Because despite the hyperbolic praise of the hackers here, Apple devices are worthless for some professional workloads.
Before you ask, I'm one user who has a Razer Blade 16 (4090) and Galaxy Book 4 Ultra that I use for CAD and BIM work. I'll pass on having a dedicated video editor.
Apple sells good hardware that's buoyed by a loud marketing department that covers its often pathetic software.
Mac users touting a bunch of third-party apps as solutions to obvious os problems (bartender, magnet, amphetamine, etc.) is tacit admission of that fact.
Unfortunately, Android runs in a VM now, too. In many tasks, I've gotten better performance from Linux apps than Android counterparts.
There's also the fact that the Android VM can't do certain things that Android phones and tablets can. As an example, files management in the Android VM is so bad that I lost access to standard access for months due to a bug...
Also, the Android environment is all the way back on version 11. If your theory is correct, that Google wants to move third-party developers to Android, then they're doing a terrible job of it. Android devs haven't and won't target all these outdated devices.
I believe Chromeos is becoming an enterprise/edu only platform. That would explain the (new) lack of interest in development and focus on security at the cost of all functionality. This is a new development and wasn't "always" the case as you claim, because many of these apis are as old as Chromeos itself (10-ish years).
App distribution is a major issue for the platform that I ran out of space to really talk about. Those driver-like things are largely extension APIs, but they were once the domain of the now deprecated "Chrome Apps." Both the Apps and Extensions are delivered via the Web Store, but I feel like there's a steady move to deprecate all system-customization on the platform.
If you want to use some non-optimized apps in a VM though, you can use the Gnome Software store or the Google Play Store.
I gave another example as well. I'm also not spewing any "hate" or "bile" for an inanimate operating system.
To make this easier to understand, please give me an example of what's missing from Mac or Windows and I'll share the way it can easily be accomplished in a native environment. After that, we can try to do the same for ChromeOS and you'll see where the holes appear.
Fugu is about slowly moving Mac and Windows functions to the web, but ChromeOS exists RIGHT NOW. Thus, if it were for that platform, there would be urgency and full support across the board. Because they don't care about filling all those holes, they choose not to support every API.
That was my point. Windows and Mac don't need Fugu to function. ChromeOS does. Still, Windows and Mac needs are prioritized over ChromeOS.
I also noticed you deftly ahem cherry-picked around the lack of server support on a web-first operating system, but that's neither here nor there.
Then it is correct? Many of the Fugu APIs don't work.
I didn't say none.
You can always tell someone hasn't developed consumer apps for ChromeOS when they white knight for it.
If you want to know a specific API that DOESN'T work, but performs splendidly on Windows, then the Eyedropper is a perfect example.
There's an old bug report for it that even has Google Chrome team support, and still no dice.
But yeah, keep rushing to defend the platform that doesn't even get proper support from its creators.
Another example is given in the link you posted. Direct Sockets API is deprecated, but its replacement isn't available yet.
So, if you were a web-dev using "vanilla" ChromeOS to test a site, you better install a full Debian VM on your 4 gb machine, because there's no other way to spin up a server.
No, I think it was correct to say Fugu is NOT for ChromeOS.
Unfortunately, Fugu is totally seperate from ChromeOS, since many of Fugus capabilities don't work on the platform. Still, on Windows and Mac, Fugu is definitely more impressive than anything ChromeOS is doing.
Versatile is the opposite of what ChromeOS has become. I would argue that there was a time (beginning of pandemic) where it looked like Google might strike the perfect balance between web-reliant (PWAs and safer extensions) and legacy-OS supported (Android, Linux, and even some slight Windows compatibility).
Now, it just seems like a bad version of the legacy operating systems. Android, but in a VM, Linux, but in a VM, and Windows delivered via the cloud!
All of this is worse than just running any of those systems alone.
For better or for worse, that's what Google is aiming at with ChromeOS. Especially now that the overarching "OS" is really just a Linux shell for multiple VMs.
I feel like Smartwatches are to phones what tablets are to laptops: a supplementary device that doesn't work as well without the primary computer.
While many people might work entirely from a tablet, or even a Chromebook, you'll run into so many issues that you're better off carrying a laptop to cover all bases. In a pinch, a watch or tablet can pinch-hit for the device they supplement, but using them as a primary device every day gets old really quick.
If "that" is referring to both, it's incorrect. Google has said they will be "well into 2024" without any benefits brought by LaCrOS. That includes any theoretical extending of the expiration dates.
Before you ask, I'm one user who has a Razer Blade 16 (4090) and Galaxy Book 4 Ultra that I use for CAD and BIM work. I'll pass on having a dedicated video editor.