platforms (in this case, Android applications) into x86
| instructions (which can run on Windows 11 with Intel or AMD
| CPUs).
| jmkni wrote:
| Will this help with Android development? Would be nice to be able
| to debug from Android Studio without needing the emulator.
| wly_cdgr wrote:
| This is great. It heads off ChromeOS and makes the Surface
| hybrids even more attractive than they already are, which is no
| mean feat. Once this is out the Surface Books will cover
| basically all use cases at least decently. It'll be great to have
| cross op with their new foldable Android phones, too. Those
| machines are an absolute joy
|
| Microsoft really killing it since Nadella took over
| leshokunin wrote:
| This is great. Finally a non hacky way to run mobile apps on a
| desktop. This is less about competing with Apple's universal
| binaries, and more about increasing Windows's versatility.
|
| You can already run Linux on Windows. Now you can run Android. No
| need to mess around with Archon, Nox, Genymotion anymore. Got a
| weather app you like? An audiobook player? Done.
|
| Hopefully this means more interoperability with Microsoft's own
| Android apps, so buying a phone like the Surface Duo and using
| the Your Phone feature actually does something.
| projectsforlife wrote:
| Absolutely. Way less janky than Mac's implementation of running
| iOS apps. While you can use mobile apps on your Windows laptop
| using native touch controls, on your Mac laptop you have to use
| that weird trackpad-driven interface. Which would you prefer?
| https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Mac-m...
| 9wzYQbTYsAIc wrote:
| Where's the screenshot of what user input looks like for
| Android on Windows?
|
| I'd love to compare those side by side to make a judgement of
| which looks more janky.
| durovo wrote:
| I believe what they are saying (hoping for?) is that since
| there are many Windows compatible laptops with touchscreens
| (unlike macbooks), Android app experience on them might be
| better.
| 9wzYQbTYsAIc wrote:
| Ah, perhaps.
|
| I'm excited to see that Apple is unifying their hardware
| architectures across their various form factors of
| computing devices.
|
| That'll be interesting in the future.
| turtlebits wrote:
| I used BlueStacks for a while, while IME was never hacky. That
| said, there was/is little motivation for me to run mobile apps
| on desktop.
|
| This definitely lowers the barrier to entry, thought I have
| little faith in how Microsoft will present it. Been burned too
| many times by them on poor UX/DX (WSL, F#)
| throwamon wrote:
| What's wrong with WSL and F#?
| hakcermani wrote:
| Is there something similar on Linux? Would make me ditch the
| Apple ecosystem once and for all for Linux and Android ..
| AkshitGarg wrote:
| Anbox (https://anbox.io/) does seem to do this. I couldn't try
| this because I couldn't get it to run on my machine a few years
| back
| jedberg wrote:
| The security implications of this are interesting. There are some
| apps, namely Snapchat and Instagram, that guarantee privacy by
| taking advantage of the phone APIs that inform the app about
| screenshots. You can in theory work around those today with
| rooted/jailbroken phones, but those are a tiny part of the
| ecosystem.
|
| But if everyone can run Snapchat on Windows, that kinda changes
| the whole game, unless they support the same APIs. But even then,
| it seems like it would be trivial to block that API.
| vyrotek wrote:
| Indeed. Automating and botting various apps seems like it'd be
| easier as well.
| erwinkle wrote:
| You have always been able to run Snapchat and android apps on
| Windows via emulators like MEmu.
| jedberg wrote:
| Sure, and on Mac too, but it's not easy and rarely done.
|
| This will make anyone able to do it.
| bialpio wrote:
| How is Windows currently guaranteeing safety of DRM'ed media
| content? I seem to recall that you cannot play back some types
| of content on Windows for example if kernel debugging is
| enabled. Maybe they aren't that far from being able to
| guarantee that pixels aren't being grabbed for apps that do not
| want to have their pixels grabbed?
| idle_zealot wrote:
| This seems backwards to me. Sure, apps should be at the mercy
| of they system when they want to use system-level features
| (interacting with other apps, accessing mic/camera, etc). But
| why should an application get to dictate which system features
| a user can invoke (taking a screenshot)?
| throwamon wrote:
| > why should [applications] get to dictate which system
| features a user can invoke?
|
| They shouldn't, but they do it anyway because virtually no
| users know how to "cheat", and most don't even know that they
| _can_ cheat. The justification is that taking a screenshot
| violates your or someone else 's privacy or security. In the
| case of security, they assume you're too dumb to know better.
| jedberg wrote:
| Snapchat doesn't block you from screenshooting, but it
| notifies the other person if you do.
| CountDrewku wrote:
| Gross. Privacy invasion trifecta. Just invite facebook along for
| the ride too.
| hughrr wrote:
| Oh great another 5gb on the install image that no one is going to
| use.
| vyrotek wrote:
| I wonder how well games will work such as the upcoming Diablo
| Immortal.
