Google's Fuchsia OS Was One of the Hardest Hit By Last Week's Layoffs (arstechnica.com) 58
An anonymous reader quotes a report from ArsTechnica: Google is still reeling from the biggest layoff in company history last Friday. Earlier cost cuts over the past six months have resulted in several projects being shut down or deprioritized at Google, and it's hard to fire 12,000 people without some additional projects taking a hit. The New York Times has a report about which divisions are being hit the hardest, and a big one is Google's future OS development group, Fuchsia. While the overall company cut 6 percent of its employees, the Times pointed out that Fuchsia saw an outsize 16 percent of the 400-person staff take a hit. While it's not clear what that means for the future of the division, the future of Fuchsia's division has never really been clear.
Fuchsia has been a continuous mystery inside Google since it first saw widespread press coverage in 2017. Google rarely officially talks about it, leaving mostly rumors and Github documentation for figuring out what's going on. The OS isn't a small project, though -- it's not even based on Linux, opting instead to use a custom, in-house kernel, so Google really is building an entire OS from scratch. Google actually ships the OS today to consumers in its Nest smart displays, where it replaced the older Cast OS. The in-place operating system swap was completely invisible to consumers compared to the old OS, came with zero benefits, and was never officially announced or promoted. There's not much you can do with it on a locked-down smart display, so even after shipping, Fuchsia is still a mystery.
Fuchsia has been a continuous mystery inside Google since it first saw widespread press coverage in 2017. Google rarely officially talks about it, leaving mostly rumors and Github documentation for figuring out what's going on. The OS isn't a small project, though -- it's not even based on Linux, opting instead to use a custom, in-house kernel, so Google really is building an entire OS from scratch. Google actually ships the OS today to consumers in its Nest smart displays, where it replaced the older Cast OS. The in-place operating system swap was completely invisible to consumers compared to the old OS, came with zero benefits, and was never officially announced or promoted. There's not much you can do with it on a locked-down smart display, so even after shipping, Fuchsia is still a mystery.
Isn't it just a safety-net OS? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: Isn't it just a safety-net OS? (Score:2)
Re: Isn't it just a safety-net OS? (Score:4, Informative)
for Java patent infringements in Android
What would an OS have to do with Java?
The statement already answered your question. An example of this would be that Android binaries depend on a "JIT" compiler/VM, which is a patented, Java based technology. When Oracle bought out Sun Microsystems, Google switched the JIT to their own version called ART.
But fuchsia was started years after that. At the time, I was under the impression that Google wanted to move from android to a potentially closed, "next generation" OS for smartphone/IoT devices. I guess only Alphabet, Pichai, and the department head knows what its specifically for now. They must still have plans for it, or they would have either made a greater employment shave than 16%, or totally cannibalized the 400 person department.
Re:Isn't it just a safety-net OS? (Score:4, Interesting)
Well I am not sure about that. The thing about lifeboats is they have to float when you need them. Fuchsia would in that circumstance need to be a ready replacement for Android with enough feature parity that consumers would at least accept it with some grumbling. Finally Oracle is really fighting over the API, which unless Google(and users) were prepared to abandon Android application support its hard to see how having their own OS helps - I guess they could run Oracle's JVM and OSS SE platform components.. but that hardly seems like a position Google would want to find themselves in..
My guess honestly is it was a vary ambitious project. They got enough working where it made sense to run small embedded hardware they had tight control over and is a little more nimble than contemporary Linux for that application so they used it; but it never got good enough to be able to support Chromium on a wide variety of hardware - at least not better than a Android/Linux stack could do so they are re-targeting it the project. Once enough people with a personal investment in it vacate important VP and Director roles they will ultimately abandon the project, and just fork BSD like they should have in the first place.
Re: (Score:3)
Fuchsia was made for putting in places where Android and Chrome don't fit. Either because of size or because the engineering teams don't want to maintain special branches like they have in the past. It's mostly for Thermostats, WiFi routers, picture frames, kiosks, etc. Could you make a phone or a desktop with it? Theoretically, but the work hasn't been done for it to have that functionality. Technically Fuchsia would be a good choice for a feature (non-smart) phone, if there was still any business reason f
Re: (Score:3)
"Fuchsia was made for putting in places where Android and Chrome don't fit."
