phones The Librem 5 - The fully open source Linux phone is finally shipping

[RichardR]

On 9/27/2019 at 4:59 AM, Ruckus42 said:

It's a first gen product and the first of it's kind.

I'd be willing to dispute that (not to detract from this new product though!)

 

Does anyone remember these?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N900

 

This was the first phone I had which felt like a smartphone.

The basic OS was functional and had a decent number of applications and games. You could also access a limited terminal and if you then wanted a full Debian terminal or desktop!

I used mine until it fell to bits.

The thing I miss most about it is the keyboard. Nothing onscreen has ever come close for me.

[Commodus]

13 hours ago, Crowbar said:

What are you ranting about and how do tablets have anything even remotely in common with this device? No one ever stated or inferred that this phone was for mainstream use. If that’s your focus then by all means continue to bask in your walled ecosystem of ignorance. Not everyone is an apple tool that wants to do things the way apple forces you to and for good reason but I guess expecting you to comprehend that is asking too much. There’s a reason the Linux community often refers someone to read the documentation. It prevents statements like yours that clearly show a lack of understanding leading to hyperbole. Wanting privacy and full control over your possessions doesn’t make you a “FOSS-obsessed cultists” and it’s a sad state of affairs that corporations like your precious apple have motivated a team to step up and provide this themselves.

 

One thing you are correct about however is that it’s “only a phone”. It’s not a tracking beacon or spy tool to harvest data from under the guise of whatever excuse the company’s marketing team can come up with that month.

 

Does this device have issues? Certainly. But, it’s a first gen product not being financially backed by shareholders. I’m not sure what your expectations were but obviously very skewed if you think a device that hasn’t even released yet and has a completely different use case is going to be comparable to an 11^th gen iphone for selfie takers.

You're both being irrational and over the top.

 

FOSS in many ways is fine, and in some situations is genuinely useful -- say, if you want an easy way for people to audit the security of a platform.  The issues arise when it's treated as a cure-all, when ease of use is neglected for too long ("read the documentation" often reflects a design failure), and when diehards insist on FOSS to the point where they sacrifice real freedom in the name of theoretical freedom.

 

At the same time, you need to chill on the Anything But Apple hate.  Apple users are not necessarily "tools" who live in a "walled ecosystem of ignorance."  I mostly use Apple gear because, as a rule, I can spend less time tinkering with it and more time actually using it.  Because my devices work well together without bending over backwards to configure them.  So long as Apple is genuinely concerned about privacy, and it is, I'm not going to insist that it open-sources every line of code.

 

The Librem 5 is a decent first effort.  I just think it's important to stress that this likely isn't the first step in some grand revolution, and that most people would be better-served by the current slate of closed-off but more powerful devices.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

1 hour ago, RichardR said:

I'd be willing to dispute that

The N900 did not use open-source hardware. 

[RichardR]

16 minutes ago, Captain Chaos said:

The N900 did not use open-source hardware. 

Good point.

I hadn't noticed that this did.

 

I was just thinking from a software side.

Don't get me wrong though, definitely an interesting project! Looks to have been in development from 2014, which was a good while ago in terms of mobile hardware.

I wonder if success of this, combined with something like RISC-V production becoming more mainstream would offer more exciting and capable future possibilities?

[PHYLO]

On 9/26/2019 at 10:59 PM, Ruckus42 said:

It's a first gen product and the first of it's kind. So yes, it's bound to be expensive and a little rough around the edges (although I personally like the chunky modular design). The OS is the real selling point here for people who value privacy. If it becomes popular, the future iterations will be much more polished and feature-rich.

It's 2019, these specs do not warrant a $699 price tag at all. You can get a OnePlus 7T for the same dang price. I just got an S10+ for $799 and it just completely wipes the floor against this thing. What. A. Joke.

 

This is a cash grab for the developing team behind this. "We'll price it high so we profit either way. If we don't sell many units we won't go through for a second revision of the phone. But if we do then sure we'll give a shot at it next year! The former's the likeliest outcome. But hey, we'll still profit!"

[dalekphalm]

2 hours ago, PHYLO said:

It's 2019, these specs do not warrant a $699 price tag at all. You can get a OnePlus 7T for the same dang price. I just got an S10+ for $799 and it just completely wipes the floor against this thing. What. A. Joke.

