Slashdot Mirror
The First Ubuntu Phone Is Here, With Underwhelming Hardware
A few days ago, Fast Company reviewer Jay Cassano was enthusiastic about Ubuntu's approach to apps for its new phone OS: namely, not relying on them, and instead interfacing seamlessly with existing websites and protocols. Now, new submitter ablutions (4006541) writes with a less than glowing review at The Daily Dot of the actual hardware that the OS is launching on. A sample that conveys the gist: Let's start with the good stuff: It sports a 4.5-inch multi-touch screen and a respectable 8-megapixel rear camera and 5-megapixel lens on the front. That's pretty much it. The list of negatives is a bit longer.
Didn't the "first" Ubuntu phone fail as a kickstarter?
Sure, the hardware sucks, but honestly I think people here are more interested in how the software works. At least I am.
Be seeing you...
I wonder if Apple will pitch a fit about the fact that the design of the device is definatly based on the iPhone's visual form. I'm sure there are a zillion "industrial design" patents and copyrights involved...
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Linux always underwhelms..
Hence the need for extra hardware.
I saw an "underwhelming post" must have been a -1. I was hoping to respond to it.
some people want this to compete with an apple or samsung.
Get a life!
This is a cheap phone that works.
Is it spectacular? Full featured?
NO, but it works! too many idiots have no clue. this a a good phone, for the 3rd world.
That is pure linux inside without any of the big corps "all your data are belong to us" thingys in the background.
And so that user could actually, really, honestly, decide Him/Her self whats going on under the hood (on software side).....
Slam it with some top end hardware, I'd be one of the first lining it up.
Why ohh why, those hardware specs. Since this could have been the phone for geeks. Above specs met, I'd be happy to through in 500 or so €
I don't have any opinion about this phone — although I've long wondered why they were bothering — but I have to question the technical savvy of a reviewer who refers to a "5-megapixel lens." A sensor is rated in megapixels, but a lens is not.
While this review of the Ubuntu offering may be "less than glowing", it's still much more positive than this review of Firefox OS. I've never seen any other device or software review filled with so many negatives.
At this point, Mozilla needs to ask itself, "What chance does Firefox OS really have?"
I mean, we already have iOS, Android, Windows Phone, Blackberry OS, Tizen, Sailfish, and now Ubuntu Touch, among others. Firefox OS is at the very end of that list in terms of quality, usability, usefulness, and every other practical measure.
Why is Mozilla wasting so many resources on an 8th place (that's an optimistic ranking, too) mobile OS that is generally disliked by anyone who has actually had to use it?
I know that Mozilla supporters will toss out some vague claims of "openness" or "freedom" in response, but those are just forms of denial. Or they'll claim it's targeting third-worlders, but even they can do better by buying older Android devices.
Ubuntu Touch should be the final nail in Firefox OS's coffin, were Mozilla to have any sense. It will clearly never be able to compete. So they're best off cutting their losses, and putting an end to the project. They should redirect the resources toward something that will actually benefit users, like undoing some of the awful changes that have been made to Firefox these past few years, or finally getting Electrolysis to work (after so many years of trying and failing). Regardless of what they do with such resources, they need to admit that these resources are better spent elsewhere, rather than wasted on Firefox OS.
Size - 4.0 inches (~61.3% screen-to-body ratio)
Resolution - 480 x 800 pixels (~233 ppi pixel density)
OS - Android OS, v4.2.2 (Jelly Bean)
Chipset - Mediatek MT6572
Internal - 4 GB ROM, 512 MB RAM
CAMERA -2 MP, 1600 x 1200 pixels
BATTERY - Li-Ion 1300 mAh battery
Stand-by - Up to 432 h (2G) / Up to 384 h (3G)
The price? Less than $60.00
In what way the new Ubuntu phone can match it?
Eww, yuck.
Pros: cheap, has FM radio
Cons: every other single thing about it.
