3 ms·

Mark my words: this phone will be an utter failure. "Linux" or "Ubuntu" aren't some magic talismans you can apply to any product and make it great; in fact, it

by codex 14y ago

Mark my words: this phone will be an utter failure. "Linux" or "Ubuntu" aren't some magic talismans you can apply to any product and make it great; in fact, it takes a lot of hard work, design talent, and money to make a phone, and Canonical does not have the last two, possibly the last three.

rogerbinns 14y ago
What do you consider failure? eg would you count 10 million units as a failure? I do agree with your sentiments and would be surprised if they even managed to sell 100k units. The problem is I can't see who would want it to actually succeed. There isn't anything in it for hardware manufacturers unless they have a large guaranteed order. And since Ubuntu uses the Android kernel, the manufacturer will have to do an Android bring up no matter what. For the carriers it might be a useful bargaining chip but they can already play Android, Windows, Blackberry etc against each other. A retailer would need to make sufficient additional revenue to justify the costs of additional training of its staff. App developers would ultimately need to get paid, and a large installed base is very conducive to that. Canonical have approximately zero credit cards on file. Google also do kickbacks to carriers when someone on their network purchases from the Play store.
- dscrd 14y ago
  >And since Ubuntu uses the Android kernel, The Android kernel?
  - rogerbinns 14y ago
    It is Linux but with various things done the Android way and including device drivers not in the standard kernel tree, as well as binary blobs depending on hardware. The important point is that Ubuntu will not be using their regular kernel and changing options to make it work for the phones, but instead will be using the Android flavoured kernel and drivers. Some links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)#Linux http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)#Linu... http://elinux.org/Android_Kernel_Features http://elinux.org/Android_Kernel_Features http://lwn.net/Articles/472984/ http://lwn.net/Articles/472984/ There is also Documentation/android.txt in some kernel trees.
    - daliusd 14y ago
      You are right about drivers but I'm not so sure about kernel. Are you sure you are not confusing Ubuntu for Phones and Ubuntu for Android?
      - rogerbinns 14y ago
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Phone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Phone "The system can be used with standard Android kernel which leads it to be installable on most recent Android smartphones." http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/phone http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/phone "yet it uses the same drivers as Android" http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/phone/operators-and-oems http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/phone/operators-and-oems "with the core system based around a typical Android Board Support Package (BSP)" So definitely the drivers and one of the rags did report that the Android kernel would be used. It would also be rather brave for Canonical to use Android drivers and binary blobs on a standard kernel since it would be a combination never been used before and probably require a bit of work (eg making sure drivers work with and without wakelocks) not to mention additional testing.
      - Shorel 14y ago
        Both will use the same kernel. The difference is that Ubuntu phone will not have a JVM as its main runtime.
bad_user 14y ago
What's with all this negativity? It's the easiest thing in the world to criticise and most people are naysayers because of that, but if the ones that actually build stuff would listen to all of this criticism then nothing would get done. > it takes a lot of hard work, design talent, and money So freaking what? Besides fart apps, all other projects need hard work, design talent and money. That didn't stop projects from succeeded without design talent and/or money, with hard work as a substitute for both. Android sucked up until version 2.3. Did that stop it from being a success? And sure, Android had good timing too, but the current market for smartphones and tablets is only getting started and will be much larger than it currently is. I can also see phone manufacturers being afraid of Google's or Microsoft's grip on the platform ... Samsung for instance is pouring resources into Bada, just in case. Personally I think Firefox OS has a much better chance of succeeding as an alternative to Android, but at the very least I'm not ready to lambast Canonical for trying. The world needs more builders and less naysayers.
- codex 14y ago
  Let me put it another way: it pains me to see mediocre companies like Canonical chase the latest fad with "me too" products. If more people could recognize failure ahead of time, perhaps we would get more true innovation somewhere else, or at least real attempts at home run, big bet initiatives. The world is full of opportunities to make original contributions. Look at Elon Musk: he may fail, but at least he is a prime mover.
  - Argorak 14y ago
    a) you seem to have a serious personal problem with Canonical. b) Ubuntu Phone is certainly not a me-too product. Its and interesting iteration of the concept, especially with the ability of running a fully-fledged desktop.
    - codex 14y ago
      Interestingly, for a time some Android handset manufacturers put out concept phones that could dock with laptop shells; when the phone was in the dock, you got a desktop version of Android, and your phone OS was still running in a window in that desktop. In fact, the mobile OS switched over to running in a virtual machine and the desktop OS took over the hardware. Interesting stuff but it went nowhere. Apple had a different take, patenting a method to place all of your desktop apps and settings on your phone (and possibly the OS itself) allowing you to use any Mac as if it were your own. Not productized yet, of course.
Argorak 14y ago
I will mark them, but you quick dismissal of the Ubuntu teams design ability strikes me as odd. All Canonical websites are very nice, Unity is a great looking and consistent shell (even if some people disagree with the overall concept) and current descriptions of Ubuntu Phone really showed that they poured a lot of knowledge into them. And then, Canonical lacks design talent?
Shorel 14y ago
iOS runs fast native Apps, while Android runs in a VM. This makes iOS faster and/or more battery efficient. This speed/performance attracts users. On the other hand iOS is a closed system while Android is open. An open system attracts developers. Ubuntu has potentially both technical advantages. It will have fast native Apps, it already has a Ubuntu store, it has Ubuntu One (similar to Dropbox / Skydrive) and it will be more open than either of iOS or Android. And Ubuntu has proven that they can deliver, with Unity in the desktop. I'm using it right now (inside a VM running on Windows 7) and honestly is the best Linux I have ever used both in the desktop and as a server in AWS. The only reason I can think for a Ubuntu phone failure is total lack of carriers interested in the product (I think more than one chinese company will jump with full force to Ubuntu, remember the so called Alibaba OS), or a half assed launch/support (again it would be the carriers fault, and it would be only relevant in USA). If I had spare money I would propose a longbet against you ^_^

