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.
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 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.
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
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?
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.'"
Do we get all the source code ?
Are they happy for people to make custom images for it ?
While many parts are open source, Sailfish OS is not completely free software and contains parts under a proprietary EULA.
Firefox OS is mostly open source as well but contains binary android drivers.
Without free drivers, there will always be a binary blob on your system which can then "phone home" or do other nasty things. Before a phone is created which does not require these blobs, there will be no phone completely running free software.
The openmoko gta01 and freerunner were attempts at this.
The gta04 by golden delicious was pretty good too and was able to run without any binary blobs (it was not necessary to install the binary powervr driver to use the phone normally without 3D).
The next upcoming thing is the neo900: http://neo900.org/