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

Ubuntu Edge

indiegogo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 390 posts

Re: Ubuntu Edge

#201

Post by zanny »

macspoofing wrote: post #126
rocky1138 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love that. The biggest problem for me is that I have a number of monitors and laptops that don't support HDMI. If there was a sub $10 adapter I could get for VGA->HDMI<-VGA then it would be a perfect world.

>The biggest problem for me is that I have a number of monitors and laptops that don't support HDMI That's not a problem for anybody else. It's practically a non-issue.

Yea, what kind of display made since 2005 doesn't support hdmi (note: dvi -> hdmi is really easy and readily available)? Analog video died in 2001, and only persists in corporate America, and it is so horribly outdated broken and crappy I can't fathom wasting development effort to get a vga port or adapter working.

Re: Ubuntu Edge

#202

Post by danudey »

threedaymonk wrote: post #89
mrt0mat0 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i have to wonder how many ubuntu users are using ubuntu simply for the cost of owning it ($0). If that group is high, which i think it is, it may imply that a lot of those same users, might not want to put money into a project. Speculation.

Do you have any basis for thinking that? I ask because my perception is that the cost of OS is effectively zero for almost all computer users: Windows or Mac OS comes free* with the computer. * Free and bundled together at a sharply discounted cost (or the cost of R&D in Apple's case) to the manufacturer aren't exactly the same, but that's not apparent to the purchaser.

The cost of OS is zero when acquiring a new computer through a retail outlet, and zero only for Linux users when acquiring computers through donations, salvage, etc.

Re: Ubuntu Edge

#203

Post by shmerl »

slgeorge wrote: post #193
shmerl wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess they just didn't find investors. Jolla managed to do it because they have expertise and accumulated knowledge in the field. Canonical don't have that.

Wrong guess I'm afraid. We (Canonical) haven't announced any hardware or network partners for a general market launch. Ubuntu Edge isn't aimed at the mass market. It's a special limited edition hardware platform which accelerates lots of interesting hardware technology combined with the Ubuntu phone. So it's designed for developers or technology enthusiasts who really value cutting edge innovation.

Then it's not so surprising, that going with extra high end non common device before releasing one available for common users didn't attract investors. It looks very risky.

Canonical had to start with practical and common device, before going into super experimental one. And with resources from the first, go for more experiments.

Re: Ubuntu Edge

#204

Post by commandar »

macspoofing wrote: post #126
rocky1138 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love that. The biggest problem for me is that I have a number of monitors and laptops that don't support HDMI. If there was a sub $10 adapter I could get for VGA->HDMI<-VGA then it would be a perfect world.

>The biggest problem for me is that I have a number of monitors and laptops that don't support HDMI That's not a problem for anybody else. It's practically a non-issue.

Uh, no.

http://shopping1.hp.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/WFS/WW-USS...

Those are the monitors HP aims at the enterprise. A lot of them have VGA only, and none of them have HDMI.

So in my organization, we have thousands of monitors that would require an adapter at minimum and maybe a couple dozen floating around that were special ordered one-offs that might have HDMI built-in.

Re: Ubuntu Edge

#205

Post by slgeorge »

shmerl wrote: post #23

Using crowdfunding wastes a huge part of the raised money on taxes. It looks like a sign of Canonical not being able to find investors. Jolla for example did, and I take it as a sign of maturity and expertise in the field.

Seriously, how exactly does crowdfunding 'waste' more money than buying something - you have to pay taxes of everything you buy anyway. You can at best argue that it's a 'waste' if we don't hit the target and no phone is produced.

The reality is that the Phone industry isn't incentivised to build products like Ubuntu Edge. It's a limited run, high-end product rather than mass-volume. In that context coming up with interesting ideas and then testing whether there's interest with crowdfunding is completely appropriate.

ps I work for Canonical so obviously I'm biased.

