[HN Gopher] PureOS 10 is Released for all Librem Products
___________________________________________________________________
PureOS 10 is Released for all Librem Products
Author : fsflover
Score : 172 points
Date : 2021-11-22 15:02 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (puri.sm)
(TXT) w3m dump (puri.sm)
| bulka wrote:
| I for one love to get the news blasts about Librem 5 USA shipping
| while waiting for my Librem 5.
| fsflover wrote:
| By the way, PureOS is officially endorsed by the FSF [0], and
| it's the most popular OS among the endorsed [1].
|
| [0] https://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-adds-pureos-to-list-of-
| endorsed...
|
| [1] https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=popularity
| moffkalast wrote:
| So what is this thing actually based on? Can it run say
| Debian/Ubuntu packages? Running an obscure distro is usually
| more pain than it's worth, even for something like Raspbian.
| fsflover wrote:
| Yes, you can run Debian/Ubuntu software. It's mostly Debian:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29308071.
| hiq wrote:
| Debian without contrib / non-free would be RYF-compliant,
| that's basically the Trisquel distribution. Taking Debian
| and making it RYF-compliant is not really an achievement.
| Sure, it's nice, but it doesn't bring much to the
| ecosystem.
| fsflover wrote:
| It brings the convergence and commercial contributors.
| kaba0 wrote:
| Is the FSF's opinion on what constitutes "libre" really that
| meaningful when we look at the full picture?
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29286715
| fsflover wrote:
| The problem you mention about the microcode is indeed
| debatable. But concerning the OS, I think FSF has a perfect
| case: it should be 100% free. Note that Purism allow updates
| of proprietary microcode and firmware on their laptops and
| phones. Those are just not a part of PureOS.
| burnte wrote:
| I'm not particularly interested in the FSF's opinion until they
| fix some major, foundational issues with the organization.
| These issues are both the continued presence of RMS, who aside
| from his sexuality related comments is far too dogmatic,
| uncompromising, and inflammitory, but also the under-the-table
| glad handing of the top management.
| fsflover wrote:
| There is nothing wrong with RMS. After his return, the FSF
| got more members than ever. See also:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22299156.
| martin8412 wrote:
| Completely meaningless..
|
| Purism gets around the requirements for FSF RYF by loading
| proprietary firmware from a separate chip instead of main CPU
| fsflover wrote:
| Why does it matter that some chip runs proprietary software,
| when it has no way to access network or RAM? It's basically
| what FSF call "hardware". Of course it would be great to have
| it open, too, but that goes beyond requirements of RYF.
| ConanRus wrote:
| How is it different from vanilla Debian?
| zeta0134 wrote:
| I'm mostly ignorant of the mobile space, but how plausible would
| it be to get PureOS installed on an existing handset? I'm
| guessing the process is considerably more involved than an
| Android ROM, but how crazy are we talking?
| MayeulC wrote:
| Why not try postmarketos with the "PureOS" user interface,
| phosh?
|
| pmbootstrap will allow you to generate an image for your phone,
| flash it, set up a cross-compile environment and a chroot with
| emulation trough qemu for local testing, it's quite easy to
| use.
|
| https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Devices
|
| https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Installation_guide
| fsflover wrote:
| It's probably impossible due to proprietary drivers tied to a
| very old Linux kernel. More info: https://forums.puri.sm/t/is-
| there-a-way-to-put-pureos-on-ano....
| [deleted]
| nixpulvis wrote:
| Quick question (embarrassingly, I haven't looked into this yet
| myself), can I install this OS on my PinePhone?
| fsflover wrote:
| You can use the Phone Shell (phosh) developed by Purism in
| Mobian OS on the Pinephone (by default).
| nixpulvis wrote:
| Oh, phosh is developed by Purism... Shows what I know. It
| runs very poorly on the PinePhone and uses way too many
| animations and gestures for my taste. This is part of the
| reason I'm still not able to use the phone reliably.
|
| If there was a keyboard as good as Android or iOS options in
| terms of speed and accuracy, then I would expect to see good
| text based interfaces popping up. But the keyboards I've seen
| have still been pretty clunky.
|
| The SXMO image for Pine64-Arch [1] seemed pretty nice, but
| clearly still in development of the basic features.
|
| [1]: https://github.com/dreemurrs-
| embedded/Pine64-Arch/releases/d...
| jlkuester7 wrote:
| I did enjoy playing around with SXMO! Thought it did a
| great job of showing what a power-user interface on a
| handheld device could be like (when it is not just and
| Android/IOS clone). That said, there is more to do before
| it is ready to be a DD....
|
| That pretty much just leaves Phosh or Plasma for mobile
| DEs. IMHO Phosh is way more usable right now (particularly
| if you use the great Tweaks app developed for
| PostmarketOS).
| https://gitlab.com/postmarketOS/postmarketos-tweaks/
|
| (I believe a version of the Tweaks comes bundled with
| Manjaro Phosh and it can be built from source on Mobian
| Phosh too...)
