4 ms·

The problem is, Ubuntu is completely unsuitable for a mobile phone or tablet. I bought one last year and had to return it because it was functionally unusable

by edent 10y ago

The problem is, Ubuntu is completely unsuitable for a mobile phone or tablet. I bought one last year and had to return it because it was functionally unusable - https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/05/the-ubuntu-tablet-a-review-of-the-aquaris-m10-ubuntu-edition/ https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/05/the-ubuntu-tablet-a-review-... The OS doesn't support modern features like multi-touch, many apps require a physical keyboard, it can't connect reliably to Bluetooth devices, app switching doesn't work - even icons are missing from certain apps! There's no app store to speak of, just a small collection of apps which haven't received even rudimentary testing. That's before we even get to the lack of "killer" apps like Angry Birds, Dropbox, Spotify. > Carriers are also interested in this flexibility. No, they aren't. I've just finished 10 years in European telcos - they don't care about flexibility. They care about profit margin and making sure that people don't ring call centres to complain about broken hardware. My old employer (O2) sells a bunch of Cyanogen based Android devices - because the cost is right and the services are good enough. Ubuntu isn't even close to competing with that yet. > Some they may provide themselves and some by well known providers; but by not being able to select options for those base services they have less flexibility on what they can do. This is factually incorrect. Providers (in the UK at least) are able to bundle services and apps with iPhones, Android, Windows Phone. I've worked with handset manufacturers to add DropBox, replace DropBox with something else, have apps preinstalled, remove bloatware - and everything in-between. > So that effectively makes it difficult for the carriers as well as alternate service providers (e.g. Dropbox, Spotify, etc) to compete. Again, that's not really true. Dropbox has a multi-million dollar marketing budget. If your new service can pay an operator €10 per customer - guess what - they'll push you to the front of the user's home screen. > I think that Ubuntu Phone has the fundamental DNA to win in this race. I don't. I've installed Ubuntu on my MacBooks, my laptops, my servers, and my TV's media box. It's a brilliant OS. But it doesn't work on touchscreens. It cannot meet the efficiency demands of small battery devices. It has no alternative services which even come close to what's on the market. I love Ubuntu - but I wouldn't let it near any of my phones.

soneil 10y ago
I had pretty much exactly the same experience with Ubuntu Touch (but on an Aquaris phone). All in all I found the window manager a frustrating and horrible experience. But the one "killer app" I really missed was email. There's precisely one native app, and it fails to load subfolders in imap. A "free" OS feels like a petty distinction when the only (usable) applications are wrappers for mobile sites.
- collyw 10y ago
  I have one, but the screen cracked a month or two back, so now back onto Android. I actually found the Ubuntu interface a lot nicer to navigate than Android, but there is a serious lack of apps for it. The GPS was next to useless compared to Android (not sure if my model had a problem, but it took forever to get a lock, on Android its almost instant). The other big downside for me was traveling. Almost all of the apps were web based so maps wouldn't even load without an internet connection. Pretty useless when I was in the South of Chile and just wanted to check the street map of a small town we were in. Android does feel way ahead of the Ubuntu phone now. Though it acts like an attention seeking child a lot of the time. I am getting notifications from Google plus, despite the fact I barely ever log into it. Beeps here beeps there always wanting my attention. From web sites I have browsed but refused to install the app as well. At least the GPS is useful now, as its one of the few things I actually find useful on a phone.
ensiferum 10y ago
Sounds like the typical FOSS syndrome. If you make comments about this you can expect "if you don't like it don't use it", "works for me" and "it's open so you're free to fix it yourself".

by edent 10y ago

soneil 10y ago

I had pretty much exactly the same experience with Ubuntu Touch (but on an Aquaris phone). All in all I found the window manager a frustrating and horrible experience. But the one "killer app" I really missed was email. There's precisely one native app, and it fails to load subfolders in imap. A "free" OS feels like a petty distinction when the only (usable) applications are wrappers for mobile sites.

collyw 10y ago
I have one, but the screen cracked a month or two back, so now back onto Android. I actually found the Ubuntu interface a lot nicer to navigate than Android, but there is a serious lack of apps for it. The GPS was next to useless compared to Android (not sure if my model had a problem, but it took forever to get a lock, on Android its almost instant). The other big downside for me was traveling. Almost all of the apps were web based so maps wouldn't even load without an internet connection. Pretty useless when I was in the South of Chile and just wanted to check the street map of a small town we were in. Android does feel way ahead of the Ubuntu phone now. Though it acts like an attention seeking child a lot of the time. I am getting notifications from Google plus, despite the fact I barely ever log into it. Beeps here beeps there always wanting my attention. From web sites I have browsed but refused to install the app as well. At least the GPS is useful now, as its one of the few things I actually find useful on a phone.

ensiferum 10y ago

Sounds like the typical FOSS syndrome. If you make comments about this you can expect "if you don't like it don't use it", "works for me" and "it's open so you're free to fix it yourself".