by codex 14y ago

rogerbinns 14y ago

What do you consider failure? eg would you count 10 million units as a failure? I do agree with your sentiments and would be surprised if they even managed to sell 100k units. The problem is I can't see who would want it to actually succeed. There isn't anything in it for hardware manufacturers unless they have a large guaranteed order. And since Ubuntu uses the Android kernel, the manufacturer will have to do an Android bring up no matter what. For the carriers it might be a useful bargaining chip but they can already play Android, Windows, Blackberry etc against each other. A retailer would need to make sufficient additional revenue to justify the costs of additional training of its staff. App developers would ultimately need to get paid, and a large installed base is very conducive to that. Canonical have approximately zero credit cards on file. Google also do kickbacks to carriers when someone on their network purchases from the Play store.

dscrd 14y ago
>And since Ubuntu uses the Android kernel, The Android kernel?
- rogerbinns 14y ago
  It is Linux but with various things done the Android way and including device drivers not in the standard kernel tree, as well as binary blobs depending on hardware. The important point is that Ubuntu will not be using their regular kernel and changing options to make it work for the phones, but instead will be using the Android flavoured kernel and drivers. Some links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)#Linux http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)#Linu... http://elinux.org/Android_Kernel_Features http://elinux.org/Android_Kernel_Features http://lwn.net/Articles/472984/ http://lwn.net/Articles/472984/ There is also Documentation/android.txt in some kernel trees.
  - daliusd 14y ago
    You are right about drivers but I'm not so sure about kernel. Are you sure you are not confusing Ubuntu for Phones and Ubuntu for Android?
    - rogerbinns 14y ago
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Phone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Phone "The system can be used with standard Android kernel which leads it to be installable on most recent Android smartphones." http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/phone http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/phone "yet it uses the same drivers as Android" http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/phone/operators-and-oems http://www.ubuntu.com/devices/phone/operators-and-oems "with the core system based around a typical Android Board Support Package (BSP)" So definitely the drivers and one of the rags did report that the Android kernel would be used. It would also be rather brave for Canonical to use Android drivers and binary blobs on a standard kernel since it would be a combination never been used before and probably require a bit of work (eg making sure drivers work with and without wakelocks) not to mention additional testing.
    - Shorel 14y ago
      Both will use the same kernel. The difference is that Ubuntu phone will not have a JVM as its main runtime.

bad_user 14y ago

What's with all this negativity? It's the easiest thing in the world to criticise and most people are naysayers because of that, but if the ones that actually build stuff would listen to all of this criticism then nothing would get done. > it takes a lot of hard work, design talent, and money So freaking what? Besides fart apps, all other projects need hard work, design talent and money. That didn't stop projects from succeeded without design talent and/or money, with hard work as a substitute for both. Android sucked up until version 2.3. Did that stop it from being a success? And sure, Android had good timing too, but the current market for smartphones and tablets is only getting started and will be much larger than it currently is. I can also see phone manufacturers being afraid of Google's or Microsoft's grip on the platform ... Samsung for instance is pouring resources into Bada, just in case. Personally I think Firefox OS has a much better chance of succeeding as an alternative to Android, but at the very least I'm not ready to lambast Canonical for trying. The world needs more builders and less naysayers.

codex 14y ago
Let me put it another way: it pains me to see mediocre companies like Canonical chase the latest fad with "me too" products. If more people could recognize failure ahead of time, perhaps we would get more true innovation somewhere else, or at least real attempts at home run, big bet initiatives. The world is full of opportunities to make original contributions. Look at Elon Musk: he may fail, but at least he is a prime mover.
- Argorak 14y ago
  a) you seem to have a serious personal problem with Canonical. b) Ubuntu Phone is certainly not a me-too product. Its and interesting iteration of the concept, especially with the ability of running a fully-fledged desktop.
  - codex 14y ago
    Interestingly, for a time some Android handset manufacturers put out concept phones that could dock with laptop shells; when the phone was in the dock, you got a desktop version of Android, and your phone OS was still running in a window in that desktop. In fact, the mobile OS switched over to running in a virtual machine and the desktop OS took over the hardware. Interesting stuff but it went nowhere. Apple had a different take, patenting a method to place all of your desktop apps and settings on your phone (and possibly the OS itself) allowing you to use any Mac as if it were your own. Not productized yet, of course.

Argorak 14y ago

I will mark them, but you quick dismissal of the Ubuntu teams design ability strikes me as odd. All Canonical websites are very nice, Unity is a great looking and consistent shell (even if some people disagree with the overall concept) and current descriptions of Ubuntu Phone really showed that they poured a lot of knowledge into them. And then, Canonical lacks design talent?

Shorel 14y ago

iOS runs fast native Apps, while Android runs in a VM. This makes iOS faster and/or more battery efficient. This speed/performance attracts users. On the other hand iOS is a closed system while Android is open. An open system attracts developers. Ubuntu has potentially both technical advantages. It will have fast native Apps, it already has a Ubuntu store, it has Ubuntu One (similar to Dropbox / Skydrive) and it will be more open than either of iOS or Android. And Ubuntu has proven that they can deliver, with Unity in the desktop. I'm using it right now (inside a VM running on Windows 7) and honestly is the best Linux I have ever used both in the desktop and as a server in AWS. The only reason I can think for a Ubuntu phone failure is total lack of carriers interested in the product (I think more than one chinese company will jump with full force to Ubuntu, remember the so called Alibaba OS), or a half assed launch/support (again it would be the carriers fault, and it would be only relevant in USA). If I had spare money I would propose a longbet against you ^_^