Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Cellphones Ubuntu Operating Systems Technology

A Month With a Ubuntu Phone 118

Posted by Soulskill from the upstart-contenders dept.
When the first Ubuntu phone came out, reviews were quick to criticize it for its lackluster hardware and unusual take on common mobile software interactions. It's been out for a while, now, and Alastair Stevenson has written about his experiences using it for an entire month. While he doesn't recommend it for phone users who aren't tech savvy, he does say that he began to like it better than Android after adjusting to how Ubuntu does things. From the article: [T]he Ubuntu OS has a completely reworked user interface that replaces the traditional home screen with a new system of "scopes." The scope system does away with the traditional mobile interface where applications are stored and accessed from a central series of homescreens. ... Adding to Ubuntu’s otherworldly, unique feel, the OS is also significantly more touch- and gesture-focused than iOS and Android. We found nearly all the key features and menus on the Meizu MX4 are accessed using gesture controls, not with screen shortcuts. ... Finally, there's my biggest criticism – Ubuntu phone is not smart enough yet. While the app selection is impressive for a prototype, in its infancy Ubuntu phone doesn't have enough data feeding into it, as key services are missing."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

A Month With a Ubuntu Phone More

A Month With a Ubuntu Phone

Comments Filter:

  • A month with a Ubuntu phone (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @02:56PM (#50154965)

    So, what is it like to not receive any calls for a month?

    • So, what is it like to SYSTEMD?

    • And what is it like to give up all the apps you use on a daily basis and replace them with links to mobile versions of that app's website?

      • Re:A month with a Ubuntu phone (Score:5, Insightful)

        by trampel ( 464001 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @03:25PM (#50155157) Homepage

        And what is it like to give up all the apps you use on a daily basis and replace them with links to mobile versions of that app's website?

        Some would consider this an advantage. I'm quite happy to use the web versions of e.g. Facebook and Twitter on my smartphone, and not their apps.

        Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1174/ [xkcd.com]

        • nice cartoon!

          I'm still Google-OS free after nearly a year of Firefox OS.

          The inbuilt email client mightn't be quite as slick as the Gmail app but it's way more usable than Google's mobile mail web page. Facebook feels lighter than the app on my old HTC. I use the web interface of the old reader since I never found an RSS reader on Android I was comfortable with. Here Maps from Nokia does the job, even if it's not Google.

          A heavy app user would feel cheated, I guess. But I'm a cheapskate who never *purchased*

      • Apps suck, flat out. I would rather we go back to webpages then the privacy invading abomination we call apps. Apps were made for companies, not us.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by sad_ ( 7868 )

        Choose between a native app that spies and snoops on your every move and god knows what else it does (all those apps are closed source after all) OR use a web based version which has much less chance of doing the afore mentioned mal-doings.

        hmmm, what to do, what to do....

  • Still can't buy one (Score:4)

    by bananaquackmoo ( 1204116 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @03:09PM (#50155033)
    Still can't buy one ( in the US ) = still don't care. They told us we would be able to buy them years ago. I'm glad they're still working on it. The fact that soe exist in the wild means I know it's not vaporware. At the same time, I'm starting to think I'll never be able to buy one.

  • I hate it already! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 140Mandak262Jamuna ( 970587 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @03:09PM (#50155035) Journal

    We found nearly all the key features and menus on the Meizu MX4 are accessed using gesture controls, not with screen shortcuts. ...

    As it is I am struggling to use most features of a smart phone. I still have not figured out a reliable way to tell which parts of the screen is active and is clickable and which parts are not. For example, today I got into the Google maps directions in the "walking" mode. 13 hours of walking to destination. Could not find a way simply change from walk to car. I have seen the icon, I know it exists. But if you are already in walk mode, switching to car mode was very non-intuitive. I am sure hundreds of young slashdotters will follow up with variations of "I am not getting off your lawn, grandpa".

    Now all the key features are through gestures? How are the available gestures indicated on the screen? Or we are expected to go through the entire routine of dressing in drags and doing a hoola? Is it left right left right up up down down A B A B or right left right left up up down down A B A B?

    • For example, today I got into the Google maps directions in the "walking" mode.

