[HN Gopher] The Pine Formula
___________________________________________________________________
The Pine Formula
Author : cunidev
Score : 115 points
Date : 2022-08-03 10:56 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (tuxphones.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (tuxphones.com)
| bArray wrote:
| > This product family will never run Linux, as developers will
| need to develop a new firmware from scratch. This is obviously
| not a problem for the earbuds, but a big limitation for the
| player
|
| Perhaps not Linux, but I suspect there would be a place here for
| a Unix-like platform that feels familiar. If for example we could
| get wide-adoption of something like the JVM or wasm3 [0] on these
| platforms, code could become quite portable, despite wildly
| different architectures.
|
| For example, Apache's NuttX [1] (that I first learned from
| Lupyuen [2], a guy making great progress working with Pine64
| products).
|
| > Processing wise, this chip is well sufficient for TWS
| headphones, but very inadequate for an audio player. It will not
| drive a good screen, it nor run high-resolution flacs or
| (probably?) support a high-quality, high-bandwidth codec. In
| fact, a first generation iPod Nano (retailing for $149 in 2006)
| had 16MB RAM, so over 16 times what the PinePod would offer. In
| fact, even the features of any custom firmware are limited from
| so little memory
|
| I wouldn't call it time just yet. Displays can be interacted with
| intelligently (to reduce pixel bandwidth) and ultra high quality
| audio codecs offer diminishing returns, especially when you don't
| have a DAC or headphones to make the most of them.
|
| My advice to Pine64 would be this:
|
| 1. Consolidate your product lines. The Pinebook is just a slower
| Pinebook Pro, just go with the Pinebook Pro. The PineTab is just
| a Pinebook without the keyboard, again I would consolidate this
| with the Pinebook Pro and just make the keyboard detachable.
|
| 2. The SBCs should just go straight into the device, thus
| creating a clear upgrade path for future products. If you want a
| PineBook Pro running Quartz, just swap the boards (of course with
| daughter boards for USB expansion, display driver, power, etc).
|
| 3. Don't be afraid to kill off products. The Pinebook and PineTab
| have never seen a new release. The PinePhone appears to be taking
| a back seat to the PinePhone Pro. The PineCube is basically DoA
| due to the processing power struggling to process the camera
| image.
|
| More generally, try to do fewer things, but do them well.
|
| [0] https://github.com/wasm3/wasm3
|
| [1] https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/
|
| [2] https://lupyuen.github.io/articles/sensor
| nsajko wrote:
| > Perhaps not Linux, but I suspect there would be a place here
| for a Unix-like platform that feels familiar.
|
| It's just a tiny microcontroller, how could it run a Unix-like?
| mfsch wrote:
| It's worth noting that the quoted article was published on April
| 1 [1]. While the PineBuds were confirmed in the following
| community update [2], the PinePod plans are only mentioned in the
| description of the development board as a "platform for earbuds
| and a digital audio player". It seems to me that the plans for a
| future DAP are still quite nebulous and I wouldn't give that much
| weight to the wording used in the April Fools' announcement.
|
| [1]: https://www.pine64.org/2022/04/01/introducing-the-
| pinebuds-a... [2]: https://www.pine64.org/2022/04/15/april-
| update-no-more-unico...
| cunidev wrote:
| I would not say the PinePod project is that nebulous, it has
| been officially proposed in the "serious" post, and even
| discussion internally regarding software support is already
| being done apparently
| schmorptron wrote:
| I wish MediaTek open-sourced their drivers so we could see a
| PineBook Pro with a relatively capable processor, that thing with
| a higher res screen and a Dimensity 9000 would be amazing.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| > Most of the competition, at this point, is doing it: SHIFT,
| Purism, Framework, MNT Research, and Raspberry Pi are moving
| towards more openness, not less, as time passes.
|
| I'm happy to consider that Pine should be doing better, but in
| what world is Raspberry Pi doing any better? AFAIK they still
| require closed blobs to boot, and it was my understanding that
| the company doesn't even consider this something to fix.
