[liendolucas]

No one tech-savvy wants this. We are already sick of Google's Android lockdowns on mobile phones, and now coming after laptops and desktops?

What's that going to be like? Will developers have to beg to have control over devices they own? Will we be locked down on the store and have to manually install "unverified" software? Will I be able to take screenshots at will on MY computer, or get a black screen because Google decides so?

The list can go on and on ad nauseam. Given what Google has done on the mobile space I have zero interest in having the same autocratic experience to be replicated on the last type of devices (PCs and laptops) where we can really have true open choices and alternatives. Screw them.

[sofixa]

> Will I be able to take screenshots at will on MY computer, or get a black screen because Google decides so?

It's not Google, it's the application vendor that decides so. And as annoying as I find it when I want to screenshot something from my bank app, the reasons behind that feature being available are pretty good.

> Given what Google has done on the mobile space

You seem to be missing the nuance that as annoying as some of those Google provided Android hoops are, they are necessary for the wider security posture of the average user (and there are more average users than techies that need to install random .apks) and, very very importantly, Google allow you to skip most of them if you know what you're doing. Considering the competition in the mobile space, it really isn't even close in terms of openness.

[kasabali]

"it's application vendors who hanged the users, google just gave them the rope" isn't the good excuse you think it is

[hulitu]

> they are necessary for the wider security posture of the average user

who's security will be raped as soon as another app is installed (hello Meta).

[matejdro]

I guess this is more meant as an replacement for Chrome OS? That one is already pretty locked down, so switching to Android does not change much.

[happosai]

ChromeOS is much more close to regular Linux systems than Android. The vendors had support Linux properly to get into ChromeOS. This allowed google go support ChromeOS laptops for very long period. Also, a a side-effect Chrome OS contractors got to contribute a lot into mainline Linux.

Android Otoh let's vendors get away with shipping binaries that work once on one Android version, making upgrades pain. And thus Android devices are generally stuck with the build they released with.

The Google decision to drop ChromeOS in favour of Android is going is going to be a huge disaster for Linux ecosystem.

[thiht]

I always assumed Chrome OS was some kind of Android build anyway, but apparently not

[iknowstuff]

GNu/Linux will never gain adoption on desktop because its fundamentally flawed: no stable abi, too many window manager/distro/libc/various dependency version targets, and also insufficient security model for random apps.

If you want a mainstream open source desktop OS, it will be Android.

[snarfy]

I want the equivalent of wine/proton, nothing more.

[saubeidl]

That already exists: https://waydro.id/

[knowitnone3]

The question is who is more evil. Microsoft or Google and my pick is Microsoft.

[goku12]

PC is one of the last remaining platforms where you don't have to choose one evil or the other. There are multiple other fair options which all are honestly better at this point, despite the incessant complaints by those who are never satisfied by them. The only thing needed to lose that refuge as well is for the consumers to simply ignore all those options and concede the market to a new overlord. Soon, we will have another locked down platform under a duopoly.

This is the utterly predictable path it's going to go down, if the consumers continue to behave like this. Yet, some people are very uncomfortable when this is mentioned. I wonder who's so excited about yet another walled platform.

[rayiner]

The era of "tech-savvy" adults is going to have been limited to later Gen X and millenials. My zoomer brother and sister in law are no more tech-savvy than my boomer parents. It's all locked down, for their own good.

[goku12]

> It's all locked down, for their own good.

Even while neglecting how silly it is to judge two entire generations as incompetent, I assure you that 'they' here aren't your zoomer brother and SIL or your boomer parents. If you think that someone is benevolently locking all these devices and platforms down to protect your kin from themselves, you are painfully behind in your understanding of capitalism. Please find a new dead horse to beat instead of this thoroughly refuted justification. I don't understand why people fail to recognize these patterns of exploitation and do something about it, despite the repeated abuse they endure. Is it Stockholm syndrome?

[bonaldi]

Because we exist within a market, where the choices of others end up affecting us - if the market "votes" for a competing thing, that might affect the market for the things you care about.

Your car analogy isn't great, but we see a similar dynamic playing out with EV vs combustion, and we did with film-vs-digital cameras. "Don't buy a digital camera if you like film" sure didn't help the film photographers.

[liendolucas]

They are pushing hard the adoption of restrictive platforms where people that have no idea how technology works lose the ability to control their devices, a fucking basic right. And this is done transparently to people that are not tech-savvy. This affects everyone, but the main difference is that is extremely hard to make people that are not in technology understand WHY such platforms should be avoided.

[jfoster]

The market for operating systems naturally falls into oligopolies.

It's usually not financially feasible for third-party applications to support more than a few of them.

Users tend to have strong preferences toward operating systems that have lots of applications built for them.

[postepowanieadm]

Because our kids will be forced to use it in schools.

[morkalork]

And what happens when your bank or government portals decide that the only methods to access their services is through apps installed on trusted platforms?

[rs186]

> I don't sit around all day complaining about Triumphs because I drive a Honda.

I mean, you could decide to complain or not complain, either is fine under a discussion thread of that specific topic. I have posted many comments like "I will never buy * because ..." on forums which I think is perfectly fine.

What matters is whether a comment contains valuable information and is contributing to the discussion. If others can use the information to form their decision, it's a net value add.