Wish list : which apps do you need?

nogoogle

@3T_Ed I would second that. Specifically with pinetab now shipping. Pinetab with the keyboard definitely could become a light-weight laptop replacement and as such an office-suite becomes something like an essential app.

WarpLover

@Rebecca58
I know the PinePhone was just released and is a work in progress, but I am wondering, if after a lot of work, could this be used as a basis for a watered down Medical Alert?
I define my ideal system as a wearable device with a button to mash, maybe wifi. The pinephone is powered up and always on (wall power), used as a base station. The alert signal from the bracelet or lanyard goes to the pinephone, activates an app, the app dials a predetermined number and sends a predetermined sms text message. "Jane Doe has activated her alert-system and wants you to come check on her". It would have nothing to do with 9-11 and wouldn't need a monthly subscription fee (except for the phone service).
Seems like creating the wearable device is the real hurdle. (knowing a lot of software work is needed too)

WarpLover

@3T_Ed
LibreOffice is great, until you have to print. In my experience, my docs have to be converted to PDF before they print on a new HP LaserJet on a Win PC. Not acceptable. I hope for a better experience in Linux.

GizmoChicken

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

Neither Libertine nor Anbox is anything other than a temporary fix.

With regard to Anbox, my guess is that many potential UT users will (for many years into the future) appreciate having the ability to run "that one critical Android app" (whatever "that Android app" may be) on UT. So I don't really see Anbox as a temporary fix, but rather as a necessary crutch on which many will rely, whether they truly want to or not.

But as for Libertine, yes, I agree 100% that it should be considered a temporary fix, and I hope UBports will eventually (but not immediately) move away from the need for Libertine.

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

We need to build apps suitable for use on touchscreen devices (across platforms).

Again, I agree 100%. But that raises the question: what packaging format would attract devs who want to develop across many platforms?

@mariogrip and/or @UniSuperBox and/or @dobey and/or @Flohack (and/or others):

I notice that, under the question "How will Ubuntu Touch work with the new SNAP packages?" found on the UBports FAQ page, the answer states, in part, that a "goal is to support Snap packages" and that "this is still a work in progress."

Of course, I realize that, at the moment, the UBPorts devs are working on a great many urgent projects and that supporting Snaps isn't (and probably shouldn't be) at the top of the list of current priorities.

QUESTION: Keeping the above in mind regarding priorities, is supporting Snap packages still among the long-term goals for UBports?

Note: Please forgive me if the FAQ is out-of-date and that I've somehow missed that Snaps are currently supported. But near as I can tell, that doesn't seem to be the case.

Bramble

@GizmoChicken

I can't say that I know enough about it to make a constructive comment, really. But that never stops anybody, so...

Someone will no doubt say I'm wrong, but UT is run on relatively low-spec devices for which x-org apps are unsuitable; so the packaging of apps has been an academic question.

Looking online, there are advocates for all the Linux packaging systems. Yet they all seem to be the same thing: Boxes within boxes!

IF .click is the most suitable to use within the UT framework*, then either it needs to be made really easy to package to .click, or some resources will need to be spent converting apps to .click format.

I guess the trend we're seeing for a UT 'flavour' over an Arch, Debian etc base is the desire to have both the UT UI and x-org apps. It would be preferable, immho, if it was proper UT though.

As I understand it(!) click packages are a cut down version of snap. UT already has quite a lot of sandboxing, so perhaps .click provides all that is needed. Idk. If .deb / apt were used, would there be more take up of UT? Would a UT desktop come any faster??

3T_Ed

@WarpLover

Regarding the alert solution, I'd recommend you to post your comment in the ICE thread . You'll find (likeminded) members looking for ICE related app/hardware solutions.

A Former User

I miss the possibility to print.

TRPrecht

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

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

something similar to andOTP,

What is wrong with Authenticator NG?

I'll look into it. When I was doing my initial look through, I must have overlooked it.

stanwood

@thilov Indeed, many users require that feature. There’s a wip on this. But it’s a hard task (not P1 currently) which will take some time.

gnugeek

for me it's

discord app / wrapper.
Firefox or decent browser. With a decent browser I can do pretty much everything I need
gpg gui/ client for my gpg yubikeys not experimented with this yet but it works on Android

arubislander

@Nathan123 said in Wish list : which apps do you need?:

A better Bible app. Like "OliveTree" for android.
I contacted OliveTree in the past about an app for Ubuntu Touch. While they did graceously take the time to answer my query, they also made it clear that they would not be allocating any resources to the task, nor where they keen on collaborating with anyone who would.

Yuri

I've been using an Fdroid browser; Lightning on my Android tablet. If some kind soul could port it, many would be grateful.
It's on Github. I'm brand new (yesterday) to UB Ports or I'd give it a stab myself.

Yuri

Another F-Droid app: K-9 Mail is open source, light and fully featured.

dobey

@Yuri Android apps (including ones on F-Droid) tend to be written in Java (or Kotlin/Dart/etc…) and so not really something that can be "ported" to UT. Rather, one would have to write a completely new app to work on UT, as UT is not Android and does not provide anything like the APIs needed by those apps, nor does Java support the display systems used by UT.

mnjrupp

@arubislander I wonder if the creator of Quick Bible would be willing?
It might be open source. But I agree with you. We need a better bible app.

DaveNotHere

@Rebecca58 For me I would want everything removable and installable. Like for me the Phone and Messaging Applications are useless to me and would like them uninstalled. Since I don't use my Nexus 5 as a cellphone. I use it as a computer/Remote Control to my big desktop computer.

I want my Ubuntu Touch to be bare to bones. All I want preinstalled is open store. The rest I want to pick and choose. I don't need 99% of the junk thats preinstalled

For what I want to see available for UT is some Ham Radio Apps, a app for Wine, some remote Admin tools(to make linking computers and cellphone/tablets easier to link together)

Dave

AppLee

@DaveNotHere
Hi, I understand that for your use case most apps are dispensable. But "junk" is a bit strong.

Regarding your use case, I'm not sure Ubuntu Touch is the best OS for you. If there are ports available for your device, I think maybe a more "conventional" Linux distro might be better.
You won't have to deal with confinement and the read-only image to fully customize your remote terminal...

Your use case is not the one intended, so I think that little will be made to match your requirements.
The main focus is towards a better smartphone, not a SBC with a touch screen.

(Just to be clear I'm not chasing you out I'm just concern about the issues you might encounter. And secretly I hope you'll be seduced by what UT has to offer )

Keneda

@mnjrupp @arubislander What's the problem with this app https://open-store.io/app/theeternalword.adam ?

Bramble

@AppLee
With respect... Ubuntu Touch was touted as the OS suitable for all use-cases: that was the whole point of convergence.

I wonder if, slowly, measure by measure, we're losing parts of the original vision.

AppLee

@Bramble
Convergence is work in progress, so slowly, measure by measure we're getting closer to it.

And also convergence is not a single simple thing.
It's not magically transforming your phone into a desktop computer.
You have to build an ecosystem with convergence apps, devices, community, developers around an OS able to achieve this goal.

Constraints from the mobile world apply to convergence as much as constraints from the desktop world.
So you can't imagine you'll get only the best that would be foolish.

So again for a particular use case choosing the more suitable solution is best.
If you require convergence then UT is my choice, but that is not what Dave is willing to achieve because he doesn't care about the phone aspect...