[kaba0]

Desktop linux (and most other desktop OSs for that matter) have utterly terrible security. You are running literally everything under the same user, which has permissions for reading-writing all of your browser caches, ssh configs, home directory from family photo backups to all your documents. A shitty bash script can encrypt whatever it feels like, the old xkcd comic is still true, the only thing an attacker can’t freely do is.. install a video card driver.

Android’s biggest contribution/change is the security model — the old UNIX one is simply way too crude, so instead android runs each application as a new, dynamically created user so that UNIX permissions actually get used properly, to a degree. But that in itself wouldn’t solve the problem of who gets to communicate with whom and who gets to use system resources, so an IPC mechanism is introduced which connects daemons with elevated permissions to ordinary applications. All this tries to cleverly build on plenty of Linux tooling/development (re-use of UNIX permissions, users, process isolation and SELinux), but puts them together in a quite novel way, creating a much bigger difference than what you would find even between Ubuntu and Gentoo.

Also, calling the biggest mobile OS a bad product is quite stupid, it is a stable and well-architected system, with a similar chaos at the top layer as what you can see in the linux distro scene, where every player does their own thing. Blame these vendors, not the core project. GrapheneOS for example for example has none of the bullshit privacy violations of big vendors.

(But I have to agree regarding the Java part, they should have followed the language development much more closely)

[wusspuss]

>Android’s biggest contribution/change is the security model — the old UNIX one is simply way too crude, so instead android runs each application as a new, dynamically created user so that UNIX permissions actually get used properly, to a degree.

That doesn't justify any of the other Android's "traits". It's also not clear why that couldn't be done as part of regular gnu/linux, as it is being done now with Wayland + flatpak/firejail/anything that introduces that sort of security model WITHOUT destroying the entire ecosystem. That would actually seem easier as that'd involve much less reinventing.

[kaba0]

Because it predates them? Also, flatpaks/etc don’t provide nearly the same level of security that android does. A fundamental part of Android security is that it is user-controllable at runtime even, giving the user more liberty. You don’t just start a program in firejail with a given incantation and later kill it to restart with camera on.

[wusspuss]

>Because it predates them?

I know, point is Android could've been something like regular linux + flatpak, that's it. If "security" were so important to them they could just invent flatpak without reinventing the rest of the system.

>Also, flatpaks/etc don’t provide nearly the same level of security that android does.

1. There's an order of magnitude less effort being spent on them. They're like RedHat's side gig or something. So not exactly a fair comparison.

2. Who are you kidding praising Android's security? A couple of years after purchase that thing stops getting security updates anyway.

>A fundamental part of Android security is that it is user-controllable at runtime even, giving the user more liberty.

1. Initially it wouldn't allow you to reject an app's permission. You could only see what an app is allowed

2. Who are you kidding calling Android user-controllable? The thing doesn't even give you root access. Also all apps are mostly proprietary and can just refuse to work if you don't give them what they want.

[kaba0]

Just to add, because your rant is really not constructive and dismissive of a whole platform: android likely has more apps than desktop linux, plenty of them in better shape as well. Why on Earth would they be buggier, when they do in fact see more users?

Android project back-ported countless battery optimizations to the kernel, so the less shitty battery life of your laptop is thanks to the project. (It still sucks thanks to all the other parts of the linux desktop stack not caring about it). Seriously, just have a look at the pinephone, which would easily have 6-8+ hours of battery life on Android, yet it burns like fire in 2 hours with one gnu/linux-based mobile os.

[wusspuss]

>Just to add, because your rant is really not constructive and dismissive of a whole platform: android likely has more apps than desktop linux, plenty of them in better shape as well. Why on Earth would they be buggier, when they do in fact see more users?

What exactly is "in better shape" on Android? Why is there not a single file manager whose functionality even approaches that of say Caja or Dolphin, but which also doesn't have ads built-in? Why is multi-window some novel experimental afterthought when it's been done properly for DECADES now several times over?

>Android project back-ported countless battery optimizations to the kernel

I do wonder if just NOT making it a platform for spyware always running in the background (google services but also pretty much everything else, install Autostarts and see) would be more effecient...

>which would easily have 6-8+ hours of battery life on Android, yet it burns like fire in 2 hours with one gnu/linux-based mobile os.

Most reviews say quite the opposite, especially about screen off mode.