Hacker News Reader

Comment by threatofrain | Hacker News Reader

I also think that desktop vs server are two different domains.

The desktop / personal user domain is looking like it's in the early stages of transformation, with mass data collection to support voice search and user intent prediction. While there's something to be said for privacy, I don't think consumers will care enough, and I don't think desktop linux systems outside of whatever Google may make is going to be adequately competitive.

This will likely not be a server concern. Engineers probably won't be interested in a service that opaquely collects data and sends it off to remote locations just so that they can say, "Cortana, run the Ansible script to redeploy my API server." But desktop users would find value in saying, "Cortana, move all email from unknown entities to my todo list."

View on HN

Linux is just source for a kernel that the userland for the various distributions are built on though. It's already largely on people's phones with Android. In fact, Chrome OS is based on Linux.

That appears to validate my belief that only Google can competitively take the Linux kernel and build atop it a software stack known as a desktop/mobile/user operating system.

And if my assertion that intention prediction and voice search will be competitive features for users, features that rely on mass data collection and expensive top talent, then I think organizations like Canonical or RedHat will fall behind in the desktop/mobile/user os space.

I tend to mix up Linux and Unix and that might be the issue here... But isn't the `Apple Garden` (OSX and iOS) an example of a desktop/mobile/user operating system built on Linux?

Apple's no M$, but they are certainly competitive.

It's entirely possible that Apple takes code or inspiration from the Linux software project, but I think it's better to say that OS X is Unix based. Even if Linux and Darwin hail from Unix roots, at some point, I think they become separate projects with separate interests and fates. What's good or bad for one doesn't have to be the same for the other.

When I think of what organizations will be competing on machine-learning backed features like intention prediction or voice search, I think of Apple, Microsoft, or Google. Those OS features won't be inside the OS. They'll be backed by a wealth of proprietary data hidden behind company servers.

I think user expectations for what a modern OS ought do will evolve, and I don't think Canonical or Redhat will be able to catch up to Microsoft, Apple, or Google.

Eventually, what we think of "Linux OS" will be Android (and if you want, OS X) and maybe some other offerings by these big giants, but the most user-demanded features won't be on the OS. Therefore, Samsung can't just fork Android and expect to compete sans Google, and Canonical or Redhat won't be able to compete either.

> It's entirely possible that Apple takes code or inspiration from the Linux software project, but I think it's better to say that OS X is Unix based.

Apple can't take code from Linux as the code is GPL licensed. OSX is largely based on NeXT and BSD. Linux and OSX are both POSIXish though.

OS X had been UNIX certified, at some point, though. Don't know if that is still true

It is. Various optional things from POSIX are missing though (https://github.com/uxcn/yafd/blob/master/src/c/pthread-dw.h).

No, OSX is based on NeXT, which was based on Mach, and BSD. As far as I know, iOS is proprietary.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com