| jeroenhd wrote:
| The Pine64 forum says the port to Pinephone is no longer being
| maintained:
| https://wiki.pine64.org/wiki/PinePhone_Software_Releases#Pur...
|
| Perhaps it's still possible if you can get the drivers and
| kernel from the right places, but if seems like you won't
| receive any official support on such a setup.
| MichaelBurge wrote:
| Is this Linux? This article or their website don't use the name
| Linux or Unix, but they're showing software like Gnome or KDE
| that are typically used on Linux.
| fsflover wrote:
| From TFA:
|
| > PureOS leverages the legendary security support from upstream
| Debian.
| MichaelBurge wrote:
| So they take security patches from Debian for some packages.
| I guess the kernel has to be Linux-compatible at least for
| that to be sensible, so it's probably Linux.
| fsflover wrote:
| It's definitely Linux. They upstream everything they can:
| https://puri.sm/posts/purism-and-linux-5-13/.
| topspin wrote:
| > the legendary security support from upstream Debian
|
| Anytime I do a vulnerability scan of a Debian image (updated
| via apt) using AWS ECR I get a laundry list of open issues
| including a few high severity CVEs. Meanwhile images based on
| Amazon Linux, Alpine or Oracle Linux are clear or have only
| few lower severity CVEs. I haven't looked at AlmaLinux
| recently but I'll need to soon; if it is anything like CentOS
| I expect the scan will be fairly clean.
|
| Whatever rationale there might be for this it is difficult to
| explain to stake holders. In any case 'legendary' seems a
| stretch comparatively speaking.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Debian is legendary for being the most widely used Linux
| distro, and as such it has the most support. And that is
| probably the most important thing, but security is not one
| of its strengths.
| oynqr wrote:
| Vulnerability scanners love false positives.
| alisonkisk wrote:
| PureOS makes an effort to avoid saying Linux. IMO it's a
| deceptive marketing ploy to take software from GNU/Linux
| without giving credit, and pretending to be something
| different, perhaps to attract lay people who are scared of
| "Linux".
|
| https://tracker.pureos.net/T749
| fsflover wrote:
| They avoid Linux, because it's GNU/Linux:
| https://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html. (FSF requires
| calling the OS GNU/Linux, not Linux, in order to get the
| endorsment.)
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| That's not what the parent commenter is saying at all.
|
| They avoid mentioning GNU/Linux in general.
| fsflover wrote:
| No, they don't: https://puri.sm/faq/what-is-gnulinux/.
| nsxwolf wrote:
| The quality of the displays Linux laptop users will tolerate
| always amazes me. Where's the HiDPI 16:10 IPS panels? Macs and
| PCs are delivering mini LEDs and OLEDs and all kinds of wonders.
| I can't imagine actually working on one of these.
| goodpoint wrote:
| Very high DPI is mostly a marketing gimmick, like it happened
| on megapixel count on cameras.
|
| Humans simply cannot see with such clarity without using a
| magnifying glass.
|
| Plus, it uses more energy and require more expensive GPUs.
| messe wrote:
| > Humans simply cannot see with such clarity without using a
| magnifying glass.
|
| You may need glasses. The difference between a 1920x1200
| panel, and a 2560x1600 display at 13.3" is slight, but very
| visible.
| zamadatix wrote:
| I suppose if you give a generous take on what "very high DPI"
| is this would be easily agreeable e.g. some phones pushing
| 600 DPI but for the devices in question they ship with ~160
| DPI displays though and that's nowhere near needing a
| magnifying glass to distinguish more clarity.
|
| It does suck some power though, same with high refresh. I
| used to have my laptop flip between 4k 200% DPI and 1080p
| 100% DPI based on whether I was plugged in. Usually ran games
| at 1080p. Important to use nearest neighbor scaling in that
| situation though or it'll get blurry.
| hello_marmalade wrote:
| As someone who is an avid Linux user for over a decade and
| MacBooks daily at work, this is 100% sour grapes.
|
| There is absolutely a visible difference between HiDPI
| displays and standard ones.
| FpUser wrote:
| Why on earth would I want waste money on 4K (or whatever their
| version is) laptop displays. Size of such display makes this
| kind of resolution useless. They work just fine at HD. When I
| want proper graphics I hook up large hires external monitors.
| fsflover wrote:
| It's just 14". Are you sure you need 4k?
| sovnade wrote:
| I don't see an issue with 1080 on 14", but having double
| pixel density (like retina) really makes using it a much
| better experience.
| jpetso wrote:
| Higher resolution means higher power consumption. If you
| follow laptop reviews, you'll see that getting a 4k panel
| will set you back at least an hour of battery consumption
| compared to standard 1080p, perhaps two or three depending
| on panel and battery size.
