Convergence, desktop, mobile app Section/class in the app store
CiberSheep last edited by
All apps should adapt though. We discourage forcing an orientation (ehem, clock, ehem) except for games.
@cibersheep in discouraging screen orientation switching you essentially draw a line in the sand and I always thought linux was more open than that. People will migrate to Arch and mobian if there arent enough functioning applications for ubports availible. Essentially you are asking developers to conform to your os rather than organzing the os in a way where more applications are compatible..it doesnt make a lot of sense and worth looking at scripts and application manifests.
I think you're jumping to conclusion and you misread Joan's post.
From a design standpoint developer are discouraged to lock the screen orientation.
The reason for that is obvious, UT is an OS for mobile devices and most of the time people use them in portrait mode but almost all devices have an orientation sensor and people can also use it in landscape. so forcing the orientation for another purpose than gaming (which is a legit move) is not recommended.
Ubuntu touch is not a traditional distro in the sense that it is intended for a daily usage by any non-tech savvy person...
So proposing or advertising non mobile-friendly apps is not the main goal here.
UT is not an OS made to run the gimp, libreoffice, inkscape or firefox as if you were on a computer.
The main purpose is to give back users their freedom. So they can have a smartphone experience without the drawbacks forced on us by big-G and the spoiled-apple.
It's an open source software so anyone can come and modify but it doesn't mean that the main goal of the foundation has to adapt for everyone's fantasy.
If someone wants to do something weird with their phone running UT, they can.
People here are willing to help but they're also free to not do it.
It takes time and time is money to get things done, so when you come here and state that UT needs this or have to make that we might find those idea nice and want to help you do it or we can give you counter-arguments and wish you good luck.
We are not in a competition with mobian or arch, we're not selling anything so if you like it we're happy if you don't we're sorry but there are alternatives.
With that in mind I'll go back on topic and regarding the convergence, yes that's a selling point and we all would love to see more and more convergent apps. But running a desktop app on a mobile is not what UBports consider convergence...
The windowed mode when connected to an external display is a great feature that I hope we will have time and money to bring back.
In my personal opinion Waydroid and Libertine are dirty hacks that don't bring a good experience. People are often disappointed.
So that's not something I'd like the foundation to work on until the OS is stable and keeping pace with upgrades (for example QT version )
@applee I think you are missing my point that many phones and tablets that are designed for linux are sold as convergence capable systems. People dont want ubports to be android the point of linux on convergence capable devices is to support legacy applications. Its a pretty simple concept and again Id rather have access to xwindow applications even if they only work when docked. Ive messeged many application devs and they dont seem enthusiastic to rewrite their entire application when it works just fine on other distros.
@hobanwashburn Your argument here is a bit far from your original topic. You were asking for tagging, not compatibility of apps. The OpenStore only offers apps that works on small screens. Libertine is the one for desktop apps so I guess that's the tagging or separation you're looking for.
UT is trying to do something different than the other distros. It's trying to design a modern OS that can cater different use cases especially mobile. It's not trying to put traditional linux desktop into mobile devices. You can say it's ambitious because it is but it is what it is. (that's a lot of "it is" ). That mau change in the future or may not. I would agree that doing things differently, such as content hub, is hurting the OS but that's mostly true because these features are not yet fleshed out. I personally don't like their current implementation but I believe in their potential.
By the way, once UT fully moves to 20.04 and wayland, it will have better compatibility with traditional linux apps. It'll be a matter of packaging though snaps, appimage and flatpaks may also come in the future. These are exciting stuffs but sadly the reality is that we lack funding and developers so achieving all of these would need a lot of time and support from the community
I always thought linux was more open than that.
Linux is just a kernel. Android is still a Linux distribution. If Ubuntu Touch does not meet your needs, you are absolutely free to choose another distribution that does.
Ubuntu Touch is built to be a quality mobile device operating system, not a generic traditional Linux distribution. If you want the latter, feel free to use something else.
Its a pretty simple concept and again Id rather have access to xwindow applications even if they only work when docked.
That is exactly what Libertine is for. If you find it or Ubuntu Touch do not suit your needs, you are welcome to contribute to fix the issues in Libertine, or go use some other distro on your device.
This isn't a place where you can just stomp in and demand that we fall in line to develop what you want. If you want to dictate how other people build a mobile operating system, I'd suggest you start a large company and higher a few thousand developers to build what you want.
@dobey Im in no way "stomping in" Im bringing up real issues that can be addressed. Also the "help" trope is empty without a work flow, development team support or structure to contribute. I wouldnt devote time to fix these issues and implement my ideas if the team isnt going to adopt them anyway.