      I know, right? Ubuntu phone is going to fail because google maps on android is buggy.

    • Of course it is up up down down left right left right B A! It's the Konami Code [wikipedia.org].

    • Re:I hate it already! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by nine-times ( 778537 ) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @04:09PM (#50155437) Homepage

      I agree with your criticism about gestures. I had the same general problem with Windows 8 when it first came out: a lot of the features in the metro UI were hidden under some kind of obscured interaction. Hover over this area, and you get one menu. Hover in a different location, and something else happens. Right click when you're in this application, and it pops up with a menu from the bottom. Right click somewhere else, and it does something different. Drag down, swipe left, do a little dance, and some kind of other magic happens. What are all the features? Who knows what you'll find next!

      It also reminds me of Apple's reluctance to have two-button mice. A lot of people made fun of it as pure stupidity, or as though it was a technological failure. It was a design choice. Apple designers didn't like context menus, since context menus mean that right-clicking in different places and in different contexts produced different menus, and the user had no real way of knowing what would be in a context menu ahead of time. The only way to learn context menus is to right-click in various places and try to discern what the pattern is, and hope that the developer was consistent. It's rumored that a big part of the reason Apple has stuck with one-button mice is that, if you're not relying on context menus, multiple buttons are largely unnecessary for normal productivity uses, and not having multiple buttons deters developers from putting important functions in context menus.

      • the reason Apple has stuck with one-button mice

        you can't press the wrong mouse button

        you don't have to explain it again for left handed people

        you can use a trackpad

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        It's rumored that a big part of the reason Apple has stuck with one-button mice is that, if you're not relying on context menus, multiple buttons are largely unnecessary for normal productivity uses, and not having multiple buttons deters developers from putting important functions in context menus.

        That's actually a big part of it.

        By having a single button, UI designers are forced to expose features somewhere somehow, which allows for exploration. You can have a context menu, but everything in it must be ac

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Dog-Cow ( 21281 )

          OS X apps also change menus when pressing the Opt/Alt key. On the plus side, the changes are live, in that you can see the change in an open menu as you press and release the key.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Heck, Microsoft even has shift-right-click and alt-right-click exposing new options. (Shift-Right-Click, "Open Command Window Here" is so useful...). Now just how is a user supposed to realize that modifier-clicking does stuff too?!

          The point is that you are not supposed to realize you can shift-right-click. It's a deliberately hidden function, for those in the know. It's like arguing that a command prompt is a confusing UI - a nearly blank screen like cryptic symbol, what key are you supposed to press?! It's powerful and dangerous, you only want people messing with it if they know what they are doing.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by plover ( 150551 )

        It's rumored that a big part of the reason Apple has stuck with one-button mice is that, if you're not relying on context menus, multiple buttons are largely unnecessary for normal productivity uses, and not having multiple buttons deters developers from putting important functions in context menus.

        I don't get it. Context is everything - when you're watching TV, you expect the controls in your hand to be able to control TV functions. When you're using a map, you expect the controls in your hand to set destinations, points of interest, identify features etc. Once you're there, you sometimes need to indicate one of several things, select multiple things, etc. A discrete button that says "press me and something will happen" is useful as a hint how to do the thing. A hidden magical swipe of the finge

        • They'd rather have cutesy flicks and swishes, so that only those "on the inside" know the magic gestures, and can feel superior to the unwashed masses who don't have iPhones.

          And there you have it: Apple knew it could make more profit by having the "cool" device that people "in the know" can use, which they can charge more for, rather than a more discoverable classic UI.

          Also, I suspect a lot of these choices have to do with patents and such. You may not be able to patent a button that says "archive," but you make an archive function activated with an obscure weird-looking icon with a bunch of random shapes on a button, or by activating "archive" with a three-finger swipe and

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Dog-Cow ( 21281 )

            When you don't want to look like a moronic, raging asshole, you might want to pick an example that makes sense. The iOS Mail app has an archive button right in the toolbar. You don't need any gesture, might less an obscure gesture, to find it. A perfectly natural tap activates it.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Dog-Cow ( 21281 )

          When you discover how to have a useful phone-sized device that does not rely on gestures, get back to us.

