@johndoe Thank you for the clarification. I really didn't know that.
At one hand I'm sorry that I use such harsh wordings, but on the other hand the post has 385 views over 10 months and its only after these harsh wordings I get some conversation on the subject...
Hatred is bad, but ignorance is far worse. And I don't think I'm the only one, I see people post feedback, suggestions or whatever, and it gets 0 replies the same way, and people just feel not need here, and don't see clear ways to contribute. Its a problem in general, but it does not justify my offensive behavior, I acknowledge that, and apologize for being rude, offensive, and dismissive of the community's achievements. I am sorry.

Ubuntu Touch appears to ignore 15+ years of Android UX evolution and established design standards like Material Design, which billions of users understand intuitively. Instead, it starts from scratch with Lomiri's outdated Unity8 paradigms from 2013-2016.

Android spent over a decade perfecting their UI year by year through user testing with billions of people. This isn't just aesthetics - it's psychology. People got used to these patterns. The whole world did.

Without being dramatically better than industry standards (and let's be honest - it's not), isn't this approach destined to remain a niche product? You have to make something twice as good or comply with standards. Otherwise you end up like Linux desktop was for decades - a niche geek thing that only recently started climbing out.

Why not adopt modern, proven UI patterns or at least offer Material Design theming to reduce friction for new users?

@Moem said in Battery life......:

Most of us manage it just fine

@Moem Most of you look every day at how your country is being torn apart by another country, and you are deeply connected to both of them so you cannot really hate either one of them in particular, and so you are considered an enemy in both of them? Most of you struggle to integrate in this f*ing life, where when you ask for help you get an answer that you cannot be helped, or people just don't care, or the best one "you should try harder"? Most of you try to integrate in a completely different country, with cultural and language barriers, afraid to go outside because you cannot interact with people? So for most of you life is like that too? Well then I'm really sorry for you and I hope things will get better for most of you! I'm sure you are doing the best you can, the way you are!

@Charly I cant use direct messeges, even to reply to someone, because of negative rep (its hard not to curse with sh***t like thats hindering day to day life, but ok). So im posting my reply here:
Hi, Charly! I'm Vova Thank you for acknowledging my questions !

@Keneda I posted the list of my questions there now. But I open separate posts for questions to open a discussion, hopefully, if there will be anyone interested to discuss. I will post them in general now.

Thank you!

Critical Questions About UBports Development Direction

Question 1: Why Continue Lomiri Instead of Adopting Existing Mobile DEs?

Why continue developing inherited Lomiri on Mir (which has pivoted to IoT/embedded) instead of adopting KDE Plasma Mobile or Phosh and contributing mobile-specific customizations upstream to benefit the entire Linux mobile ecosystem?

KDE has maintained Plasma desktop for 25+ years, created the Qt/Kirigami framework that scales perfectly between mobile and desktop, and continues massive improvements through 2024-2025 (they're basically saints of the FOSS community at this point). Wouldn't contributing to their mobile effort multiply your impact rather than maintaining a legacy Unity8 fork alone?

---

Question 2: Why Maintain Core Apps Instead of Using Existing FOSS Software?

Debian doesn't develop calculators, browsers, or music players - why does UBports? Given the maintenance burden (you're actively seeking maintainers for core apps), wouldn't it be more sustainable to adopt existing FOSS applications (GNOME Calculator, Firefox, VLC, etc.) and focus development efforts on OS-level integration and hardware enablement?

Mike Gabriel is now packaging Ubuntu Touch core apps FOR DEBIAN - doesn't this prove you could just USE Debian apps instead of maintaining your own?

---

Question 3: Why Create a Walled Garden That's Neither Android Nor Proper Linux?

The current architecture creates a walled garden: Android apps only work in Waydroid containers, Linux apps only in Libertine containers, and native Click apps are isolated. Meanwhile, standard apt packages can't be installed normally.

Look, I have no problem with containers as wrappers/isolators where the app is unaware it's in a container and just works. But your approach makes it impossible to run existing GUI apps that aren't factored into your containers - no display output, no sound, nothing! Apps need to be specifically adapted or they simply don't function.

Wouldn't adopting standard Linux infrastructure (Wayland + standard package management) allow both better Android integration AND native Linux app support, making Ubuntu Touch a true Linux phone rather than a third platform that's neither Android nor proper Linux?

---

Question 4: Why Not Focus on Universal Infrastructure Like Halium?

With Halium providing excellent hardware enablement that even Droidian uses, why not focus UBports' limited resources on perfecting the adaptation layer between Halium and standard Linux distributions (making your hardware work universally available), rather than maintaining a complete separate mobile stack?

When you contribute to Halium, everyone benefits. When you develop a custom browser, even you suffer from the maintenance burden while creating unnecessary competition with established browsers.

