4 ms·

This is nice, but what problem does it solve? Mobile and Desktop operating systems solve different issues on their own. Ubuntu tried this - how'd that go? Sec

This is nice, but what problem does it solve? Mobile and Desktop operating systems solve different issues on their own. Ubuntu tried this - how'd that go? Second issue is: how do I use it? How can I install it on MY devices? I'm all for privacy and I want to is it, just seems like a dream and it will never come to fruition

meruru 8y ago
It solves bug #1 This bug is widely evident in the PC industry. Steps to repeat: 1. Visit a local PC store. 2. Attempt to buy a machine without any proprietary software. What happens: Almost always, a majority of PCs for sale have Microsoft Windows pre-installed. In the rare cases that they come with a GNU/Linux operating system or no operating system at all, the drivers and BIOS may be proprietary. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1
- masklinn 8y ago
  > It solves bug #1 It doesn't do so anymore than ubuntu already does.
  - meruru 8y ago
    It does so more directly by being a PC without Microsoft Windows pre-installed or proprietary BIOS. Almost always, a majority of PCs for sale have Microsoft Windows pre-installed. In the rare cases that they come with a GNU/Linux operating system or no operating system at all, the drivers and BIOS may be proprietary. Ubuntu helped enable Purism to exist and they are great for that too.
    - masklinn 8y ago
      > It does so more directly by being a PC without Microsoft Windows pre-installed or proprietary BIOS. Ah, so it does so by redefining the inconvenient bits completely out of bug #1.
      - meruru 8y ago
        I don't understand what you're saying and to be honest I don't care. All I wanted to say is that people should support Purism because they value FOSS principles. Sorry if I was too obtuse.
        JohnFen 8y ago
        > people should support Purism because they value FOSS principles That is a huge point in their favor, but it alone is insufficient. People should support Purism because they find the project desirable in addition to agreeing with their FOSS principles.
joekrill 8y ago
> This is nice, but what problem does it solve? It solves a _development_ problem, in that it reduces the amount of work needed to allow an application to reach a larger number of devices. Basically the same reason for things like React Native and PWAs. > Ubuntu tried this - how'd that go? So because someone else failed at solving a particular problem in a particular way previously, we should simply give up on it?
- dcdevito 8y ago
  How does it solve a development problem when an ecosystem doesn't really exist (On Linux) in the real world?
- masklinn 8y ago
  > It solves a _development_ problem, in that it reduces the amount of work needed to allow an application to reach a larger number of devices. Sounds like a repeat of the Java strategy: you can run garbage nobody wants anywhere nobody wants to run it. > So because someone else failed at solving a particular problem in a particular way previously Microsoft also attempted it, and also failed quite miserably. > we should simply give up on it? Not necessarily, but at the very least you could avoid lying by omission (mentioning Google and Apple which don't exactly attempt convergence and pointedly ignoring every pre-existing attempt at the concept) and maybe consider humility and avoid overblown claims given you're not the first to attempt it, nobody's succeeded, there's no evidence available that you are succeeding, and you've really not shown anything which would made anyone think "this is going to succeed where everybody else failed".
  - joekrill 8y ago
    Microsoft failed in a completely different way: their entire mobile platform failed. I'm not sure it had anything to with UWP specifically, and as far as we know that had little to do with it. But regardless of the reason, I still don't think that should prevent others from trying to solve the problem in different ways.
    - 8y ago
masklinn 8y ago
> Ubuntu tried this - how'd that go? See also: Microsoft. The entire point of Windows 8 and later UWP were convergence. In fact that article reads like pure bullshit, they're only mentioning the two OS vendors which are not attempting convergence (some cross-polination at best) and ignoring the history of suck and failure that is "OS convergence".
- sixothree 8y ago
  As a developer I'm fairly disappointed in how Ballmer messed this one up for us. C# is a nice place to spend your day. And the promise of write once run anywhere is really starting to materialize.
Vinnl 8y ago
The problem it solves is writing an app suite for the phone from scratch. There's now a really quite capable web browser running on their phone, which is likely to be a far better experience than had they written it from scratch. Pair that with upstreams that appear to have enough goodwill to agree to maintain their patches for them, and it's obvious why they're pursuing this.