Verdict: no thanks. I don't care what you compare it to, it still stinks. This is like comparing dog shit to wolf shit.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
The article talks about their sales tactic, artificial exclusivity in Europe, which makes it likely that they are aiming for the tech enthusiast crowd.
As long as software is written well and it wont lag (doubt it).
Name one phone with good software and crappy hardware that I'd consider using. There isn't one. Good software doesn't make the weak screen or camera good. Processor speed may be over rated, but adequate RAM is certainly not, especially with a low-end processor.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
Underwhelming software as well.
Honestly, I don't care how mediocre it is - if it gives me control over the software on my device I'm sold. I was dreading buying a new Android
I will buy one. My question is it going to be EASY to purchase? It's at a price point that is trivial and if Ubuntu runs on it decently, then I will mess with it. But I tried ubuntu on the Nexus 4 and it was unholy horrible and chunky, so I cant see this lesser phone being better.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
The screen has crappy resolution - less than 10% more pixels than those old Windows desktops displayed in 800x600.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
I expected comments from someone who has, you know, maybe touched the device at least once.
I'm not enamored with the phablet trend. I like my Galaxy Nexus, its about the idea size to me. Something smaller with touch could be exciting. I don't need a billion pixels on the phone, but it needs to have some grunt and a good way to get a big keyboard, mouse, and monitor attached.
Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!
Perhaps better than you think, if it's natively-compiled code instead of some Java-esque thing.
Kid-proof tablet..
And it doesn't say much of anything other than rambling off hardware specs. Is this what qualifies as a review these days?
Sorry, but "Linux" from Canonical is not something I'll willingly use even (and perhaps especially) on a phone. Oh, I know I know.. after they got caught installing spyware they completely changed.. or so they say.
Look, if I had time to dig I may change my tune. I don't, and they lost my trust. Not that I was ever a user of Ubuntu, but up until they got caught I was not against them either.. thinking that getting more people into Linux was a good thing and they made it easier.
yeah yeah.. all of them other guys are bad too. At least I know what to do to protect myself a bit from those other guys.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
You have your timeframe wrong; SVGA dates from the dos era of 1987 - several years before Windows 3.x
If it takes too long to boot, to switch appications, to accept input, has too short a battery life, or cannot keep with simple video applications due to hardware limitations, the architectural fanboys are not going to be enough of a market to keep it in business. Small sales won't bring down the cost of manufacturing to compete.
I scimmed tfa, and I'm not sure they touched the phone.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Obviously Ubuntu devs thought the biggest selling point for this phone was that it was running Ubuntu/linux.
We've been here before, it was called OpenMoko. Though that project blazed the trails for ARM-based Linux, it never got off the ground due to the lack of driver support (the chipset guys knew it) and underwhelming h/w. Once an openmoko developer, and seeing how ARM linux has evolved, we really haven't progress much aside from getting driver support and Android (though the biggest mobile player, has an OS that runs less efficient than iOS, BB, WP7).
I'm starting to believe that Linux has finally hit a limit--it excels in the business (server, routers, robots). Forget the direct-to-consumer space--it's not gonna happen, and Ubuntu phone sort of solidifies it w/all the hype that came with it. Hi, FreeRunner 2....
some people want this to compete with an apple or samsung.
How about comparing it to a Motorola? It's no cheaper than a Moto G, which is twice the phone it is.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Perhaps better than you think, if it's natively-compiled code instead of some Java-esque thing.
Right, just like how iOS apps written in Objective C and compiled for the CPU core in the phone and not for a VM are faster than Android apps. Except they aren't.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Do we get all the source code ?
Are they happy for people to make custom images for it ?
Android's ART runtime compiles apps to native code. They literally become ELF files, just like every other executable on Linux. The Dalvik format that apps are distributed in is now serving a similar purpose to the LLVM IR used internally by Apple's compiler.
funny thing i'm writing a reply to you on a netbook with a 1024 by 600 screen. Physically bigger than the phone screen. Possibly comparable cpu with the n270 in this netbook too. Maybe a little light on ram. However it seems this was a phone designed for android so at least shares the specifications of an android phone.
