A Month With a Ubuntu Phone 118
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."
A month with a Ubuntu phone (Score:5, Funny)
So, what is it like to not receive any calls for a month?
Re: (Score:2)
So, what is it like to SYSTEMD?
Re: (Score:2)
IIRC Ubuntu Phone hasn't switched to systemd.
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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]
Re: (Score:2)
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*
Re:A month with a Ubuntu phone (Score:5, Insightful)
Well I for one am content with a 'dumbphone'.
I have a desktop PC for my computing needs and the cloud services I need while in transit are adequately served by the web. If I'm restless on public transport I'll whip out my e-reader and read a chapter of a book rather than fiddling with an app.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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....
Re:Developers will not come (Score:4, Interesting)
I think the plan is that once 16.04 is released the devices should be capable of running most any Linux desktop application and while that isn't always the most manageable in a touch environment, it's more of a matter of adapting them for use on a phone instead of having to build an app from scratch.
I'm probably not the typically user in this regard, but I have an iPad and use almost no third party apps, with the only one that gets much frequent use being the YouTube app. Beyond that it's a few games, but the browser and various included media apps are sufficient. Having a huge number of apps also means that it's necessary to weed out a lot of crud that was just made as a quick cash-in move and is laden with ads as a result.
Ubuntu phone doesn't need to have the market share of Android or Apple to be successful just like Linux never needed the market share of Microsoft to be successful.
Re: (Score:2)
Similarly, Linux was never successful on the desktop for precisely the same reason; not enough commercial software, particularly games.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Developers will not come (Score:5, Interesting)
Blackberry is dead, Nokia is dead. Android and iOS will die someday too. Ubuntu may be a very very small player, but the licensing and cost will appeal to very low cost hardware makers, and maybe someday Ubuntu phones can flood Chinese and Indian markets. Or they could die as Windows mobile.
Re: (Score:3)
2021: "You basically have two major players in mobile OS, Atari and Commodore. I don't see that changing..."
Re: (Score:2)
"My Amiga Shits on your ST"
This will always be true :)
Re: (Score:1)
...and my speccy shits on your 64.
This will always be true.
Re: (Score:2)
My PET shits on your... No, my PET just shits
Re: (Score:3)
A few years ago you would be saying "You basically have two major players in mobile OS, Symbian and BlackBerry OS. I don't see that changing..."
Actually prior to the iPhone there was really only 1 major player. Which was Nokia with near 70% global market share with Windows Mobile and BlackBerries taking about up 11% a piece.
Re: (Score:2)
Android is already free. Why would the cheap Chinese/Indian companies pay a licensing fee over the $0 for Android?
It's not free at all to the phone makers, they have to give google all sorts of consideration. The phones must conform to google's specifications, they have to load all the google software and provide all the google services. They can't strike out on their own and make a radical new interface because they have to support all the google stuff, so it's not "free" at all.
Re: (Score:2)
That is false. AOSP can be used for free, and there are devices that use it. That Google's apps and services are not available is no different for any other platform Google doesn't support, such as Ubuntu Phone or Symbian or Meego.
Re: (Score:2)
Apples and Oranges.
When Symbian ruled the roost, most mobile phones sold were dumb phones which are more appliances than they are handheld computers.
Nowadays, your smartphone is in reality a computer that happens to make calls, and needs a lot of additional software for it to work more to the users liking. It will be harder to dislodge Android iOS for the same reason it is hard to dislodge Windows - inertia and a very high barrier to entry. Before smartphone, the only barrier to entry was to make a phone th
Re: (Score:2)
Android and iOS offered an experience that people liked better than what was available before. What does Ubuntu Phone have to offer that people want and can't get elsewhere?
Still can't buy one (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
I hate it already! (Score:5, Interesting)
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?
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I hate it already! (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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:1)
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
So where is the 1-button apple keyboard?
Re: (Score:2)
The same place as your intelligence. It never existed and never will.
Re: (Score:1)
The same place as your intelligence. It never existed and never will.
That would be right next to your sense of humour then.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
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)
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)
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)
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
Re: (Score:3)
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)
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)
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)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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,
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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)
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".
Re: (Score:3)
As Grandpa always said, "If it ain't broke, DON'T FIX IT!"
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This has taken me years to realize. As an engineer I want to optimize
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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)
"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.
Re: It should be "an" not "a" (Score:1)
I'm pretty sure it's ewww-boon-too
So what about under the hood stuff? (Score:3)
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)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
actually shipping product
Really? This stuff is ALL vaporware if you live in the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
Is the Internet new to you? It's trivially easy to buy and import phones into the US.
If it doesn't have a service contract and a proper warranty, then it's a "software development device" or a "toy", not a "phone"
At this point probably 99.9% of sales are to software developers, who are buying a "software development device", not a "phone". They will continue to use their other phones.
Re: (Score:2)
Unity 8 is coming to the desktop in 14.04, wait 15.04, wait 15.10, wait 16.10...
Re: (Score:1)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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?
Re: (Score:2)
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?
Re: (Score:2)
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?
Re: (Score:2)
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)
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).
P.S. Neither are hard to try yourself w/ MultiROM (Score:3)
Re: P.S. Neither are hard to try yourself w/ Multi (Score:1)
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
Re: (Score:2)
I have a friend that swears by SailfishOS. Great info, thanks for sharing.
Re: (Score:3)
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)
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
Re: (Score:2)
In regards to the short battery life... could this perhaps be because it's written by developers who are used to a desktop environment, and thus, have very little experience writing mobile operating systems?
It's a prototype device for software development, not a shipping product. It could have problems in its power supply circuitry. It might have a substandard battery. Such problems would not stop its deployment as a development device. It could be any of these problems and it's pretty pointless to speculate further.
Re:Battery life not so great (Score:5, Informative)
It's a prototype device for software development, not a shipping product.
Wrong on both accounts. The MX4 has been a shipping Android phone since September of last year. The Ubuntu phone is the exact same hardware.
It might have a substandard battery.
It does't. GSM Arena stated about 16.5 hours talk time, ~14 hours web browsing and around 9.5 hours for video playback. For the time of the battery benchmarks it was no worse than most other phones.
Such problems would not stop its deployment as a development device. It could be any of these problems and it's pretty pointless to speculate further.
Except it's not a development device.
Re: (Score:2)
Gosh, those Model Ts get terrible mileage and they are so unreliable, Ford will surely fail in short order.
The best features! (Score:2)