A lot of hind-sight analysis built into that claim. It wasn't "made" for anything in the beginning, what it found a home in doesn't explain how it started.
Good (Score:1)
Android is ok now running on linux. Don't want to go into the fucksia walled garden. Just as much as I do not want to be in the Apple walled garden. Or any other walled garden. Playstore is not great. But when necessary the way out is pretty easy.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
and once in natural daylight
I'm not gonna unpack all that shit that came before or after this, but the only time you get a "true" color from a surface is on a clear day with the sun at your back and the object in front of you.
Re:fuchsia slip (Score:4, Funny)
On the other hand, this stereotype might be false.
Well maybe, but men are much better at determining the difference between "penis" and "baige"[sic] [xkcd.com] as colours.
Re: (Score:1)
Don't be evil? (Score:4, Insightful)
What was a glimmer of hope at some point is nothing but a sad reminder that companies necessarily become evil entities on reaching a certain point, when a self-serving,bureaucracy of bean counters and largely useless managers and executives takes over.
Google, you have made it: no need to feel envy of the Microsofts, Oracles, etc. world over any more -- you have definitely joined their ranks.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps they know it'll be a maintenance burden (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why? is your first name Richard?
Re: (Score:2)
> I should've said GNU/Linux
It's unlikely Microsoft would use glibc on top of a linux kernel.
Does anybody actually call Android "GNU/Linux"?
Re: (Score:2)
Does anybody actually call Android "GNU/Linux"
No, because its only the linux kernel that is related to GNU. The linux kernel is also not a GNU owned or controlled component. Its merely the kernel GNU grudgingly adopted to build its OS environment on top of.
Re: Perhaps they know it'll be a maintenance burde (Score:1)
Right. And you also forgot to put your pronouns in your username.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's say that it's technically a better OS than Linux (playing devil's advocate). Then let's say they roll it out to all their devices and it works great and doesn't have all those pesky GPL licenses to worry about. In an ever changing world of hardware and standards, they've still got the burden of keeping the thing up-to-date, which is a never ending cost. This is something they get for free from Linux.
Google's bean counters have an uphill battle in front of them. There is a much greater presence of NIH at Google than NIH headquarters in Bethesda.
Re: Perhaps they know it'll be a maintenance burde (Score:2)
and doesn't have all those pesky GPL licenses to worry about. In an ever changing world of hardware and standards, they've still got the burden of keeping the thing up-to-date, which is a never ending cost. This is something they get for free from Linux.
IIRC fuscia is FOSS, of the BSD/MIT/Apache variety, so they still could get the "keeping up to date for free" thing for free if the OS gains enough traction, but with less legal exposure...
Re:Perhaps they know it'll be a maintenance burden (Score:4, Interesting)
I think one of the reasons behind Fuchsia was to avoid an existing maintenance problem with using the Linux kernel in Android.
Because Linux is monolithic, each SoC vendor (Qualcomm, etc.) has to release a new version of their kernel for there to be a new Android version for the devices that use that SoC --- but the SoC vendors would rather that customers buy new phones than to perform maintenance.
With Fuchsia, which is a microkernel system with user-space drivers, Google could update the core OS on a device and leave the drivers alone.
Re: (Score:1)
Google's stated ambition is to use mainline Linux kernels updated via the play store, presumably via some sort of extra fixed ABI interface level/shim for the drivers (so the phone makers can keep their unmaintained blob drivers but everything else gets updated). I guess they're all-in on that path now. In theory then they are just maintaining the shim and updating it for new kernels, instead of having to fork the entire kernel.
Re: (Score:3)
instead of having to fork the entire kernel.
But fuchsia is already that "fork", in the form of a kernel replacement. They haven't cannibalized fuchsia yet, so it still must be part of Alphabet/Google's plan for a future product or future environment.
Now, if only someone can explain why they still keep dart & go alive...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Perhaps they know it'll be a maintenance burden (Score:4, Insightful)
Let's say that it's technically a better OS than Linux (playing devil's advocate).
Actually, fuchsia was more about being a better device OS than their own android; a linux kernel based OS. The linux kernel is monolithic in design, and linux is based to serve an array of devices from internet cloud servers, to desktop computers, to smartphones to IoT devices. They all fall under different hardware architecture niches, and linux may not be able to most efficiently support all niches.