 

This is a cash grab for the developing team behind this. "We'll price it high so we profit either way. If we don't sell many units we won't go through for a second revision of the phone. But if we do then sure we'll give a shot at it next year! The former's the likeliest outcome. But hey, we'll still profit!"

I mean there is a reason it costs so much:

1. Non standard and very expensive components - because they've intentionally handicapped themselves with open source hardware, which is very limited in availability.

2. Economies of scale - basically because these parts they are using are being manufactured in incredibly small quantities (compared to, say, standard smartphone SoC and components that are manufactured in the hundreds of millions of units).

 

That of course, doesn't change the fact that this phone is ridiculously terrible value, though.

 

The only person who would buy this, is like... a spy. Legit, it's only for people who want utmost privacy and control at the expense of all other aspects and features.

 

A normal user would be a moron for buying this.

 

If they can get the cost down to say... $250 or $300? Sure. But that won't happen, unless they compromise on hardware that isn't open source.

[suicidalfranco]

1 minute ago, dalekphalm said:

The only person who would buy this, is like...

Stallman

[dalekphalm]

2 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

Stallman

Sure.

 

Well, anyone else would be stupid to buy this, unless they already had another smartphone, had lots of disposable income, and were buying it just for fun.

[Thaldor]

40 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

Stallman

Wouldn't count on that. IIRC, he refuses to use any kind of cellphone because "government tracking" just as he refuses to use long distance trains in US because they ask to identify. ()

[Commodus]

1 minute ago, Thaldor said:

Wouldn't count on that. IIRC, he refuses to use any kind of cellphone because "government tracking" just as he refuses to use long distance trains in US because they ask to identify. ()

The more Stallman's idiosyncracies and creepy behaviour come to light, the more he makes you want to use Apple and Microsoft products out of spite.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

1 hour ago, Commodus said:

The more Stallman's idiosyncracies and creepy behaviour come to light, the more he makes you want to use Apple and Microsoft products out of spite.

IIRC Stallman is now neither a member of MIT or FSF, and in the latter case, with many of the key members being... annoyingly closed-minded, to put it VERY mildly, they have been effectively running headless, with even more of an contrarian and accusatory tone behind their recent actions.

[Crowbar]

8 hours ago, Commodus said:

You're both being irrational and over the top.

 

FOSS in many ways is fine, and in some situations is genuinely useful -- say, if you want an easy way for people to audit the security of a platform.  The issues arise when it's treated as a cure-all, when ease of use is neglected for too long ("read the documentation" often reflects a design failure), and when diehards insist on FOSS to the point where they sacrifice real freedom in the name of theoretical freedom.

 

At the same time, you need to chill on the Anything But Apple hate.  Apple users are not necessarily "tools" who live in a "walled ecosystem of ignorance."  I mostly use Apple gear because, as a rule, I can spend less time tinkering with it and more time actually using it.  Because my devices work well together without bending over backwards to configure them.  So long as Apple is genuinely concerned about privacy, and it is, I'm not going to insist that it open-sources every line of code.

 

The Librem 5 is a decent first effort.  I just think it's important to stress that this likely isn't the first step in some grand revolution, and that most people would be better-served by the current slate of closed-off but more powerful devices.

If you can’t audit the microcode of the hardware used in the device then it defeats the entire purpose of what this phone is for since you can’t guarantee that it’s not dubious in some way. What “ease of use” exactly does this hinder? I really have no idea why non-Linux users are so afraid of the operating system. Pretty much all modern distributions have the option for an entirely UI based desktop environment that’s not far removed from windows or in this case android. Do any of these fail to be user friendly? Is moving a few sliders left or right considered “bending over backwards to configure”? This is such an outdated and inaccurate narrative that I question if you have any idea what you are talking about. What freedoms exactly are being sacrificed here? Arbitrary "features" that can all be accomplished with a web browser aren't relevant and there will always be a compromise between convenience vs priacy/security.

 

Aside from that I’m not going to waste time on having an apple debate at the moment. However, when you inherently choose a much more expensive option over the other offerings available on the market simply for a logo, have to compromise with artificial restrictions set in software, support with your purchase the endless anti consumer practices and fight back against right to repair then that’s 100% sheep like behavior that there’s no valid excuse for.

