Google is developing fusion OS Fuchsia, is this really necessary? -
Google-IT information
A few days ago, has reported that Google was developing a name for "Fuchsia", the new operating system. Due to the contribution of the project by Travis Geiselbrecht and Brian Swetland, the two men is the main developer of the Android system, and Dart,Flutter from the Chrome team, and it can support both ARM and x86 architecture and industry rumors of Google's plans for reunification in 2017 Android and Chrome OS, Most analysts believe Fuchsia's goal is to open up the PC and phone, and even future IoT fusion of Google's operating system.
Refer to fusion systems, immediately thought of in the industry is that Microsoft can say Microsoft is trying to get through to move for the first time in the industry (such as smart phones) and PC system manufacturers, the most typical is the previous Windows8 series and now Windows10. But the end result is, hardly any on the mobile side, according to the latest statistics, in the last quarter, based on the Windows Phone system mobile phone shipments have slid sharply to 1.2 million units, overall market share is less than 2%. As for its performance in the PC market, as of the latest Windows10 free policy ends, PC system installed capacity was 350 million, far less than Microsoft's expectations, and 1 billion installed capacity goal was delayed.
For Microsoft in the mobile PC market (compared to only two) very different performances, while industry blame Microsoft in the mobile eco-system vulnerability (with Google's Android and Apple's iOS in comparison) and lack of experience, but we know, ecological without any underlying software (mainly operating system), hardware (mainly chips) support. And for Microsoft for, mobile market of intelligent phone main used of chip schema is ARM,PC is is x86 schema, to wants to with with a kernel build of operating system both two species completely different of ecological needs and experience, despite from theory line have pass, but to has specific of practice in the is is another thing, even led to in market and user (mobile and PC) in the two not please of embarrassing situation. Windows8, for example, by PC users criticized for being too biased towards mobile users ' needs and experiences, but unfortunately, Microsoft's "bias" in the mobile market and user has not been approved.
If the Microsoft Fusion benefit on the operating system side, end at the bottom of the chip, Intel also walked the same path with Microsoft. As we all know, x86 architecture of the Intel chip is mainly used in the PC, and the efficiency and experience of Microsoft Windows is the best mix of soft and hard. But to March mobile (main is intelligent phone) market, its take has support Android system of strategy, despite Intel constantly for Android system for optimization, but in its compatibility and experience always and ARM+Android of combination has gap, results is Intel in pay has billion dollars of input and losses zhihou, had to weakened its in mobile market of efforts, even has rumors said, future Intel will gave up in mobile market of compete for.
We give examples of Wintel is to illustrate, as global operating system and chip bosses, yet are leaders in their field, but it turns out, regardless of whether they are in soft or hard level are trying to simultaneously support two different system or framework of integration policies, results failed to succeed, difficulty of integration.
Specific to the report Google Fuchsia, specific technology or not, but on their underlying supports two different chip architectures (Android ARM,Chrome OS support x86), it faces the same challenges with Microsoft (in a system supporting two architectures, and experience consistency). Needs to be added is, as Android and ChromeOS are two completely different systems and ecology (a local, a cloud-based), and Microsoft Windows (only local) compared to its fusion (keeping different equipment and applications experience) may be more difficult. Even more crucial is that Google's Android and Chrome OS from the current market performance, Google developed a fusion OS is necessary (compared to the risks and opportunities), after all, in the mobile market, Statista released the latest data show that 84.1% of the Android mobile operating system market share has, far exceeding the second 14.8% of the iOS. In the PC market, Chrome OS is also strong, and even in the last quarter of its United States PC market shipments have surpassed Apple's MacBook. In such a situation, Google how much meaning and value in Fuchsia?
To sum up, we believe that, based on the Wintel carrot before failed to secure the effective integration of reality in Fuchsia and Google hope to achieve integration of Android and Chrome OS location and situation, its not necessary to develop a fusion of the operating system.
