8 ms·

Except that it won't break the app-store duopoly. At what point will WhatsApp or even Signal consider providing a web-app, or even an open API for others to bui

Except that it won't break the app-store duopoly. At what point will WhatsApp or even Signal consider providing a web-app, or even an open API for others to built clients against? Not doing this is a policy choice, not a technical one. Will banks offer something that doesn't require authentication via an app? Governments? App here meaning: Android or IOS. One solution might be to provide a sandbox for Android apps, but you would still be locked into Google's app-store and require accepting their terms of use. And while your OS might be open and not user-hostile, all the apps everyone uses will still be the same. I want a phone like this, but I don't see it changing the duopoly.

padraic7a 6y ago
Signal has given some, probably very little, support to the Ubuntu Touch port now known as Axolotl. https://github.com/nanu-c/axolotl https://github.com/nanu-c/axolotl I'm sure that if it grew in popularity they might be inclined to support it further.
- Freak_NL 6y ago
  Wouldn't that mean you could use Signal without their client app? I though that was explicitly forbidden by OWS?
  - mpol 6y ago
    Sure. I use Whisperfish on Sailfish OS for Signal conversations. I hear the developer is quite positive about the support he gets from Signal about getting it up to speed. There was that famous blog post, I think in 2016, where they said they won't support third-party clients, but they got so much flac over it, they might have reconsidered. Also, there is in the EU a Digital Markets Act being worked on. That will mean some networks that play a big part in society will need to allow third-party clients. https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/digital-markets-act-ensuring-fair-and-open-digital-markets_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/euro...
linmob 6y ago
IMHO, it does not have to change the duopoly, as long as it creates sustainable options for those who want to escape that duopoly. In that way it‘s already a success.
- 7357 6y ago
  It's more likely to happen with platforms such as this than without.
- amelius 6y ago
  The point was: if it doesn't change the duopoly then who will write apps for the open platform? Not banks. Not governments. They will keep on developing only for Android and iOS. And people with a pinephone will have a great phone with a great OS, but with a shitty selection of apps.
  - danShumway 6y ago
    I already use Linux with my bank and when I'm interacting with my government. And unlike on Android, the barrier of entry for me to write apps and set up quick solutions to problems is much lower. I don't need to run my code on a completely separate environment with no overlap. Emulation is going to be easier. I don't need to install Eclipse or whatever the heck Android devs tolerate now. That's part of the point of using Linux -- not creating an ecosystem from scratch. Virtually all of my computing outside of my phone is already done on Linux devices, and the setup works for day-to-day computing. Support is good enough for me. What makes you think Pinephone going to have worse support than my current Linux desktop? My hope with Pinephone is that a decent influx of Linux phone users will improve the quality of desktop software on Linux as well, since it forces devs to stop ignoring touch screens and to start thinking about responsive design. Ideally, the desktop versions of many apps should scale on interfaces like this without needing to be rewritten. But regardless, I'm still not particularly worried that my bank website is going to stop working.
    - amelius 6y ago
      To take one example: the interaction with your bank goes through a web-browser, I suppose? You probably need a special device for 2FA? In most bank apps, you can simply log in using a PIN-code and do things like check your balance, make small wire transfers, and make payments in stores through NFC. Doing these things in a web-browser on a mobile phone with a separate 2FA device is much more cumbersome. (I use Linux exclusively on the desktop so I know what you are talking about, but it just isn't going to work on a phone in the same way).
wwarner 6y ago
I'll agree, and add that it's not clear that people really want privacy. Not that we've been given a choice, but the very first thing that the major players are going to say is that people want the all knowing experience that Google and FB provide.
zepto 6y ago
There is no reason it can’t break the ‘duopoly’. It clearly isn’t going to do so overnight or in a year or two. But it easily could over the 5-10 year timeline. A distributed App Store plus an experience that is more attuned to the needs of users than iOS or Android can accomplish that. To solve the ‘bank’ problem all it needs to do is provide a really solid PWA story. What it shouldn’t do is provide Android compatibility.
- aroman 6y ago
  > plus an experience that is more attuned to the needs of users than iOS or Android can accomplish that. Why would this project be more effective at doing this than iOS or Android? I don’t see why people other than ideological technologists would want to use this phone. To be clear, I think it’d be great if they did, but I think you’re massively understating the difficulty of challenging iOS and Android. Many companies have tried before - Microsoft, Amazon, Canonical, and failed.
  - fsflover 6y ago
    > I don’t see why people other than ideological technologists would want to use this phone. AFAIK every single change in tech starts from such people.
    - aroman 6y ago
      Sure, they start there but they eventually expand beyond that initial core group to the wider population. I’m saying that in this case, I don’t think it will expand beyond that initial group. Why would non-idealists use this phone when the alternative they already have in their pocket and know how to use can do everything the PinePhone can do?
      - zepto 6y ago
        > Why would non-idealists use this phone when the alternative they already have in their pocket and know how to use can do everything the PinePhone can do? Nobody expects them to. People will use it when it does something the alternative they already have cannot do. Using the term ‘idealists’ is perjorative but more importantly, it implies confusion about why people buy this phone. The people who buy the phone today do so because it allows them to do things which the alternatives cannot. I.e. the purchase is pragmatic. This is the precise opposite of idealism.
amelius 6y ago
If banks and governments keep writing apps only for the duopoly, then there is the argument that the duopoly becomes a public utility and should be opened up. This view would also protect FOSS projects that emulate the iOS environment (e.g. Wine but for iOS)
mannerheim 6y ago
Isn't the Signal client GPL? Seems you could fork or write your own client.
- Freak_NL 6y ago
  OWS doesn't allow third-party clients.
  - mannerheim 6y ago
    From a quick search, it looks like this is something they certainly don't like, but it doesn't seem like something they can stop either.
  - hiq 6y ago
    In practice they don't run after them, see signal-cli.
Krisjohn 6y ago
> At what point will WhatsApp or even Signal consider providing a web-app I have Telegram on my Pine Phone and it works great. It also runs a proper version of Firefox (even if it does identify itself as running on Android.)

padraic7a 6y ago

Signal has given some, probably very little, support to the Ubuntu Touch port now known as Axolotl. https://github.com/nanu-c/axolotl https://github.com/nanu-c/axolotl I'm sure that if it grew in popularity they might be inclined to support it further.