|
| I like high-res screens. But in general, the best course of
| action for a laptop is to get the lowest possible
| resolution that still works for you. Personally, I have a
| hard time seeing how an upgrade from 1440p-ish to 4K-ish
| makes any discernable difference on a 14" and how it
| justifies cutting into my power efficiency.
| FpUser wrote:
| Maybe for some. I personally would not pay a single extra
| penny for 4K on 14" and do not see much difference in
| practice.
| fsflover wrote:
| It's probably a question of price and what this tiny
| company is able to do with the suppliers. Comparison with
| Apple is not very fair.
| zamadatix wrote:
| Based on my dealings with replacing random laptop panels
| for family members a 4k panel tends to be well within $50
| of a 1080p one and supplied by the same
| manufacturers/distributers so I don't think it's related
| to price. Could very well have to do with keeping the
| supply chain and parts list simple though.
| megous wrote:
| Buying some leftovers from some supplier is likely not
| the same as securing a reliable supply for periodic few
| thousand unit sales for a few years.
|
| There's likely some sweet (sour) spot of "not enough"
| that the supplier will care, and "too much" to satisfy
| your demand from some stock leftovers.
| moffkalast wrote:
| It makes for a much slower experience more like, assuming
| the other hardware isn't up to spec. Which it definitely
| isn't, it being a laptop.
| zamadatix wrote:
| HiDPI != 4k
| diffeomorphism wrote:
| If the choice is between fullhd and 4k, then hidpi==4k.
| anuragsoni wrote:
| Dell sells XPS 13s with Linux preinstalled. The newer XPS has a
| 16:10 display, and they have hidpi OLED panels as an option.
| ActorNightly wrote:
| I am sort of generalizing here, but I bet that most linux
| laptop users are probably into development more than they are
| into multimedia. Syntax highlighting doesnt require fancy
| displays.
| dmitriid wrote:
| > Syntax highlighting doesnt require fancy displays.
|
| It does. Text looks better on high density displays.
| underscore_ku wrote:
| so funny how they hated on Canonical's convergence 6 years ago
| and now they say stupid stuff like this "true convergence is
| here" LMAO
| fsflover wrote:
| Any links?
| megous wrote:
| There's no one true convergence. :) Everyone can have their own
| definition. I guess Purism disagrees, if theirs is a true one.
| reginold wrote:
| I tried out a PinePhone recently. While I applaud the progress
| being made by the devs, PinePhone is still a ways out from being
| a daily driver.
|
| For those looking for a Linux phone, is Purism the only (close
| to) usable option?
| Arnavion wrote:
| The PinePhone is fine as a daily driver. If it's not good
| enough for you, that's fine, but don't generalize it as if it's
| something obvious and applies to everyone.
|
| Edit: People responding to me as if I said it's suitable as a
| daily driver for "most people" or "casual users" need to learn
| how to read. Not only did I not use either of those phrases,
| the context of the conversation was "those looking for a Linux
| phone", which neither of those demographics are.
| reginold wrote:
| Agree with the other respondents here. I love the PinePhone
| project and want them to succeed long term. That said,
| recommending it to causal users as a daily driver before it's
| ready causes more harm than good.
| abstract_put wrote:
| While I love the PinePhone, I think "still a ways from being
| a daily driver" is a more accurate representation than "fine
| as a daily driver" for most people's experiences. Some people
| are definitely able to daily drive the PinePhone, but e.g. ht
| tps://www.reddit.com/r/PINE64official/comments/qm1aut/pine...
|
| > Firefox: 8 seconds to open; ... and loads my start page in
| 21 seconds.
|
| It's constantly improving, and the PinePhone Pro seems
| similarly promising, but I'd be downright shocked if there
| triple digits of people daily driving it and enjoying the
| experience (outside the satisfaction of living on the
| bleeding edge).
| mastazi wrote:
| I have a PinePhone, with the distro that was recently
| selected as the "official" one, so it's supposed to be the
| most polished[1].
|
| I can't even do things as basic as placing an app icon on the
| home screen, and expect that it will still be there after the
| next reboot.
|
| So it is not a daily driver by any stretch of the
| immagination, regardless of what you mean by daily driver.
| Even if your idea of daily driver is "a feature phone would
| do", it's still not there yet (MMS not being fully working,
| most feature phones have that).
|
| I love the PinePhone and I want to see it succeed, I don't
| regret spending the money on it, but it is most certainly not
| usable as a daily driver.
|
| I can see some progress being made with every single update
| though, so in time it will eventually get there thanks to the
| community.
|
| [1] https://pine64.com/product/pinephone-beta-edition-with-
| conve...
| Arnavion wrote:
| >I have a PinePhone, with the distro that was recently
| selected as the "official" one, so it's supposed to be the
| most polished[1].
|
| It isn't. It's only pre-installed because there's a money
| deal involved with pre-installing it. Manjaro also did
| weird things like announcing they have working MMS when
| they didn't, and even outside of phones are considered to
| be a weird distro given their relationship with Arch. Going
| by the IRC channel, a lot of people install a different
| distro.
