Jide Tech Created The Beautiful, PC-Optimized Version Of Android That Google Wouldn't

[merikafyeah]

I've been pretty satisfied with AMIDuOS so far: http://amiduos.com/

I see no need for a dedicated hardware device for this kind of thing but then again I'm the type of user who knows how to modify an OS to exactly how I want and I find Android to be too lacking, but I can imagine it would be nice for someone who knows Android better than Windows.

 

[LostAlone]

I really feel like this is a waste of development time. Not because it's not an interesting project for Android hobbyists, simply that there's such a slim user case and such little upside to using an Android desktop that for an actual profit-seeking entity it's just... A bad idea.

I get the potential idea behind really thin, cheap desktops for libraries and schools and stuff. Except that we already have those really low cost desktops around. It'd take a LOT to beat those existing systems on price and even then, running on an OS that your tech team is (understandably) not trained for brings up all kinds of problems, and that doesn't even start on the problems for users not being used to it. Even being able to save space for towers isn't that big of a deal when you are going to have to have a monitor and keyboard and mouse too.

Add to that all the missing software and you start seeing everywhere that this falls down. No matter how populous the google play store is, core applications are fundamentally different on that platform. Just simply stuff like using a different e-mail client and lacking right click menus is a big stumbling block for casual users.

The Ubuntu hybrid mobile/desktop idea has a lot more legs than this. It just does. And even then that's not something that most places would want to use as their OS.

Yes, we are seeing some convergence between mobile and desktop, but the end result is going to be us all using Android at home, it's our phones being able to run our desktop programs.

 

[tntom]

Looks just like 'papyros.io'. Papyros is a modern operating system which adheres to Google's Material Design guidelines and is based on Arch Linux. Only Remix would support Android Apps.

 

[aldaia]

I really feel like this is a waste of development time. Not because it's not an interesting project for Android hobbyists, simply that there's such a slim user case and such little upside to using an Android desktop that for an actual profit-seeking entity it's just... A bad idea.

I get the potential idea behind really thin, cheap desktops for libraries and schools and stuff. Except that we already have those really low cost desktops around. It'd take a LOT to beat those existing systems on price and even then, running on an OS that your tech team is (understandably) not trained for brings up all kinds of problems, and that doesn't even start on the problems for users not being used to it. Even being able to save space for towers isn't that big of a deal when you are going to have to have a monitor and keyboard and mouse too.

Add to that all the missing software and you start seeing everywhere that this falls down. No matter how populous the google play store is, core applications are fundamentally different on that platform. Just simply stuff like using a different e-mail client and lacking right click menus is a big stumbling block for casual users.

The Ubuntu hybrid mobile/desktop idea has a lot more legs than this. It just does. And even then that's not something that most places would want to use as their OS.

Yes, we are seeing some convergence between mobile and desktop, but the end result is going to be us all using Android at home, it's our phones being able to run our desktop programs.

You seem to forget that there is a new breed of users coming, whose first contact with an operating system was Android. Those users will be more than happy to have the familiar apps and interface in their desktop, and they will probably not miss any software because android is already running all the software they know and need.

Yes I know, there are users like me (and I assume you too) that started in the desktop and then transitioned to mobile. However the world changes very fast and we are a species in extinction.

When I started as a professional in computing, serious productivity was done with mainframes (already declining by then) and minicomputers. PC's where just a toy and its OS (DOS) was pathetic compared with let's say the capabilities of VMS on a VAX. Most tech savy people where despising PC's on similar premises, yet we all know the result, PC's Have been the dominating computing platform for nearly 3 decades, while minicomputers have gone extinct. I wouldn't be surprised to see history repeating itself.

 

[xenol]

Windows only has 400K apps? Since when?

 

[Achoo22]

This is the wrong direction for PC software to go. Not slightly wrong, but 180-degree wrong. If you care to maintain control of your own hardware and the software it runs, Android is a terrible, terrible choice. It's the end of the hobbyist era.

 

[kenjitamura]

Windows only has 400K apps? Since when?

Windows RT probably only has 400k apps; that's windows for ARM processors.

 

[beayn]

For everyone claiming Windows has more than 400k apps, they are referencing the Windows App Store, not Windows OS, or just WIndows RT... although the App Store includes Windows RT, it's not restricted to it.
Go to the Windows App Store in Windows 8 and you'll find 400k "Apps".

(Forever scroll... the bane of the PC existence just made me post this on the wrong article without noticing because you know, why click on an article when you can just forever-scroll to all of them until you run out of RAM).