Freak_NL 6y ago
Wouldn't that mean you could use Signal without their client app? I though that was explicitly forbidden by OWS?
- mpol 6y ago
  Sure. I use Whisperfish on Sailfish OS for Signal conversations. I hear the developer is quite positive about the support he gets from Signal about getting it up to speed. There was that famous blog post, I think in 2016, where they said they won't support third-party clients, but they got so much flac over it, they might have reconsidered. Also, there is in the EU a Digital Markets Act being worked on. That will mean some networks that play a big part in society will need to allow third-party clients. https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/digital-markets-act-ensuring-fair-and-open-digital-markets_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/euro...

linmob 6y ago

IMHO, it does not have to change the duopoly, as long as it creates sustainable options for those who want to escape that duopoly. In that way it‘s already a success.

7357 6y ago
It's more likely to happen with platforms such as this than without.
amelius 6y ago
The point was: if it doesn't change the duopoly then who will write apps for the open platform? Not banks. Not governments. They will keep on developing only for Android and iOS. And people with a pinephone will have a great phone with a great OS, but with a shitty selection of apps.
- danShumway 6y ago
  I already use Linux with my bank and when I'm interacting with my government. And unlike on Android, the barrier of entry for me to write apps and set up quick solutions to problems is much lower. I don't need to run my code on a completely separate environment with no overlap. Emulation is going to be easier. I don't need to install Eclipse or whatever the heck Android devs tolerate now. That's part of the point of using Linux -- not creating an ecosystem from scratch. Virtually all of my computing outside of my phone is already done on Linux devices, and the setup works for day-to-day computing. Support is good enough for me. What makes you think Pinephone going to have worse support than my current Linux desktop? My hope with Pinephone is that a decent influx of Linux phone users will improve the quality of desktop software on Linux as well, since it forces devs to stop ignoring touch screens and to start thinking about responsive design. Ideally, the desktop versions of many apps should scale on interfaces like this without needing to be rewritten. But regardless, I'm still not particularly worried that my bank website is going to stop working.
  - amelius 6y ago
    To take one example: the interaction with your bank goes through a web-browser, I suppose? You probably need a special device for 2FA? In most bank apps, you can simply log in using a PIN-code and do things like check your balance, make small wire transfers, and make payments in stores through NFC. Doing these things in a web-browser on a mobile phone with a separate 2FA device is much more cumbersome. (I use Linux exclusively on the desktop so I know what you are talking about, but it just isn't going to work on a phone in the same way).

wwarner 6y ago

I'll agree, and add that it's not clear that people really want privacy. Not that we've been given a choice, but the very first thing that the major players are going to say is that people want the all knowing experience that Google and FB provide.

zepto 6y ago

There is no reason it can’t break the ‘duopoly’. It clearly isn’t going to do so overnight or in a year or two. But it easily could over the 5-10 year timeline. A distributed App Store plus an experience that is more attuned to the needs of users than iOS or Android can accomplish that. To solve the ‘bank’ problem all it needs to do is provide a really solid PWA story. What it shouldn’t do is provide Android compatibility.

aroman 6y ago
> plus an experience that is more attuned to the needs of users than iOS or Android can accomplish that. Why would this project be more effective at doing this than iOS or Android? I don’t see why people other than ideological technologists would want to use this phone. To be clear, I think it’d be great if they did, but I think you’re massively understating the difficulty of challenging iOS and Android. Many companies have tried before - Microsoft, Amazon, Canonical, and failed.
- fsflover 6y ago
  > I don’t see why people other than ideological technologists would want to use this phone. AFAIK every single change in tech starts from such people.
  - aroman 6y ago
    Sure, they start there but they eventually expand beyond that initial core group to the wider population. I’m saying that in this case, I don’t think it will expand beyond that initial group. Why would non-idealists use this phone when the alternative they already have in their pocket and know how to use can do everything the PinePhone can do?
    - zepto 6y ago
      > Why would non-idealists use this phone when the alternative they already have in their pocket and know how to use can do everything the PinePhone can do? Nobody expects them to. People will use it when it does something the alternative they already have cannot do. Using the term ‘idealists’ is perjorative but more importantly, it implies confusion about why people buy this phone. The people who buy the phone today do so because it allows them to do things which the alternatives cannot. I.e. the purchase is pragmatic. This is the precise opposite of idealism.

amelius 6y ago

If banks and governments keep writing apps only for the duopoly, then there is the argument that the duopoly becomes a public utility and should be opened up. This view would also protect FOSS projects that emulate the iOS environment (e.g. Wine but for iOS)

mannerheim 6y ago

Isn't the Signal client GPL? Seems you could fork or write your own client.

Freak_NL 6y ago
OWS doesn't allow third-party clients.
- mannerheim 6y ago
  From a quick search, it looks like this is something they certainly don't like, but it doesn't seem like something they can stop either.
- hiq 6y ago
  In practice they don't run after them, see signal-cli.

Krisjohn 6y ago

> At what point will WhatsApp or even Signal consider providing a web-app I have Telegram on my Pine Phone and it works great. It also runs a proper version of Firefox (even if it does identify itself as running on Android.)