The problem with Android is its diverging from the Linux desktop path (i.e. X11->Wayland). Being completely incompatible put Android apart and it arguably can't be called a Linux desktop at all. The split it caused in the mobile devices (with no drivers available except for Android) is a horror, and like Aaron Seigo called it - Android is the best friend and the worst enemy.
The real future of the Linux desktop and mobile is Wayland, and Android it seems will stay apart forever, going its own path.
The real future is what users like best, not what developers think that users might like. I personally don't like the Wayland approach and I think that competition is fine. Let the "market" decide what's best.
Users like what's comfortable and functional to use. But those who create it - are developers. Regular mobile Linux has hard time presenting existing software solutions to the user because of the hardware barrier reason. And not because they are in any way inferior to the Android user experience (if anything - they are superior).
I.e. there are practically no manufacturers which provide closed Linux drivers or open specs (so open source drivers could be created). They mostly only care to provide Android drivers. Hopefully Jolla and Plasma Active will help to break through somehow.
This situation is caused by Android's historic roots, since it started as a proprietary project, and didn't take in account any interests of the Linux community. The fact that it was open sourced later didn't really change anything - it's de facto completely separate from the Linux desktop as well as from the mobile Linux varieties which share the effort with the desktop distros. Wayland was created with collaboration in mind. Android architecture - was not.
I'm curious - why cant a desktop version of Android be possible ? I mean, OSX is moving to a world where an app developer (optimistically) can code once and compile to both desktop and mobile targets. Why cant Android be able to drive that in Linux.
I would like to think that if Android was available on both desktops and mobiles, we would have been happily playing Dark Souls using Steam-on-Linux by now.
It's not that it "can't". It's just that would be bad for Linux even more. Do you want the sick situation with mobile drivers to spread to desktop as well? No, thanks.
Also, Android is rather narrow in its capabilities comparing to normative Linux. No need to cripple the desktop like that.
It's going to be other way around - normative Linux will start competing with Android in the mobile sphere.
> The split it caused in the mobile devices (with no drivers available except for Android) is a horror, and like Aaron Seigo called it - Android is the best friend and the worst enemy.
These mobile devices could grow some HDMI and USB ports in a few iterations and becoming stationary.
That's not the point (many of the mobile devices already have a USB and HDMI). The point is - Android incompatible architecture put it apart from the rest of the Linux world. And it's a horror to squeeze X.org or Wayland drivers (as well as other Linux drivers) from the mobile manufacturers, when they say "we are too busy with Android".
I have a Transformer Infinity with the dock that I use as a netbook that I can plug into tvs and stream movies off of. The most recent iterations of the Nexus Q et al have mini usb and mini hdmi ports and can effectively do the same thing as well. Android devices have been at the point of being desktop replacements starting this year, and mainly due to the Transformer tablets, but any bluetooth keyboard + hdmi complient device can serve the same function given a beefy enough processor.
The real future of the Linux desktop and mobile is Wayland, and Android it seems will stay apart forever, going its own path.