 

[rluker5]

1) Looks like they just tried to copy Windows 10 UI straight up
2) Only 400k apps on Windows? Try >10 million, most without needing "app store" garbage either! (Steam is one such app store)
3) Android 4.4+ is not "low memory", when my phone starts up it's already using ~500mb, or about 25% of my phone's memory, while windows 7 on a similar spec computer is ~600 without disabling too much.

Can't blame them for wanting to copy W 10, the look is great for computers. Unfortunately copying the look opens it up for comparison. This is probably the main thing holding Windows phone and RT back - apps are junk compared to programs.
Windows 8 was so far ahead of its time it's controversial. Give Apple 4 more years (W8 will be 7 yrs old then) and they will copy it too.

My Lumia 635 only has 512mb ram and it isn't slow.

 

[ozicom]

Well I've heard about Android OS installed monitor from AOC before but nobody followed AOC at this to make a trend. Also there's various HDMI sticks with Android. This device is not different than the sticks but software team worked in different way and people get excited. Years ago people get excited with Linux which is totally freeware OS but only a little percentage of PC users prefer Linux. So i hope this gadget will make a difference.

 

[drtweak]

If this was more refiend, apps made better to work on a desktop enviroment, I could see this lifting off a bit more. it is a good idea. As far as desktops go though I am and will also be a windows (7) user. As for as any other mobile/tablet device, the only reason why you will see me with an apple is to learn it better not to use it lol.

I would like to see where this goes. As someone pointed out would be nice if something like DuoOS got off the ground a bit more and maybe got AMD support? (I'm not an AMD Fanboy but I needed to upgrade and that was all i could afford)

 

[LostAlone]

I really feel like this is a waste of development time. Not because it's not an interesting project for Android hobbyists, simply that there's such a slim user case and such little upside to using an Android desktop that for an actual profit-seeking entity it's just... A bad idea.

I get the potential idea behind really thin, cheap desktops for libraries and schools and stuff. Except that we already have those really low cost desktops around. It'd take a LOT to beat those existing systems on price and even then, running on an OS that your tech team is (understandably) not trained for brings up all kinds of problems, and that doesn't even start on the problems for users not being used to it. Even being able to save space for towers isn't that big of a deal when you are going to have to have a monitor and keyboard and mouse too.

Add to that all the missing software and you start seeing everywhere that this falls down. No matter how populous the google play store is, core applications are fundamentally different on that platform. Just simply stuff like using a different e-mail client and lacking right click menus is a big stumbling block for casual users.

The Ubuntu hybrid mobile/desktop idea has a lot more legs than this. It just does. And even then that's not something that most places would want to use as their OS.

Yes, we are seeing some convergence between mobile and desktop, but the end result is going to be us all using Android at home, it's our phones being able to run our desktop programs.

You seem to forget that there is a new breed of users coming, whose first contact with an operating system was Android. Those users will be more than happy to have the familiar apps and interface in their desktop, and they will probably not miss any software because android is already running all the software they know and need.

Yes I know, there are users like me (and I assume you too) that started in the desktop and then transitioned to mobile. However the world changes very fast and we are a species in extinction.

When I started as a professional in computing, serious productivity was done with mainframes (already declining by then) and minicomputers. PC's where just a toy and its OS (DOS) was pathetic compared with let's say the capabilities of VMS on a VAX. Most tech savy people where despising PC's on similar premises, yet we all know the result, PC's Have been the dominating computing platform for nearly 3 decades, while minicomputers have gone extinct. I wouldn't be surprised to see history repeating itself.

Sorry man but you're wrong. While there's plenty of kids who's first touch of a 'computer' is their android phone, they aren't ever sitting down to write an essay on their phone. By that logic we should use the XBOX dashboard as a core productivity OS; because the kids know how to use that, right?

Yes, some kids know how to use their phone or their xbox more than a desktop computer but if they aren't using it for the kind of tasks that everyone typically uses a traditional machine (whether desktop or laptop) for then it simply doesn't matter. Knowing how to play Angry Birds won't help you write or compute or do any work on any platform at all.

The world is changing in many ways but it's hasn't changes that much just yet. There are millions and millions of people (even my 80 year old parents) who know how to write a document on windows. They know how to use the spell check and format text and where the relevant buttons are for the stuff they do. Kids do too. My 11 year old niece knows how to play a bunch of terrible infinite runners on her tablet but she still does her homework on a proper laptop.

