Wish list : which apps do you need?

AppLee

@canadien666
Have you read this thread ?
Maybe Podbird can fit your need: https://forums.ubports.com/topic/4299/podbird-reignited

AppLee

@Bramble
Yes, I'm acting as a moderator to help keep things polite and respectful.

But I'm also trying to help as much as I can.
Android won't be a better solution than UT for this particular case.

And if someone wants to hack UT, I'll try to help them out and yes it could be using another friendly Linux based distribution.

About being able to remove all unused apps, I'm personally all for it.
This way people can truly have the experience they build. And I hope it will be possible in a not so far future. But priorities...
Hopefully one day we'll be able to choose an OS base for our device, on top of it we'll be able to have multiple DE and then multiple convergent apps depending on the use case.

mnjrupp

@Keneda I use the Eternal Word app for listening but it looks to be a wrapper for inline app. the Android Quick bible app has many features like search, and commentaries; just to name a few. It doesn't require Internet connection .

canadien666

@AppLee Hi, thanks for the suggestion. I love Podbird, it's a great, well made app. I'm looking for something to use my own mp3/audio files ripped from my Audible and Overdrive folders.

I'll have to see if Podbird is able to handle the use I'm looking for. Lollypop and Talefish do a good job of this, but not on UT.

Yuri

@Bramble The tablet I'm typing on has far lower specs than the Pinetab. There are only a few apps I use on on the spyware named Android.

A Former User

@DaveNotHere Somewhere in November should be released the Popcorn Computer with LoRa capabilities. It will run Linux, but is not clear which distro. As for UT, many people want many things..., maybe too many considering the numbers of developers involved in this project.

poVoq

Stiched panorama images from within the camera app would be cool.

I guess one could do it manually, but the common "turn the camera" UI from Android is very convenient.

3T_Ed

Jitsi video conference app

With an increasing number of video calls and not willing to use Zoom or Skype for the obvious reasons. I don't want to do video conferences at all, however recent developments seem to force me into video conferences. Jitsi packages for Ubuntu are available. Besides the fact that not everyone is skilled enough to make this work, as I understand using packages with Libertine also can break OTA/stability. A 'secure' Jitsi open source app for video conferencing would be great and might even attract more people to open source mobile distros like UT.

AppLee

@3T_Ed
The video chat request is one long lasting problem that requires a huge amount of work.

You have to understand that just because something exists as an open source app, it doesn't mean that it can be easily ported to Ubuntu Touch.

You can name Jitsi, Telegram, Snapthing, Faceboo, Zoo, Whatsarrg or any other solution, the problem is the same (well you add troubles with closed source softwares of course).

The major challenge is how an app accesses the camera, the network, the mic and the speakers.
Right now, there is no proper way to make it happen.

The problem is not in the frontend nor in the hardware, it's how to route the various data, encode it before streaming to the network.

But it will come some day because it's on everybody's mind...

3T_Ed

@AppLee
Thanks, I understand completely. As the thread says it's part of a wishlist and this particular one is on mine. Well, not really as I try to avoid video's, as said I feel I have no other choice to use those kind if communications whilst trying to maintain myself in the real world ;). It was definitely not meant as a push factor towards devs.

domubpkm

As an indispensable (game ) new port on the OpenStore, there is now Tux Racer. Very happy about that !

AppLee

@3T_Ed
Yes the thread is about app wishes so I understand the post.
I just wanted to clarify things so people won't come with "this is a basic feature everyone needs in 2020"...
What is basic from a end user point of view can be in fact really tricky. Especially with a completely different OS such as Ubuntu Touch.
Our OS is very special and it comes with a cost... you just can't have it all

I understand people's frustration regarding some topics and I share it sometimes.
But as a software engineer, I have some understanding of the challenges such features represent and I try to explain it so people won't jump to conclusion.

rik

@mnjrupp @arubislander @Nathan123 I was thinking of a "Better Bible App" also. It would be great if it could use Crosswire / sword modules like AndBible does. Then access to commentaries, etc. would be possible.

So maybe the question is if something like Xiphos / Bibletime for traditional Linux is easier to port over to Ubuntu Touch or if it would need to be a "build from scratch qt quick" app?

rik

@Keneda I think the main challenge is that it is a webapp and only a single version. So it needs to be used online, no hilighting, no notes, no multiple versions, no commentaries, etc. Maybe the request should be more clear: an offline full-featured native bible app.

Irenicus

I think the best thing to do is get Android compatibility layer working.

WLBI

@Irenicus said in Wish list : which apps do you need?:

I think the best thing to do is get Android compatibility layer working.

I think so too...
All problems with non existing apps are solved at once, as soon it's possible to use Android apps.

Bramble

It was good to see an update of the Calendar app this morning: I've often thought that the flipside to a calendar app - using the same resources - is a ToDo list... Perhaps the maintainer might consider adding that functionality. (They could perhaps take inspiration from nitrotsks)

AppLee

@WLBI and @Irenicus
That's an easy mistake for people without technical knowledge to think that we can "adapt" android apps to UT.

While the API used in android is known it's not that easy to adapt to UT.
First of all "confinement" how can you confine an android app those are very different way of designing an OS and are not compatible.
It's like taking a bike and wanting to turn it into an airplane (or the other way around).

Current limitations regarding video chat (for example) apply to anbox as well as regular apps. A native app is easier to make than porting an existing android app.
So no, from a developer point of view, an "fully featured" anbox or any "android compatibility layer" is harder to achieve and won't fix problems like, background GPS tracking, video chat or device specific issues.

The only way this compatibility can work is by corrupting UT into becoming some flavor of android ; and that's not what we want (as UBports community).

Edit: And I didn't mention the heavy inefficient use of Java in most android apps

WLBI

@AppLee said in Wish list : which apps do you need?:

A native app is easier to make than porting an existing android app.

So means to say, it's more easy to code the whole app, than make it working with Anbox?
But let's say, if only 10 or 20% of the Android apps are working with Anbox, it's already a huge gain in apps.

AppLee

@WLBI
Of course anbox can help and bring some simple apps from android to UT.
But it's not a magical solution.

And I think it already works fine for this kind of apps. The problem remain with needy apps.
The ones using any sensors or accessing personal data like contacts and calendar...
Autonomous apps with access to the network will be OK I guess.
(I don't use anbox myself so I'm not really sure)

So basically, easy to do apps are easy to do natively and they are the only one that anbox can bring. More sophisticated apps are tricky and it's easier to do it natively.
Anbox bring numbers when I'm looking for quality, so not my thing.

But I agree it can help many people for example running their banking app that should work fine with only network access once sandboxed within anbox.