@AppLee In times of COVID19 isolation these news made my day

@grandpa

Why would UbPorts foundation with it's stated objective of respecting user privacy and open source software even remotely consider cooperating with the most intransparented IT-company in the world, bound to the regulations of an authoritarian anti-democratic regime ?
This would be the end of UbPorts foundation before it even has fully taken off.
This also nicely demonstrates the importance of being a foundation registered under German law because any activities in such direction could be in conflict with the foundation by-laws and objectives.

Related to GizmoCicken's questions. The roll out of the first end-user version of pine phone in March will likely create a high demand for UBTouch and bring in new users which is great for the project. These new users will, however, also require resources and attention e.g. download server capacities for the store, attention in the forum etc.. Does UbPorts foresee any capacity shortages (IT infrastructure as well as man-power) to handle these requests (I remember having read a post form Jan asking for assistance with server resilience issues) ? Sounds like a luxury problem but are we at risk of becoming a possible victim of our success ?

@Opolork Under "System Settings" click on "about" and the storage space is displayed. For more detailed information open terminal and type "df -k" it will display a list of all partitions and the percentage of space used on each.

This is a great thread, one of the kind why I value and support this community.
I think part of the problem is the way how UbPorts communicates the "big picture" strategy and the other part is the "mindset" of many new UT users.
For someone devolping UT this path forward is reasonably clear, even if it means taking backroads and dealing with unexpected obstacles. For many new users coming from Android or iOS, UT may be conceived as a mediocre alternative for the seemingly "all inclusive and free" (please note the hyphens!) solution to their problems. These users may be better off to continue using android or iOS to meet their needs and I think it is fair to communicate this directly (e.g by closing such threads).
Then, there is the group of enthusiastic users who are willing to change their mindset and leave the "dark side" without having any clue of software development on smart phones etc. (I am one of them) and may only be able to contribute to the project financially but not in terms of skills or time. For these users a less defensive, off-putting attitude to these questions may be more encourraging. I am using UT as my daily driver on FP2 and N5 and I am typing these lines on my new PineTab, which I received yesterday. I think it is a wonderful piece of community built hard- and software and already meets 75% of my personal use case specifications (despite e.g. a known copy past bug in the file manager), which is more than I expected. I received an OTA to version 5 today but I have no clue which issues were supposed to be fixed (relative to version 4) so that I could specifically test them (same for the pine phone). I think here we are missing an opportunity to get potentially interested enthusiastic but unskilled new users involved.
I understand the decision to not use the milestones on github for OTA releases to take of perceived pressure of the dev team but some "relative" timeline or priority list, understandable for non-dev users, may be helpful to frame expectations of this (apprently growing) part of the user community and avoid many posts on this topic in the forum.

@makeixo As @Flohack pointed out already: UbPorts cannot collect money on behalf of a 3rd party (the developer), at least not without a bulk of legal implications, not to speak of time, resources and manpower to invest in setting up such a scheme. I think it should already be possible for developers to upload free trial version on OpenStore which need be unlocked once the trial period has exdpired. So the user would have to buy some form of license code from the dev and likely provide something like a device ID. But this is then a business between the end user and the dev. I dont´t see why and how UbPorts should be involved in such a deal as a broker. UbPorts should invest resources and manpower in what they are doing best, which is OS development.

@Elpibe I have the exact same problem with my 2015 Subaru audio system and posted it under a different thread some time ago. This pairing problem seems - at least in part - also be caused by the Subaru audio system and not only by UBtouch. I had no problems pairing my FP2 or N5 with audio systems in several rental cars from different companies (Nissan Micra, Hyundai Accent and Ford Mustang) with music player, contacts and phone calls mostly working (some funny behavior on the Nissan when accepting incoming calls). I will try htc_tatoo's command line solution.

I tried to pair my Nexus 5 with my car's (Subaru Forester) audio system via Bluetooth. The phone detects the audio system but there is no dialog box to enter the PIN from the audio system in the Bluetooth setup. The audio system thus refuses the connection request. Is there any work-around for this ?
Thanks.