---

Question 5: Why Ignore 15+ Years of Mobile UX Evolution?

Ubuntu Touch appears to ignore 15+ years of Android UX evolution and established design standards like Material Design, which billions of users understand intuitively. Instead, it starts from scratch with Lomiri's outdated Unity8 paradigms from 2013-2016.

Android spent over a decade perfecting their UI year by year through user testing with billions of people. This isn't just aesthetics - it's psychology. People got used to these patterns. The whole world did.

Without being dramatically better than industry standards (and let's be honest - it's not), isn't this approach destined to remain a niche product? You have to make something twice as good or comply with standards. Otherwise you end up like Linux desktop was for decades - a niche geek thing that only recently started climbing out.

Why not adopt modern, proven UI patterns or at least offer Material Design theming to reduce friction for new users?

---

Question 6: Why Custom Containers When Wayland is the Proven Standard?

Wayland is now the proven, stable industry standard display server used by default in major distributions like Fedora and Ubuntu. It's secure, performs well, and standard Linux apps work natively with it.

Why maintain custom container systems (Libertine for Linux apps, Waydroid for Android) instead of using standard Wayland and focusing development on phone-specific adaptations like touchscreen support, high-DPI scaling, rotation, and battery management?

It should be vanilla Linux that just factors in that you use a touchscreen instead of mouse and keyboard, that your screen is small but high-DPI, screen rotation and such. Not making YET ANOTHER custom GUI forcing EVERY OTHER software maintainer to develop specifically for your GUI!

---

Question 7: Why Add Yet Another Package Manager to Linux's Existing Hell?

Linux already suffers from package manager fragmentation (apt, dnf, pacman, snap, flatpak) which discourages professional software development. For developers, packaging into ALL existing package managers is pure hell already - this is why Linux development sucks for devs and there's so little professional software on Linux.

Click packages add yet another format that developers must support. Even Mozilla, a major FOSS advocate, declined to maintain packages for Ubuntu Touch's system.

Wouldn't adoption of standard package management (allowing normal apt install) lower barriers for developers and increase app availability? How can Ubuntu Touch attract professional software when it adds to an already problematic fragmentation issue?

---

Question 8: Custom Browser - Really? How Many Years Until You Have Extensions?

Developing a custom browser (Morph) creates a maintenance burden and unnecessary competition with established browsers like Firefox/Chromium.

Even if you succeed, even if this browser works perfectly and you have resources to maintain it - how many YEARS do you think it will take the community to develop even HALF the extensions that Firefox/Chrome have? And extension developers would need to maintain Firefox extensions, Chrome extensions, Opera extensions, AND your custom browser extensions? REALLY?!

Meanwhile, Halium development benefited everyone (Droidian, postmarketOS, etc.) because it's universal hardware enablement. Why not focus limited resources on infrastructure that benefits the entire Linux mobile ecosystem rather than duplicating existing software that already works elsewhere?

---

Question 9: If You Want a Walled Garden, Why Not Just Use LineageOS?

If you want a walled garden but FOSS - use LineageOS. Yes, there are vendor blobs, but Ubuntu Touch doesn't free us from them! It uses the same blobs in Halium.

LineageOS at least gives you the entire Android app ecosystem. Ubuntu Touch gives you neither Android NOR proper Linux - just isolation and containers everywhere.

What's the point? What problem are you actually solving that LineageOS OR a proper Linux mobile DE (like KDE Plasma Mobile/Phosh on standard Wayland) doesn't solve better?

Why continue developing inherited Lomiri on Mir (which has pivoted to IoT/embedded) instead of adopting KDE Plasma Mobile or Phosh and contributing mobile-specific customizations upstream to benefit the entire Linux mobile ecosystem?
KDE has maintained Plasma desktop for 25+ years, created the Qt/Kirigami framework that scales perfectly between mobile and desktop, and continues massive improvements through 2024-2025 (they're basically saints of the FOSS community at this point). Wouldn't contributing to their mobile effort multiply your impact rather than maintaining a legacy Unity8 fork alone?

@bamboy360

1 out of 1
Error

You need 0 reputation to upvote

I UPVOTE

@Moem
I'm grateful that you noticed my post and took time to have a conversation with me. Thank you for that!

Exactly, it's a handful of devs, and I'm very frustrated to see that so much talent is wasted on maintaining:

Custom software Ubuntu Touch maintains:

• Morph Browser - Custom QtWebEngine browser without extension support (when Firefox Mobile exists with full extension ecosystem)
• Custom core apps: Calculator, Email client, Calendar, Clock, Gallery, Notes, File Manager, Music player, etc. - when mature FOSS alternatives exist (GNOME Calculator, Geary, GNOME Calendar, etc.)
• Click packaging system - alongside Snap support now (maintaining TWO packaging systems)
• Lomiri/Unity 8 shell - entire custom mobile UI/shell
• Ubuntu SDK - custom development toolkit
• Libertine containers - custom solution for desktop apps

Yes, I am impressed that people, the open source community, the UBports community in particular cracked VoLTE among other achievements like the 24.04 upgrade. These are REAL accomplishments.