          Basically, you have no fucking clue how to make it better, but you'll spout off anyway. That's the sign of an unintelligent bigot.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by plover ( 150551 )

            As I pointed out in that same paragraph, Android has actual user interface controls, including a labeled home button, a menu button, and a back button. I can at least clumsily navigate with them, even if I don't know their magic gestures. Does that solve your dilemma of it being impossible to implement a useful UI on a phone sized device?

            Anyway, thank you for frothing up into a true iFanboi rage at my comment. No criticism of Apple is complete without receiving the expected how-dare-you-diss-my-iPhone re

        • While the gestures on iOS aren't as discoverable as I'd like, I find that, once I am introduced to them, I just know them. They're among the easier controls to remember that I've found. Consider pinch and expand: they're natural once you have an idea they might work, and they're unambiguous. On desktop/laptop applications, the mouse wheel might do that or it might do something else.

          Do you have a better way to control a phone without a keyboard attached?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        I can't understand why they hang on to the top menu bar for app menus though. It's a horrible UI that changes as you select different apps, and it isn't entirely clear where the system stuff ends and the app starts. It makes you move your mouse away from your working area to access it.

        So I'm not sure I buy the usability argument, because the only other option for menus is such a disaster on Mac OS. Context menus, when done half competently, make a lot of sense. No searching through a large number of menus,

        • I can't understand why they hang on to the top menu bar for app menus though.

          That's easy. Fitts' Law [codinghorror.com]. Putting menus on the edge of the screen makes it easier and faster to select the menu.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            That blog post is easily debunked by simply observing Mac users. They don't ram the cursor against the top of the screen, they carefully aim it every time. It's a loss for most people, unless the carefully train themselves to behave against their normal human nature.

            Look at it this way. When you are grabbing things in real life and you know that there is a hard stop you can come up against, you rarely just slam your hand into the thing. It still move with precision, because aside from anything else slamming

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Herve5 ( 879674 )

              I have been a mac user from day one up to when Apple evolved into a closed ecosystem (through their central store), which means some 25 years anyway.
              I still *perfectly* remember the main horror when my company forced windows onto us was indeed the need to "carefully aim" the cursor at a window border, rather than ramming it onto the screen ege.
              Because, mind you, contrary to your hand when rammed the cursor doesn't hurt itself. "Look at it this way".

    • Google Maps is the worst. Just when I figure out the interface they change it on me. One time it took me a week to figure out how to make it avoid tolls.

      As Grandpa always said, "If it ain't broke, DON'T FIX IT!"

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward
        I keep on hearing that phrase bandied about. However, I'm an engineer and our motto is, "If it ain't broke, optimize it!" I firmly have the engineering mindset, whereby we want to create new things that haven't existed before. How about you?
        • I am a meta engineer, who optimizes the process of optimization. If the cost of doing the optimization is more than the potential benefits, don't optimize. The cost of thinking about optimization is more than any possible improvements you might achieve after the implementation, don't even think about it.
        • I too am an engineer, and I optimize things for a living. However, you have to exercise some level of restraint. There are plenty of projects that can be marginally better, but the customer won't notice or care. At some point a project is "good enough" and you ship it. If you obsess over making everything perfect you will either end up making vaporware or annoying your customers with seemingly pointless changes (e.g. Google Maps).

          This has taken me years to realize. As an engineer I want to optimize

        • I've heard engineers say "If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet" also.

    • Re:I hate it already! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by bill_mcgonigle ( 4333 ) * on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @04:33PM (#50155599) Homepage Journal

      Gestures can be incredibly useful but mostly they're wildly abused by programmers who are not UI designers.

      Here's an example: in Chrome, if I pinch to zoom in on a screen, a minor variant of that gesture (I haven't discerned what it is yet) will destroy the current browser window. So about 20% of the time I zoom I lose my session. No 'undo' close either.

      Developers, *please*: give me an option to disable all data-destructive gestures. I'll turn them on if I feel like juggling chainsaws on a given day.