The question that intrigues me is will this phone upgrade like a pc or will its first and last operating system be the one that it ships with? Can it switch distro maybe run an arm version of debian ?
Is it open enough?
The spec seems reasonable, not stella but its a phone i think the gpu will be up to the job of playing youtube video's and capable enough for web browsing. I'm tired of throwaway android devices that don't get updates it might be ok. The article basically says nothing about the software at all and that is the difference between it running android and running linux.
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
well were it open enough then it wouldn't be a big problem to port over dalvik for some android action. it's probably possible. with the current one as well.
besides, the phone HAS apps. it's just that they decided to focus more on HOMESCREEN WIDGETS.
the fucking "cards" are HOMESCREEN WIDGETS on limited home screen. limited, how so? their shape and positions are limited, so the copped out. cheaper and faster to make the home screen like that
besides all that, you can get pretty decent android phones for sub 100$ now with specs about the same - and you get to run android apps AND you get to run custom homescreens AND you get to read your news, control your music playback and everything else from the homescreen if you really want to, except you get more control over how the homescreens are laid out(you could make one of the homescreen pages a "music" page, one a "news" page and so forth).
besides, if the cards concept as they call it is any good you'll have it in android next week. fuck, the material design guidelines are pretty much "material" cards too(that's the new android recommended ui paradigmschimshshit). I wouldn't be so as surprised to go to android market today and finding some homescreen replacement or another that does the same thing.
furthermore, you can make android apps in qml/qt as well! in fact, it's much less cumbersome method than doind native android(you need to do some android shims only for very few native api's that most apps don't need anyways and it's outweighted by the ease of integrating c++ code into your qt/qml projects vs. native android using ndk).
in short, the ubuntu guys are putting a lot of spindoctoring and this is a completely different much cheaper to achieve cop out than the original ubuntu phone and has almost nothing to do with the original ubuntu phone concept, which at least had the aspect of running desktop ubuntu if you wanted when connected to something! by the way, you can get ubuntu for android on any friggin android phone! or debian for android as well for that matter!
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Why not?
I don't really care if it have others.
And I don't necessarily care for Dalvik VM either.
What I meant was actual Android. So whatever the OS was good/flopped or not the phone would so to speak had been a no-risk purchase (Maybe they don't want to spend that time and effort moving over Android though.)
I guess Dalvik is better than nothing. I don't know how good it's on the Jolla phone.
Nokias MeeGo and last Symbian phones had USB OTG and MHL too. I didn't really see that as all that interesting (sure Ubuntu would have better desktop software than Symbian.)
I wonder where Microsoft will be in all of this (using shared OS foundation won't it?), the very likely competition from them vs Steam kinda have materialized in something real with Xbox for Windows 10.
Compared to what? I can't even run modern MacOS or Windows on my old Macbooks and PCs, and Linux runs circles around the old versions of the OSes that came with them by default. Oh wait, you're joking. So hard to tell when people mistake Ubuntu for Linux around here.
Just compared the latest preview version of Elementary OS and the latest preview version of Windows 10 on a notebook with C1D and GMA950.
Elementary OS had horrible tearing, choppy and slow animations, and popped up a "System problem detected" right on the first boot.
Windows 10 worked fully smoothly with all the bells and whistles.
Linux is not the way to breathe life into an old computer anymore. That time was 15 years ago. These days you can make an old PC run Linux fast only by using a simple window manager and turning off all the desktop effects. Even then you would be left dealing with loads of bugs everywhere.
True, but in Slashdot you're supposed to be a mindless zombie who automatically hates everything SystemD-related.
The screen has crappy resolution - less than 10% more pixels than those old Windows desktops displayed in 800x600.
Except that it's a 4.5" display. For that size of screen, 960x540 is a deluxe resolution.