| dhdhhd wrote:
| Wow this is great. Goes back to work
| blibble wrote:
| crappy phone apps on the my desktop PC?
|
| just what I've always wanted
|
| well at least now I'll be able to play Diablo Immortal....
| wtetzner wrote:
| Maybe this is a step toward a new Windows Phone that is
| compatible with Android apps.
| Ashanmaril wrote:
| Actually, in some cases mobile apps are higher quality than
| desktop versions. Mainly because the standard for mobile is to
| make native apps for the platform, while on desktop everything
| is Electron
| williamtwild wrote:
| EVERYTHING is electron? Thats a bit overly broad and
| inaccurate.
| Ashanmaril wrote:
| Stop being so intentionally obtuse, you know what I mean
| 2Gkashmiri wrote:
| how can windows run android apps but linux which is base of
| android itself cannot do that ? what happened to arm and x86
| differences? if rosetta stone thing is being done, why can't
| linux do that even natively on arm?
|
| edit: base=kernel
| ThatPlayer wrote:
| Android still uses bytecode for a lot of apps. Unless you're
| using Android NDK, which does have native code and requires
| different releases for different processors, ARM and x86 isn't
| really relevant.
|
| Intel even made an attempt into the smartphone CPU market with
| the Asus ZenFone 4 back in 2014 with an Intel Atom x86
| processor running Android. Modern Pixelbooks (and other x86
| Chromebooks) run Android apps fine too, and those are
| technically Linux, so therefore it's already been done. Anbox
| also seems to do it fine in a container. Never tried that
| though.
| moogly wrote:
| But why? I can think of exactly 0 Android apps I would like to
| run on my Windows desktop (and I've been an Android user since
| the original Samsung Galaxy S). Is this really something people
| crave to do?
| 88840-8855 wrote:
| I am running and using 5 iOS on my M1 Macbook and they are
| useful to me. I wished we could continue sideloading iOS apps,
| but unfortunately Apple blocked that. And it sucks that devs
| can block installation of iOS apps on the Mac, although it is
| technically possible. This is artificial limitation purely for
| commercial reasons. Bad.
| cblconfederate wrote:
| maybe ... they want to stop the javascript-based desktop app
| craze. E.g. their android skype mobile does not look much
| different from their skype desktop now.
|
| Maybe they want to steal google's OS
| ptx wrote:
| Great, so now we can run React Native apps on Android on
| Windows. Apparently Microsoft heard we liked runtimes, so
| they put a runtime in our runtime so we can virtualize while
| we virtualize.
| hogFeast wrote:
| I am not sure this is for consumers. If you are a developer
| though, this is clearly pretty attractive.
| moogly wrote:
| I can see that, especially since the Android emulators have
| been historically terrible (never tried the Intel one though,
| which maybe had some of this tech?).
|
| But this was highlighted in the video clearly targeted at
| consumers with great fanfare, so I don't know...
| KaoruAoiShiho wrote:
| Yeah? Tiktok's app is way better than the website. Snapchat etc
| doesn't even have a usable website.
| rbanffy wrote:
| I believe the question is why having the app on a Windows
| machine if the phone is usually nearby.
| azov wrote:
| Typing on real keyboard, for example, is much better than
| typing on a phone.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Now I will be able to respond to messages and notifications
| better while in VR! A super niche use that should be way
| improved by this feature
| KaoruAoiShiho wrote:
| If you're already on the PC the PC is usually more
| convenient.
| ThatPlayer wrote:
| I have multiple monitors and it's easier and more
| convenient to throw up an app on my screen and control with
| my mouse and keyboard than to pick up my phone, unlock it,
| and use that screen.
| wly_cdgr wrote:
| To kill Chromebooks
| rbanffy wrote:
| OTOH, now that I can sell my Android apps on the Microsoft
| store, why would I even bother to make a Windows-specific
| port?
|
| Blackberry tried it with Blackberry 10 and failed. IBM failed
| the same way with OS/2. If you make your OS compatible with a
| foreign platform, there is less incentive to write original
| software for it and, therefore, there is less reason to get
| your platform instead of the one you are compatible with.
| wly_cdgr wrote:
| As a user though, why would I get an operating system /
| device that can only run Android software when I can get a
| device that can run both Android and Windows software?
|
| And as an Android dev, I now have an incentive to optimize
| for Microsoft device form factors, which is a lot easier to
| do and maintain than making a whole port
|
| And I don't see that there are too many developers who are
| now writing Windows desktop apps who will suddenly decide
| to rewrite for Android. Cos what apps are native? Stuff
| like CAD software, Unity, Photoshop, etc - stuff that has
| heavy complex UIs and wouldn't work well if at all in most
| Android contexts
| rbanffy wrote:
| Maybe Google licensed them some of the stack in return for
| telemetry on desktop users as well. Non-Chrome usage of
| desktops is a space Google can't get much data from and one
| they'd really want to access.
| dcgudeman wrote:
| "licensed them some of the stack"? Android is open source.
| ehsankia wrote:
| They're not even using the Play Store, they completely side
| steped Google and used Amazon App Store, so your theory
| doesn't really hold water.
| actuator wrote:
| There are platforms that debut on phones first and either are
| limited to phones or launch way later on web. WhatsApp for
| example was a phone only thing for such a long time.
| TameAntelope wrote:
| It's nice to be able to force "Windows only" developers to
| still ultimately use Linux, so I can drop developer support for
| Windows.