 

Finally, (and again) no one from Purism has ever stated this was for the mainstream market, so comparing it against a device from that segment is short sighted since none of them do what this claims to.

[Crowbar]

3 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

Sure.

 

Well, anyone else would be stupid to buy this, unless they already had another smartphone, had lots of disposable income, and were buying it just for fun.

Yes, it’s stupid to care about privacy and having control over your possessions ...

[dalekphalm]

16 minutes ago, Crowbar said:

Yes, it’s stupid to care about privacy and having control over your possessions ...

Privacy is certainly one aspect of ownership that someone should value. But you're better off buying a blackberry running Android, or loading CopperheadOS, etc, than buying this.

 

You'd have to be concerned about Privacy over all other concerns - so much so that you're compromising heavily on essentially all other aspects that make a good smartphone experience.

 

And that's okay if that's what you value. But even if you value privacy, there are far too many compromises to make this a good phone.

[Crowbar]

1 minute ago, dalekphalm said:

Privacy is certainly one aspect of ownership that someone should value. But you're better off buying a blackberry running Android, or loading CopperheadOS, etc, than buying this.

 

You'd have to be concerned about Privacy over all other concerns - so much so that you're compromising heavily on essentially all other aspects that make a good smartphone experience.

 

And that's okay if that's what you value. But even if you value privacy, there are far too many compromises to make this a good phone.

Please list "all other aspects".

 

The phone literally does everything any other smart phone does.

 

Using your logic, this phone has a user replaceable battery and headphone jack. I guess all the other top end flagships currently on the market are "stupid" to buy since you have to make too many compromises, right?

 

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Crowbar said:

Please list "all other aspects".

I'm not going to list an exhaustive list of all important smartphone features - but important ones include:

1. Fast SoC - the SoC in the Librem 5 is comparable at best to a Qualcomm 200 series SoC. This is entirely and totally unacceptable for a phone that costs $700 USD, unless you're working in the intelligence community (etc), where you're utmost concerned with privacy and security above and excluding all other factors.

2. 720p screen: While functional, it's still incredibly underwhelming compared to any other $700 USD smartphone.

3. Incredibly slow eMMC storage - compared to other smartphones using NVME storage, etc - in the $700 USD price range, that puts this at a large disadvantage.

And most importantly:

4. OS - Yeah it's Linux, but how many apps are out for it right now? They promised sideloading Android, but that's never really worked out well for anyone else that tried, so I'll believe it when it's working and 100% seamless.

1 minute ago, Crowbar said:

The phone literally does everything any other smart phone does.

Yeah. But worse.

1 minute ago, Crowbar said:

Using your logic, this phone has a user replaceable battery and headphone jack. I guess all the other top end flagships currently on the market are "stupid" to buy since you have to make too many compromises, right?

Those are two features that some people put value on, and others don't. The fact that they include a user replaceable battery and a headphone jack is a good thing. It's one of the few redeeming values of this phone. But you must consider those 2 features along with all the negatives.

 

Aside from that, for $700, there are quite a number of other Android phones that both have a replaceable battery and a headphone jack, that will provide a superior user experience, that I would suggest to most users over this.

 

Again, if privacy is your only main concern? Go ahead and spend $700 on this. But for the vast majority of users, it's a total ripoff.

[Commodus]

1 hour ago, Crowbar said:

If you can’t audit the microcode of the hardware used in the device then it defeats the entire purpose of what this phone is for since you can’t guarantee that it’s not dubious in some way. What “ease of use” exactly does this hinder? I really have no idea why non-Linux users are so afraid of the operating system. Pretty much all modern distributions have the option for an entirely UI based desktop environment that’s not far removed from windows or in this case android. Do any of these fail to be user friendly? Is moving a few sliders left or right considered “bending over backwards to configure”? This is such an outdated and inaccurate narrative that I question if you have any idea what you are talking about.

 

Aside from that I’m not going to waste time on having an apple debate at the moment. However, when you inherently choose a much more expensive option over the other offerings available on the market simply for a logo, have to compromise with artificial restrictions set in software, support with your purchase the endless anti consumer practices and fight back against right to repair then that’s 100% sheep like behavior that there’s no valid excuse for.