 

[popatim]

Android is so unsecure that the only thing I would throw this on is a kids pc.

 

[aldaia]

I really feel like this is a waste of development time. Not because it's not an interesting project for Android hobbyists, simply that there's such a slim user case and such little upside to using an Android desktop that for an actual profit-seeking entity it's just... A bad idea.

I get the potential idea behind really thin, cheap desktops for libraries and schools and stuff. Except that we already have those really low cost desktops around. It'd take a LOT to beat those existing systems on price and even then, running on an OS that your tech team is (understandably) not trained for brings up all kinds of problems, and that doesn't even start on the problems for users not being used to it. Even being able to save space for towers isn't that big of a deal when you are going to have to have a monitor and keyboard and mouse too.

Add to that all the missing software and you start seeing everywhere that this falls down. No matter how populous the google play store is, core applications are fundamentally different on that platform. Just simply stuff like using a different e-mail client and lacking right click menus is a big stumbling block for casual users.

The Ubuntu hybrid mobile/desktop idea has a lot more legs than this. It just does. And even then that's not something that most places would want to use as their OS.

Yes, we are seeing some convergence between mobile and desktop, but the end result is going to be us all using Android at home, it's our phones being able to run our desktop programs.

You seem to forget that there is a new breed of users coming, whose first contact with an operating system was Android. Those users will be more than happy to have the familiar apps and interface in their desktop, and they will probably not miss any software because android is already running all the software they know and need.

Yes I know, there are users like me (and I assume you too) that started in the desktop and then transitioned to mobile. However the world changes very fast and we are a species in extinction.

When I started as a professional in computing, serious productivity was done with mainframes (already declining by then) and minicomputers. PC's where just a toy and its OS (DOS) was pathetic compared with let's say the capabilities of VMS on a VAX. Most tech savy people where despising PC's on similar premises, yet we all know the result, PC's Have been the dominating computing platform for nearly 3 decades, while minicomputers have gone extinct. I wouldn't be surprised to see history repeating itself.

Sorry man but you're wrong. While there's plenty of kids who's first touch of a 'computer' is their android phone, they aren't ever sitting down to write an essay on their phone. By that logic we should use the XBOX dashboard as a core productivity OS; because the kids know how to use that, right?

Yes, some kids know how to use their phone or their xbox more than a desktop computer but if they aren't using it for the kind of tasks that everyone typically uses a traditional machine (whether desktop or laptop) for then it simply doesn't matter. Knowing how to play Angry Birds won't help you write or compute or do any work on any platform at all.

The world is changing in many ways but it's hasn't changes that much just yet. There are millions and millions of people (even my 80 year old parents) who know how to write a document on windows. They know how to use the spell check and format text and where the relevant buttons are for the stuff they do. Kids do too. My 11 year old niece knows how to play a bunch of terrible infinite runners on her tablet but she still does her homework on a proper laptop.

We will see in 10 years from now who was wrong and who was right. History seems to suggest that cheaper less capable (at the time) mass market computer systems tend to replace the existing dominant computer systems. Minicomputers replaced mainframes, and micro computers replaced minicomputers. The last is an example of people (and very intelligent by the way) failing to see the path that the future will take.

Once upon a time there was a company named Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC). DEC was once the leading minicomputer manufacturer, at one time the second-largest computer company after IBM.

A DEC research group demonstrated two prototype microcomputers in 1974 but Ken Olsen (DEC CEO) chose to not proceed with the project. The company similarly rejected another personal computer proposal in 1977, Olsen famously derided microcomputers in 1977, stating "There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home." It was only after IBM had successfully launched the IBM PC in 1981 that DEC responded with their own systems, but it was too little too late.

Years later, the minicomputer declined in the face of generic Unix servers and Intel-based PCs, and not only DEC, but every other minicomputer company collapsed or merged. The irony here is that DEC was sold to Compaq (a PC company) in 1998.

Fast forward to 2015, Intel-Windows is the dominant computer system. Yet, there are new systems (smartphones) using a less capable OS (Android or IOs) but with a much bigger market (billions of smartphones are sold every year). Intel CEO admits they refused Apple's offer to make first iPhone's processor, just to try in later years to enter (not very successfully) the smartphone market. Apple turned to ARM and today there are more chips with ARM inside sold every year than x86 CPUs have been produced by Intel and AMD together in all history. At the same time windows is struggling to gain market share in the smartphone arena. The similarities with DEC in the 70's and 80's are striking.