Live data from Hacker News

PinePhone Pro Announced

pine64.org

281–290 of 375 posts

Re: PinePhone Pro Announced

#281
post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MediaTek is horribly hostile to free software and would be a terrible fit in something like this. MediaTek is the reason the Gemini PDA couldn't do what the PinePhone is doing despite making some similar claims. As for not waiting for a newer Rockchip part, it sounds like they are making it clear this is not a second generation PinePhone, just a more powerful version of what we already had. There will likely be a pro…

I'd be interested to learn more about Mediatek's hostility. I only mention them because I did not see any red flags on their SoC specifications.

MediaTek puts the responsibility of releasing the downstream kernel tree source code on the Android OEMs.

And some of those don’t comply with that.

(but otherwise, they are upstreaming support for their SoCs nowadays anyway)

Re: PinePhone Pro Announced

#282
post #163

It is frustrating to me that despite the blunt verbiage about it being a beta device for software and hardware developers, people even here are griping about it being not ready for everyday use. If a free and open-source mobile operating system is missing software support for a feature you want, please contribute to its development.

The product page doesn’t include the word “beta” anywhere.

I wouldn’t even call it a phone if it can’t act as a phone out of the box, let alone use the “pro” moniker.

Why is it not labeled as a development board with a touchscreen and cell modem?

Re: PinePhone Pro Announced

#283
post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many hundreds or thousands of enthusiasts are needed before it's suitable to be a daily driver? I see the fragmented approach on the software side as a major hindrance to the goal of achieving a device that can be used by a normal person as a reasonable replacement for other smart phones. I check in on it every l every 6 months or so, update my pinephone and give it a few days. So far, it doesn't meet reliability…

TBH I think having a flutter port for this operating mobile system is probably the most likely way for it to succeed. That way you can do a flutter app and it will work on this too, while still having mainline OS support. Then you would need to fill in some common services like push and such.

It's desktop Linux, so you can do this now! I know of at least one Flutter app available as a Flatpak on ARM Linux (FluffyChat).

Re: PinePhone Pro Announced

#284
Got my Pinephone today. Currently the most usable modus operandi is to install openssh server and remote from desktop) Getting so much fun anyway, worth every buck.

I wonder. Firefox has Android version with mobile-optimized look and feel. I beleive it shares a lot of code with desktop version. How hard will it be to build that version for Linux graphics desktop?

Re: PinePhone Pro Announced

#285
post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked into sxmo and I think it falls clearly into the "clever hack" category and not in the "actually usable" category. There is only so far you can get on a touchscreen device without actually programming any of the apps to support touch. The lack of hardware acceleration in anything X related is also basically going to ensure that it always has poor performance, everything needs to be moved to use GLES based ren…

> I looked into sxmo and I think it falls clearly into the "clever hack" category and not in the "actually usable" category. Agree to disagree? Also I think you’re being somewhat disingenuous or uncharitable here. sxmo has clearly had a unique vision for mobile Linux for power users and executed on just that. All core phone functionality is available through regular, composable shell-scripts. And all major events can…

I honestly do not see what is so remarkable about it. It just never seemed to me like a unique vision but instead an effort to adapt some existing X11 tools to a mobile workflow. Which is a fine thing to do if you like those tools, but that's different from having some grand new vision.

To elaborate: The use of a tiling window manager with explicit workspaces doesn't really make sense to me on a phone since every app runs fullscreen anyway. The use of shell scripts doesn't really make sense since editing text on a phone is awful. I don't understand what the definition of "power user" means here either. What does this do that other phones and shells can't do? I can edit shell scripts in Termux on Android too, but it's still awful and unpleasant. Unfortunately I just wasn't able to figure out any reason to use it.

And just to be clear, I would not describe any Linux phone as a grand new vision. They're sadly all playing catch up. Maybe that will improve in the next few years.

Edit: I forgot to mention, the use of volume buttons to control a device with a touchscreen is pretty ridiculous. I mean, come on, you have that big nice touchscreen and you're not going to use it? Or has this improved recently where you don't have to do that anymore? Please let me know, thanks. Maybe I'll try it again if this is any better.

Re: PinePhone Pro Announced

#286
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A basic but very important question: can it phone and send/receive text message reliably? Smartphones are so bloated with functionalities, it seems nobody ever talks about that. I don't see the answer on the website.

Not reliably, the modem can crash at any time and until you restart it manually from the terminal you can't send/receive text/calls.

I send and receive texts all the time on my PP. What are you talking about?

Re: PinePhone Pro Announced

#287

Nokia is re-releasing their 6310 phone this year and honestly I'm more tempted to go down that path at this point. Just a regular, reliable phone. The most painful thing for me at this point will probably be authenticator apps. That said the pine phone looks really cool and I hope they succeed. Mobile Linux is going to be such a large uphill battle without huge investments. But with Google/Apple having compensation p…

6300 has kaios. It should have the authenticator apps in store.

Re: PinePhone Pro Announced

#288

It has a Quectel EG25-G modem. I've not used this particular device, but I have used Quectel GNSS modules, and they've been a surprisingly helpful company to work with. I'm a nobody, and working with Sony, Trimble, or ublox has been an exercise in frustration; you have to convince a salesperson that you're a big company and you can sell thousands of devices in order to just read the datasheet. This one does have some…

> will a tower with a band 66 antenna give this modem some of the central band 4 subset, or will it try to negotiate a channel that this can't access?