@kcir No, this is not normal. Same issue, sales@ubports.com way to slow to respond (> 1 month in my case). Not sure what the problem is but I would expect a faster response if e.g. a client's credit card was charged after a web site crash when no order was placed.

@Lakotaubp Thank you very much for trying to connect. I have also sent another email to sales@ubports.com and still have not heard anything back. I am wondering whether anybody reads these emails which are sent to this address ?

@guru same thing here and my credit card was charged three times.awaiting response from sales.

Addendum

Just received the confirmation email and the order has been processed. Despite the error message from above.

Just tried to order something from the store. Once I finished paying with my credit card, I get the following error:

Internal server error
("Unable to post message, please configure the sender's email address.",' ')

My shopping cart is still listed as full and I have not received any order confirmation by email. I have not yet checked if the amount was charged to my credit card, but it looked like the payment went through (after entering the 2FA code). I did not use a user account to order.
Any idea what went wrong ?

This is a great thread, one of the kind why I value and support this community.
I think part of the problem is the way how UbPorts communicates the "big picture" strategy and the other part is the "mindset" of many new UT users.
For someone devolping UT this path forward is reasonably clear, even if it means taking backroads and dealing with unexpected obstacles. For many new users coming from Android or iOS, UT may be conceived as a mediocre alternative for the seemingly "all inclusive and free" (please note the hyphens!) solution to their problems. These users may be better off to continue using android or iOS to meet their needs and I think it is fair to communicate this directly (e.g by closing such threads).
Then, there is the group of enthusiastic users who are willing to change their mindset and leave the "dark side" without having any clue of software development on smart phones etc. (I am one of them) and may only be able to contribute to the project financially but not in terms of skills or time. For these users a less defensive, off-putting attitude to these questions may be more encourraging. I am using UT as my daily driver on FP2 and N5 and I am typing these lines on my new PineTab, which I received yesterday. I think it is a wonderful piece of community built hard- and software and already meets 75% of my personal use case specifications (despite e.g. a known copy past bug in the file manager), which is more than I expected. I received an OTA to version 5 today but I have no clue which issues were supposed to be fixed (relative to version 4) so that I could specifically test them (same for the pine phone). I think here we are missing an opportunity to get potentially interested enthusiastic but unskilled new users involved.
I understand the decision to not use the milestones on github for OTA releases to take of perceived pressure of the dev team but some "relative" timeline or priority list, understandable for non-dev users, may be helpful to frame expectations of this (apprently growing) part of the user community and avoid many posts on this topic in the forum.

@onehuman If you are only interested in file transfer, what works well for me is the wifi-transfer app from openstore (https://open-store.io/app/wifitransfer.costa). It sets up your phone as a temporary ftp-server with single-use password and you can connect with your preferred ftp client (e.g. Filezilla) from your PC.

@augustblake using UT since 2018. First on N5 now on FP2 and PinePhone. N5 and FP2 are - for my use case - daily driver ready except for the bluetooth issue with most car audio systems (not being able to take and answer calls hands-free), so for me this are the 10% missing. PinePhone for me, has quite a way to go to become daily driver ready.

@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.

@C0n57an71n Very interesting idea, love it , but as simple as it sounds implementation might be tricky. How would one make sure that devs get paid at some point, that the code remains open source.
I don't think this would work without a somehow enforceable contract between the solicitor of the app and the dev. At which point would the dev get paid ? Once the app is in OpenStore ? What if the dev does not get paid ? Who would remove the app from OS ? At this point it might have been downloaded many times already. Who would pay for maintenance of the app, updates etc....
I am sure that this would work out in good faith for most of the community members but disputes (satisfaction of the solicitor, criteria for fulfillment of app specs etc.) will arise and who would then be the arbitrator ?
These kind of "bounty" schemes do exist, I am not sure however how potential disputes would be addressed.