谷歌正开发融合操作系统Fuchsia，真的有必要吗？ -
谷歌 - IT资讯
日前，有报道称，谷歌正在开发一款名为“Fuchsia”，的全新的操作系统。由于该项目的贡献者有Travis Geiselbrecht和Brian Swetland，这两人是Android系统的主力开发者，而Dart，Flutter又来自Chrome团队，加之其可以同时支持ARM和x86芯片架构及业内一直盛传的谷歌打算在2017年统一Android和Chrome OS，所以多数分析认为Fuchsia的目的就是打通PC和手机，甚至是未来IoT的谷歌的融合操作系统。
提及融合作系统，业内马上想到的就是微软，可以说微软是业内首次尝试打通移动（例如智能手机）和PC的系统厂商，最典型的就是之前的Windows8系列和现在的Windows10。但最终的结果是，其在移动端几乎没有任何的作为，据最新的统计，其在上个季度基于Windows Phone系统的手机出货量已经大幅下滑至120万部，整体市场占有率不到2%。至于其在PC市场的表现，截至到最新的Windows10免费策略结束，PC系统装机量为3.5亿部，远远低于微软的预期，并使得10亿装机量的目标被迫推迟。
对于微软在移动与PC市场（仅限于二者相比）大相径庭的表现，尽管业内多将其归咎于微软在移动生态系统的脆弱（与谷歌的Android和苹果的iOS相比）和体验不足，但我们知道，任何生态均离不开底层软（主要是操作系统）硬件（主要是芯片）的支持。而对于微软来说，移动市场的智能手机主要采用的芯片架构是ARM，PC则是x86架构，要想用同一个内核打造的操作系统兼顾两种完全不同的生态需求和体验，尽管从理论上行得通，但到了具体的实践中则是另一回事，甚至导致在市场和用户（移动和PC）中两头不讨好的尴尬局面。例如此前的Windows8就被PC用户诟病为其过于偏重移动用户的需求和体验，但不幸的是，微软的这种“偏袒”在移动市场和用户中也并未得到认可。
如果说微软在操作系统端融合不利的话，在底层的芯片端，英特尔也走了与微软同样的道路。众所周知，英特尔的x86架构芯片主要应用于PC中，且与微软的Windows是效率和体验最佳的软硬搭配。但为了进军移动（主要是智能手机）市场，其采取了支持Android系统的策略，尽管英特尔不断针对Android系统作优化，但在其兼容性和体验始终与ARM+Android的组合存有差距，结果是英特尔在付出了百亿美元的投入和亏损之后，不得不减弱其在移动市场的努力，甚至有传闻称，未来英特尔将放弃在移动市场的争夺。
我们在此列举Wintel的例子是想说明，作为全球操作系统和芯片大佬，按理说其在各自的领域均是领头羊，但事实证明，无论它们是在软还是硬的层面均试图采用同时支持两个不同系统或者架构的融合策略，结果均未能成功，可见融合难度之大。
具体到此次报道中谷歌的Fuchsia，具体的技术不谈，但就其支持两种不同的底层芯片架构（Android支持ARM，Chrome OS支持x86）看，其就面临着与微软同样的挑战（以一个系统同时支持两种架构，并保持体验的一致性）。需要补充说明的是，由于Android和ChromeOS是两个完全不同的系统和生态（一个基于本地，一个基于云端），与微软的Windows（仅基于本地）相比，其融合（保持不同设备和应用体验）的难度可能会更大。更为关键的是，从目前谷歌Android和Chrome OS的市场表现看，谷歌开发一款融合操作系统是否有必要（风险与机会相比），毕竟在移动市场，据根Statista公布最新数据显示，Android已经占据移动端操作系统市场份额的84.1%，远超排名第二的14.8%的iOS。而在PC市场，Chrome OS也是风头正劲，甚至其在上个季度的美国PC市场的出货量已经超过了苹果的MacBook。那么在这种形势下，谷歌Fuchsia存在的意义和价值到底有多大？
综上所述，我们认为，基于之前Wintel软硬兼施均未能达成有效融合的现实以及谷歌目前在Fuchsia希望达成融合的Android和Chrome OS所处的位置和态势，其完全没有必要去开发一款融合的操作系统。