|
| >I can't even do things as basic as placing an app icon on
| the home screen, and expect that it will still be there
| after the next reboot.
|
| Known plamo bug that they haven't fixed in forever. I
| stopped using it for that and other reasons and have no
| idea why people like it. phosh works fine.
|
| Also, "things as basic as" implies that saving the
| positions of homescreen items is somehow more fundamental
| than everything else on the phone, and if they can't get
| this to work then obviously everything else must also be
| broken. It isn't, and it's not.
|
| >So it is not a daily driver by any stretch of the
| immagination, regardless of what you mean by daily driver.
|
| It makes and receives calls, sends and receives SMS,
| downloads voicemails, runs an up-to-date web brower, takes
| decent photographs of documents when a scanner isn't
| available, and allows me to ssh to my other machines.
|
| Turns out different people have different criteria for
| their daily driver phones. Shocking.
|
| >Even if your idea of daily driver is "a feature phone
| would do", it's still not there yet (MMS not being fully
| working, most feature phones have that).
|
| a) MMS matters to a few select countries in the world. But
| since you assumed everyone else has the same view as you
| about what a daily driver is, presumably you also assumed
| that everyone else finds MMS important.
|
| b) Dumbphones can't do three of the five things I listed
| above as my criteria for a daily driver.
|
| c) In the US, it's next to impossible to find a dumbphone
| that will continue to work in the next few years because of
| carriers shutting down everything that isn't 4G and 5G.
|
| Really, all this conversation thread has revealed is that
| people don't think there's a middle ground between a phone
| that's 100% usable by all 8 billion people in the world or
| a phone that's 100% unusable.
| kaba0 wrote:
| I mean, please be honest and say that the exception is those
| who find it usable as a daily driver.
|
| Compared to the "average" phone of a typical person (which
| depends on country), the pinephone is slower and less capable
| than that with worse battery life. I do own one, but this is
| the unfortunate reality. I could probably use one as a daily
| driver, but at that point I could probably just as well be
| without a phone, as taking photos is 2000s category and
| desktop firefox is not the most usable on a touch interface,
| let alone on such a weak CPU.
| m4rtink wrote:
| If you want a Linux distro running on a mobile phone with good
| build quality and decent specs there is Sailfish OS:
|
| https://shop.jolla.com/
|
| It unfortunately not fully open source, but other than that its
| a normal Linux distro (Qt, DBus, systemd, rpm, Python, etc.). I
| have been running it on my primary device for years so I would
| say it is useable. ;-)
| kaba0 wrote:
| The actually usable category would probably start at a
| bootloader unlocked android, and arguably the best "distro" on
| them is graphene os, which pays a ton of attention to security
| and privacy (while "gnu/linux" derivatives mostly couldn't care
| less about security unfortunately, but privacy without that is
| meaningless)
| bogwog wrote:
| What do you mean by a "Linux phone"?
|
| If you just mean a phone that can run a more traditional Linux
| distribution, you could look into Postmarket OS. There's a list
| of supported devices here:
| https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Devices
| megous wrote:
| One definition may be a phone that you can run current
| mainline Linux on (5.16-rc2) without much trouble or loss in
| functionality.
|
| Maybe with some patches on top to enable more functionality,
| but easily rebaseable, unlike some abandoned 3-6 years old
| kernel with milions of lines of changes that you have no way
| of rebasing on top of the latest Linux release, to be able to
| enjoy all the latest Linux kernel advancements.
|
| More strict definition would be that you can just boot Arch
| Linux ARM on it or other ARM distro out of the box, and all
| HW will be accessible and usable.
|
| Otherwise Linux phone is any old Android, because all of them
| run some hacked up version of Linux. :)
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| On an unrelated note, the video at the end demonstrating the new
| release it is awful. Awful in that anyone new to this who isn't a
| tech nerd will be very confused and put off purchasing.
|
| I know that purism does focus on the tech nerd audience - but
| with demos like that, good luck selling it to people who are just
| privacy-conscious who want a glorified, private flip phone
| replacement.
| iechoz6H wrote:
| There are many privacy-conscious non tech-nerd's who like
| nothing more than watching a video of some guy punching in
| different passwords on a phone.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| Yes - but Purism is really limiting their audience here,
| going for the tech nerd privacy conscious crowd.
|
| I know far more people in my life who are privacy conscious
| but not tech nerds, to the point they would consider buying a
| flip phone.
|
| If Purism marketed to them as being a superior private flip-
| phone alternative, they could sell far more phones.
|
| I guess what upsets me most is that Linux companies like
| Purism claim they want to build a 3rd ecosystem. You aren't
| going to get a 3rd ecosystem going with videos like that.
| moffkalast wrote:
| > going for the tech nerd privacy conscious crowd
|
| Which is kind of stupid frankly, most of those will rather
| install themselves something custom.
| fsflover wrote:
| Perhaps you will like videos here more:
| https://puri.sm/products/librem-5.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| Adding to my prior comment above: If I was trying to
| build a 3rd Ecosystem, this webpage is, even though
| better than the announcement, still pretty bad.
|
| The top half part is quite good. It's not presenting
| itself as modern or slick, but as privacy and freedom and
| transparency. It's a good angle, because hardware is not
| this phone's strength.
|
| The bottom half is where things go off the rails. "One
| Powerful GPU?" Don't gaslight me - anyone who has played
| a game on a smartphone looks at that and goes _oof_.
| HTML5 apps because you don 't have real apps? Blegh -
| especially because it says in the description "we plan
| to." The "competitive chart"? A huge mistake because it
| gives the competition absolutely no points - which makes
| it look obviously biased and completely lacking
| credibility. What other company makes "competitive
| charts" that don't acknowledge, at least somewhat, the
| good points about the competition?
|
| And then there's the availability part which is just
| really bad. _52 weeks?_ There will be two OnePlus phones,
| a new iPhone model, and a new Samsung model by the time
| that thing supposedly ships. Also, if you are really
| concerned about your privacy - you can 't wait a _year_
| being no more private than before!
| fsflover wrote:
| > "One Powerful GPU?" Don't gaslight me - anyone who has
| played a game on a smartphone looks at that and goes
| _oof_.
|
| It's the best mobile GPU working with fully free
| software. This is for the audience that cares about it.
|
| > HTML5 apps because you don't have real apps?
|
| But they do have real apps. Thousands of desktop Linux
| apps.
|
| > Also, if you are really concerned about your privacy -
| you can't wait a year being no more private than before!
|
| If you're in a hurry, consider this:
| https://puri.sm/products/librem-5-usa.
|
| Agree concerning the "competitive chart". Still it looks
| funny IMHO.
| megous wrote:
| > It's the best mobile GPU working with fully free
| software. This is for the audience that cares about it.
|
| T860MP4 in Pinebook/Pinephone Pro is similar or better,
| and also works with fully free software.
| seoaeu wrote:
| Wow, a lot of the copy on that page is pretty bad...
|
| "Parents: You will love the Librem 5 because it will
| allow you to communicate with your child, ..." -- Um, in
| 2021 people know what a phone is. Maybe skip to the part
| about why yours is better than the competition?
|
| "Lifetime updates that actually extend your phone's life"
| -- Do they think updates from other companies make their
| phones self destruct? Seems like they're alluding to
| specific scandals, but it is kind of odd not to link to
| them directly. Also comes across as really evasive to not
| say _how many years_ of updates they guarantee.
|
| "Real convergence means bringing your desktop computer
| with you wherever you go." -- Have you not heard of a
| laptop? Surely they could have started with an actual
| definition of what convergence means. Doesn't help that
| the rest of the paragraph is talking about how hard they
| worked shrinking the OS instead of why you'd want the
| feature. (Side note: operating systems are software so
| nothing special is needed to get one to physically fit in
| my pocket)
| fsflover wrote:
| > Do they think updates from other companies make their
| phones self destruct?
|
| Actually, it's the lack of updates from other companies
| making their phones self-destruct, as in they become
| unusable bricks. If the software is proprietary, you have
| no way of updating it yourself.
|
| > Also comes across as really evasive to not say _how
| many years_ of updates they guarantee.
|
| It's "forever". The devices run FLOSS, which means that
| even if Purism disappears, they will still get updates
| from the Linux community. My 12+-year-old laptop runs
| latest Debian.
|
| > Surely they could have started with an actual
| definition of what convergence means.
|
| It's linked: https://puri.sm/posts/converging-on-
| convergence-pureos-is-co....
| seoaeu wrote:
| Those are all reasonable arguments _which would have made
| sense to include on the product webpage._ That said, are
| there really that many people who are unhappy with the
| 5-7 years of support that a company like Apple provides?
| And is it really such a great strategy to emphasize a
| target audience of "people who want to keep their phones
| indefinitely instead of buying new ones"?
| fsflover wrote:
| I agree that the page could benefit from some
| improvements. However see this nice comment:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29309861.
|
| If all you care is longevity, then Apple is definitely a
| good choice. However, if you also value freedom, then
| your only other mainstream choice is Android, which is
| only supported for 3 years or less.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| That is better, but it doesn't negate my point that for
| non-tech-nerds, that announcement video of the new OS is
| pretty droll.
|
| I think my point is more along the lines that Linux
| people overestimate regular folk's interest in specs and
| details. But that isn't a winning strategy in the real
| world. Apple doesn't say how many megapixels their
| cameras have, or how many GBs of RAM their phones have,
| or the CPU clock speed, or the modem version - and the
| specs they do give, they don't advertise them out loud.
| Has Apple ever announced that we have a 2000xSomething
| OLED display in huge letters? No, it's a "Liquid Retina
| XDR" display and that's all most people need to know. If
| you really care, it's in the specs sheet.
|
| That's also not counting the actually _embarrassing_
| parts of this release. You just got a Camera app? In
| 2021, where phones are all about Cameras, you only got an
| out-of-the-box Camera app just now? (Maybe there was a
| camera app earlier - but the release video implies the
| camera app is all-new and wasn 't there before.)
|
| And despite not advertising specs - they sell just fine.
| If Apple got overly technical, they might sell less
| because it's confusing.
| pengaru wrote:
| > that announcement video of the new OS is pretty droll
|
| The whole post is droll, it's a big fat nothing-burger
| based on my casual perusal. Felt like they just needed to
| say _something_ about the version number changing on
| their distro.
| fsflover wrote:
| So you think that convergence is nothing? Perhaps you
| know some other vendor developing and selling phones with
| a desktop OS and desktop apps?
| megous wrote:
| Pine64. :)
| fsflover wrote:
| They're using Purism software mostly.
| megous wrote:
| I don't think so.
|
| Or is KDE now a Purism project? Or is Sailfish? Or sxmo?
| Or is p-boot? Or Linux kernel when no drivers overlap
| between the two SoCs? Or is crust? Or modem manager? Or
| all the work going into modem's kernel and firmware? Or
| is megapixels a purism project? Or debian/arch linux arm
| and all the packaging effort done there that many distros
| with pinephone support rely on?
|
| Pinephone software support is so much more than re-using
| PureOS components.
|
| Anyway your question was:
|
| > Perhaps you know some other vendor developing and
| selling phones with a desktop OS and desktop apps?
|
| And that doesn't require any PureOS components for full
| functionality. I run i3wm on my Pinephone for
| convergence. Easy to dual-boot into i3wm/arch linux or
| any other mobile distro for use on the go (mobile wayland
| based DEs have terrible performance with dual monitor use
| anyway, compared to plain old Xorg, and if anything is
| less needed is to fluidly swap between desktop and mobile
| UI, when reboot takes a few seconds anyway). Maybe some
| people really need that kind of convergence, but dual
| boot is enough for me.
|
| I've made this project to showcase that functionality to
| people, and to also show that there's not just
| PureOS/phosh
|
| https://xnux.eu/p-boot-demo/
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GjXQFnMHGY
| fsflover wrote:
| I actually said _mostly_. More than half users use phosh
| on their Pinephone AFAIK (including myself). I don 't
| argue that it's all there is to software on the
| Pinephone. There are definitely many other important
| pieces. But I don't like how they do not sufficiently
| acknowledge the Purism contributions IMO.
|
| Thank you for the p-boot, it's great and I'm using it
| myself. However I don't think that volunteer development
| is sustainable in the long-term and can lead to a usable
| (daily driver for non-nerds) GNU/Linux phone without
| commercial contribution.
| megous wrote:
| > I don't think that volunteer development is sustainable
| in the long-terms and can lead to a usable (daily driver
| for non-nerds) GNU/Linux phone without commercial
| contribution.
|
| That's interesting, but arguing that is not my goal in
| this discussion.
|
| You just asked what other comapny builds phones that can
| run dekstop OS and apps. Pine64 now has two. And IMO best
| uscease for that is without any PureOS components, just
| with straight desktop apps as existed before all this
| adaptation to smartphone form factor and touch interface.
| (It's my bias showing here, because I don't like nor use
| GNOME dekstop environement. Someone who likes GNOME may
| enjoy that PureOS putting some effort into making it
| possible to connect to a monitor and seamlessly
| transition into some convergent environement where their
| favorite apps will adapt to the current screen size.)
| seba_dos1 wrote:
| On your list, you have actually mentioned some projects
| that Purism has worked on, upstreamed patches to or
| financed development for things that also benefit
| PinePhone and other environments than GNOME/phosh. I'd
| add SDL and Wayland as other obvious examples, but
| there's likely more than what comes to my mind right now
| :)
| megous wrote:
| Hmm. :)
| pengaru wrote:
| Based on my understanding of how all this "convergence"
| stuff is integrated into GTK/GNOME apps; by explicit
| integration of libhandy, I _know_ this is a rather
| unsubstantial post because I didn 't see anything
| illustrating GTK+ apps I actually care about working
| "convergently". i.e. there was no demonstration of GIMP
| working in a phone/tablet touch interface being dragged
| into a desktop monitor seamlessly.
|
| So, what exactly am I supposed to be impressed by here?
| Maybe I need to revisit the post, since I did skim it
| pretty quickly.
| fsflover wrote:
| > GIMP working in a phone/tablet touch interface being
| dragged into a desktop monitor seamlessly.
|
| It's a desktop OS. If you connect an external monitor,
| you can use any desktop software, including GIMP. Works
| fine on my Pinephone with phosh.
| pengaru wrote:
| > It's a desktop OS. If you connect an external monitor,
| you can use any desktop software, including GIMP. Works
| fine on my Pinephone with phosh.
|
| How is that any different than literally _any_ other
| distro you can boot on a handheld?
|
| You're basically confirming my point; nothing especially
| "convergent" about pureos to see here, no?
| fsflover wrote:
| Not sure what you're talking about. Which other phones
| allow to run _unmodified_ desktop apps?
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| That's not what _convergence_ generally means, though. It
| means the same apps working across devices in their
| native formats.
|
| People aren't going to connect their phones to a monitor
| and dock to use GIMP. People _might_ use GIMP on their
| phones if it were available.
| fsflover wrote:
| Using full desktop apps with an external screen is
| definitely one part of the convergence. Another part, as
| you say, is a possibility to use desktop apps on the
| phone screen. There are many already working apps,
| including desktop Firefox and more:
| https://forums.puri.sm/t/list-of-apps-that-fit-and-
| function-....
|
| Upd: here is GIMP for you:
| https://social.librem.one/@eliasr/105589789106877911.
| m4rtink wrote:
| There is even the (proprietary) desktop like interface
| called DeX on Samsung devices - so there is definitely
| potential.
| pengaru wrote:
| > Not sure what you're talking about. Which other phones
| allow to run unmodified desktop apps?
|
| I'm not sure what _you 're_ talking about.
|
| We've had the ability to run unmodified desktop linux
| apps on handhelds since the bad old FPU-less days of the
| Sharp Zaurus.
|
| That's ancient history, and the whole f!cking promise of
| "convergence" AIUI is to make those applications _usable_
| in touch interfaces while being capable of transitioning
| seamlessly back into a desktop point-and-click
| interaction model when you dock the handheld.
|
| It's basically just an Android thing to be a linux-based
| handheld that actively obstructs running conventional
| desktop linux software. And even in that world you can
| coax it by adding the missing userspace bits, isn't there
| an android app that does just that (termux)?
| https://github.com/termux/x11-packages/issues/144
|
| Anyways, this feels like a pathetic strawman discussion
| at this point, I have better things to do today, cheers.
| chipotle_coyote wrote:
| The problem is that it doesn't do a super good job of
| explaining why non-nerds -- or arguably, nerds! -- should
| care about "convergence" in this regard, and how it
| improves over existing solutions. I mean, I'm over here
| in Apple-land, walled garden etc. etc. etc., but there
| are a _lot_ of applications that I have that exist in
| both macOS and iOS versions. This is true for most of
| Apple 's own apps, and actually true for a lot of third-
| party apps, too: in a practical sense, I've had
| "convergence" for many years now.
|
| Sure, these aren't usually _literally_ the same pieces of
| software running on the Mac, the iPhone, and the iPad.
| But from what I can tell, that 's not literally true on
| Purism, either, because the software is going to have to
| be recompiled for different CPU architectures. So now
| we're actually a lot closer to what Apple's been doing
| the last few years with Catalyst (and kind of slouching
| toward a grander strategy with SwiftUI). And again, not
| to put too fine a point on it, but I don't actually care
| in practice how much code is shared between the versions
| of my prose editor I'm running on the desktop and on the
| phone, given that they function the same way and edit the
| same files. (And share them all completely transparently,
| because they're using iCloud. Walled garden etc. etc.,
| but this is a real selling point.)
|
| Purism's real argument is free-as-in-freedom software.
| And that's a good argument. But I think they need to get
| a lot better at reaching the "casual but concerned"
| audience, and that means getting better at writing press
| releases and product announcements. Speaking as a
| professional writer, the PureOS 10 announcement page is
| _really, really bad._ You may not think it 's fair to
| judge the quality of the product based on that, and it
| isn't, but it's still going to happen. (Judging from the
| comments here they also need to get better at, well,
| shipping hardware, which is an even more serious problem,
| granted.)
| capdeck wrote:
| Every dollar that Purism puts into its products as opposed to
| marketing is a dollar well spent. Good products advertise
| themselves. But before they can advertise themselves they need
| to become good. Catch 22. Purism is on the right track though.
| martin8412 wrote:
| It's a $1200 alpha product. The amount of tech enthusiasts
| willing to drop that amount of cash is small, and probably
| already close to exhausted.
| user764743 wrote:
| Meanwhile people have waited years to get their Librem 5 [1] and
| are still waiting while being denied a refund after the company
| retroactively changed their refund policy [2].
|
| [1]
| https://old.reddit.com/r/Purism/comments/qsaap3/purism_is_a_...
|
| [2]
| https://old.reddit.com/r/Purism/comments/htqz2q/purism_wont_...
| MerelyMortal wrote:
| But they are getting them. I just got mine last month. It was
| almost a 4 year wait (!), but it is worth it.
|
| I hope the company catches up while they continue to make the
| Linux computing world better. Being aware of their faults is
| important, but trying to drag them through the mud does a
| disservice to everyone.
| justin66 wrote:
| > It was almost a 4 year wait (!), but it is worth it.
|
| _Linux is only free if your time is worthless_
| eptcyka wrote:
| I've paid for mine, still haven't received it.
| fsflover wrote:
| > It was almost a 5 year wait (!)
|
| The phone was crowdfunded in September/October 2017, so it's
| 4 years.
| MerelyMortal wrote:
| Thank you for correction, I updated. I just know it was a
| long time, but I have patience and willingness to support
| the project.
| user764743 wrote:
| I've followed the company for years and sometimes observing a
| company's behavior with costumers will tell you a lot more
| about them than pretty blog posts. I mean, let's not forget
| how they lied about the phone being able to make calls for
| months while it couldn't. All I'm saying is I invite others
| do dig deeper into the company, I don't think they are as
| transparent as they claim.
| seba_dos1 wrote:
| For months? The first batch (shipped to people who opted
| in) didn't yet have automatic call audio configuration in
| software, but it worked when configured manually and a
| software update that made it work out-of-box came in 2 or 3
| weeks afterwards IIRC (Nov 2019). At that point phone calls
| worked on the devkit for many months already.
| fsflover wrote:
| I also followed the company for years. They are much more
| transparent than any other company, although still not 100%
| transparent. All software development proceeds in the open.
| All code is free and upstreamed. Developers and employees
| reply to questions on the public forum.
|
| They're having a hard time with the funds now, so they
| probably have to delay refunds in order not to go bankrupt.
| Recently they got some inestments, so it should get better:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27949435.
| kbenson wrote:
| > They're having a hard time with the funds now, so they
| probably have to delay refunds in order not to go
| bankrupt.
|
| That right there is a red flag. Sometimes companies don't
| make it. I've never heard of a story where a company put
| themselves above their duty to their customers in a way
| such as that which didn't lead to massive problems down
| the road.
|
| I sincerely hope your interpretation is incorrect.
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| Companies have to develop a product and then recoup the
| R&D from sales. If it costs $X to do the R&D and your
| margins are $M, you recover them after N = $X/$M sales.
|
| But then you need $X before you can make even the first
| sale. One way to do that is by taking pre-orders. Then
| you have money for the R&D before you have a product to
| ship.
|
| The problem comes if the product is late to market and
| then the people with pre-orders are unhappy. To give them
| a refund you have to have sold N products -- not
| including the one they're canceling -- or else you don't
| have the money because you already spent it on R&D.
|
| As long as you eventually sell N products, you can
| eventually give the refund, but you might not be able to
| do it yet. And, of course, if you never sell N products,
| you're in trouble.
| kbenson wrote:
| I understand this, and I understand the reasoning. I've
| just never seen it turn out well. That can definitely be
| a sort of survivorship bias, where I haven't heard of
| most the companies that did it and succeeded and that
| didn't have later problems where it came to light.
|
| I just think that once you've accepted money for a good
| or service and haven't delivered that good or service,
| and the person wants their money back, you should be
| giving that money back to the degree you're capable. That
| it's inconvenient and may actually lead to the
| dissolution of your company or result in people not
| getting all their money back isn't really relevant. Make
| a case to the people and see if they are willing to
| accept it or alternatives (such as waiting a bit for more
| of their return), but don't make decisions on their
| behalf when your duty to return their money is clear.
| capdeck wrote:
| Got mine two months ago - original backer. Last year Purism
| offered backers to choose the batch - I replied - put me in the
| latest one possible, because I wanted most up-to-date hardware.
| I could have gotten my device in May if I would have chosen an
| earlier batch.
|
| Also moved twice in last 4 years and Purism accidentally sent
| it out to old address. When I noticed that and asked for help -
| they stopped the package and re-sent me a new one to the new
| address.
|
| Very happy with the device. Very happy with service and
| support. Freedom is well worth waiting for.
| martin8412 wrote:
| They may have sold it as if you had a choice of which batch
| to get. You did not. Evergreen is the only batch sent to
| customers
| caboteria wrote:
| 4 years and counting for me, and my estimated shipping date
| (i.e., no sooner than date) is "1st Quarter 2022".
|
| One note: according to the email they sent to crowdfunders in
| September, they've changed their policy back to what it was
| originally and will now issue refunds.
|
| > If you would like us to go ahead with refund, we can now
| allocate your parts to another order and refund your Librem 5
| product in accordance with the policy.
| notdarkyet wrote:
| Their website clearly states that the Librem 5 USA ships in 90
| days when ordered: "Now Shipping! Place your order now, get in
| approximately 90 days!". I had ordered mine in November of
| 2020. One year later and still no device delivered.
|
| This either seems like a lie or they are having issues managing
| a proper queue.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-22 23:01 UTC)