| selfhoster11 wrote:
| The "killer app" of the Pine formula is that it reliably gets
| brand-new hackable devices into the hands of the community at an
| affordable price point. A PinePhone is $150 + a whole lot of
| shipping and import taxes, but many alternatives are:
|
| - more expensive - the SHIFT6mq is 600 EUR, the Librem 5 starts
| (!) from EUR 1600 (!!!), the Fairphone 4 starts at 580 EUR. No
| way in fucking hell is anyone going to be buying these unless
| they are already in a well-paying tech job - which is
| automatically exclusionary towards all tech-curious teenagers
| worldwide, and working adults from lower-paid countries. Do we
| seriously want open(-ish) tech to be a toy only for the rich? I
| sure as hell don't.
|
| - unreliable in production - open hardware is often (more often
| than not?) a limited-edition item. If you are there to order from
| the initial batch (or if you're lucky, the second batch), great -
| you can buy it. But discover it a few months/years too late, and
| the product is so unobtainable from the secondary market that it
| might as well have never existed.
|
| - difficult to purchase across territories - USA-based (or
| alternatively, European-based) hackers get to enjoy having an
| open product, whereas the rest of the world merely gets to lick
| the shopfront window from across the ocean.
|
| - less hackable - Can you flash an open firmware on any given
| Android phone? Anyone's guess. Can you do so for any random Pine
| product? Most likely, yes, even if it contains blobs. User
| freedom-wise, blobby but otherwise unrestricted firmware is heck
| of a lot better than any restricted firmware.
|
| - not brand-new - hardware ages both in terms of specs (less
| powerful than the mainstream non-open alternatives - this is IMO
| part of what killed OpenMoko so badly), and in terms of actual
| hardware PCBs, batteries, screens etc aging slowly until it can
| no longer reliably operate/operate within spec.
|
| I will be the first to criticise the fact that Pine seems to be
| increasingly leaning on the community to produce working
| software/firmware for their products, but I will also be the
| first to commend them for their ability to deliver open(-ish)
| hardware to more than just the globally well-off with cash to
| burn on their ideals (something that not all of us can do).
| nsajko wrote:
| Don't know whether there was an update to the fine article, but
| the article currently seems to mostly refute your points.
|
| > Pine formula is that it reliably gets brand-new hackable
| devices into the hands of the community at an affordable price
| point
|
| I guess this depends on the definition of _hackable_ , but the
| revelation that I got from the article is that Pine actually
| doesn't operate that way, they just sell the cheapest hardware
| they can instead of "hackable" hardware.
| cunidev wrote:
| The points above are indeed valid, but for example there is a
| line to be drawn between PinePhones and their secondary
| products.
|
| Also, near the end it does explain/justify the need for a
| compromise in "libreness", as essentially anyone would agree on
| given the extraordinary price of "pure libre" hardware.
|
| The main point in my opinion is not pushing for radical
| hardware, but rather accommodating the needs of developers and
| end users in a "libre-ish" lineup.
| MartijnBraam wrote:
| The alternative is just using one of the discarded phones most
| people already have in their drawer somewhere with
| postmarketOS. If you're in luck it's one of the well supported
| chipsets
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| Do the phones in most people's junk drawers have unlockable
| bootloaders?
| bob29 wrote:
| yes or buy one on ebay for a fraction of the price of some
| libre maker flavor of the month soon to be ewaste
| CameronNemo wrote:
| Many second hand phones go for <100$ and are unlockable.
| zajio1am wrote:
| > I will be the first to criticise the fact that Pine seems to
| be increasingly leaning on the community to produce working
| software/firmware for their products
|
| Isn't this a double standard? Linux is most commonly used on
| PCs and i do not think that PC/mainboard manufacturers are big
| into producing Linux (or other) OS/software for their products,
| they left it on wider ecosystem.
|
| Pine64 just use the same approach that use PC/mainboard
| manufacturers, instead of 'consumer appliance' approach that
| use phone manufacturers.
| dmitrygr wrote:
| > It will not drive a good screen, it nor run high-resolution
| flacs or (probably?) support a high-quality, high-bandwidth
| codec.
|
| What is this drivel? 900KB of RAM is plenty for all of the above
| and then some, if you know how to use it. An MP3 decoder's
| runtime footprint can fit into 16KB of RAM, aac needs just a bit
| more. A ui can be made of constant image pieces that never need
| to live in RAM, leaving ram only for things like rendering text.
|
| Years ago i made an mp3 player with an OLED screen that properly
| rendered English, Cyrillic, and accented latin characters in a
| proportional font, all on a cortex-m3 microcontroller with 64KB
| flash and 32KB ram.