 

Finally, (and again) no one from Purism has ever stated this was for the mainstream market, so comparing it against a device from that segment is short sighted since none of them do what this claims to.

I think you misunderstood what I was arguing -- I wasn't levelling criticism at Purism in particular, but FOSS zealotry in general.

 

It's fine for Purism to pitch FOSS microcode as a selling point; I just don't think you can argue that a device is inherently untrustworthy if its code is closed source.  Purism's stance doesn't hinder ease of use, but I do think Linux advocates often overstate the intuitiveness of the platform -- it's easy for them, because they're technically savvy enough to handle anything the OS throws at them.  But most people?  Not so much.  I'd liken it to a theme park attraction: everyday people are fine so long as they stick to the prescribed path, but the illusion disappears quickly if they veer off.

 

Please don't assume that Apple fans are simply chasing after the logo or blindly rubber-stamping everything Apple does.  I buy their gear because it lets me focus on the things that actually matter in life, like spending more time with my girlfriend. Life's too short for anything else, and I refuse to be stereotyped just because you have an Apple hate-on.

[Thaldor]

24 minutes ago, Crowbar said:

Yes, it’s stupid to care about privacy and having control over your possessions ...

That kind of is the whole point, there is nothing more. Lacking features (mostly software; see Meemo, SailfishOS for reference how well that sideloading Android has worked), check, lacking performance (that SoC is the prime example of piece of shit and it's one of the things you cannot upgrade), check, extremely high price compared to the normal markets, check; just another FOSS project that is more proof of concept than something that may actually be something more than a sidenote in the book of history of FOSS where fanatical purism barred the road to success.

 

Like I think this quote from their ad site is the best example how much is wrong:

Quote

• When you purchase a Librem 5, you can be confident that we will continue to provide security updates, privacy improvements, bug fixes, and new features… for the lifetime of your device, without compromising performance. Your Librem will stay secure and responsive for years to come. Like a good wine, it will probably get better over time, not worse.
• Upon initial shipment of the Librem 5 in 2019, it will offer the essentials: phone functionality, email, messaging, voice, camera, browsing. The featureset will expand after shipment and over time to more free software applications. Your user experience will improve as we incrementally add commonly requested applications and features (such as calendaring, notes, calculator, PDF viewer, etc.) while keeping performance in mind.

"for the lifetime of your device, without compromising performance", yeah, well... "Better over time, not worse" has said so many phone and other SoC using device makers and it always has come to that that after few years the new device just has so much better SoC that it's completely impossible to keep supporting the first device because it just lacks the performance, you can think about supporting something like 8085 CPU on a modern GNU+Linux distro that would need to also support Threadrippers. "incrementally add common applications and features (such as calendaring, notes, calculator..." Oh, back to time when we send or saved as drafts text messages and emails to keep notes with phones and like SailfishOS was at launch very much one of the worst to come and extremely barebone compared in applications and "essential apps" and even it had a calculator and calendar. Of course getting apps needs developers where we get to this:

Quote

Developers will love the Librem 5 because it will allow them to control their software and the freedom to really own the hardware they rightfully purchased.

Someone seems to have forgotten that quite the large part of developers want to have the cutting edge technology because developing software for something 10 years old is kind of pointless. Also we have heard companies, for which straight out buying developers wasn't a question about money and they burned a lot of it, going under because they didn't attract enough developers (yes, I'm talking about Microsoft and Windows Phone which basicly died because no one couldn't give a shit about it because it didn't have developer support because it didn't have users to pay for that development because the phones were crap compared to others on the market and they lacked the apps that had become popular on other phones).

[Crowbar]

11 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

I'm not going to list an exhaustive list of all important smartphone features - but important ones include:

1. Fast SoC - the SoC in the Librem 5 is comparable at best to a Qualcomm 200 series SoC. This is entirely and totally unacceptable for a phone that costs $700 USD, unless you're working in the intelligence community (etc), where you're utmost concerned with privacy and security above and excluding all other factors.

2. 720p screen: While functional, it's still incredibly underwhelming compared to any other $700 USD smartphone.

3. Incredibly slow eMMC storage - compared to other smartphones using NVME storage, etc - in the $700 USD price range, that puts this at a large disadvantage.

And most importantly:

4. OS - Yeah it's Linux, but how many apps are out for it right now? They promised sideloading Android, but that's never really worked out well for anyone else that tried, so I'll believe it when it's working and 100% seamless.

