Before dreaming, you first have to be FREE so you can sleep tight. A communist country will never devise anything of value but oppression. The way innovation works in countries like that is by copying, reverse engineer and steal from the rest. All my devices are running Windows, everybody develops apps and packages for Windows and lately for Linux and Ubuntu. We have choices here, we let everybody come in and compete in the american markets and sell cheap stuff without much regulations. Are you going to have a cheap copycat software running your already Made in China hardware. Hellooo...Wake up!
@Junko: Thanks for a detailed perspective! All of those possibilities you mentioned make sense. The thought that occurs to me that if China wants to avoid using an outsider's OS for security reasons (3c. in your comment)...other countries also might want to avoid China's own OS for the same reason :)
On the surface, it sounds like China has good reasons for the new OS. The Chinese market is huge now and just getting bigger. However, as a previous poster inelegantly stated, the Chinese wll certainly "borrow" the technology they need to bring whatever they have in mind to market. History shows us that. And Apple, Microsoft, and Google have already set the die. I suspect this new OS will be another close copy. I hope they prove me wrong with a new paradigm.
Defintely a was ! I am in the loop on these plans and a local effort does simply not make sense. Linux is open, so calling a variant Indian is simply meaningless. What is being actively encouraged is contributions to the Linux kernel. So you will see a lot more Indian input to Linux. For commercial situations variants like Redhat are actively encouraged.
India is pretty much a Ubuntu/Centos/RH/Android country. Nobody I talk to feels this is a bad thing.
Gluster for example was and continues to be developed out of India (Indian startup with US sales office before RH bought it) but nobody went around calling it Indian. I actively discourage adding the Indian tag to any of the efforts I lead. think it reflects a gross sense of inferiority ! HCL Tech used to have its own BSD/SVR3 based OS back in the 80s and nobody made a big fuss about it. This was not just a distro and had a customized kernel supporting 4 CPUs.
CDAC does have the BOSS Linux distribution but that makes sense, a distro with good Indian locale support. More distros are always welcome.
Having said that there is a major experimental opensource OS effort that I am heading based on the L4 Microkernel. This is needed for high security applications and for virtualizing Android in secure mobile devices. It is an Indian originated effort but is like any other open source project. We also need it for our secure processor which Linux cannot support. This will be used for key defense/secure applications but also for commercial applications like in finance terminals. Currently I have 3 subprojects - to add trustzone, to virtulaize android and to run the new Android VM directly on it so the OS can run andrpoid apps natively. Unlike the Chinese, we are open. You do not have to guess, just ask us ! We will gladly share the code.
You can see it at bitbucket dot org slash casl slash secureos
In any case given the number of Indian geeks at Google and MS, Android and Windows qualify as Indian OSs !
Indian government officials have been talking about for years. let me try and find out what they are actually planning - or rather at what stage they are are today or whether it has been shelved or what. It would be interesting especially against this background of a new Chinese OS.
Please consider the China's political environment first. The new government is quite differnt from its former.
You may be quite right about that and I respect your opinion here.
But when the matter comes to something as big as an operating system -- which is obviously targeting both desktops and mobile (used in mass consumer products), I do worry that the government's will alone might not be enough to make things succesful on the commercial market.
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.