But at the same time, the OS doesn't even ship a decent resource monitor. htop isn't even available by default, and users have to ask why it's not included. The preinstalled apps are mostly custom "core apps" like calculator, email, and file manager rather than proven system utilities that would help users understand what their OS is doing. Even shipping htop by default would show that devs understand what an OS actually needs.

But again, I see this over and over again in FOSS: people reinvent apps when such FOSS apps already exist, fork whole distros instead of making configuration sets/setup scripts, reinvent damn web browsers... And we all end up with thousands of half-baked apps, OSes, and projects.

Meanwhile, look at what Droidian and Mobian are doing: They use pure Debian packages, desktop Firefox with extensions, existing DEs (Phosh/Plasma Mobile), and focus their limited resources on making Linux work on mobile hardware. They don't waste time rewriting calculators.

And every time I try to draw people's attention to this pattern, everyone acts like it's nothing, like there is clearly no issue at all. But the user numbers tell a different story - Ubuntu Touch isn't growing, while projects that leverage existing FOSS infrastructure (like PostmarketOS with 700+ contributors) ARE growing.

I don't say this to attack - I say it because I genuinely wanted Ubuntu Touch to succeed, and it frustrates me to see talented volunteers burning time on problems that have already been solved by the broader FOSS community.

@Moem I did. No one even replied to my post about a year ago. Clearly the project maintainers to busy padding each others backs for making updated versions of calculator and browser. I dont know how many YEARS this project needs to understand what many other projects learned the hard way - DO NOT REINVENT Fing BROWSERS - its a dead end. And os makers making their own custom browser... instead of at least implementing decent keyboard suited for terminal (that is already exists in FOSS - unexpected keyboard).
I don't know where is it i can help here, when the whole building is on fire and it habitants acting as it is fine, making me a weirdo for pointing obvious flaws.

@uxes less corp f****** up version https:// claude . ai/public/artifacts/e810a24a-00f4-42ea-aed3-24a780428c2f

@uxes anyway f*** ubports. the project is led by snobs and the aggressive spam filter on legitimate posts proves it. TL;DR the project wastes resources reinventing the wheel with custom calculators and browsers while the core OS remains unusable.

@uxes thank to f******* "spam protection" that ubports forum uses. It was complaining about the post over and over again until i put it into claude with max sugarcoting/corptalk setting. What a waste of time for setting up such "spam" /censorship system

Acknowledged Accomplishments

The team has achieved impressive milestones:

• Ubuntu 24.04 LTS upgrade completed (September 2025)
• Waydroid integration shipping by default on Halium 9+ devices
• VoLTE support working on Mediatek devices
• Snap support enabled by default in 24.04
• Personal data encryption implementation
• Theme live-switching capabilities

These represent significant technical accomplishments by a volunteer-driven project.

Core Strategic Concern

The central issue appears to be resource allocation: development effort is invested in areas that may not address the primary barriers to user adoption.

1. Browser Development Challenge

Current situation:

• Morph browser maintained by small team
• No extension support (including ad blocking)
• Ongoing security update requirements
• Complex codebase maintenance burden

Historical context:
Only well-resourced browser projects have remained viable long-term (Firefox with Mozilla, Chromium with Google backing).

Alternative approach:
Consider adopting Firefox Mobile or Chromium-based solution with privacy enhancements, allowing browser development resources to redirect toward core OS improvements.

User impact: Privacy-conscious users expect basic functionality like ad blocking, which is currently unavailable.

2. Custom Packaging Systems

Current approach:

• Click packages (legacy)
• Ubuntu SDK (community-maintained)
• Recently enabled Snap support

Challenge: Maintaining multiple packaging systems with limited resources.

Alternative consideration:
Accelerate transition to established packaging formats (Snap, Flatpak) to tap into broader Linux ecosystem and reduce maintenance overhead.

3. Application Ecosystem Strategy

Current model: Custom applications for core functions (browser, calendar, email, calculator, gallery, music player).

Resource reality: Each custom application requires ongoing development, security updates, and feature parity efforts.

Distribution model comparison:
Major Linux distributions (Debian, Arch, Fedora) focus on packaging existing quality FOSS applications rather than developing custom alternatives.

