How Does Ubuntu Touch Compare To Android Open Source Project?



  • For a long time I've gotten by on wifi/tablets/dumbphones and didn't know much about ios/android, my perception was just that Apple and Google had heavy control over them, so I was refreshed to see Ubuntu Touch and other such projects as open alternatives to them.

    I was wondering if AOSP is decent? What are the pros and cons compared to UT?

    I was thinking of running AOSP on one older device and UT on a newer.

    edit: Another related fork: Android Open Kang Project



  • ASOP is more of a base-layer. Try LinageOS for a end-user friendly open Android.

    UT is a completely different sort of thing, so that would be comparing apples and oranges.



  • @poVoq Ok thx. Doesn't have to be user-friendly for me.

    Or like also what about https://www.replicant.us/?



  • Just a quick move to somewhere a bit more appropriate.



  • I said end-user friendly. That is quite different from user-friendly (= usually meaning dumbed-down these days) 😛

    Replicant is AFAIK super outdated and badly supported on semi-modern devices.



  • AOSP isn't a complete operating system, UT is.



  • Ok, I tried installing LineageOS and read a bit about the various mobile operating systems (Wikipedia).

    I still feel a little confused on the pros and cons of Android versus Ubuntu Touch, or what was so "wrong" with Android that Ubuntu Touch needed to be created, or how they are so essentially different, or if the creation of Ubuntu Touch was just done because it could be done (which is fine). Is there a post on the Ubports site describing the differences, or should a pros/cons page be created? Basically, I'm not bothered by the idea that LineageOS/Android could offer more for now, but I am wondering what the long term possible benefits are of the Ubuntu Touch approach that could be achieved in the long term: any over Android that come to mind?

    I can see how they are kind of "reverses" of each other in some senses though: in Android for instance with the "Termux" app, you can install a full linux distro to work with, along with Android apps on the normal system. In Ubuntu Touch, you can run Android apps in "Anbox", and Linux Desktop apps in "Libertine containers" (at least in theory, I wasn't able to get either working in practice yet but I may have messed something up).

    Also: can you install .click packages in Android or has there been a thought of creating that compatibility?



  • Ubuntu Touch is basically a full desktop class operating system. So contrary to Android you can more or less do everything you could do on a Linux PC.

    The big advantage of this isn't immediately obvious when just looking at the phone part of UT, but once you look at it from the convergence point of view it becomes obvious, i.e. connect it to an external screen and in immediately turns into a regular full desktop.

    After many years this is sort of possible with Android as well, but this is a very recent development and you still can't run all the standard Linux desktop applications on it of course.

    In addition UT isn't build on a very convoluted Java base as Android, and thus is much easier and nicer to work with from a developer's point of view.



  • @mirroronthewall
    Quite a few of us are also very concerned about privacy... It's well-known that if you use Google software, they are well-aware of everything you're doing, and are keen to exploit that for financial gain, by selling your data to advertisers.

    UBports Ubuntu Touch doesn't do that. In fact, the system is designed such that apps have to ask your permission to access other apps.



  • @3arn0wl said in How Does Ubuntu Touch Compare To Android Open Source Project?:

    @mirroronthewall
    Quite a few of us are also very concerned about privacy... It's well-known that if you use Google software, they are well-aware of everything you're doing, and are keen to exploit that for financial gain, by selling your data to advertisers.

    UBports Ubuntu Touch doesn't do that. In fact, the system is designed such that apps have to ask your permission to access other apps.

    The OP asked about AOSP though. AOSP is mostly degoogled out of the box, and the rest (e.g., captive portal detection, fallback DNS) can be disabled or changed in the source before compiling. The ecosystem of Android apps which don't require Google services is large, and the microG project mimics Google services adequately for a large percentage of those apps which do require them.



  • @trainailleur
    🙂 Fair point.


Log in to reply