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| Yes. I want to run Pleco on my desktop.
|
| I might also want to run wechat there, though that could run
| into a variety of issues.
| miohtama wrote:
| > I can think of exactly 0 Android apps I would like to run on
| my Windows desktop
|
| Maybe you present a minority of the user base and this is not
| targeted to you. So, yes.
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| Well for one the youtube app has access to secret forbidden
| content that the website doesn't. And the podcast app I paid
| for has a free phone version and a _subscription_ non-phone
| version. For both of these, when I 'm at my desktop, I want to
| use them on my desktop.
| loudtieblahblah wrote:
| Same reason you can run Linux on windows.
|
| They don't want you to go to another platform for anything.
| jimlikeslimes wrote:
| I agree with the sentiment. The only thing I can think of are
| certain mobile only banking apps. Maybe an SMS messaging app
| would be useful? Slim pickings from my quick scan of my phone.
| MomoXenosaga wrote:
| Considering nobody uses the word "program" anymore and it's app
| this and app that...
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| If anything, Amazon knows this will really incentivize updating
| your Android app on the Amazon App Store, or bringing it there if
| you haven't.
|
| And that's good for us because, should the Amazon App Store
| become more viable for manufacturers, Google might find
| themselves increasingly losing control of Android, and
| increasingly forced to make the Play Store more competitive.
| madeofpalk wrote:
| Will it?
|
| Has the iOS apps on M1 Macs incentivised developers to do
| anything, apart from just opt out of the program?
| dharma1 wrote:
| Yeah I don't think it's really taken off. The iOS apps that I
| would actually like to use on my M1 Mac have just opted out -
| not sure why.
|
| For MS I think this could be a modest low risk win, even if
| it doesn't massively take off. It gets them at least some
| tablet apps, and some popular social apps for desktop,
| without having to incentive developers to port them.
| NelsonMinar wrote:
| Amazon's App store as it stands now is a bit of a ghost town.
| If apps are on there at all they're often outdated versions. I
| assume Google won't agree to cooperate with Microsoft and let
| the Play Store be supported. Anti-trust should help with that
| kind of monopolistic play but lol.
| handrous wrote:
| Google's well on their way to replacing Android, no? I thought
| a lot of their announcements at events the last couple years
| had been about their from-scratch Android replacement.
|
| Maybe another big company will pick it up, but if not, I don't
| see much benefit to the hobbyist community over the current
| status quo if Android gets "opened up" more but also loses 99+%
| of total corporate backing toward its development. Even if
| Amazon or MS run with it (and maybe that's what this is the
| beginning of?) that seems more like an on-life-support scenario
| than one with a bright future for Android.
|
| Could go totally differently if major phone and tablet
| manufacturers ignore the New Shiny Thing and stick with Android
| so developing commercial software for it remains viable, I
| guess.
| tomComb wrote:
| They might use Fuschia to replace the Linux kernel in
| Android, but Android would remain the same from an end user
| or app developer perspective.
|
| They aren't just going to turf Android.
| 015a wrote:
| I don't think Google is in a position to "replace" Android.
| They simply don't control the hardware; they can ship Fuchsia
| to their Home assistants and thermostats, but when it comes
| to phones and personal computing devices, they don't have
| many cards to play (beyond Pixel, like 0.5% of the Android
| market). The power lies with hardware manufacturers and
| developers.
|
| Their new wearables partnership with Samsung may help here.
| Maybe Samsung would play along with a new Fuchsia phone OS.
| But there's still the developer issue; any new OS like this
| would need Android-backward compatibility support exactly
| similar to what Microsoft is doing here. "Android" in this
| sense doesn't mean "the OS"; its the application system.
|
| What's happening in the Android world right now is so healthy
| and excellent, I almost can't believe its the product of Big
| Tech. Google is already pushing Android apps on ChromeOS, now
| Microsoft has them on Windows, through the Amazon app store,
| and nowhere in any of this is the actual Android Operating
| System. The comparison here isn't Android vs iOS vs Windows;
| its Android vs Flutter vs Web. Its a new way of writing
| "native"-adjacent multiplatform applications; the OS doesn't
| matter anymore.
|
| Sure the touch-friendly UI will suck in some applications, on
| some deployments of Windows. That's not Android's fault; its
| on the developer to recognize the input method and canvas
| size, and adjust accordingly. I hope more do!
| WastingMyTime89 wrote:
| > Its a new way of writing "native"-adjacent multiplatform
| applications; the OS doesn't matter anymore.