| sneak wrote:
| > _Some days ago, I was sitting in a dark, neon-tinted,
| pleasingly nerdy computing club in Berlin, with several Linux
| hackers around me. Most of them either had a PinePhone or a
| PinePhone Pro, someone else had Librem 5s plugged into their
| laptop as they tested out new software._
|
| I wish C-Base (the venue in question) were "pleasingly nerdy"
| enough to ban smoking indoors. Berlin is so maddeningly stuck in
| the uncivilized past in this regard; I would love to participate
| in these events and communities but cannot do so until this
| problem is fixed. There seems to be no will to do so in Berlin.
| c0balt wrote:
| Please keep cbase (not ccc, standalone hackerspace) seperate
| from all hackerspaces in berlin. Spaces like xHain have banned
| smoking indoors while also being a lot more inclusive.
| cunidev wrote:
| This. While C-base was a cute space architecturally, as a
| newcomer I did not find it terribly welcoming.
|
| For one, there was an interesting elitarian aura around
| "members", versus us common "visitors", and the staff (very
| politely) asked me not to be seen around with a camera on my
| neck, although I was there with other ~8 people who I
| personally knew, and only took the "tunnel" picture at the
| top of the post.
| tunap wrote:
| Crazy they allow it. Even I, a dirty smoker, know not to smoke
| around electronics.
| miduil wrote:
| I thought C-Base banned smoking after the Ordnungsamt showed
| up?
|
| > There seems to be no will to do so in Berlin.
|
| X-Hain is your friend, it's small but people smoke outdoors.
| goethes_kind wrote:
| What do people with Linux phones do about banking apps? All my
| banks force me to do online banking through an app (at the very
| least used as a security token generator). I would really love to
| have a Linux phone but I'm stuck with Android because of that.
| ge96 wrote:
| Wonder could you write one with Plaid.
| kn0where wrote:
| In the US in my experience, it seems like all banks rely on SMS
| or email-based 2-factor. I'm sure that will change but our
| financial institutions are perpetually behind the times. So at
| least for American users, the lack of banking apps isn't much
| of an issue.
| cunidev wrote:
| If SafetyNet checks are not a concern, several people used
| banking apps inside Android runtimes (like Waydroid) on their
| Pinephones. Clearly not ideal for everyday operation, but for
| occasional tasks it does the job decently well and the overhead
| is low
| mastazi wrote:
| Personally I don't do online banking on the phone, but your
| mileage may vary depending on your needs and how often you are
| away from a desktop.
| tpoacher wrote:
| Yes, it's insidious isn't it.
|
| I wish I could say the answer is to find a bank that doesn't do
| it, but there don't seem to be any. The whole thing verges on
| apocalyptic.
| mastazi wrote:
| Personally I hadn't heard about this until a minute ago,
| which means that luckily there are banks that don't require a
| mobile app...
| bitL wrote:
| No good solution. Perhaps a cheap Android for $30 just for
| those apps... Maybe running Android in a VM inside a computer
| would work for that?
| narag wrote:
| That's what I plan to do.
|
| But $30?
|
| ~100EUR is the minimum I've found. Do you have a link? Or
| maybe you meant non-Android...
| kop316 wrote:
| I guess it depends on how much you use it?
|
| On the Linux phone itself, you can try out Waydroid
| https://waydro.id (and it seems to work on regular Linux too?).
|
| I also think there are Android Distros you can install in a VM
| as well (though I admit I have not tried it).
| mhd wrote:
| Interesting to hear this. I'm getting a bit annoyed about too
| much reliance on iOS/Android apps myself, but at least for most
| banks around here I still have the option of alternatives. I do
| miss my printed out lists of verification numbers, but I could
| pay for SMS delivery or get one of those smartcard readers.
|
| Which, now that I looked it up, seem to be a German
| peculiarity.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transaction_authentication_num...
|
| Another annoyance lately is traveling. I need two apps for the
| car sharing services, two for public transit, maybe another
| handful for scooters/bike rental etc.
| afandian wrote:
| In what country? In the UK I've never been forced (or even
| encouraged) to install the banking app. Which is lucky, becuase
| I'd sooner switch bank.
| tpoacher wrote:
| Also in the UK and have no idea what you're on about.