Yeah. But worse.

Those are two features that some people put value on, and others don't. The fact that they include a user replaceable battery and a headphone jack is a good thing. It's one of the few redeeming values of this phone. But you must consider those 2 features along with all the negatives.

 

Aside from that, for $700, there are quite a number of other Android phones that both have a replaceable battery and a headphone jack, that will provide a superior user experience, that I would suggest to most users over this.

 

Again, if privacy is your only main concern? Go ahead and spend $700 on this. But for the vast majority of users, it's a total ripoff.

-         You reference the performance of the device without ever having actually used it. Why would I take your opinion seriously at this point? Either way, to you, what would be deemed an “acceptable” soc for this device? Since I’m sure you’ve already done the research to ensure other options are open source and already have price quotes from distributors, correct? Also, you fail to understand that Linux inherently requires less resources to run and remain responsive due to the lack of excess bloat, tracking and crapware running in the background. Unless you are playing the most resource intensive games, (which on a 6 inch screen is a terrible experience anyway) the hardware of this device is perfectly adequate for the daily tasks the general populace uses their smart phone for.

 

-         It’s not a 720p screen. 1440 horizontal pixels puts it at an 18:9 ratio. Again, good enough for a 6 inch screen. I would personally prefer if it was a true 720p screen since I hate 18:9 but that’s a small gripe on the grand scale and not something I would get pissy about knowing the list of benefits this phone has which you fail to mention, only focusing on what you feel entitled to while ignoring the scope of the project.

 

-         Please tell me about what use cases you have that are bottlenecked by this storage solution? Please provide the data from such findings as proof that this is actually an issue. Again, as I’ve been stating repeatedly, flagship smart phones these days provide well above what most people need and are never actually saturated to the extent that for example doubling the RAM makes any difference. However, it does add cost and when you aren’t fully utilizing that performance it’s going to waste despite being included in the price.

 

-         How can you judge the app support of a device that’s not released yet? How many apps did android or apple have day 1? How many tasks of these apps can be done using a web browser? I think this is your weakest argument thus far. Support will grow as adoption does. You clearly don’t understand how dedicated the Linux community is. There’s an alternative program for literally everything available on the desktop, so why would this be any different?

 

Either way, keep dropping the double standards. Only apple is apparently allowed to remove features while not being “stupid” and forcing the user to compromise, right?

[Crowbar]

11 hours ago, Commodus said:

I think you misunderstood what I was arguing -- I wasn't levelling criticism at Purism in particular, but FOSS zealotry in general.

 

It's fine for Purism to pitch FOSS microcode as a selling point; I just don't think you can argue that a device is inherently untrustworthy if its code is closed source.  Purism's stance doesn't hinder ease of use, but I do think Linux advocates often overstate the intuitiveness of the platform -- it's easy for them, because they're technically savvy enough to handle anything the OS throws at them.  But most people?  Not so much.  I'd liken it to a theme park attraction: everyday people are fine so long as they stick to the prescribed path, but the illusion disappears quickly if they veer off.

 

Please don't assume that Apple fans are simply chasing after the logo or blindly rubber-stamping everything Apple does.  I buy their gear because it lets me focus on the things that actually matter in life, like spending more time with my girlfriend. Life's too short for anything else, and I refuse to be stereotyped just because you have an Apple hate-on.

There was no misunderstanding. You’re relying on generalizations that haven’t been true for probably a decade. Linux is more user friendly then ever and can be set up to be entirely UI based. When’s the last time you used a desktop machine with a distribution installed? What is your level of experience having used it? What exactly would you (or the average user) be doing that would require anything further then installing basic packages? You literally don’t even have to open the big scary console if you don’t want to anymore.

 

Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, hardware integrity is becoming more and more of a larger issue with every passing day. How many researchers have found serious flaws lately? How many countries are putting huawei on their list of banned companies because the security of their hardware is in question? Hell, even microshaft is changing bitlocker encryption to be entirely software based since they can’t guarentee the hardware other corporations are putting out there.
 

I’m not blindly pigeon holing you as being an apple tool. My label is based exclusively on proof of the reasons I mentioned above. Apple products have no more “time saving” advancements over Linux at this point in time outside very specific use cases for a select minority which I’m sure you aren’t a part of and even if you were, could be argued that an apple product is not the most efficient or effective way of doing it.

