Google is building its own DeX: First look at Android's Desktop Mode

I don't know. Google is always building lots of stuff and most of it gets shelved before it ever sees the light of day, and 75% of what does get released gets shuttered within 5 years.

The reality is if it isn't ads or ads adjacent, Google will lose interest. And based on their historical revenue I suppose they ought to continue with this model.

I wish they'd open-source what they're shuttering. Would be a win-win as far as I can tell.

If they did it would probably have to be rewritten as it probably depends on a ton of internal google systems.

Google needs a widely used platform for AI integration into every computing task, based on interactions with and data on that device. Their best bet is to expand the reach of Android into traditional desktop tasks.

Android already made lots of progress on multi screens and adaptive layouts, and there is now a new developer center with guides for what they call productivity apps.

You're right. I guess this illustrates a downside of closed-source and walled-gardens.

> The reality is if it isn't ads or ads adjacent, Google will lose interest.

Or unless it is a tool they need, like Gerrit.

Not to mention, more people than we realize are on their phones. For those of us who use both a phone and computer, it is VERY easy to overlook.

For example, my wife, she is primarily on her phone as a computing device. Only recently after buying a Mac Mini and a Cricut is she back to using a standard computer. She might borrow my laptop for online shopping just so she can open 50 windows and 80 tabs to consume all available memory on my Macbook Air, but that's probably because Safari on iOS has sane tab caps.

I also know that games predominantly for PC / Web have become predominantly mobile over the years. There's a reason Roblox plays on your phone and tablet. You might not have the specs for a gaming machine, but your iPhone / iPad / Android definitely do.

How is it a win for Google to release something open-source that had potentially cost them lots of money? Even if they don't need and pursue it anymore, why would they just give it to the competition? It's always easily said to "just open-source" it but Google is a business and owes outside software developers nothing.

I feel you on what you're saying, but Google's Chromebook business is _big_ (11.5 Billion in revenue 2024) and this seems like a way to pull together that with their Android development.

How can another company compete with a product Google no longer offers? There is no competition because Google quit competing.

If Google spins up a project and then abandons it, how could they possibly be harmed by someone else offering a comparable product? Google has already accepted a total loss on the product, there's really nothing for them to lose here.

What benefit do they see in exchange for the effort in open sourcing things?

It's certainly a win for the rest of us, but how does Google benefit to make it a "win-win", and not just a "win"?

> What benefit do they see in exchange for the effort in open sourcing things?

Goodwill and more people willing to try whatever they release next, rather than the current situation of “Oh, Google is releasing a new thing? Pass. They’ll just stop supporting it and I’ll be left in the cold anyway, so no bother even trying”.

Killing so many projects makes fewer people interested in trying whatever they release next, which means fewer users, which means a higher likelihood it’ll be abandoned. It’s a vicious cycle that could be stopped or even reversed if they open-sourced their abandoned stuff.

To be clear, I’m not necessarily advocating Google should do it or that it’s be a clear win with no downsides. Maybe the upside wouldn’t be worth it, but there is an upside.

> What benefit do they see in exchange for the effort in open sourcing things?

Next (good) thing they build will probably have greater adoption, due to less fear of "they'll kill this in two years anyway".

Lol, sibling commented same thing at the same time.

I like and agree with your "open source as 'abandonment insurance'" angle here ...

> Goodwill and more people willing to try whatever they release next

When's the last time your (pick your favorite non-technical) relative cared if the product they were trying was open-source?

It's a win, because people will not fear Google shuttering their experiments, and thus will be more likely to use them. It's also a win, in that it furthers a common good: if Google abandons a venture, why would they be upset if someone picks it up and succeeds? It's also a win, in that it boosts the open-source community (or industry, whatever you want to call it), which is also a win-win. If you want to by cynical, it would also be a win in that you could spin a narrative about how Google's monopoly-fueled profits trickle-down via open-source projects and thus unregulated capitalism works.

My point has nothing to do with licensing, but longevity.

What non-technical users know is “Google released a project, I invested my time in it, they abandoned it, and I was left hanging. This has happened multiple times so I no longer want to try anything new they release”.

Had the projects been open-sourced, at least some of them would have been picked up by others and continued so non-technical users would know “Google released a project, I invested my time in it, they abandoned it, then someone continued it and I’m still using it to this day. I’m happy to try this new Google thing, because even if they abandon it I won’t be left in the cold”.