|
| All major banks require app-based authentication. Many also
| offer sms as an alternative, but this is being phased out
| across the board. A handful maaaay still allow you to do
| banking via physical cardreader verification if all else
| fails (and you have no record of having ever installed an
| app).
| mastazi wrote:
| Wait a second, (I'm curious because here in Australia this
| thing doesn't seem to exist) is this limited to their
| mobile site (you need app in order to log in on your
| phone), or you actually need to have a phone with you when
| you access online banking on your desktop? If it's the
| latter, that's crazy, what if you don't have a smartphone?
| That would be a complete deal breaker for me, I would
| switch to a different bank
| afandian wrote:
| All I can say is that I bank with two mainstream high-
| street banks and use password + SMS authentication, with
| the option of a card reader.
| tomxor wrote:
| > All major banks require app-based authentication [...] A
| handful maaaay still allow you to do banking via physical
| cardreader verification [...]
|
| Uhm no... I can personally attest to at least Barclays and
| Natwest allowing you to use a cardreader + website, no apps
| needed, all online services available through website.
| Those are 2 of the top 4 largest banks in the UK, I
| wouldn't be surprised if it was a similar story for the
| rest. I imagine they would get in pretty deep legal trouble
| if they forced people to use smart phones.
|
| Just because you don't try to use stuff without an app
| doesn't mean it doesn't exist anymore, I don't have a smart
| phone - life is good in the UK.
| weberer wrote:
| In Finland, you have to use a bank's authentication service
| to do pretty much anything. Most people use a mobile app for
| that, but paper codes work as well.
| linmob wrote:
| My bank (comdirect in Germany) fortunately has an okay mobile-
| friendly website and sells a tiny hardware device to generate
| the "TAN" for their weird proprietary way to secure
| transactions.
| troyvit wrote:
| Honestly I recommend switching banks. I don't use a linux phone
| yet but I just tested my credit union's web site[1]. Not only
| does it work but it has a mobile version that seems -- now that
| I look at it -- more functional than the app.
|
| [1] Security Service Federal Credit Union
| kobalsky wrote:
| > more functional than the app
|
| given the increasing insanity that is getting a mobile app
| published and updated, I'd say that this will be normal than
| not in the future.
|
| you need a team devoted to keep up with the monthly threat of
| your app getting removed because some new requirement. the
| upkeep is terrible.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| I use a local credit union as well and also just use their
| website.
| Jhsto wrote:
| The Venn diagram of Linux phone users and people who want to
| reduce proprietaries in their life is rather big. That's to say
| it's almost the point of the hardware to point you these
| problems. And in my opinion, frankly, your anecdote is more
| about your choice of bank and not which phone you use.
|
| That being said, what about banks with open APIs? Wasn't there
| some EU legislation?
| megous wrote:
| It's "open" api for some bullshit aggregation data slurping
| services, not for normal customers to access their data
| directly and easily for themselves on their own hardware in
| automated way. There are banks with nice XML/JSON based API
| specially made for easy syncing and login via API keys you
| generate in a _normal_ bank web UI. But those are very rare.
|
| If anything EU fucked up all my bank automation, except for
| this one bank, by requiring 2FA just for logging in, and not
| only for making transactions.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| weberer wrote:
| Nordea gives you paper codes when you sign up. You can do
| everything through their website as long as you use those codes
| for MFA. Each time you authenticate, you have to use the next
| code in the series. Once you run out, you go to the bank and
| pick up another code book.
| marcodiego wrote:
| I stopped using my bank's online service the day they required
| a proprietary service[1] installed. It is very inconvenient, I
| have to go the physical agency to get info I could get from my
| pocket anywhere, but that is the price I'm willing to pay if
| they require me to continuously run proprietary code on my own
| device.
|
| [1] https://seg.bb.com.br/passo-a-passo.html?system=Linux
| selfhoster11 wrote:
| The best I can advise is try to access it via the online
| banking website, if available. Otherwise, you simply cannot use
| mobile banking apps unless you have some way to emulate a
| sufficiently "verified" Android environment somewhere (on your
| phone or some VM somewhere else), and use that to open the app.
| goethes_kind wrote:
| I would never try to do online banking on my phone if
| possible.
|
| The banks have however decided that issuing separate security
| dongles is too costly, so instead they forced us all to
| install an app that acts as a security token. So I cannot do
| online banking without the mobile app.
