Live data from Hacker News

Ubuntu for Android

ubuntu.com

11–20 of 183 posts

Re: Ubuntu for Android

#11

I don't understand what you use for input devices? Bluetooth keyboard and mouse paired with the phone?

Maybe the dock has a few USB ports? Otherwise, I'm not sure what exactly the dock does. You don't need a dock to connect a display to a phone with HDMI-out, which are the only phones supported.

Re: Ubuntu for Android

#12
I know it's immature of me to note this, but what's up with the logo to the left of "Ready to talk?". Is it just me, or is it faintly reminiscent of... well, something else?

Re: Ubuntu for Android

#14
post #6

Is this the way Apple is headed? Just dock your iPhone, boom, OS X on the monitor.

That's where the whole world is headed. As a general consumer, why have a desktop when you can dock your phone/tablet and playback or stream videos, edit content and browse the web?

Well, because it's annoying to constantly have to dock your phone in order to use the desktop, for one thing.

What are the upsides here?

Synchronised calendar, user accounts, data, everything? You can do that without sharing the hardware. (Much harder to do it without relying on the internet, admittedly.)

Less maintenance because you don't have to worry about two devices?

Cost efficiency because you don't have to pay for a standalone computer? I suppose that's the big one, and I guess it's good enough. Then again, you could just get something like a Raspberry Pi for not much money. And if you need a dock, that won't be free, either.

Don't get me wrong, I see the potential, but I'm not sure it's where the world is headed. I guess it will be one of a large number of modes in which people use computers with displays larger than tablets.

Re: Ubuntu for Android

#15
post #12

I know it's immature of me to note this, but what's up with the logo to the left of "Ready to talk?". Is it just me, or is it faintly reminiscent of... well, something else?

Ha. Maybe we're both immature, but you're not alone. I'm surprised none of the techies at Ubuntu picked up on it. Or maybe they did...

Re: Ubuntu for Android

#16
post #12

I know it's immature of me to note this, but what's up with the logo to the left of "Ready to talk?". Is it just me, or is it faintly reminiscent of... well, something else?

I really hate to say it, but I would agree. Either Canonical has a sense of humor, or they need to think about how their users interpret their interfaces more.

Re: Ubuntu for Android

#17
This, or something like it, is the future: the computing device is portable, and adapts itself to the forms of input available. There's no reason why your display should have to be permanently attached to the device that drives it, and increasingly, it won't be.

I don't know what the implications are for Ubuntu or Android. But genuine support for a first-class computing experience is one of the few things that would tempt me back onto those platforms.

Re: Ubuntu for Android

#18
I am so excited about this idea, being able to dock and have a full desktop with full applications and keyboard would be awesome. I have BusyBox on my Android phone but it usually isn't enough to make it function like a real Linux desktop. However, I hope that Canonical will stay true to itself and develop and release this as truly open software.

Edited for clarity.

Re: Ubuntu for Android

#19
post #11

I don't understand what you use for input devices? Bluetooth keyboard and mouse paired with the phone?

Maybe the dock has a few USB ports? Otherwise, I'm not sure what exactly the dock does. You don't need a dock to connect a display to a phone with HDMI-out, which are the only phones supported.

I think the idea is so that you can just drop in a dock to connect USB, HDMI and power, rather than plugging and unplugging three different cables each time. That is, the dock wouldn't offer new kinds of ports, so much as collect them together for the user.

Re: Ubuntu for Android

#20
"Ubuntu is the killer app for multi-core phones in 2012"

This text is displayed as if it's a quote, but as far as I can tell, it's not: http://goo.gl/vKHOI (link is to a Google search for the above text). If there's anyone from Canonical here, can you comment on why that is presented as a quote, or what/where it's a quote from, if it is in fact a quote?

Post reply on HN