Re: Ubuntu Edge

#206

Post by Zigurd »

achiang wrote: post #58
xanderstrike wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was my thinking. The whole time through that video I was wondering why they don't just buy a couple thousand Nexus 4s to load up with their custom build and re-sell. If they're planning to put Ubuntu on other manufacturers hardware, the official Google supported phone sounds like a pretty good place to start, and the speed at which those phones sell would be a great way to test the interest in their new platform…

Reselling someone else's developer phone from last year isn't exactly the marketing message we're going for. Edge is meant to be a premium product, not just another "me too". Unrelated: if you simply want to test drive Ubuntu for Phones, it's already been ported to 40+ platforms.

I think everyone understands what Canonical is trying to do. They just question whether it's a good idea. It's very difficult to make the best phone on the first try. It adds a lot of project risk to Ubuntu for mobile devices to try.

On top of that, if you don't have OEM launch partners for phones, maybe you shouldn't be doing phones. If the carriers really want you, they will make the channel commitments that the OEMs need to green-light a phone.

Re: Ubuntu Edge

#207

Post by shmerl »

slgeorge wrote: post #205
shmerl wrote: post #23

Using crowdfunding wastes a huge part of the raised money on taxes. It looks like a sign of Canonical not being able to find investors. Jolla for example did, and I take it as a sign of maturity and expertise in the field.

Seriously, how exactly does crowdfunding 'waste' more money than buying something - you have to pay taxes of everything you buy anyway. You can at best argue that it's a 'waste' if we don't hit the target and no phone is produced. The reality is that the Phone industry isn't incentivised to build products like Ubuntu Edge. It's a limited run, high-end product rather than mass-volume. In that context coming up with in…

Seriously, how exactly does crowdfunding 'waste' more money than buying something - you have to pay taxes of everything you buy anyway.

Unless I misunderstood something, crowdfunding (in current form) has low effective outcome, since it's taxed as presales (which axes the raised funds significantly). I think it's a bit weird, since in essence this is fundraising, and not presales, but this how it works for some reason. Investment doesn't work the same way, and the input can be used for the intended purpose much more effectively.

Re: Ubuntu Edge

#208

Post by wmf »

jamesbrennan wrote: post #181

I wonder what 'Fastest multi-core CPU' actually equates to. Has anyone found technical specifications that include a more specific value than 'fastest'?

The fact that they don't provide details probably means that the processor hasn't been announced yet. Presumably it will be faster than a Snapdragon MSM8974. http://www.anandtech.com/show/7082/snapdragon-800-msm8974-pe...

Re: Ubuntu Edge

#209

Post by ubersync »

Am I missing something? How is this phone any different from say Google Nexus 4, or Samsung Galaxy S4? E.g. Google Nexus 4 has almost the same specs other than RAM, Storage and Dual LTE. But it is only for $300.

More specifically, how does the Formula 1 analogy fit in? This phone is priced about the same as iPhone, Samsung Galaxy and has almost the same specs.

Re: Ubuntu Edge

#210

Post by rlpb »

lewtds wrote: post #72
grey-area wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've ordered one too, because I really like the sound of a Phone OS based on Ubuntu, not controlled by the likes of Google and Apple, and with a UI based on HTML. The proposed UI and demo apps look nice, I like the idea of losing the chrome as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO7QbCqFY7Y It's going up quite fast, from 167k to 198k as I finish writing this, but I'm not sure if they'll make their target, just beca…

The UI is not based on HTML, it's QML. It's a GUI declaration language similar to XAML from MS. The whole QML described UI is an accelerated OpenGL scene backed by Qt technology so the performance should be much higher than that of HTML5.

HTML5 is also supported. From http://developer.ubuntu.com/get-started/:

"Native or HTML5, your choice

We recognize HTML5 as a core Internet technology often used to develop cross-platform apps. As such, the Ubuntu toolkit offers the flexibility to support HTML5 too. It’s your choice to decide whether you want to go native with QML and the best Ubuntu integration or HTML5 and less integration via Unity webapps."

Post reply on HN