Suggested approach:

• Package best-in-class existing FOSS applications
• Maintain only mobile-specific components (shell/UI, system settings, core integration)
• Contribute improvements upstream to benefit entire FOSS ecosystem

4. Waydroid Integration Opportunity

Current status: Waydroid ships by default on Halium 9+ devices (positive development).

Improvement opportunity:

• Include in first-boot setup wizard
• Deeper launcher integration for seamless app appearance
• Unified notification system
• Transparent file sharing

Strategic framing: Position as feature rather than workaround - "Run Android apps while maintaining full Linux system" similar to Wine on desktop Linux.

Comparison: PostmarketOS Approach

PostmarketOS demonstrates alternative strategy:

• 500+ device ports versus Ubuntu Touch's approximately 50
• 700+ contributors and growing
• Active funding (NGI grants, reserves over 40k EUR)
• Reuses existing components (Alpine packages, established desktop environments)
• Monthly development updates with community engagement

Key difference: Focus on making Linux work on mobile hardware rather than rebuilding entire application stack.

Migration Barrier Analysis

Significant adoption barrier: No migration tooling exists to help users switch from Android.

Current user experience:

1. Manual backup of Android device
2. Flash Ubuntu Touch
3. Manual restoration of contacts, messages, photos, app data
4. Time-intensive setup process

Comparison: iOS provides "Move to iOS" app for Android to reduce switching friction.

Proposed solution: Ubuntu Touch Migration Assistant

Android-side component (F-Droid app):

• Export contacts (vCard format)
• Backup messages (encrypted)
• Transfer media library
• Export browser data (bookmarks, encrypted passwords)
• Calendar and event export
• System settings (WiFi networks, Bluetooth pairings)
• App inventory for alternative suggestions

Ubuntu Touch-side component:

• First-boot migration wizard
• Automated data restoration
• FOSS alternative suggestions for Android apps
• Waydroid setup for essential applications
• Configuration preservation

Impact: Reduces primary psychological barrier to switching - fear of data loss.

Resource Allocation Suggestion

Current distribution (estimated):

• Browser maintenance: 15%
• Custom applications: 10%
• Multiple packaging systems: 10%
• Shell/UI: 10%
• Core OS (hardware, drivers): 25%
• Waydroid integration: 15%
• Major upgrades: 15%

Suggested focus:

• Hardware support and Linux core: 50%
• Shell/UI and convergence: 20%
• Waydroid integration polish: 15%
• Single packaging system: 10%
• Migration tooling: 5%

Convergence as Differentiation

Unique value proposition: Full desktop Linux environment accessible via phone form factor.

Competitive analysis:

• Samsung DeX: Limited to Android applications
• iPad: Cannot run desktop applications
• Other mobile Linux: Variable convergence quality

Opportunity: Position as "laptop replacement in pocket" with seamless transition between mobile and desktop modes.

Recommended Strategic Shifts

1. Adopt established browser solution (Firefox Mobile or privacy-focused Chromium)
2. Complete transition to single packaging format (Snap or Flatpak)
3. Package existing quality FOSS applications rather than maintaining custom versions
4. Polish Waydroid integration for seamless Android app compatibility
5. Develop migration tooling to reduce switching barriers
6. Focus majority resources on hardware support, power management, and driver development
7. Emphasize convergence capabilities as primary differentiation

Alternative Keyboard Recommendation

For terminal usage and power users, consider packaging Unexpected Keyboard as default option. It provides excellent FOSS keyboard with superior terminal support, aligning with Linux power-user demographic.

User Requirements for Reconsideration

As someone evaluating alternatives, these improvements would warrant returning to Ubuntu Touch:

1. Browser with extension support (or polished Waydroid browser experience)
2. Migration tool preserving Android data during switch
3. Refined convergence capable of laptop replacement
4. Optimized power management for extended battery life

Conclusion

This feedback stems from desire for Ubuntu Touch success rather than criticism. Recent achievements (24.04 upgrade, Waydroid integration, VoLTE support) demonstrate capability for significant technical accomplishments.

The suggestion is ruthless prioritization: focus on unique capabilities (full Linux on mobile hardware, convergence) while leveraging existing FOSS solutions for common problems (browsing, applications, packaging).

Current trajectory shows technical competence but may benefit from strategic refocusing on core differentiation rather than reimplementing solved problems.

The volunteer team has proven ability to execute difficult technical challenges. The question is whether resources can be concentrated on areas providing maximum user value and competitive differentiation.

---

Feedback from Linux enthusiast evaluating mobile alternatives

wow... This ubports project is really born dead. uninstalling this junk from my phone

postmarketos has a great bootstrap script, to get started, to not bloat main system, to automate rutine processes, guide on the porting process, etc.

Does anyone interested in adopting the script, or making own script for ubports bootstrap ? With text based gui and stuff

https://gitlab.com/postmarketOS/pmbootstrap