Hi trans,
Since AROS already has hosted version of Andoid, and given the fact that aros has support for intel architecture anyways, my _guess_ would be that it is not too hard to do.
I think the problem lies more in finding someone who can invest time to be able to come up with a working solution.
Ofcourse making it run native would require more investigation and writing supported drivers.
Because of the diversity in phone-manufacturers and their individual choice of used (expanding) hardware we might not see something like a native port happening anytime fast.
AROS really could use more skilled developers to be able to pull such things off. Right now the focus of current developers lies in totally different field, like trying to move AROS OS itself forward instead of widening the hardware support.
It is like the developer from FS-UAE mentions. "I have a choice, making more/better features in the emulator itself and expanding it _or_ spend my time on supporting more hardware. As developer i choose the first"
And that's exactly what current AROS development is doing :)
Ofcourse things might change overnight :D
transJunior MemberPosted
11 years agoAt this point in time I wish more developers would choose the second. I think platform support is more important when there are too few users. Having platform options would increase the popularity of AROS in general which would lead to more developers joining in.
I really wish it would be true trans, and i was thinking more or less the same.
Unfortunately practise shows otherwise :(
AROS supports (native) 68k, x86 (32 and 64 bit), arm and powerpc processors already.
AROS also supports Windows, Linux, Darwin, Android, Windows and hardware like the SAM.
The most recent contribution is the attempt to (native) port AROS to the Raspberry Pi (current hurdle is porting our USB-stack).
So, in short all the pieces of the puzzle are already there, yet no more developers seem to join in, while we could desperately need it.
As a (negative?) side-effect all that architectures need to be supported and maintained as well, giving current developers practically less time to work on improvements (or as practice shows, leaves the current support for some architectures a bit behind once in a while)
In that regards it is strange to see that a project like ReactOS (which only serves one cpu architecture) having much more developers and interrest.
I really wish i would know what's the solution for that.
Hi cavemann,
Although this view might be right, i think the same about ReactOS ;)
The endless stream of games and applications without paying microsoft tax is reason for me to choose AROS :D
ok ok ok, maybe not so the endless stream of applications.
I also have to correct myself as it seems ReactOS also has support for arm (other support seems to have been abandoned).
But looking at things a bit more serious, AROS indeed lack some software to be more competitive. But i don't think this would be a reason for (system)developers to stay away.
But alas i have no clue either so maybe you're right, even if i disagree with people that consider AROS as being such as you suggested.
Todays crop of coders never played with Commodore or Atari. They like C++, C#, or java... not C (or Pascal).
Todays system programmers come from India and China and have never seen an Amiga.
Todays game programmers work in teams larger than all the Aros developers together. But I live in Redmond so take this with a grain of salt.