 

If you “refuse to be stereotyped” then stop fitting the mold.

[Crowbar]

2 hours ago, Thaldor said:

That kind of is the whole point, there is nothing more. Lacking features (mostly software; see Meemo, SailfishOS for reference how well that sideloading Android has worked), check, lacking performance (that SoC is the prime example of piece of shit and it's one of the things you cannot upgrade), check, extremely high price compared to the normal markets, check; just another FOSS project that is more proof of concept than something that may actually be something more than a sidenote in the book of history of FOSS where fanatical purism barred the road to success.

 

Like I think this quote from their ad site is the best example how much is wrong:

"for the lifetime of your device, without compromising performance", yeah, well... "Better over time, not worse" has said so many phone and other SoC using device makers and it always has come to that that after few years the new device just has so much better SoC that it's completely impossible to keep supporting the first device because it just lacks the performance, you can think about supporting something like 8085 CPU on a modern GNU+Linux distro that would need to also support Threadrippers. "incrementally add common applications and features (such as calendaring, notes, calculator..." Oh, back to time when we send or saved as drafts text messages and emails to keep notes with phones and like SailfishOS was at launch very much one of the worst to come and extremely barebone compared in applications and "essential apps" and even it had a calculator and calendar. Of course getting apps needs developers where we get to this:

Someone seems to have forgotten that quite the large part of developers want to have the cutting edge technology because developing software for something 10 years old is kind of pointless. Also we have heard companies, for which straight out buying developers wasn't a question about money and they burned a lot of it, going under because they didn't attract enough developers (yes, I'm talking about Microsoft and Windows Phone which basicly died because no one couldn't give a shit about it because it didn't have developer support because it didn't have users to pay for that development because the phones were crap compared to others on the market and they lacked the apps that had become popular on other phones).

So your entire argument hinges on applying past broken promises and failures from completely different companies to Purism that has yet to be determined?

 

Please let me know where you bought your crystal ball from because I’d really like to know what the winning numbers are to the next lottery.

[Commodus]

13 hours ago, Crowbar said:

There was no misunderstanding. You’re relying on generalizations that haven’t been true for probably a decade. Linux is more user friendly then ever and can be set up to be entirely UI based. When’s the last time you used a desktop machine with a distribution installed? What is your level of experience having used it? What exactly would you (or the average user) be doing that would require anything further then installing basic packages? You literally don’t even have to open the big scary console if you don’t want to anymore.

 

Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, hardware integrity is becoming more and more of a larger issue with every passing day. How many researchers have found serious flaws lately? How many countries are putting huawei on their list of banned companies because the security of their hardware is in question? Hell, even microshaft is changing bitlocker encryption to be entirely software based since they can’t guarentee the hardware other corporations are putting out there.
 

I’m not blindly pigeon holing you as being an apple tool. My label is based exclusively on proof of the reasons I mentioned above. Apple products have no more “time saving” advancements over Linux at this point in time outside very specific use cases for a select minority which I’m sure you aren’t a part of and even if you were, could be argued that an apple product is not the most efficient or effective way of doing it.

 

If you “refuse to be stereotyped” then stop fitting the mold.

You just supported my point.  Oh, surely you'll be fine, because no one ever needs to do more with their PC than install and run basic packages, right?  I'm sorry, but I use my computer for both personal and professional uses that require a smooth workflow and more than the basics.  I expect my devices to work in harmony beyond syncing my browser tabs, and I won't get that with Linux.  And in case you're curious: yes, I've run Ubuntu in a VM in the past couple of years.  I stopped because I wasn't really getting much out of it, especially since some of the apps I need aren't available there.  It was fine, but I wouldn't call it just as easy to use.

 

I agree that hardware integrity is an issue.  But again, open source isn't absolutely necessary to achieve that goal -- it can help, but ultimately you need a trustworthy team that knows what it's doing.  Also, a tip: calling Microsoft "Microshaft" doesn't exactly convince anyone that you're presenting a mature, reasonably objective argument.  Just ask Penny Arcade.