|
| If only someone had thought about that before: a language
| targeting a bytecode interpreter and an ecosystem of
| library sitting on top of the operating system in order to
| be able to run programs on any operating system. In a way
| we could call it a virtual machine as it makes the OS
| insignificant. Written like this it sounds like 1994 tech.
| A shame we had to wait so long...
| robotresearcher wrote:
| Also LISP in 1958. It's a great idea that will always be
| around.
| [deleted]
| anfilt wrote:
| Byte Code and VMs are are older than just 90's tech but
| okay. I still honestly prefer native code, but it does
| not work well for non-open source software unless the
| developer also compiles for other systems. Also windows
| is really the only major non-*nix OS these days. Although
| apples GUI software stack is still a pain port for when
| porting.
| 015a wrote:
| Sure, its 20s tech (WASM), 10s tech (Web/PWA), 00s tech
| (Java), 90s tech (Java), 80s tech (Erlang/BEAM), jeeze
| even 50s tech (Lisp)...
|
| There are people who complain about how the industry is
| moving in cycles and how what's old is new again and how
| functional languages did that back in 1922. These people
| don't change the world; they just complain about how
| other people are changing it.
| anfilt wrote:
| Huh? I don't see how what I was saying was complaining?
| Sure things sometimes happen in cycles, I did not even
| mention that, but it is not necessarily a bad thing. VMs,
| and byte codes are a tool, and have their place. However,
| they do have their limitations compared to natively
| compiled code.
| ForHackernews wrote:
| I thought Samsung had their own OS[0] that they were using
| for watches/smart TVs, and also keeping in their back
| pocket as a hedge against Google's influence? Are they
| giving that up?
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tizen
| mike_d wrote:
| Tizen is used for Smart TVs, refrigerators, and cameras.
| Targeting devices that need to be "smart" but have a
| relatively low CPU budget and at best embedded GPUs.
|
| The most recent phone that shipped with Tizen had a 480 x
| 800 pixel display.
| jrm4 wrote:
| I hope they try, and I suspect it would end up the same way
| that OS/2 ended up for IBM, i.e. failure. Not that I love
| or hate any particular company; but I do believe in (real)
| competition and I think this would help foster that.
| (Strong enemy of my enemy vibes here though.)
| handrous wrote:
| Right, but if no-one picks up the torch of maintaining and
| developing Android and giving it away to device
| manufacturers, I'd imagine going with the _new_ Google OS
| that they _are_ going to do that for, would be very
| tempting. Most phone manufacturers haven 't shown an
| interest in putting a ton of work into the Android,
| themselves, even just to customize it beyond adding some
| shovel-ware and maybe a theme (notable exception: Samsung)
|
| Possibly the _app_ ecosystem will survive, even if the OS
| itself withers into obscurity, provided Fuscia can run
| Android apps (seems likely, but I haven 't kept up with
| news on that sort of thing)
| gman83 wrote:
| If Google were to ditch Android for Fuchsia, I could see
| this Microsoft/Amazon alliance stepping in and saying
| they'll build Android moving forward.
| Grazester wrote:
| When/if Google ditches Android you think they will give
| up the echo system? You think suddenly Android apps
| wouldn't run on Fuchsia? It would be a seamless
| transition(look at how they did it on the Nest Hub).
|
| All the "cool" new Google features and performance
| upgrades may be Fuchsia only. I wouldn't bank much on
| Amazon. They just need an OS to run their readily
| disposable devices. I don't see them putting too much
| effort into this.
|
| Google is going the hold the hand of manufacturers and
| ease them into it.
|
| At least if Google had any sense this is how it would be
| done.
| leucineleprec0n wrote:
| I think that's exactly what this is; it functions as
| insurance of sorts for the mobile world - such that they
| aren't _totally_ locked out of a feasible platform (see
| tablets especially for both ) and also a "why not" for
| MS & Amazon both. It gives MS a starting point for an
| Android SDK + existing Amazon Android apps - and Amazon
| can bolster their offerings which currently are fairly
| barebones.
|
| It could amount to little, of course. Even iOS apps on
| MacOS as a concept and practice has not remotely the
| luster ardent Apple acolytes predicted, certainly not yet
| even 7 months in.
| miohtama wrote:
| Fuchsia is a kernel, not operating system. Google intends
| to swap Linux under Android to Fuchsia. One reason is the
| bad track record of Linux supporting device drivers.
| fbkr wrote:
| I thought Zircon is the kernel and Fuchsia is the
| operating system. Though that wouldn't prevent Google
| from building Android on top of Fuchsia.
| [deleted]
| wvenable wrote:
| Google replacing Android might end up like when Intel tried
| to replace x86. AMD came along with AMD64 and forced Intel
| back into making compatible chips. It might end up being an
| even brighter future for Android.
| partiallypro wrote:
| Google has about as much power to replace Android as
| Microsoft has the power to replace Windows. The ecosystem is
| too big now to go back.