meruru 8y ago

It solves bug #1 This bug is widely evident in the PC industry. Steps to repeat: 1. Visit a local PC store. 2. Attempt to buy a machine without any proprietary software. What happens: Almost always, a majority of PCs for sale have Microsoft Windows pre-installed. In the rare cases that they come with a GNU/Linux operating system or no operating system at all, the drivers and BIOS may be proprietary. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1

masklinn 8y ago
> It solves bug #1 It doesn't do so anymore than ubuntu already does.
- meruru 8y ago
  It does so more directly by being a PC without Microsoft Windows pre-installed or proprietary BIOS. Almost always, a majority of PCs for sale have Microsoft Windows pre-installed. In the rare cases that they come with a GNU/Linux operating system or no operating system at all, the drivers and BIOS may be proprietary. Ubuntu helped enable Purism to exist and they are great for that too.
  - masklinn 8y ago
    > It does so more directly by being a PC without Microsoft Windows pre-installed or proprietary BIOS. Ah, so it does so by redefining the inconvenient bits completely out of bug #1.
    - meruru 8y ago
      I don't understand what you're saying and to be honest I don't care. All I wanted to say is that people should support Purism because they value FOSS principles. Sorry if I was too obtuse.
      - JohnFen 8y ago
        > people should support Purism because they value FOSS principles That is a huge point in their favor, but it alone is insufficient. People should support Purism because they find the project desirable in addition to agreeing with their FOSS principles.

joekrill 8y ago

> This is nice, but what problem does it solve? It solves a _development_ problem, in that it reduces the amount of work needed to allow an application to reach a larger number of devices. Basically the same reason for things like React Native and PWAs. > Ubuntu tried this - how'd that go? So because someone else failed at solving a particular problem in a particular way previously, we should simply give up on it?

dcdevito 8y ago
How does it solve a development problem when an ecosystem doesn't really exist (On Linux) in the real world?
masklinn 8y ago
> It solves a _development_ problem, in that it reduces the amount of work needed to allow an application to reach a larger number of devices. Sounds like a repeat of the Java strategy: you can run garbage nobody wants anywhere nobody wants to run it. > So because someone else failed at solving a particular problem in a particular way previously Microsoft also attempted it, and also failed quite miserably. > we should simply give up on it? Not necessarily, but at the very least you could avoid lying by omission (mentioning Google and Apple which don't exactly attempt convergence and pointedly ignoring every pre-existing attempt at the concept) and maybe consider humility and avoid overblown claims given you're not the first to attempt it, nobody's succeeded, there's no evidence available that you are succeeding, and you've really not shown anything which would made anyone think "this is going to succeed where everybody else failed".
- joekrill 8y ago
  Microsoft failed in a completely different way: their entire mobile platform failed. I'm not sure it had anything to with UWP specifically, and as far as we know that had little to do with it. But regardless of the reason, I still don't think that should prevent others from trying to solve the problem in different ways.
  - 8y ago

masklinn 8y ago

> Ubuntu tried this - how'd that go? See also: Microsoft. The entire point of Windows 8 and later UWP were convergence. In fact that article reads like pure bullshit, they're only mentioning the two OS vendors which are not attempting convergence (some cross-polination at best) and ignoring the history of suck and failure that is "OS convergence".

sixothree 8y ago
As a developer I'm fairly disappointed in how Ballmer messed this one up for us. C# is a nice place to spend your day. And the promise of write once run anywhere is really starting to materialize.

Vinnl 8y ago

The problem it solves is writing an app suite for the phone from scratch. There's now a really quite capable web browser running on their phone, which is likely to be a far better experience than had they written it from scratch. Pair that with upstreams that appear to have enough goodwill to agree to maintain their patches for them, and it's obvious why they're pursuing this.