Why not?
Ask Apple.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The fact that Ubuntu Touch can run on low-spec hardware is a great thing which also saves consumers a lot of money when buying new phones... Give it time and an all singing all powerful phone will appear with Ubu Touch pre-loaded...
The article neglects to mention both FirefoxOS and Jolla Sailfish. While neither is available on hardware with impressive specs - the first Jolla phone is nigh-identical to this one spec-wise, but at over a year old it has more excuse - I believe Sailfish may offer you the access you desire? It's descended from Maemo, which was pretty literally "Debian Linux compiled for ARM, with a touch-focused window manager and management tools". I haven't personally used Jolla enough to know anything about how much control it gives you, but on Maemo rooting your phone was a built-in (though hidden from casual discovery) feature.
Alternatively, easily-rooted Android devices do exist. In fact, given that this device apparently runs a heavily customized version of Android (yes, I RTFA), it may even come pre-rooted; there's nothing preventing developers from doing that.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
I'm not sure what this Ubuntu phone will cost, but it's specs look soundly mid-range to me. I mean, they aren't high-end, much less flagship, but they aren't low-end dross either. Nobody is going to be impressed by them, but an awful lot of people still have phones with worse specs, either because they bought a mid-range phone in the last year or because they bought a low-end phone yesterday.
The phone that the AC grandparent posted is low-end dross (actually, it's possible to get a significantly better phone for that "less than $60" if you're willing to look around a bit; the roughly-two-year-old Lumia 520 had better specs and was available for $50 or less for a while). Compared to it, the Ubuntu phone has a better display, twice the storage and twice the RAM, a much better camera... and now I'm out of things to compare, because TFA doesn't actually give much in the way of specs.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
Larger screen, more pixels
Twice the CPU - 1.3ghz quad core A7
Twice the ram - 1GB
Twice the storage - 8GB
Two cameras, 8MP + 5MP (instead of a single 2MP)
Almost twice the battery
It's thinner too
Bluetooth 4.0
Costs 169 euros.
It's not priced as a high-end phone, why did you expect it to be one?
If the Ubuntu phone isn't too overpriced for its hardware, it's fine.
I still don't understand why anyone who isn't wealthy would pay $1000 for an iPhone.
Ok, I'm poor so I have a small, cheap samsung. For 1/6th the cost of an iPhone it runs Android and does everything just fine with a tiny screen and crumby cameras.
It's my music source 100% of the time.
Articles like these are absolutely worthless. Sure, it's always interesting to see some numbers, but what matters is how it works. Saying the entire phone is bad purely based on its technical specifications says a lot about the reviewer. Quote: "[The Ubuntu phone is] ... a phone that is so middle of the road it could be arrested for loitering". Is this journalism?
Can anybody please tell my how such an article is able to reach the Slashdot front page?
Don't underestimate the choice of programming language for Android's success - Java has a huge developer base (and a history with J2ME).
i.e. Apple has enough of a cult following with objective-c but would the Play app model have succeeded if the technology had been C++ or open source darling python?
Here's a comparison: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
running a Big Boy's OS. You know, a device that gives its user a lot of freedom and power. A phone that could be connected to a keyboard and monitor to do the same or similar things my 6 year old desktop can do.
These specs are not a good match for that vision. I can live with the poor resolution, the mid-range camera and the relatively small screen size (though I'm definitely a fan of phablets). The slow CPU and limited amount of RAM are killers, though, and not in the good sense of the word.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Instead of offering 3 different models of a phone based on the memory it contains, I'd prefer an option for faster processors.
It's no longer the century of the fruitbat, we live in the centrury of streaming, we don't give a crap about memory.
Linux does fine in direct to consumer space, actually.
You just have to abandon the notion of "a Linux box" as acting how Linux does on the server and other things you know and love.