| kumarvvr wrote:
| This is an absolute win-win for Microsoft and Amazon.
|
| Microsoft gets Android Apps, Amazon expands its app store and
| Google is shunted out of the Microsoft eco-system.
|
| I see this as an absolute brilliant thing to happen to the app
| ecosystem.
|
| I really hope innovation accelerates on the Amazon App store.
| tomComb wrote:
| This could be good for competition, but it's hard to see it
| as being about innovation.
|
| Same as Microsoft copying Chrome and calling it Edge, users
| have another browser, now with MS telemetry etc. instead of
| Google. Good for user choice but hardly innovation.
| jacob019 wrote:
| Firefox user here. If I had to choose between MS and Google
| telemetry, which I don't, I would choose MS any day.
| canadianfella wrote:
| This would be so weird to see if I had a time machine 20
| years ago.
| tomComb wrote:
| Ok, great, so now there is one more option that addresses
| your preference) but it still isn't really innovation.
|
| (I don't really follow how your comment related to the
| issue.)
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| > Google is shunted out of the Microsoft eco-system
|
| We'll see about this one. Last I checked, half of Microsoft's
| own apps couldn't run on Android if Play Services was
| disabled.
| wilsonnb3 wrote:
| Microsoft brought the office suite to Amazon's app store
| pretty recently, when Amazon launched their latest 10 inch
| tablet with a keyboard attachment.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| That's good to know. One of the things that pushed me
| completely off Android was discovering how few even
| Microsoft apps I could use without Play Services' malware
| being installed as well.
|
| And it's very likely Google will find ways to retaliate
| against Microsoft for working with the Amazon Appstore
| here. They are pretty aggressive against forks. Honestly,
| I would suspect the next Duo won't be able to run Play
| Services, because Microsoft dared to work with a
| competing Android app store.
| maliker wrote:
| Plus it counters Apple, which recently made iOS apps
| available on macOS.
|
| Seems like all the major OS are betting that mobile is going
| to be the focus of future native app development and don't
| want desktop users to miss out.
| zamadatix wrote:
| I don't think it says quite that much rather they've given
| up on the idea of a universal native app platform being
| realistic.
| mike_d wrote:
| > Google is shunted out of the Microsoft eco-system
|
| iOS is 54.33% of all tablets, Android is 45.57%. Microsoft,
| Amazon, and everyone else combined account for 0.1%
|
| It doesn't seem like an ecosystem Google has the time to
| worry about.
| slim wrote:
| 54% of all tablets in USA maybe? It's more like 5.4% of all
| tablets in reality
| mike_d wrote:
| Worldwide. In the US it is slightly higher.
| https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-
| share/tablet/worldwide
| zuminator wrote:
| I expect Amazon would be included under Android in those
| numbers.
| cronix wrote:
| I just went through my phone and there isn't a single Android app
| I'd actually want to use on my PC. Most of my apps are just
| hobbled versions of websites anyway, so I just use the fully
| functional browser with a full sized keyboard and nice big
| monitor and use the websites when I'm on the PC, and for that all
| I need is a single browser and the OS doesn't really matter.
| [deleted]
| dmitrybrant wrote:
| Microsoft _really_ wants to convince you that your phone and your
| PC are the same thing. But they 've failed in the execution of
| this idea several times now.
|
| The fact that this partnership is with the Amazon app store, not
| the Google Play store, is a strong hint of how serious they are
| about this, and how this latest iteration will work out.
| okareaman wrote:
| The old saw was that Microsoft takes 3 tries to get it right.
| Don't know if it applies anymore.
| blablablerg wrote:
| what about bringing office to linux?
| tootie wrote:
| This is neat but I'm struggling to think of a case where this
| would be useful.
| bitL wrote:
| You can get the free Microsoft Office from Android running on
| Windows 11 "natively"...
| layer8 wrote:
| It's only free for screen sizes up to 10", isn't it?
| neogodless wrote:
| Personally, depending on how it translates...
|
| Instagram where I can upload photos on the desktop and tweak
| them.
|
| Could use my banking app with Windows Hello for authentication.
|
| In other words, the cases where the Android App has more
| features than the web site version.
| wvenable wrote:
| You're struggling to think of a case where an OS can run
| applications written for another OS would be useful?
| tootie wrote:
| I think the majority of mobile apps are very coupled to the
| mobile ecosystem. Or they exist to coverup the poor mobile
| web experience. I can use social media and messaging from any
| desktop web browser already. Anything geared around mobility
| or photography won't be very useful on a desktop. And at
| least a few apps just have "mobile only" as their edgy
| marketing strategy.
|
| I get why this is potentially useful but I can't think a
| single app I'd actually use this way.
| wtetzner wrote:
| A big part of the reason Windows Phone failed was a lack of
| a good app ecosystem. Maybe they're working their way
| toward a new Windows Phone that is compatible with Android
| apps?
| anoncake wrote:
| Good luck passing "Safety"Net with a Windows Phone.