      • I always get jumped on for this, but to me the whole 'menu at the top' thing in OSX seems like a beta quirk that never went away. I just can't get used to the fact that they don't even attempt to put all the features I need right next to where the pointer is on the screen (ie. context menu). Mousing to the top of the screen to control a window that is at the bottom of the screen kills me and is probably the main reason why I would never want OSX as my primary OS.

    • This is one of my gripes. You can't change navigation settings mid navigation. If you want to drive instead of walk or the more common option of deciding you want to avoid tolls you actually need to go back to the route options menu (last thing before navigation starts) and only from there can you change these options.

      This isn't you being old, this is Google limiting what you can do from certain areas of the app, .... needlessly.

      • I naturally assumed Google maps would have some way to access the settings mid navigation. But in a typical desktop application I would have been confident that the application was not designed correctly. In the phone apps I am never sure. I keep thinking, "May be if click and hold there, or swipe here or pinch over there, the menu might appear".

        • I keep thinking, "May be if click and hold there, or swipe here or pinch over there, the menu might appear".

          For all the valid complains about Google's recently strange design decision this is actually one of the few ones that does not apply. Google applications and their design guidelines give clear guidance that there should be no guessing by the user and a visual queue needs to be present for an action to happen. That's why they introduced the "action" menu (3 dots) in the first place.

          Now what annoys the shit out of me is that seemingly every time they release an updated version of maps those dots are on a diff

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sad_ ( 7868 )

      "Now all the key features are through gestures?"

      no, it's not like that. apps/scopes aren't controlled by gestures, they have buttons and icons and stuff, just like any other mobile OS.
      and those gestures are limited to simple swipes, swipe left, right, up & down. that's it. so one swipe opens the menu bar, another switches to the next app, etc.
      it really is super easy. It's like the top to button swipe in android, but then for all directions.

  • So what about under the hood stuff? (Score:3)

    by TheDarkener ( 198348 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @03:53PM (#50155303) Homepage

    I was disappointed TFA didn't mention anything about what you might or might not be able to do aside from the normal functions of a phone. It's Ubuntu, after all. Do I get a shell? Do I get root? Can I install Ubuntu packages such as openssh-server, rsync, etc? Is there anything accessible resembling a real Linux environment?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Can I install Ubuntu packages such as openssh-server, rsync, etc? Is there anything accessible resembling a real Linux environment?

      Nope and nope. You just get shitty scopes and that's about it.

      • Nope and nope. You just get shitty scopes and that's about it.

        From the web site:

        Ubuntu supports all the different smartphone segments. At the high end, it creates an entirely new ‘superphone’ category with converged devices that act as phones on the move, but with full PC functionality when docked with a keyboard and monitor.

        So YES, you CAN have your full Ubuntu desktop. You will probably have to plug in a monitor and keyboard and mouse, but yes, it does all run on your phone.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Except no currently sold phone does support the convergence feature. You're confusing a statement about future direction with an actually shipping product. Canonical has stated that the first phone that can run the Ubuntu desktop isn't due until a tentative release of October. So, no, the person can't CURRENTLY get such a phone. From here [omgubuntu.co.uk]

          The first Ubuntu Phone that will be capable of turning into a desktop PC will be made by Bq.

          A tentative launch date of October 2015 has been set for the convergence device, though this is likely to changed depending on the state of ‘converged’ code within the Ubuntu OS itself.

          So, my statement stands: No, you cannot currently do that. All you get is shitty scopes.

          • actually shipping product

            Really? This stuff is ALL vaporware if you live in the USA.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Merk42 ( 1906718 )
              or anywhere else
              Unity 8 is coming to the desktop in 14.04, wait 15.04, wait 15.10, wait 16.10...

    • Do I get a shell? Do I get root?

      If you can't figure out how to use google, I don't think you should get root access.

      • If you can't figure out how to use google, I don't think you should get root access.

        I was commenting on the article, not my ability to type search phrases into a text box, jackass.

        Also, do you really think *anyone* that purchases a device, regardless of their technical expertise, shouldn't have administrative access to it? Who are you, the root police?

        • Also, do you really think *anyone* that purchases a device, regardless of their technical expertise, shouldn't have administrative access to it? Who are you, the root police?