So far you just had broad stroke of ideas.
If you have a specific idea of you want to achieve we can help you converge to something that will benefit everyone.
IIRC you want to improve convergence (in the meaning of external display) that's something many people are expecting.
Now we need to focus on something achievable (your skills are an important factor there) an that will fit the current state of development.
What is your first idea ?
- Improve Libertine
- Add GDK support to Libertine
- Other, ...
Lakotaubp last edited by
@hobanwashburn The point being made in all the replys is that the priority of both those working on Ubuntu Touch directly and the Foundation as a whole is to make UT the best moble device operating system it can be, and that is it. Anything else will have to wait to be (if ever by UBports) implemented or developed further.
There are many proof of concept ideas such as Libertine and Waydroid (Anbox as was. Now being developed as a successful on going side project) that may be desirable but are not the main focus for UT. Wishing it to be otherwise will not make it happen given the time, resources and money available.
This is all Open Source so anyone is free to look at an issue or project and run with it as far as they can and I'm sure there are many here who would offer advice and help. However moving to Ubuntu 20.04 is top of the priority list for UT and that goal of being the best mobile OS it possibly can.
@applee My skill tree is unimportant in my comments and concerns. Does ubports want to reach a more diverse user base if so at what point and when do we start talking to eachother that way? The OS is for the most part stable and its getting more so as well as easy to use UI wise. But it could be better I just want ubports to do well because I see it as having the potential to be the best mobile OS. My critque is not to hurt anyone it actually is with the intention to help. I think developers would add tags to their applications rather than rebuilding them to fit a particular windowing system, resolution, and or dpi.
I understand that and as @Lakotaubp explained, the foundation is busy moving to 20.04, fixing major issues in the current running code and porting to newer devices.
5G and VoLTE are also big challenges for the survival of UT.
So I agree that it would be nice to widen the user base, but atm this is a luxury that the foundation on its own cannot do.
That's something that contributors like you and I can carry on our own time.
And hence my question about your skills.
You can contribute by testing, translating, you can help with the reviews or you can also create native apps or improve Libertine.
Waydroid is a good example of things done by community members to improve their experience.
They created a crowdfunding campaign to raise enough money, they contacted and hired a developer capable of improve anbox for Halium9 devices...
You'll always find margin for improvement. But where do you want to invest some time and effort ?
On this forum you'll find people willing to help if they can.
But the foundation and core devs have already a long roadmap ahead.
@applee My time is limited and it actually can be very helpful to give an outside perspective especially concerning reverse compatibility and accessability options for people with physical or technical limitations. This topic did create discourse and provoke some people to think about application and screen management which even if it wasnt well recieved its an undeniable issue. We all know that libertine isnt the ultimate especially when it comes to end users and accessability. So is there a path forward other than stomping in and demanding people like libreoffice to rewrite their applications?
Libreoffice and Firefox are two common examples.
Those software have a huge code base and are very difficult to port to a mobile OS because of the CPU and RAM consumption.
Trying to motivate the maintainers to port to UT is (according to me) impossible.
My opinion is towards a more and better native app. So bringing in developers.
There is also some fringe cases that can help motivating developers like improving Libertine and Waydroid.
The idea here is that developers attracted by UT and the ability to use APK or "Legacy Linux" apps, then they'll realize that nothing beats a native apps for convergence and UI and hopefully will lead to more and better native apps.
If you want a clear distinction I'd say that the OS is held by the foundation while the apps are provided by the larger community of users.
The core team is working hard to bring 20.04 and newer QT to give users and developers the tools to create and support more and better native apps.
@applee I want to see a future where we can cast our workspace to a tv and use our phone as the keyboard/mouse. My issue is that in fedora mobile for instance desktop applications work out of the box but might not be usable in every orientation. Id rather have some functionality and choice than none of either and ill leave it at that.
@hobanwashburn Several replies have said that if there is a feature you particularly want then you should create it, rather than wait for somebody else to do so. You have hinted that you might have the appropriate skills, but I don't sense any willingness by you to step up to the crease. Is that correct assessment?
@hobanwashburn You came onto this forum, and created multiple threads and a comment in an already existing thread, basically ranting about how UT is not a traditional Linux distro, and telling us what we should do.
So yes, that is "stomping in." And here you are attempting to refute by doing more of the same.
There is documentation about how to contribute with development. There are chat groups. Developers actively help people. We have places to open tickets about issues. So clearly, you didn't even take the initiative to attempt to contribute.
Legacy apps aren't going to work well on a phone, and in many cases even with an external dislpay and mouse/keyboard, it will still be an inferior experience to using those apps on a real PC, even if everything was working perfectly on the UT side.