Replace the upper level guts with something more reasonable and you know, Linux is popular. A stunningly large number of devices run Linux in consumer devices, and Android powers a lot of phones. The thing in common is that the Linux core is hidden behind a pile of custom code that hides its nature because it has to.
Things like SystemD, NetworkManager, PulseAudio and other big blob programs are attempts to get "regular" Linux to behave more like how consumers expect their devices to behave. Which are incredibly complex behavior that can't just be tied together with a bunch of shell scripts.
Just think how basic operations are done on Android. It's obvious Linux can do them, since Android can do it, but damn is it hard to get desktop Linux to behave like Android.
Elementary OS had horrible tearing, choppy and slow animations, and popped up a "System problem detected" right on the first boot.
Uh ... my guess would be ElementaryOS somehow didn't auto-detect your graphics card right and you were using X with VESA. That would do that. I just set up a Linux laptop with an Intel graphics card. Worked great; VA-API allows hardware-accelerated 1080i H264 video, with deinterlacing, with no tearing. I'm sure it could handle the 10 or so polygons used for desktop effects without problem.
Linux is not the way to breathe life into an old computer anymore. That time was 15 years ago. These days you can make an old PC run Linux fast only by using a simple window manager and turning off all the desktop effects. Even then you would be left dealing with loads of bugs everywhere.
Dude, Linux runs on the Raspberry Pi. In the last few years I set up Linux on a system with a 700MHz Celeron and 256MB RAM. I've purchased a Linux VM with 128MB of "virtual" RAM. It'll run.
Use XFCE on old hardware. And new hardware; it's the current king of traditional desktop interfaces in the window manager world.
GNOME, KDE, and the others have lost their minds. That doesn't mean you have to drink the kool-aid, too.
Re bugs, my experience has been Linux is pretty bug-free. The only thing I'm running into trouble with is X deciding to segfault every week or so on my work machine. Annoying as fuck, but at least I can restart it without restarting the whole computer. It seems to be fixed in the last update, too, though it hasn't been long enough. And, I'm running Slackware-current, which is technically a beta distro though it's usually pretty stable.
vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
Indeed, this spectacular failure MUST be a lesson for those opensource yahoos and pottering-like primadonnas. However, I'm not sure if they learn this lesson.
The biggest problems with Linux phones are not specs, or drivers, or hardware, but:
1. UI polish. I bough that horrible piece of sh%t called Nokia N800. The UI sucked like an old Vietnamese prostitute, pardon me. And this was not the worst one: NeoFree Runner anyone?! The phone where you needed to use terminal to send SMS? Who the **** will buy this piece of crap? No one, and this is why Ubuntu phones will be collecting dust on shelves (I've been saying this for years).
2. User Applications. You hear me, Canonical morons? I said USER application! No, WhireShark, ssh, and gcc are not for a regular user. The apps must do something useful, and do it well. No, crashing every 2 minutes is not acceptable (unlike your desktop trash). Because you competing with Android and iOS, you should be at least on par.
3. Apps installation process. God forbid you messing with debian-style repositories - this is a sure path to nightmarish demise of the whole platform. No dependencies, no fuss, no repos. AppStore was a great invention, and is perfect for mobile devices (app sideloading in Android is good, I hope they will not remove this feature).
In short: Ubuntu phone (just like every other opensource phone) is a failure by design. This is because UI is always an after-though of unpaid designer wannabies, apps are half-baked crap that crashes every time you tap in a wrong place, and the whole installation process (go type a debian repository address on a tiny screen!) is usually typical Linux distro fiasco. Add to this pile an outdated hardware, stupid bugs (we don't have QA - our users will do this for free!), miniscule number of apps, low built quality, and non-existent marketing - and there you go! Opensource fiasco of the Year!
Uh ... my guess would be ElementaryOS somehow didn't auto-detect your graphics card right and you were using X with VESA.
I verified that and it is properly using the official Intel graphics driver.
Dude, Linux runs on the Raspberry Pi.
