Just imagine if they completely forgo the Windows CE and Hybrid (or half-measures) and the likes of Windows10 Mobile (with Continuum) was what they released off the bat. Imagine if Microsoft took the iPhone 3G and Google One seriously. Many people think the current market, which is a two-horse race, cannot support another ecosystem. It's not enough to have a great OS, or a great hardware, or BOTH.
I'm saying if all that money and coding-time was pooled together, it would be impressive, and if properly managed it would yield an OS that is impressive.īut as you alluded to, that wouldn't be enough. This is the problem with Linux and all open-source projects: it's stupendously inefficient due duplication of work. And in many cases they did work which another OS was doing or had done already. My point is that individually none of those OS ever had a chance. And yeah it would require a compatibility layer. And even if it was, it would be buggy, clunky, and just an outright mess. I agree, taking all those OS as they were/are right now, it won't be possible to put them together into one single OS. moreSorry for late response, I wanted the comment to be detailed.
Surely there would need massive code and framework rework needed to co. You wouldn't want to get sued by Xerox for having a name that sounds too much like theirs.ĪnonD-558092, Not so sure about that. Nice comparison too, kind of proving how a third and a fourth option can actually work, though ZerOS would be a bad name. It's really a shame what poor management can do.
Ironically, Continuum (or something close to its principle) was adopted by Samsung, Huawei and then Google. And you listed such projects that indeed worked that way (even if there's not many, like VLC, Linux and LibreOffice).Īnd again you're completely right with Windows. It would indeed have solved a boatload of problems if there wasn't such duplication and all resources were being dedicated to a single project. In practice, it leads to the mess you described. moreNow you're putting your finger on the double-edged sword that is open source software: "You don't like something? Fork it!" In theory, that's a wonderful thing to be able to make a current project your own and not having to deal with the current maintainers' vision if you don't like it. Kangal, Sorry for late response, I wanted the comment to be detailed. as long as the device has unlockable bootloader, TWRP, Root, Magsik, and heaps of community developer support (custom drivers, custom kernels, custom roms, custom mods). I suppose a similar case can be made with iOS 7 versus iOS 13, the cumulative additions could be seen as a new major update.Īll things considered, I prefer the Android ecosystem. Though I guess comparing Android 5.1 versus Android 10.0, you could say that's now one major improvement. Since then it's been smaller iterative improvements/differences.
IOS made a huge upgrade with version 7, and Android made a second huge upgrade with version 5.1. That's where Project Butter was borne, and implemented on Android 4.1, which kinda did improve smoothness but it was still behind Apple due to the nature of the ecosystems (open vs vertically-aligned). I remember even Google made a big fuss about it, and said they were going to aim for the same level of smoothness. Yet, I preferred Android 2.0-2.3 over Windows Mobile, and that preferred over Symbian.Īpple's OS was severely limited during iPhone 2G (basically a feature-phone), and it got more and more robust with the iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, subsequent updates, and eventually to iOS 4 on the iPhone 4.
No contest.Ĭoming from Windows Pocket PC Edition (later renamed to Windows Mobile), this experience was not foreign to me. I had far more App crashes, lag, hangs, freezes, shutdowns, restarts, and bootloops on my Early Android Devices, than I had on iPhone/iPad during the same period. Anonymous, Did you ever use iOS then? It had more than enough if it's fair share of hiccups and bugs.