          Just curious, do you have root administrative access to the computer that runs your microwave oven?

          • Just curious, do you have root administrative access to the computer that runs your microwave oven?

            Just curious, do you have root administrative access to the double redundancy checker in your head brain?

        • C'mon, it's a joke, I laughed, you should laugh too.
          BTW I once saw a show in Australia called "The Root Police". it was NOT what you think it should be...

    • Shell, yes. But with caveats; contrast SailfishOS (Score:5, Informative)

      by Phil Urich ( 841393 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @04:31PM (#50155583) Journal

      I was disappointed TFA didn't mention anything about what you might or might not be able to do aside from the normal functions of a phone. It's Ubuntu, after all. Do I get a shell? Do I get root? Can I install Ubuntu packages such as openssh-server, rsync, etc? Is there anything accessible resembling a real Linux environment?

      WIth Ubuntu Phone/Touch (I swear they keep flipping what they're calling it) you get a shell, and last I used it the interface was actually pretty good. However, although many nice packages are shipped installed, you cannot by default install normal packages yourself because the root filesystem is read-only, and is updated as an incremental image with each new version. So you can disable that read-only nature and then install your own packages, but that then disables system upgrades, and if you re-enable system upgrades you are by definition wiping out all your installed packages.

      In this respect I've found SailfishOS far more familiar, even though it's an RPM-based distro and I'm far more familiar with DEB-based distros, because SailfishOS under the hood acts exactly like any other distro, it just happens to run on your phone (with much of the gesture-based swishiness of Ubuntu Phone). If I want to install git, I just type "pkcon install git" or whatnot and I get it. If a system library has a bug, I can recompile it with a fix myself and replace the .so. In theory Ubuntu Phone is more open than SailfishOS (which has several components that are closed-source still), but in practice I find SailfishOS far more open in that it doesn't discourage you from playing around under the hood---not to mention that their stack is far more standard (Wayland, PackageKit+RPM, etc) than Ubuntu Phone's stack (with Mir, the whole Snappy thing and "click-packages", etc).

      • Forgot to mention, if you're at all curious and happen to have a rooted phone already, it's quite possible you'll be able to use MultiROM [github.com] to dual/triple/etc boot to test Ubuntu Touch or SailfishOS or FirefoxOS or whatnot out. Ubuntu is particularly easy since if you're running a supported Android device and already have root it's literally just:
        1. 1. Install the app from the Play Store [google.com]
        2. 2. Click on the option to install MultiROM's bootloader (and patched kernel if yours doesn't have kexec)
        3. 3. Once the app has
        • Ubuntu's click packages take advantage of dpkg and are basically simplified deb packages, so I wouldn't call them foreign.

          The read-only nature of the default file system is there for a good reason: It allows them to ensure the integrity of the image, resulting in simple updates without file conflicts. If user A is on update 189, then user B with update 189 has the exact same files on his system partition. Other advantages include: clean rollbacks in case of an error (no failed partial upgrades with files

      • I have a friend that swears by SailfishOS. Great info, thanks for sharing.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Uecker ( 1842596 )

        IMHO the biggest strategic blunder of all this mobile Linux distributions is that they break compatibility with standard X11 / Linux. Why be incompatible?

        I know for Sailfish the reason was that they could get access to Android drivers more easily by using Wayland instead of X11, but for me it meant that I completely lost interest in Sailfish at this point. Maybe XWayland will run someday... or does it already?

        I also still believe that the networking of X11 would be really great if exploited properly - espec

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I bought an Ubuntu phone (MX4) 2 weeks ago and yes, you get a shell (dash). There is a terminal app (don't remember if it was pre-installed or if I installed it myself, sorry).
      ssh server and rsync are pre-installed. And you get all the important GNU utilities (grep, sed, etc.), too.

      The root filesystem is read-only by default but this can be changed by editing a config file (or just temporarily re-mount rw). So yes, it is more GNU/Linux-y than an Android device.

      Phone and SMS apps work as expected except MMS

  • Fans of the Ubuntu desktop OS will be glad to know that Whoopsie, Geoclue, and Zeitgeist were among the first apps ported to the Ubuntu phone.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Close