The desktop is quite crusty on R-Pi too. It's fine for embedded/server use though, and I do not have complaints about those scenarios. It will be interesting to see how Windows 10 performs on R-Pi 2. :)
Use XFCE on old hardware. And new hardware; it's the current king of traditional desktop interfaces in the window manager world.
XFCE hasn't seen a new release in almost 3 years, the compositor tears (because it is based on XRender), and it does not have any desktop effects. Windows on the same hardware runs cool zoom animations and translucency without a hitch. Other than that, XFCE seems relatively glitch-free, so I agree that it's one of the best choices.
Re bugs, my experience has been Linux is pretty bug-free. The only thing I'm running into trouble with is X deciding to segfault every week or so on my work machine.
Now you are just cheerleading. :) You can't realistically say that your experience is "pretty bug-free" if X (in practice: whole desktop) crashes roughly weekly.
we really haven't progress much aside from getting driver support and Android (though the biggest mobile player, has an OS that runs less efficient than iOS, BB, WP7).
WTF? Well, Android is Linux, and well, it is the biggest mobile player, but... Linux will never amount to anything.
Who modded up this shit?
I just don't have the time to root/want to bother risking a bricked device anymore. FirefoxOS got dismal reviews and my experience with Mozilla is that they're more concerned with (bad) design rather than functionality. Jolla might be an option but I have my doubts as to whether they have the resources to hang in long term, Ubuntu might. Any option that allows me to delete (or does not have) the mass of pre-bundled crapware/social media apps/etc. and that can turn off the nightly Android phoning home is better than hardware specs in my books.
Yep. This is blogspam.
Sounds like my HTC Desire A8181 from five years ago:
Size - 4.0 inches (~61.3% screen-to-body ratio)
Resolution - 480 x 800 pixels (~233 ppi pixel density)
OS - Android OS, v4.2.2 (Jelly Bean)
Chipset - Mediatek MT6572
Internal - 4 GB ROM, 512 MB RAM
CAMERA -2 MP, 1600 x 1200 pixels
BATTERY - Li-Ion 1300 mAh battery
vs
Size - 3.7 inches (~54.6% screen-to-body ratio)
Resolution - 480 x 800 pixels (~252 ppi pixel density)
Chipset Qualcomm QSD8250 Snapdragon (1 GHz Scorpion CPU, Adreno 200)
Card slot - microSD, up to 32 GB, 4 GB included
Internal - 576 MB RAM; 512 MB ROM
Camera - 5 MP, 2592 x 1944 pixels, autofocus, LED flash
Battery - Li-Ion 1400 mAh battery
http://www.gsmarena.com/htc_de...
Linux is not the way to breathe life into an old computer anymore.
XFCE hasn't seen a new release in almost 3 years, the compositor tears (because it is based on XRender), and it does not have any desktop effects.
Um, just so we're clear, you're saying that you want desktop effects on an old machine - Linux is crap because it can't make your old computer do all the things that your new computer can do?
I feel your pain - I've been trying to get Call Of Duty running on my EGA 386SX25 with 4MB RAM for weeks now, and Microsoft wouldn't even assist me with installing windows 7. They keep talking about some "minimum requirements" crap. All I want to do is breathe new life into this old hardware, and they're completely unhelpful. I think it's a conspiracy to make me buy new hardware. Windows really is the worst OS ever.
I use XFCE on all my machines, including my beefy multi-core nvidia-powered gaming rig which could easily run your bells-and-whistles environment. It's fantastic on a high-end machine - so fast! I had tearing too on that machine (but not on my intel-powered laptop), for about 15 minutes. Did you try typing 'xfce [graphics card model] tearing' into a search engine?
I just had a really "out there" thought: maybe XFCE hasn't had a new release recently because it's not broken and therefore doesn't need fixing?
Now you are just cheerleading. :) You can't realistically say that your experience is "pretty bug-free" if X (in practice: whole desktop) crashes roughly weekly.
I am forced to agree with this.
