Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Librem 5 USA

puri.sm

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 148 posts

Re: Librem 5 USA

#51

Post by jolmg »

computerex wrote: post #39
jolmg wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like it can be fixed with a software update, though. A few days of waiting doesn't seem like that big of a deal. It's not like the phone is going to be forever unusable.

If it was an issue that could be fixed "in a few days" why wouldn't they simply fix the issue and then release the phone? Or are you suggesting that not being able to make phone calls on a phone is something that slipped through their testing? It has been a "few days" since their announcement and of course this "bug" hasn't been fixed. It seems less like a bug and more like a major design flaw/hurdle.

> why wouldn't they simply fix the issue and then release the phone?

Hadn't they pushed the release date many times already? I think making progress more palpable was important. Isn't it better to ship something flawed and continue improving while already in the hands of people than to ship nothing at all and appear more and more like vaporware?

Re: Librem 5 USA

#52

Post by blihp »

icefog wrote: post #12

I'm unsold on spending $2,000 or even $700 on a new phone, but I also care deeply about privacy and security. Is there any strong reason to choose "Librem" over a cheaper Android running LineageOS or GrapheneOS? They can be purchased for a fraction of the cost and have been quite reliable for me.

Any Linux phone is going to be expensive vs. an Android phone for what you're going to get given the low unit volumes. For some, privacy is worth a premium. For others, the ability to just run Linux will be.

That said, I'm probably going to go for the PinePhone as I just don't see the value add of the Librem. $2k is nuts for the dubious value of assembling a device in the U.S. (both because of our current issues and the fact that the chips, the things you need to be most worried about being compromised, would still be produced elsewhere... so you're paying a lot of money for a placebo) I think the Pine approach makes more sense cost/benefit-wise: just get a Linux phone version 1 built, worry about adding the sun and the moon later. But I can understand that there are those who look at the Pine as being too low-end feature-wise and are willing to pay up for the Librem.

Re: Librem 5 USA

#53

Post by seba_dos1 »

computerex wrote: post #48
seba_dos1 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and of course this "bug" hasn't been fixed You can hear call audio if you use CI images since a few days ago already. Last rough edges are being sorted out right now before finally packaging it all into PureOS.

The issue is that you can neither hear call audio nor transmit any audio, and it'll be fixed when the fix is in the hands of the customers that got the device.

Yes, that's the issue I'm talking about. It already works both ways on CI images, which every customer can grab and install themselves - it simply has packages taken directly from git, as opposed to explicit releases from regular images.

I have said that because of:

>It seems less like a bug and more like a major design flaw/hurdle.

to show that it's not true.

Re: Librem 5 USA

#54

Post by peschu »

computerex wrote: post #29

A fair warning to anyone looking at placing an order for this. https://jaylittle.com/post/view/2019/10/the-sad-saga-of-puri... https://jaylittle.com/post/view/2019/10/the-sad-saga-of-puri... https://jaylittle.com/post/view/2019/10/the-sad-saga-of-puri... The company practices a lot of shady business. Their "phone" that they are so proudly claiming to be releasing to backers cannot place phone calls , the camera doesn…

haters gonna hate ;-)

Re: Librem 5 USA

#55

Post by AnthonyMouse »

icefog wrote: post #47
swebs wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there's the old adage of "Vote with your wallet" by buying a privacy-respecting phone, you're incentivizing manufacturers to make privacy-respecting phones. And $2000 is quite a vote

I value this sentiment and do feel charitable, but $2000 is not a small amount for me - I could buy 10 or more used Android phones for the same price and flash them with open source software to give to friends and family. Wouldn't that maximize my contribution to collective privacy instead?

For two years until the non-replaceable batteries in the used phones wear out, so you'd also have to do it again every two years. Whereas with this, it's expensive because it's uncommon, but the more people who buy one the faster they can cover their development costs or fund further development that makes them more popular and achieve economies of scale, and the sooner it is that they can be making them at commodity prices for everyone.

Re: Librem 5 USA

#56

Post by seba_dos1 »

computerex wrote: post #46
fghtr wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They shipped out a "phone" that can't place phone calls. They also shipped a devkit, whose screen did not work. But a software update made it work. Same here. This is the only phone, where updates make it better, not worse.

> This is the only phone, where updates make it better, not worse. I don't know how you can even begin to support this claim. My phone updates apply a bunch of security patches, which by definition make the phone better and more secure. This is certainly the only "phone" that literally can't place phone calls. If this was a minor issue that could be addressed by a simple software patch in a timely manner, they would…

If that would be the only reason holding up the shipment, I'd definitely want to receive my early device (that I explicitely opted in for) before it's fixed.

Re: Librem 5 USA

#57

Post by newnewpdro »

computerex wrote: post #35
alfalfasprout wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but there is a significant increase in costs to produce everything in the US. I've been shocked by how certain production processes are simply super difficult to find in the US. Even things as simple as injection molding can cost 2-3x as much. Add on shipping costs, etc. within the US and you can easily add several hundred dollars or more to the cost of this product. That's especially true given the low volume.

Be that as it may, with the problems purism has been having in developing this phone this announcement points to a desperate attempt at getting cash. https://jaylittle.com/post/view/2019/10/the-sad-saga-of-puri... https://jaylittle.com/post/view/2019/10/the-sad-saga-of-puri... https://jaylittle.com/post/view/2019/10/the-sad-saga-of-puri...

Right, it's obvious, $2k per sucker for something they don't have to make until Q3 2020. Sounds like an interest-free loan to me.

I suspect they don't have the cash on hand for manufacturing the pending existing librem 5 orders, which unless I'm mistaken requires some redesign work to fix the thermal issues.

Re: Librem 5 USA

#58

Post by bitL »

What's the native development framework for Librem 5 apps? I see they support web apps, but what do they use for native apps?

Re: Librem 5 USA

#59

Post by seba_dos1 »

bitL wrote: post #58

What's the native development framework for Librem 5 apps? I see they support web apps, but what do they use for native apps?

Just a regular GTK+ for native experience - or basically any GNU/Linux toolkit that works with Wayland when interpreting "native" technically.

Re: Librem 5 USA

#60

Post by duskwuff »

computerex wrote: post #30
fghtr wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why Librem 5 costs that much: https://puri.sm/posts/breaking-ground/ Upd: quote from the Purism forum: "First hardware kill switches; first replaceable cellular modem and Wi-Fi/ Bluetooth (on M.2 cards); first smart card reader (for 2FF OpenPGP card); first running 100% free software; only current phone to offer convergence as PC without special hardware" https://forums.puri.sm/t/will-the-librem-5-be-a-white-elepha..…

It's probably also the only "phone" that can't place phone calls.

This isn't hyperbole. The speaker used to not work during voice calls:

> The other [problem] is that call audio isn't routed to the speaker. I haven't personally hit this, I'm just using a data-only SIM and can't remember the last time I actually used a phone to make a voice call.

https://azdle.net/2019/11/comparing-apples-and-gnomes/

Post reply on HN