Here in the US (and likely in other places), carriers use MFBI[0] to solve this issue - it lets them broadcast both AWS-1 (as B4 and B66) and AWS-3 (as B66 only).

This first came into use when AT&T wanted to use B17 (Lower 700MHz blocks B-C) for their LTE network, rather than B12 (Lower 700MHz A-C). This prevented users from bringing their phones to smaller carriers (T-Mobile and US Cellular), who had significant 700A holdings. The FCC eventually pushed ATT to use both B12 and B17.

> little-used ATT bands

This phone likely wouldn't work on AT&T anyway - despite California's SB822 [1] forbidding it, they whitelist only specific devices on their network, and can go as far as soft blocking your account if you have one that is incompatible. I've linked the compatible phone list[2] below.

SB822's net neutrality provision has already been upheld in court (AT&T subscribers lost "data-free TV" on AT&T owned platforms because of it), but it remains to be seen whether other provisions (bans on tethering restrictions or device whitelisting, for instance) will be upheld as well.

That said, one nitpick I'd have is that these bands aren't necessarily "little-used" - B14 is FirstNet spectrum, and AT&T is currently rolling it out to a point where it reaches 99% of the population indoors. That's a strong commitment, and the band's support for HPUE means it can support coverage further than others at a similar frequency. B30 is WCS, which AT&T uses for capacity in a lot of places - but at 2300MHz it's not particularly useful for coverage. B17 is irrelevant due to MFBI and B29 is supplemental downlink (only useful for capacity).

It's important to think about the carrier aggregation combos that this device supports too - for folks who live in cities, carrier aggregation means a significantly more usable experience when the networks are congested. I don't see a supported list for that modem online, but it would depend on which are enabled in firmware anyway.

> 600 MHz T-mobile band 71, which has a wide rollout but poor device support.

As for T-Mobile; Band 71 is necessary in a lot of places, because they've been spectrum constrained for a long time. Until the 2017 auction for this 600MHz spectrum (which was rebanded from Digital TV service), they had no nationwide low-band holdings (unlike AT&T, who held many 850MHz Cellular licenses from decades ago, and Verizon, who won nationwide licenses to the 700MHz Upper C block in 2008). In 2015, they picked up licenses in the the Lower 700MHz range, mostly exclusive to A block - but they acquired almost none in US Cellular markets (much of the midwest, and parts of the northeast/northwest).

It's difficult to build out a network on midband alone - cell sites must be spaced far closer, and in-building coverage is very poor. This was one of T-Mobile's main limiting factors for a long time, and they didn't truly resolve it until that 2017 auction.

T-Mobile had a reputation for a long time for dropping service as soon as you entered a large building - this is why. Physics mean that lower frequencies are useful to telcos because they travel further, while higher frequencies are useful because they can carry more data.

The post-auction DTV transition wasn't short - it happened over 9 or 10 phases, which extended from 2018 until early 2020 (and were then extended again, due to the pandemic). This is part of why phones seem to have poor support - the 600MHz band is not widely used for cellular outside of the US and Canada even today, so it's common on popular phones made for those markets[3], but not in more niche devices like the PinePhone.

[0] Multiple Frequency Band Indicator (https://www.phonescoop.com/glossary/term.php?gid=551) [1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml... [2] https://www.att.com/idpassets/images/support/wireless/Device... [3] https://www.tmoband71.com/

Re: PinePhone Pro Announced

#289
I will ask this question again: why not use android instead, since android is open source? Building another mobile OS from scratch seems ill advised, or what am I missing?

If android is open source, it's not google-dependent. I think there's something that I don't understand, but I bet that the core of android can still be used by any phone manufacturer, so I don't really see why pinephone is making their own OS.

Does that mean that android, despite being open source, is hardly usable/customizable by developers, or too complex/bloated?

Re: PinePhone Pro Announced

#290
post #289

I will ask this question again: why not use android instead, since android is open source? Building another mobile OS from scratch seems ill advised, or what am I missing? If android is open source, it's not google-dependent. I think there's something that I don't understand, but I bet that the core of android can still be used by any phone manufacturer, so I don't really see why pinephone is making their own OS. Doe…

There's a couple of big reasons, as I see it:

- licensing: some people, myself included, think a FOSS/Libre license such as LGPL/GPL3 is better for people and society. Android is mostly apache, which means it's not resistant at all to a company "stealing" it without giving back to the community.

- dependency on google: like it or not, key components of android are completely maintained by google. That means that the future of an open platform is at the whims of one organization. Sure, you could fork, but android is a massive project and a small team could hardly keep up.

- "the core of android can still be used by any phone manufacturer": android, and the related IPs, is pretty firmly in the control of the US government. A lot of funding for non-android mobile OSes comes from other governments interested in a platform and support that is unencumbered from five eyes states

My personal opinion? Having more platforms is good, as are more compatibility layers. Android is more than just an OS or a platform, it's a set of ABIs for running apps that's used by over a billion people.

Post reply on HN