 

Your observations on Apple are false and presumptive. Yeah, if all you ever do is run a web browser and an office suite, you might as well be running a Linux box... hell, a Chromebook will be fine.  But I do considerably more than that.  I run image editing, collaboration and social tools that don't have adequate Linux equivalents and wouldn't integrate as smoothly with the products I use.  I have a host of mobile and wearable devices that I need to keep in sync on multiple levels.  I need an automated, easy-to-recover backup (which Apple's Time Machine offers).  And for the most part, I've had an extremely easy time setting up and running all of this.  Hell, my parents benefit from this syncing and Time Machine backup.

 

The funny thing is that you challenged me on my use of Linux, but it's not even clear that you've used a Mac for more than a couple minutes in a store.  You need to actually live with one to see what I mean, and it gets more complicated if you want to see the integration with other Apple devices, Time Machine backups and other features.  It's easy to claim that Linux is just as easy and seamless if you're a tech-savvy user who's rarely if ever used Macs, and might never have needed to help friends or family maintain their systems.  It's another matter to have years of experience across multiple platforms and to have seen the differences between platforms on a fundamental level.

[Crowbar]

On 10/1/2019 at 11:34 AM, Commodus said:

You just supported my point.  Oh, surely you'll be fine, because no one ever needs to do more with their PC than install and run basic packages, right?  I'm sorry, but I use my computer for both personal and professional uses that require a smooth workflow and more than the basics.  I expect my devices to work in harmony beyond syncing my browser tabs, and I won't get that with Linux.  And in case you're curious: yes, I've run Ubuntu in a VM in the past couple of years.  I stopped because I wasn't really getting much out of it, especially since some of the apps I need aren't available there.  It was fine, but I wouldn't call it just as easy to use.

 

I agree that hardware integrity is an issue.  But again, open source isn't absolutely necessary to achieve that goal -- it can help, but ultimately you need a trustworthy team that knows what it's doing.  Also, a tip: calling Microsoft "Microshaft" doesn't exactly convince anyone that you're presenting a mature, reasonably objective argument.  Just ask Penny Arcade.

 

Your observations on Apple are false and presumptive. Yeah, if all you ever do is run a web browser and an office suite, you might as well be running a Linux box... hell, a Chromebook will be fine.  But I do considerably more than that.  I run image editing, collaboration and social tools that don't have adequate Linux equivalents and wouldn't integrate as smoothly with the products I use.  I have a host of mobile and wearable devices that I need to keep in sync on multiple levels.  I need an automated, easy-to-recover backup (which Apple's Time Machine offers).  And for the most part, I've had an extremely easy time setting up and running all of this.  Hell, my parents benefit from this syncing and Time Machine backup.

 

The funny thing is that you challenged me on my use of Linux, but it's not even clear that you've used a Mac for more than a couple minutes in a store.  You need to actually live with one to see what I mean, and it gets more complicated if you want to see the integration with other Apple devices, Time Machine backups and other features.  It's easy to claim that Linux is just as easy and seamless if you're a tech-savvy user who's rarely if ever used Macs, and might never have needed to help friends or family maintain their systems.  It's another matter to have years of experience across multiple platforms and to have seen the differences between platforms on a fundamental level.

So your experience with Linux was "It doesn't run the propriety software I want and I'm not willing to adapt even though I had to initially adapt to macos but it's still no good and now I'm going to apply this same logic to a Linux based phone that I've never used." Got it...

 

Ever stop to think that if you had that mentality when trying macos for the first time that you would feel the same way as you apparently do regarding Linux? I also find it hard to believe that in 2 years of running Ubuntu, you never stumbled upon the repository with probably a dozen alternatives to all the programs you claim to need. Regardless, this is all irrelevant on the grand scale here because the OS on the Librem 5 is really not much different then android. So unless you find that challenging to use for unheard of reasons, your argument has no weight. You've also yet to provide any use case that doesn't involve installing basic packages so I'm going to side with my initial instinct that you don't have any and would rather just complain for the sake of complaining despite said issue not having any effect on you what so ever.

 

By the way, who the hell is "just ask penny arcade" and why should I care about what they have to say?

[vorticalbox]

On 9/27/2019 at 4:54 AM, BuckGup said:

I have seen this happen 3 other times. Remember how great the ubuntu phone was going to be?

Or how little interest there is for developers to make apps on anything other than android or iOS.