| toast0 wrote:
| Microsoft had an Android compat suite and an iOS compat
| suite in some of the Windows Mobile 10 betas.
|
| They decided not to ship either one, although I don't
| think I ever saw an official reason.
|
| The app ecosystem was a small part of the failure of
| Windows Mobile, IMHO. A larger issue was that they
| abandoned the low end in WM10, and that's where they were
| doing well in WP7 and 8. That each major version of the
| OS also had a new app framework was a lot of work for app
| developers, too. And blocking 3rd party browsers (mostly)
| and then making WM10 use Edge which was somehow worse
| than Mobile IE, when a browser is key on a platform
| without a lot of native apps didn't help.
| enlyth wrote:
| BlueStacks claims to have more than 500 million users, I know a
| few friends who use it to play mobile only games on their PC
| for example. If android emulation was so useless on Windows, it
| wouldn't be so popular
| read_if_gay_ wrote:
| > BlueStacks claims to have more than 500 million users
|
| That would be twice the playerbase of Candy Crush for a
| fairly niche software.
| ww520 wrote:
| Flutter and Dart would have more reach with this adoption on
| Windows 11.
| up6w6 wrote:
| I don't think they added a complete emulation of arm64, so it
| probably only runs apps with support for x86 (I have no idea of
| how many apps dont have support, but they exist) like BlueStack
| and most of emulators - So apple still has the advantage of using
| the same architecture for everything and running the apps
| natively.
| dr-detroit wrote:
| the goal isnt to make life fun for developers its to get
| consumers using significantly powered down devices from now on
| sedatk wrote:
| > I don't think they added a complete emulation of arm64, so it
| probably only runs apps with support for x86
|
| It uses Intel Bridge, which is a JIT compiler like Rosetta. So,
| they seem to have done it for ARM64.
| smusamashah wrote:
| Some years later everyone will realize that desktops are not
| phones and are meant to utilize more available screen space. Then
| everyone will come up with "revolutionary" desktop interface
| ideas and we here at HN will call it out that we already had
| these back in 90s.
|
| I am waiting for that time. Windows 10 is "phony" already and
| becoming more like it's built for people with low vision. I hate
| it's UI. I hope bringing android in windows don't turn into
| another Electron.
| bitL wrote:
| Now you'll have UI elements from Windows 3.1, Windows 95,
| Windows XP, Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows 10, Windows 11 and
| Android all in a single operating system!
|
| Can't wait for the Android Settings integration to Control
| Panel next...
| pradn wrote:
| I use Windows 10 every day, and I think the days of the desktop
| UI mattering are over. 95% of my time is in Chrome and Steam
| games. Windows already has split screen and that's enough for
| home use.
|
| That said, I can't say how it feels at work.
| nikanj wrote:
| That already happened once, that's how we got Windows 10 after
| the tablet-first travesty that was Windows 8. And I agree with
| you, we'll likely see it happen again.
| CarelessExpert wrote:
| I know you're being a bit sarcastic but:
|
| > Some years later everyone will realize that desktops are not
| phones and are meant to utilize more available screen space.
|
| Keep in mind there's plenty of android apps designed to
| function on tablets with much larger screens. Obviously there's
| not nearly as many as on the iOS side of the world where the
| iPad is far more successful, and there's a wide variability in
| how good they are at taking advantage of the extra real estate.
| But they're out there.
|
| The real issue, IMO, is that those apps are designed with a
| touch-based UX, and that doesn't translate well to mouse-based
| interaction. And one of the few areas where Apple and I are in
| agreement is in poor ergonomics of a touchscreen on a laptop or
| PC.
| smusamashah wrote:
| > those apps are designed with a touch-based UX
|
| And now days every desktop app is made as if "mouse" doesn't
| exist. Or as if `market research has shown that bigger
| buttons engage more users`. I like to see more on my screen
| in one go.
|
| That's why we get multiple monitors or bigger monitors. To
| see more content.
|
| And everyone is hellbent on wasting it. More CPU/RAM got us
| more web-as-desktop apps. Higher resolution, bigger screens
| are giving us bigger, emptier GUIs.
| rgserious wrote:
| https://recallgavin2020.com/
| bilal4hmed wrote:
| Thats fantastic, but how does this work with purchases made on
| the Play store. If I bought an app on the Play Store does it
| carry across to Amazon ?
| dmitrybrant wrote:
| Absolutely not -- the Amazon app store and the Google Play
| store are completely different entities. The fact that
| Microsoft partnered with Amazon instead of Google for app store
| integration is a strong indication of how serious they are
| about this whole thing.
| Jtsummers wrote:
| Amazon's App Store and Google Play Store are distinct stores.
| Purchases do _not_ carry over between them because they are
| competitors (in the same sense, you can 't return an item to
| Walmart that you purchased at Target, even if they both sell
| it). You can install the Play Store on your Amazon devices,
| which allows you to use your Play purchases on the device
| (without jumping through too many hoops, like getting the apk
| and sideloading it).
|
| This sounds like it's integrating with Amazon's app store
| directly so unless there's some way of sideloading Android apps
| using the underlying bridge to run them, Play Store purchases
| would not be available on Windows.
| IAmMaulik wrote:
| Great Analogy!
| drcode wrote:
| I figure the reason Amazon and Microsoft a ganging up in this
| way is precisely to address this issue: They want vendors to
| support a more portable mechanism for purchases that isn't tied
| to the Google silo.
| igravious wrote:
| Oh! What a neat idea, one which had never occurred to me. It
| sure would be awesome if EU or USA antitrust bodies
| legislated to force vendors to support a portable mechanism
| for purchases. It'd be nice if Google voluntarily enabled
| this, it'd give them a unique selling point over Apple and it
| would kick-start a (vibrant?) 3rd-party store ecosystem.
|
| edit: the more i think about it the more it makes sense -
| multiple hardware vendors of the handsets themselves, then
| multiple software vendors of the the apps themselves. Would
| surely spur competitiveness and innovation when it comes to
| app pricing/bundling/sales/...
| bilal4hmed wrote:
| approve
| programbreeding wrote:
| Unless something has changed recently that I'm unaware of, that
| definitely isn't currently possibly on Android itself. I assume
| it won't be possible using the Windows-version of the Amazon
| AppStore either. But maybe this will cause the devs to start
| pushing to make that a thing.
| anoxor wrote:
| I have a few older friends that struggle with tech, but have
| learned their phone apps well. For them, this could be a benefit
| to not have to learn the differences between the app and website.
| ksec wrote:
| This got me thinking. At what point will there be a Windows
| Mobile that could run Andriod Apps?
| dementik wrote:
| There was. Project Astoria by Microsoft which was abandoded few
| years ago.
|
| That was rather promising, but IIRC it got to some legal
| problems.
|
| I was in beta (or alpha, do not remember) test group.
| [deleted]
| la_fayette wrote:
| To be honest I have no idea why someone would use Android apps on
| Windows?
|
| Popular apps can be used via the web-browser or even have a
| separat desktop app (e.g., whatsapp, facebook, youtube, ...).
| That is similar with games.
|
| Edit: apps which require sensors, such as gps, gyro, etc.
| wouldn't work anyway...
| _-david-_ wrote:
| I don't use Snapchat so I could be mistaken but I don't think
| it works in a web browser or in a desktop app. There could be
| some others as well.
| dharma1 wrote:
| A lot of web apps are not as good as their native counterparts.
| And maybe MS is planning an act 2 with foldable phone/tablet
| hybrids, after the failed Windows Phone.
|
| There's been a few attempts at containerised android apps on
| Linux too - Anbox and some others. Looks like that one runs on
| the Pine phone now too. Makes more sense for touch/smaller form
| factor, not so much for desktop (except maybe for some popular
| mobile only apps like TikTok)
| spideymans wrote:
| Because mobile apps ported on the web often suck (ahem...
| Instagram, TikTok), and the mobile version might suck less.
| pests wrote:
| What? My windows laptop has all the sensors, gps, gyro, etc
| that you would need.
| nonbirithm wrote:
| Personally I have seen streams of people playing mobile games
| with gatcha-style monetization using their computers, and feed
| the game window into OBS. I don't think many of those games
| have PC counterparts. It sounds more convenient than having to
| set up an external capture card.
| [deleted]
| hashingroll wrote:
| I hope this will mean we can finally stream 4k content on Prime
| Video, Disney+, et al. in Windows PC.
| haolez wrote:
| This has been possible on ChromeOS (i.e. Chromebooks) for a while
| now and the experience is subpar. Most apps are not designed for
| desktop and the UX just feels unrefined. This could be fixed, of
| course, but on the app creators' side.
|
| However, weirdly enough, VPN Android apps work just fine at a
| system level on Chromebooks. Go figure...
| anotherman554 wrote:
| This will be a good feature for windows tablets like the
| Surface, which lack a decent amount of touch friendly apps.
| Zababa wrote:
| > Most apps are not designed for desktop and the UX just feels
| unrefined.
|
| This is still better than having to use an emulator or not
| being able to use the app at all.
| haolez wrote:
| There are some exceptions, like Outlook - it works in Desktop
| mode just fine.
| tonetheman wrote:
| Android apps already run on Chromebooks...
| tehnub wrote:
| I'm super excited to try the Android Apple Music app on Windows!
| We've been stuck with the bloated, slow iTunes desktop app for so
| long now. I was hoping they'd announce an update for it along
| with lossless and spatial audio, but there's been nothing so far.
| Synaesthesia wrote:
| Have you tried the web player? Also the beta version for
| Android has lossless and spatial
| database_lost wrote:
| "Android apps will run natively on Windows 11 and will be
| downloadable from Amazon's Appstore, via the new Windows Store
| that's included in the operating system." - _confusion
| intensifies_
| andix wrote:
| I understand it in this way: you will find all Android apps
| published in the Amazon store also inside the Windows Store. So
| there is no need for republishing all Android apps to the
| windows store.
|
| They partnered with Amazon. Google probably wasn't helpful in
| integrating the play store.
| CountDrewku wrote:
| Making one massive spyware conglomerate that collects every bit
| of personal data from individuals that's possible.
| kumarvvr wrote:
| They are merging the meta-data from both stores and presenting
| a unified interface, branded as windows store.
| swiley wrote:
| The MS Windows platform is more dead than the idea of personal
| computing.
| kart23 wrote:
| Can I actually run APKs? Or will it be some closed-off platform?
