Compatibility or not as a development priority?
Bastos last edited by Bastos
The other selling points of Ubuntu Touch don't magically go away just because it can also run android apps.
Flohack last edited by
Artificially breaking compatibility is definitely a bad idea. IMO the best option would be to allow Anbox work as a third-party app - if you want it, you can download it from the store and use it - but not as a core functionality of the OS.
Would it be possible to be distributed as as a click or snap in the open store?
But one is inevitable - once option to install Android Apps appears, there will be much less (not none at all, but less) reasons to develop native apps. Telegram client for Ubuntu Touch for sure would have never been developed if users could just run the Android version.
Yeah, no artificial breaking. What will work will work - means, if Anbox can be packaged and installed, people will use it. Still its an early alpha or beta, I expect much harder problems coming its way like: GPU accelerated rendering (games), access to hardware, exchange of data between applications (will not work between Ubuntu app and Android app currently, attach a photo from Ubuntu camera to Android Telegram? not easily possible), push notifications, button emulation. Just a few.
If someone can convince me that its just installing Anbox and then on top the Android App, I will conclude that its a way to go. But expect Anbox to take some time until it can even reach parity with F-Droid requirements.
Summary: Anbox is a separate project, we shall provide an installable version as snap package, maybe also as click. But for the legacy devices which will only support click packages I doubt that Anbox will iron out all the things I mentioned before.
Bastos last edited by
For me the main thing for compatibility is not to run apps which need huge ressources. There you are right, this should be ubuntu apps. And this also because of an self confident compettitive approach.
But all those specific apps like phillips hue or an energy management app my company is currently developing with a software partner are only available for Android or iOS. Those are making live beautiful even if not depending much on resources so they can run in a container like Anbox
cpb last edited by
Android compatibility brings the Android users, who will publicly attack the OS for not letting them enjoy the full Google experience.
Nothing enrages people like unmet expectations, so best to manage it from the outset by simply making it incompatible.
As for a device not being useful without apps, its a matter of focus: what can I do with this device that’s a massive PITA with an Android? For me (I hope) its secure work: like real n900-superphone-level work.
advocatux last edited by
I don't want Android apps in UBports.
For those who want a mixed Android experience there's LineageOS, and for those who want a full Android experience there's, well, Android.
Please keep UBports as free as possible of Android and Google claws (yes I know about the mandatory layers that we can't avoid for now. Let's hope we'll be free from Google someday).
ZeroPointEnergy last edited by
I completely agree with @NeoTheThird, I think his post is absolutely spot on.
This discussion reminds me of the wine discussions on the desktop. The reality is that people will make it work, because they have a desire to run all the software need on this phone without having to rely on a secondary device just for the odd android app.
On the desktop wine allowed me to completely ditch windows and still play games for years before steam opened their doors on Linux. I think with android we have a similar situation. The goal is to free your phone and turn it from a jailed toy into a general purpose computing device which respects the freedom of the user to run whatever he likes. It is probably not a good idea to replace apple or google just with some other guy who dictates what you can and can not do on the device you purchased.
I think the real question is if this should be a core-app. My personal opinion if I may, is that this should not be a core app and that this should always be optional as an app in the openstore. This way the purist can run his pure system and stay completely away from anything android and the pragmatist can ditch android and use ubports as his daily device while still enabled to run the odd android app he may need.
hans1977se last edited by
@ZeroPointEnergy I think so too. Anbox can be very nice, and i'll use it for sure to get around the lack of some specific application, but the core applications should be pure native i think.
Flohack last edited by
I also answered in the other thread like this: https://forums.ubports.com/topic/316/android-apps-to-run-in-ut/18
UKPhil last edited by
This is a tricky one and I totally agree with 99% of the posts. However, I do believe that the core apps should be minimal and native, (with native being the main word here). Yes, there is a need for Anbox, but let’s keep that for the people who want to download it and run their Android apps. Just like “Wine” is in the Ubuntu desktop. We can talk about this all we want, but the fact of the matter is that people have come to expect certain apps and if we want this great os to get anywhere we need to also offer them, be it in a native format. We cannot get away from the fact that people both use and have the right to use what they want. The old chestnut “Whatsapp” being a being a prime example of this, my work use this all the time and there is no way of getting them to move to Telegram. So I too would have to carry two phones around, just so I can use a few apps that I need to on an Android phone. The one great thing about Ubuntu desktop is that you can get native apps for everything you would want to do in Windows and often they are far better. We need to get to that situation.
apemonkey last edited by
Compatability has to be in the core in some form.
To me theres no realistic way without compatability.
I gave up on my ubuntu mx4 and now use the mx meizu flyme android because of............the money.
Not linux/Android/freedom, like/dislike discussions, but simply because I would have to have two phones: To operate with my banking, reading danish newspapers, see danish television, use the danish mobilePay, use the phone with online ticketing for bus/train - a lot of stuff that has nothing to do with "hobbyist" fiddling with philosophical linux/windows/android speculations but all to do with very everyday digitalizations of very soon everything in daily life.
And all those local institutions in all countries are NOT going to create linux compatible versions of their apps.
But they are going to be even more necessary to have access to.
That leaves the discussions with no choice - if the UBport is going to be anything else than a utopian/idealistic project, it will have to cooperate with a lot of android apps.