But here's my experience: I can't remember the last time I restarted a machine or my window manager. I don't think it was this year. I just ran 'uptime' on all my machines, and I certainly haven't rebooted this year.
// to do: Quip about systemd goes here
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Um, just so we're clear, you're saying that you want desktop effects on an old machine - Linux is crap because it can't make your old computer do all the things that your new computer can do?
Yes, exactly. Because somehow Windows manages to do it just fine.
>Except they aren't.
Actually, in many cases they are. Why does Android music software suck so bad? Because there is a horrible latency between touching the screen and having your software instrument play music. Remember how annoying playing quake with a high ping was in Quake back in the day? Now imagine playing a synthesizer with that latency. Welcome to the world of suck that is Android.
I'm starting to believe that Linux has finally hit a limit--it excels in the business (server, routers, robots). Forget the direct-to-consumer space--it's not gonna happen,
We have it, and it's called Android. It has an even more radical departure of an interface and userland than Ubuntu, proving that this is not the problem with Ubuntu's phone effort — the problem is that theirs sucks. Shuttleworth's vision of Linux is a dumb one, coated with candy but devoid of function. Android is candy-coated for easy swallowing, yes, but it actually does stuff. And if you really want to, you can run pretty much any Linux software you want which is available for your architecture. You can get an X server, and wayland will use android drivers. So in just what way do you justify not calling Android linux?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Use XFCE on old hardware.
Ugh, XFCE. Even LXDE is better, and it's lighter, too. But both have absolute shit file managers.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
funny thing i'm writing a reply to you on a netbook with a 1024 by 600 screen.
I have three netbooks, but sadly, any portable PC with less than 1280 lines is dead to me because that's what it takes to run some of the last windows programs I'm actually using. And that program is older than netbooks.
Similarly, any handheld device on which I'm expected to surf the web with less than 720p resolution is dead to me, because that's not really enough resolution for that.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If only BBQ opened QNX / blackberry os to be a competitor instead of a dead end road.
I'm also confused by all the bashing. This Ubuntu phone is firmly grounded on Moto G levels of price and hardware specifications, and that phone was a major hit. It's not 2010 - you don't *need* a flagship phone for browsing the web or the UI decently. Flagship GPUs are incredibly overspecced for everything except HD gaming, which is not something most people would want to do on their phones, especially since they drain the battery pretty heavily. The screens are also overkill. QHD screens on phones look beautiful, but what's their point? Are you going to watch a movie on a 5" screen? Do they even release movies on QHD? That'd be a heck of a big file. No, you're mostly going to stare at a beautifully rendered UI for brief periods. Even briefier considering those screens tax the battery like mad.
Rant aside, what I mean is bashing a new phone for having sensible specs just seems weird to me.
The desktop is quite crusty on R-Pi too. It's fine for embedded/server use though, and I do not have complaints about those scenarios. It will be interesting to see how Windows 10 performs on R-Pi 2. :)
Umm ... R-Pi 2 is still ARM, right? So, wouldn't the answer be, "not at all, because MS is bailing out of ARM"? They discontinued the ARM-based Surface recently.
I verified that and it is properly using the official Intel graphics driver.
Weird. Have you checked what glxinfo says? I think it's possible for OpenGL to be software rendering even if the driver isn't VESA in certain broken setups. Another good step would be to try Knoppix on it, to see if it's a distro-specific issue or not. I used Knoppix recently on some random computers with Intel drivers and desktop effects worked fine.
XFCE hasn't seen a new release in almost 3 years, the compositor tears (because it is based on XRender), and it does not have any desktop effects. Windows on the same hardware runs cool zoom animations and translucency without a hitch. Other than that, XFCE seems relatively glitch-free, so I agree that it's one of the best choices.
No, they haven't had a major release recently, but XFCE is definitely still maintained. It's possible to get Compiz to work with XFCE, but, like sibling poster suggests, I would just not use desktop effects if they're not working. I'm sure I could get them working if I really tried, but I'm not using desktop effects on any of my machines. They're a novelty item that wears off quickly.