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| The Amazon Appstore is awful, and due to issues between them and
| Google it is likely that you won't be able to install any Google
| Play Apps, like YouTube or Gmail. There are so many apps that
| pretend to actually be the official apps too and Amazon seems to
| not really flag anything from what I can tell.
|
| I really hope there will still be a way to sideload the Google
| Play Store. It is one of the first things I do on Amazon devices.
| ladyanita22 wrote:
| Who will this actually benefit? We won't know until some years
| later...
| brainless wrote:
| Is it just me or does anyone else think this is Microsoft's first
| step to create it's own Android fork eventually?
|
| I have been thinking what's really keeping the "new" Microsoft
| outside the smartphone game?
|
| Google creating a desktop OS market share is not really on the
| horizon. But if Microsoft takes the right steps it might venture
| out to smartphones again, and gain market share this time. The HN
| crowd may not be the best audience for unified experience that
| Apple seems to be heading toward but there is sure demand for it
| in the mainstream.
| poisonborz wrote:
| They wouldn't have Play Services, which gives all the power of
| the ecosystem. Just having a good desktop back country doesn't
| help anything in the mobile space, as Windows Phone showed. It
| also won't go without experienced hardware partners, and
| Samsung is already in Google's pocket, the other top dogs being
| Chinese, who don't look for fitting in the western markets
| anymore.
| jacob019 wrote:
| Not exactly. Play services/GCM is _the_ push notification
| system on Android. Even on my completely degoogled phone I
| have to use microG to support push notifications from google
| 's servers because every app developer has hardcoded their
| app to use GCM. It doesn't have to be that way. An alternate
| push notification service with a client alternative could be
| made available. Developers and users could start using it.
| Ideally there would be a standardized protocol, and a system
| setting so that the user can set their preferred push
| notification provider. Apps would use the system provided
| endpoint for push notifications and we would get a little
| control back. I sure wish I could self host push
| notifications.
| commoner wrote:
| Amazon Appstore (used for Microsoft's Android integration
| in Windows 11) uses Amazon Device Messgaing (ADM) instead
| of Google's Firebase Cloud Messgaing (FCM) for push
| notifications. A FCM receiver is built into Google Play
| Services to enable push notifications for Play Protect
| certified Android devices, but ADM is a viable alternative
| for Amazon and Microsoft as long as developers tailor and
| submit apps to the Amazon Appstore.
|
| https://developer.amazon.com/docs/adm/overview.html
|
| Gotify and OpenPush are open source push notification
| solutions, both in the beginning stages of development:
|
| - Gotify: https://gotify.net/
|
| - OpenPush: https://bubu1.eu/openpush/
| easrng wrote:
| See also https://unifiedpush.org/ which has a Gotify
| connector
| mhermher wrote:
| I always wondered if a WINE for Play Services was possible.
| marcodiego wrote:
| Hope this makes more people contribute to anbox.
| thrower123 wrote:
| Why though? What's the point?
|
| I absolutely don't want to run the crapware on my phone on a real
| computer.
| catern wrote:
| I wonder if this will share anything with WSL (Windows Subsystem
| for Linux)?
| geehum wrote:
| Microsoft seems to be very focussed on the Developer experience
| in recent years. Take WSL for example. Is this not part of that
| drive?
| listic wrote:
| So, now macOS will run iOS apps; Windows will run Android apps.
| What's the Linux's answer?
| badkitty99 wrote:
| When eta Win11 Universal Control?
| xyst wrote:
| So Microsoft has its own App Store, then within that App Store
| there exists the Amazon App Store. Apps on this third layer will
| then be executable or sideloadable in Windows 11?
|
| Sounds like a disaster to me.
| Grazester wrote:
| When I read that in the article, I had to re-read that line 3
| times to understand what was going on.
| TameAntelope wrote:
| More like, "There is one Microsoft App Store, but apps on
| Amazon's Android App Store will also appear in Microsoft's App
| Store so you won't as a developer have to publish your Android
| app two places for them to show up in two places."
|
| I would bet, for better or for worse, these Amazon Android apps
| will share metadata as well, so you'll see the same "Star"
| rating in both the Microsoft App Store and the Amazon Android
| App Store, but that's speculation on my part.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-06-24 23:01 UTC)