| tpxl wrote:
| I changed banks over their requirement of having an android
| or apple phone. The clerk gaped when I told her I don't
| have a smartphone.
| 4ggr0 wrote:
| I would try to call them and flat-out tell them that you
| don't own a smartphone. Just tell them that you're using a
| dumb flipphone to communicate. Maybe they have a way to
| authenticate via SMS or alternative means. Else that would
| mean that peopler from an older generation who still don't
| have smartphones are just excluded from using this bank,
| which would be strange.
|
| Else your only option is to buy a cheap android phone which
| you only use for this login. In a way that makes your
| banking activities even more secure because you're only
| using the device for 2FA codes :)
| fsflover wrote:
| Except this insecure, non-updated device would also be
| sending tonns of data to Google continuously.
| daptaq wrote:
| Not everyone uses banking apps?
| ridgered4 wrote:
| Are the requirements different in different parts of the
| world? I've never used a banking app, I just use a web
| browser on my desktop.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| I didn't use banking apps when I used Windows Mobile for
| years, but the big thing I've since found handy is mobile
| deposit. Generally without a phone app, you have to drive
| your checks to the bank.
| nikodunk wrote:
| As someone who builds the banking apps of joinatmos.com, uses
| linux on desktop and aspires to use it on phone - I've been
| thinking about this too. Our react native build won't support
| Linux (say, Flathub) very well at all, and building a separate
| GTK app is not cost effective for a startup. Flutter could
| work, or if we'd made our mobile app a wrapped website in
| Cordova or whatever that would have been an option I believe
| too.
|
| For now, our mobile Linux users would be "stuck" with the
| mobile web experience, though we tried our hardest to make it a
| performant PWA that you can pin to your home screen. The main
| thing you lose is persistent biometric login, though many
| privacy conscious users seem to not trust biometric unlocking
| of your session in the first place (they mistakenly think their
| Face is being uploaded to our servers, which is of course not
| how the technology works on iOS/Android) so that may not be an
| issue.
|
| Edit: From my time trying to use a dumbphone as a daily driver
| a few years ago, cash apps were a bigger problem (Venmo, etc)
| as theres a social component to "not paying someone back until
| later because I dont have a smartphone".
| CameronNemo wrote:
| _though many privacy conscious users seem to not trust
| biometric unlocking of your session in the first place (they
| mistakenly think their Face is being uploaded to our servers,
| which is of course not how the technology works on iOS
| /Android)_
|
| For me, my hesitation with biometric unlocking is due to it
| being legally weaker than a passcode.
|
| https://www.biometricupdate.com/202007/another-federal-
| court...
| nikodunk wrote:
| I see good point.
| CameronNemo wrote:
| Instead of Cordova, you might want to try Tauri.
| https://tauri.app/
| fezfight wrote:
| I dunno about you, but I'd prefer it all just work via
| Firefox, so assuming that's functioning, you'd have my
| business.
| trs-80 wrote:
| I would really like to see someone raise the same questions this
| article does at the next community Q&A.
| MartijnBraam wrote:
| I was going to write something similar, but this covers it pretty
| well actually. Hopefully there could be some more developer
| support in the future again like the community editions once
| were.
| trs-80 wrote:
| I am glad to see a growing chorus of people voicing similar
| concerns, which myself and others have long held. The article
| links to a similar article from Drew DeVault for instance (down
| at the bottom).
|
| Perhaps if nothing changes after a while, it might become time
| to add your voice to the other public pleas. Or maybe speak to
| PINE64 directly/privately (I don't know how well you know
| them).
| paulcarroty wrote:
| > Some competitors to PINE64 and Purism are now Precursor, SHIFT,
| MNT, and Fairphone among others
|
| Great, more competitors - faster evolution. I'll definitely get a
| Linux phone in near future, just a bit scared about my free time
| if any update will break the caller or SMS app.
| rjsw wrote:
| I don't run Linux on any of my Pine64 devices, I'm happy with
| them just doing hardware.
| CameronNemo wrote:
| Do you use TF-A and/or U-Boot?
| kop316 wrote:
| Do you run anything on them then? I think the article's
| argument holds for any software, not just Linux.
| rjsw wrote:
| I run NetBSD on my Pinebook and Quartz64.
| matrix12 wrote:
| Ditto all the Pine items.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-08-03 23:01 UTC)