If part of fuchsia's design was to move to a microkernel based design (like seL4), in theory, it could operate more efficiently in architecturally constrained designs like ARM based embedded chips, while also being more secure/flexible than android at the OS level. More likely, it is meant to target specific (future?) platforms, or to be an advantage to android or any other OS for military/security hardware system contracts. Perhaps its design was a platform meant to develop AI-based applications off of it.
400:1 (Score:5, Insightful)
It takes 400 employees at Google to replicate the work of 1 Finnish grad student?
Re: 400:1 (Score:2)
Re:400:1 (Score:4, Insightful)
Something tells me that particular Finnish grad student wouldn't have lasted long at Google. He probably would have pissed someone off with his "take no crap" attitude and got himself fired a long time ago.
Re:400:1 (Score:4, Interesting)
He probably would have pissed someone off with his "take no crap" attitude and got himself fired a long time ago.
That's the new, bottom up woke, Google era. It didn't exist at the start of Google, and Pichai has been working hard at reigning in wokesters, while (incredulously) pursuing some sort of commercial relationship with authoritarian China.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering the skimming he did as an employee of TransMeta, a company that itself never delivered product, I'd say he looks like an ideal Google employee. Can't get yourself fired when you only work on your own pet projects and the company expects nothing more.
Re: (Score:2)
TransMeta now sounds like a project of Zuck to pretend to be trans in his metaverse
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It does now but that is a more recent phenomenon. Companies only do that if they can make a profit from using it.
Re: (Score:2)
"Companies only do that if they can make a profit from using it."
No they don't. For many companies, investing in Linux is preferable to maintaining their own entire OS. They don't need to "make a profit" from Linux, only to make available a complementary product to the offerings that actually generate their profit.
Re: (Score:2)
"make a profit from using it."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think "make a profit from using it." includes that point.
Re: (Score:3)
Linux Torvalds didn't write the user-land programs and system libraries, and Linux is (was) a monolithic kernel, with a more or less well-known interface and defined behaviour for every syscall.
The Fuchsia team had to design and write a microkernel system from scratch (apart from the very early beginnings with the LittleKernel that they adapted into Zirkon). They also seem to have expert knowledge in non-Unix OS technology from the last forty years.
Re: (Score:1)
Greta Thunberg's "Greenix"? The most energy efficient OS ever.
Re: (Score:1)
The hard parts of system design is the interface and a functional suite of apps build to that interface.
Linux would never have existed if not for Unix.
Hagiography is fun, but it doesn't make for accurate history.
Re: (Score:2)
At least, if you need a usable result in less than 20 years, without recruiting countless volunteers throughout the world or financing from your greatest competitors.
Re: (Score:2)
It takes 400 employees at Google to replicate the work of 1 Finnish grad student?
The Linux kernel sees contributions from well over 1000 developers in every release. The user space tools include tens of thousands more. So no, it is not the work of "1 Finnish grad student".
Re: (Score:2)
It takes 400 employees at Google to replicate the work of 1 Finnish grad student?
kernel != OS
GNU/Linux
All the rest of user space... etc.
What happened to this place.
Shocking. (Score:1)
donotwant (Score:1)
All I really want is for Google to just fix stupid bugs, some of which are long-standing. They never even supported pinless pairing
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget that when the topic of Apple's evilness comes up.
Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
Fuchsia OS was designed to further enable the use of closed source drivers. I also remember reading an article about a developer prevented from securing Fuchsia in a certain way because it would interfere with advertising.
There are no need or desire for this project to continue.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, I'm totally okay with them pissing away money at supporting/developing fuchsia.
What I don't get is "why they haven't buried dart or golang yet?"
Google wants to escape the GPL (Score:4, Interesting)
Google wants to escape the GPL.
That's the real reason to invest so many resources in a almost entirely new OS.
My two cents.
What makes Fuchsia unique and worth continuing? (Score:3)
Versus BSD, OpenSolaris/Illumos, Chorus, Mach, Darwin, Spring, etc. ... the world isn't just Linux and NT ... it certainly wasn't Evil for Google to finance a new OS. I fail to see any Evil in a decision (if that is what is happening) to abandon the effort because it isn't demonstrating a financial rate of return commensurate with the investment. What moral imperative are they violating?
If they do starve it or kill it off, we can hope that some good publications can come out of it so we can all learn something from it.