![]() Some bugs and improvements are present as well in the Ubuntu Touch OTA-1 Focal release, such as a fix for an issue when trying to mute the phone’s microphone during phone calls, a fix for a context menu issue in the Morph Browser, as well as fixes for various issues when receiving MMS messages.įurthermore, this release improves XWayland integration and improves support for running legacy X11 apps on Lomiri, adds support for PIN codes between 4 and 12 digits, updates broadband provider data, adds support for USB-C USB-PD, improves PAM/logind integration, and refreshes various Lomiri effects. Your comments are welcome here,” said UBports. I just wish we'd hurry up and learn it already so I could have a sweet phone/tablet that runs a regular Linux distribution reasonably well.“Other UT devices that currently run Focal might not have all features working yet with OTA-1 depending on the exact status of their port., but you are free to try if you wish. When that happens, the project as a whole almost always suffers-just like what we saw with Ubuntu Touch. The key here is to focus and not get distracted by shiny possible features. Choose one, and contribute patches to it to help with any unmet needs. Does this phone system need an app store? There are several "app store" like software projects out there. Whenever possible, those pain points should be solved by utilizing existing projects. What are the pain points and how do we alleviate those pains? And I know a whole slew of others who have been jonesing for exactly the same thing.Īt that point we, as a community, could turn our attention to "2.0" and plan out which specific features are most critical to us. Maybe not ideal for everyone, but pretty spectacular just the same. Even if the project never went any further, we'd have a phone/tablet that we could easily run desktop software on. You know what? It would, right there, be pretty awesome. And it would be a base that we could continue to work from-and that others could utilize to build new systems from that focus on different needs and workflows. Would it have cool "convergence" features? Nuh-uh.īut it would run. Would it be "optimized for touch input"? Nope. ![]() Declare it 1.0.Īt this point we, as a community, would have a phone (or tablet) that runs Linux. Come up with a fairly straightforward system for installing/flashing the image onto the phone.Find existing software to manage voice calls (there are several already), and modify them (if necessary) to get them technically working.Work on support for the key hardware components: Wi-Fi, touchscreen, cellular data, cellular voice, IO.Get the Linux distribution up and running on that device.Don't get distracted by expanding to multiple devices. Pick a phone or a tablet-something commonly available in abundance that already runs Android (maybe a Samsung or Google device).The goal, if it's going to succeed, needs to be simple and clear: Take an existing Linux distribution (there are plenty of great options), and get the darn thing running on a singular, existing mobile device. To start with, we need to scale back the goals. ![]() So, what do we do now? How do we build a Linux-based, free-software mobile system and actually-you know-ship it in a usable, viable state? How to create a Linux-based mobile system that succeeds The road-side is littered with the corpses of mobile Linux system roadkill that had far too ambitious plans to succeed considering the resources at their disposal. For proof of this, look no further than the fact that many of the people who worked on this system didn't use it on any regular basis.Ĭanonical is not the first company to fail with a Linux-based mobile software stack. Make no mistake, while a few Ubuntu Touch-based devices certainly did ship, the system was not "finished" enough to keep people wanting to use it on a regular basis. But it also had a very slim chance of actually hitting a high-quality "1.0" release with all of those features intact. The people in charge had a vision-and they stuck to it. That said, I absolutely understand why features weren't chopped. It absolutely, without a doubt, was never going to succeed without an engineering executive coming in and taking the axe to a significant portion of those goals. One that Canonical, even with the help of the existing Ubuntu community, simply did not have the resources to accomplish. All new applications utilizing that SDK (everything from the terminal to the web browser was new).A brand-new packaging and container system (Snappy).An entirely new desktop environment (in Unity, which had already undergone one major rewrite in its short life).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |