Help me understand one basic question, please

jojumaxx

Please correct me, if I am wrong:

Compared to any Android based phone, the Pinephone offers most privacy due to most hardware operating with open source software and the hardware switches.

As an OS, focussing on privacy, shouldn't be the pinephone the first device to put effort in?
Additionally, isn't development on the pinephone easier?
Development should be much more efficient since there's no messing around with Android compatibility layers, proprietary hardware pieces, etc.

So why is the most suitable device hardly maintained? Why wasting so much time and effort in adapting Android phones which develop so fast, UT developers hardly can keep up with?
If I get it right, after all the time, the Pixel 3a is the only device not lacking features. There are so many incomplete builds and despite that, new phones get added to the list instead of completing those which are there already.
If someone would ask me, which device to buy, honestly I don't know. The Pixel 3a is complete, but old. The others are incomplete. Even the preinstalled Volla Phone is not 100% ready and therefore way too expensive.

Why not make the pinephone (pro) a really great UT device?
Why not concentrate powers on one device which can be most easily maintained and make it THE UT phone?

I don't get it. Am I wrong with what I said?
Please help me understand that...

Thanks!

carl

jojumaxx: The Pixel 3a is complete, but old.

Maybe old, yet I received it in new original condition, the only problem, the video camera is not functional but should be functional with the next OTA-24 updates

Keneda

@jojumaxx said in Help me understand one basic question, please:

As an OS, focussing on privacy, shouldn't be the pinephone the first device to put effort in?
Additionally, isn't development on the pinephone easier?
Development should be much more efficient since there's no messing around with Android compatibility layers, proprietary hardware pieces, etc.

Only core devs could answer the best to this.
Maybe @Flohack wich is the most active on the forum ?

Anyway, about the age of some devices, that's not a problem regarding on how are working so well some of them like MX4 (wich by the way only lacks flashlight function in top menu, but works with utorch).

After all, second, long, life to devices is a requirement for the sake of the humanity.

Dicheable electronic like what is done with most electronic devices is a shame, a huge waste of ressources and energy.

I switched 7 years ago after a rapidly obsoleted first android smartphone (LG backtime "flagship" Optimus 3D, only one update, 6 months after purchase !) for my MX4 UT edition, and still happily enjoying it.

I switched primarily for the long lasting support, privacy was not my first target.

kugiigi

UT has been running mainly on Android-based devices for almost a decade. That alone makes it a lot easier and simpler to develop for them (I'm not saying it is easy and simple ). Pinephone on the other hand runs mainline kernel which is obviously ideal but needs a lot of things to develop. Main things would be cellular functions and power management which as far as I know, are still big issues on all distros for the Pinephone. UBports can't shift their focus on mainline devices and leave their millions of users using Android-based devices. However, there are efforts that would make it easier to have UT running well on mainline devices. Focal upgrade is a big start and also targetting to upgrade to recent Mir version would be big too since it will make wayland support better. UBports is a very small community, it's even a niche group among Linux groups. These things aren't easy to do. As much as it would be nice having the Pinephone Pro the flagship UT device, it doesn't make sense right now.

Lakotaubp

@carl That is correct please see latest Q&A blog https://ubports.com/blog/ubports-news-1/post/ubuntu-touch-q-a-120-3863

Lakotaubp

@jojumaxx There are new porting guidelines on the way that will help clear up some of your questions please see the Q&A blog https://ubports.com/blog/ubports-news-1/post/ubuntu-touch-q-a-120-3863 Also the move to 20.04 ubuntu base will mean some of the older devices currently on the list will also unfortunately no longer be supported.
As for the reasons why the PinePhone is where it is, it was hoped that it would attract new devs to work on the UT version this has not happend. For the tech details as to why developing UT for PinePhone is not staright forward you will need someone who knows the details and I do not want to give false information. There is a PinePhone group who may be able to help with your questions https://t.me/utonpine
For now our priority is the move to Ubuntu 20.04 so that for now is where the work is going.

Moem

@jojumaxx said in Help me understand one basic question, please:

There are so many incomplete builds and despite that, new phones get added to the list instead of completing those which are there already.

It might be good to realise that most porting is done by the community, not the core devs. If a volunteer steps up and adds a new port, then that is not taking away time or energy from core development; that's a community member deciding where to place their own efforts.

I do agree that it would be better to have fewer ports, but more complete ones. But that's hard to organise when you're working with volunteers.

On the other hand, most of us happily use ports that are not listed as 'complete'.

Emphrath

@jojumaxx Quick answer: it may look easier, but given UT development history, it's actually much harder

jojumaxx

Thank you for your answers. I think I get most of the things said. I also use Android phones with UT as daily driver. I am with you since the BQ E5 entered the market and don't get me wrong, I am happy with UT.

But the result is and will be incomplete builds running after Android and non-available phones. A smooth shift to Pinephone would surely be possible, by maintaining existing builds while moving towards the Pinephone.
Compared to UT the community builds available on the Pinephone are quite young.
I tried some of them and out of the box they do many things (for daily use) better than UT (freedom of installing reliable software, convergence, infos on lockscreen, app controls on lockscreen, control over headphones, night light, widgets,...).
I guess there would be time to address those things without the need to chase android compatibility and spend time to find out how to communicate with proprietary hardware.

If I wanted a new phone running UT, that's hardly possible since you don't find most of the phones any more or (e.g. Volla, Fairphone, Shift) are way too expensive (well, I get what I pay for concerning the Fairphone). So I have to choose between used phones with mostly non-replacable batteries.
I don't want to say that old phones are bad. On the contrary. I still love the BQ E5 and it is still in use. And that's one of the great things about UT. The long life of the phones which has the opportunity of reducing the environmental impact. But concerning phones with non-replacable batteries, their life comes to an end after years in use.

And btw, battery life of the Pinephone has improved a lot on most distros and is not bad at all any more.

Next, I can't rely on UT apps since I never know how long they will be maintained. Millions use Ubuntu on PCs with the possibility to install software and without blowing up their system and for sure, not all of them are pros. So why is UT so restrictive?
I am not the most experience linux user, for sure, but I tried different distros on the pinephone for months, with all the freedom you can have and I didn't blow up a single one...
How do you get new users with all those restrictions?
(I know, UT IS NOT Ubuntu).

The Pinephone is available and not too expensive. It has a removable battery and is user-repairable.
Therefore I would happily switch. And most people using UT are not average smartphone users, I'm sure they would understand.

Of course, the community should create builds for whatever they want, but the core team should focus on one phone which is done right. And due to the things I said, that's none of the old android phones. Maybe the Fairphone 4 could be it, but that's too expensive for some people even if its policy is worth it.

I understand now, I did not get things completely wrong. But I still can't understand the direction taken.

Probably it won't be too long until one of the Pinephone builds is daily-driver-ready. Then, there will be no reason to get a UT phone for those who want a linux phone (and that is, what UT is to "normal" people, it's not known as alternative mainline OS)...
In addition to that, there are things like the Pinetime and companion apps... Maybe I didn't realize it yet, but UT can't connect to (Android) smartwatches, yet, can it?
Since they run on Mobian (Debian) they would probably run on UT, too...

I really don't want to discredit UT, I use it myself everyday and I love it.
I'm just wondering about all that...

KNERD

Problem is drivers. The PinePhone itself is based on quite old hardware, and lacking of drivers. And nobody wants to write drivers for old hardware. The issue was resolved with former Android based phones by using the already available drivers.

PinePhone Pro is using much newer hardware so there may be hope for it.