Now you are just cheerleading. :) You can't realistically say that your experience is "pretty bug-free" if X (in practice: whole desktop) crashes roughly weekly.
One machine out of six, man :) And I was using a beta distro, and I think it might be fixed now. I actually think it's one screensaver that causes or caused it, but I don't know which one because xscreensaver uses a random one each time it starts. It could also be a hardware issue with the machine, though I doubt it.
vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
Like I said: one machine out of six, and I'm using a beta distro.
Like you, I typically only reboot when the power goes out.
vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
Give firefox os a try - it's simple to install as an emulator in your browser by selecting WebIDE
15 years ago, most distros did not work out of the box on most *current* hardware then. The common quip in forums then was: "Oh, you did not check all the hardware for Linux compatibility before you bought it? It's your fault then". Then we got spoilt by Ubuntu which worked out of the box on most hardware.
Desktop effects did not work on most computers for many years or at least made the desktop unstable after some use.
I think you are pining for a past that never was. You *could* make old hardware work with Linux, but only with some effort. You always toned down your fancy desktops when running on old hardware. If you want to make old hardware work, try a stable, mainstream distro like Debian or Ubuntu, not some "preview" distro. For that old hardware, I'd go with Lubuntu desktop.
1 GB of RAM is not that bad for a phone.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
I'm not hostile to them, I'm using Firefox right now. I'm just critical of their choices in certain areas.
Items like the burger menu and status bar being like Chrome's take priority over fixing major issues with the sqlite database(s) (install SQLite manager, you'll be amazed at how long data is being stored) and simple things like being able to view content inside the browser (example bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s... - yes, it's coming up on its 15th birthday).
Most of their design choices are just "me too" instead of anything meaningful or original. I can't fault them too much though, they set out to copy the major browsers early on and they've stuck with it. I just wish they were quicker with less visible fixes and slower on design changes.
Oh, I get it, you were being sarcastic. Very funny!
Damn this intarweb and it's lack of intonation and body language.
Old reviews focused on old hardware won't tell you much about the OS. Give it a try before you bash it. It's really well-done. Beats Android in my book. It can even properly switch tasks.
Required reading for internet skeptics
15 years ago, most distros did not work out of the box on most *current* hardware then.
That is not the point here. Although I agree that hardware support is these days very good in Linux. It does not cause big problems for me.
The point is that in relation to Windows, today Linux is generally not "significantly more lightweight" like it was in the past. All those people running Xfce can run full modern Windows 10 on the same machines without any problems. I'm not saying that they would necessarily want to, but perfomance-wise it would work fine.
i'm looking at this phone, and the only thing that is so-so is the screen resolution. ... and running a real linux, all for less then 200 euro.
All other things just look fine, 1.3Ghz quad core, 1Gb ram, 8Gb storage (expandable),
What is not to like? I'm buying this.
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
Yes, but I would argue that Windows was not heavy even back then. In my tests, XP consumed a little less than 60 MB of RAM with unnecessary services turned off. In 2000, Linux certainly consumed less than that, but mainstream Linux desktops got more heavy than that fairly quickly. Most average Windows users had sluggish desktops because they had too many programs that put themselves in startup, rather than with the Win OS itself being bloated or sluggish. Vista did become a bloat, which was an exception rather than the norm. Win 7 quickly corrected that.
I am not arguing with the point that Linux can be as bloated as Windows or more. My KDE desktop is certainly not more responsive than my Windows boot. I am just saying that this is not a new thing.
And it was always the case that regardless of how much better Linux got with hardware support, Windows generally had it better.
I fully agree.
Android phones that compare to Apple hardware are massively overcompensating with processor and battery life.
Wait, is the iPhone powerful, or are other phones overcompensating when they have powerful processors? I'm not up on the iFanboy newspeak this week.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"