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

Furilabs Linux Phone

furilabs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 259 posts

Re: Furilabs Linux Phone

#131

Post by INTPenis »

freedomben wrote: post #105
KetoManx64 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are wrong about AOSP. I'm running LineageOS (Android 14) on both my phone and tablet without Gapps and it is a fully functional system. (NewPipe for youtube, Aurora/Fdroid for for App Stores) I don't know what you mean by "look and feel of early android" either, as AOSP based ROMs look just like Google Pixel in the settings, quick dropdowns and dialogue popups.

LineageOS != AOSP. They've put quite a bit of work on top of it too make it usable. To be clear I have nothing against lineage, and I'm a Graphene OS user myself, but these projects add a lot of value on top of raw AOSP.

Still though it kinda proves my point. What's the quickest path to a usable phone? Quite a bit of work on top of AOSP, or even more work ontop of Linux?

Re: Furilabs Linux Phone

#132

Post by numpad0 »

whyowhy3484939 wrote: post #69
ninetyninenine wrote: post #43

What I want is quality to the level of flagship android phones or the iphone with the ability to plug it in to a keyboard, mouse and screen and have it function as my laptop as well. One single integrated experience. I think everyone wants this. We have the technology we have the demand, it's just companies who make the high quality phones want to completely lock down the market. You would think the free market would…

> I think everyone wants this. You asked for it. I don't want that. I don't want an "integrated experience" and "flagship quality". The first sounds juvenile and the second sounds unnecessarily expensive and probably containing shit I don't need, like fancy cameras to look good on my nonexistent socials. What I want is a simple, slow, old, efficient, simple phone with the interface of an 80s era 8bit computer that ca…

LTE set that back by a lot. For years there were no VoLTE implementations in common use other than stuffs on Android. Even those had compatibility issues and lots of carriers still block unapproved clients trying to register on VoLTE.

For 3G, you could always do that. You only needed the right modem module with voice call support and audio I/O, like bare PCM pins, and a host micro to handle AT commands.

Re: Furilabs Linux Phone

#133

Post by riversflow »

fsflover wrote: post #119
riversflow wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One single integrated experience. I think everyone wants this This is insane to me. Like not just no. Hell no. I want my phone to be a gadget, like a watch, not a whole ass computer. I want my tablet to be its own thing from my laptop, which is different from my PC(s). I absolutely, positively do NOT want general purpose computing to be the typical paradigm. I don’t want, need, or even like the idea of my phone, th…

> I want my tablet to be its own thing from my laptop, which is different from my PC(s). But what's the point in owning three devices when you can own one doing everything? How about in addition an mp3 player, a camera and a flashlight, too?

I like tools to have defined roles, not multipurpose.

I mean the top post is a ~200USD “smart” pomodoro timer. I’m not even close to that.

I use my phone for communication, quick photos/ notes and sound. It carries my cards. I want it to be completely locked down because it gets used in public and could be stolen.

I use my laptop for personal business including coding. I want it to be secure and streamlined.

I have a gaming PC, it runs widows and gaming rootkits and all kinds of questionable software. I don’t want my sensitive data around that computer.

I do art on my ipad, I want it to be about art. I dont need the phone stuff there. I don’t want my personal stuff there.

> flashlight too

lol I actually carry a flashlight with me always. Phones are absolutely garbage compared to a modern High CRI flashlight. I also have a FF camera and take it with me very frequently.

Re: Furilabs Linux Phone

#135

Post by m463 »

"privacy centric" then uses google services as part of web page. easy fix - quit referencing gstatic.com

That said, it is awesome they are making this phone, and even if you don't use it, more choices are better for everyone.

Re: Furilabs Linux Phone

#136

Post by Nextgrid »

numpad0 wrote: post #132
whyowhy3484939 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think everyone wants this. You asked for it. I don't want that. I don't want an "integrated experience" and "flagship quality". The first sounds juvenile and the second sounds unnecessarily expensive and probably containing shit I don't need, like fancy cameras to look good on my nonexistent socials. What I want is a simple, slow, old, efficient, simple phone with the interface of an 80s era 8bit computer that ca…

LTE set that back by a lot. For years there were no VoLTE implementations in common use other than stuffs on Android. Even those had compatibility issues and lots of carriers still block unapproved clients trying to register on VoLTE. For 3G, you could always do that. You only needed the right modem module with voice call support and audio I/O, like bare PCM pins, and a host micro to handle AT commands.

> there were no VoLTE implementations in common use other than stuffs on Android

What's wrong with the Android one - is it not permissively licensed?

I think the biggest problem of Linux phones is the community's obsession with trying (and failing) to reimplement (multiple times, in parallel) things that Android does really well and can be used as-is.

That's why the PinePhone or Librem 5 still can't even match the usability (at basic things like phone or camera or battery life) of a 2010-era Android phone, despite having similar hardware.

You want a Linux phone that actually works? Start with an AOSP-based phone and provide manufacturer-approved root and escape hatch such as first-party terminal and Wayland/X server app to run Linux apps.

Over time, you can slowly replace Android components with their Linux desktop counterparts when they're ready (or the other way around - the Android bits can just be the commonly-accepted solution to specific problems in Linux - even desktop - distros), but at least you're starting from a solid base.

Re: Furilabs Linux Phone

#137

Post by GranPC »

m463 wrote: post #135

"privacy centric" then uses google services as part of web page. easy fix - quit referencing gstatic.com That said, it is awesome they are making this phone, and even if you don't use it, more choices are better for everyone.

Good catch. We'll fix that. Thanks!

Re: Furilabs Linux Phone

#138

Post by joecool1029 »

Nextgrid wrote: post #136
numpad0 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LTE set that back by a lot. For years there were no VoLTE implementations in common use other than stuffs on Android. Even those had compatibility issues and lots of carriers still block unapproved clients trying to register on VoLTE. For 3G, you could always do that. You only needed the right modem module with voice call support and audio I/O, like bare PCM pins, and a host micro to handle AT commands.

> there were no VoLTE implementations in common use other than stuffs on Android What's wrong with the Android one - is it not permissively licensed? I think the biggest problem of Linux phones is the community's obsession with trying (and failing) to reimplement (multiple times, in parallel) things that Android does really well and can be used as-is. That's why the PinePhone or Librem 5 still can't even match the us…

> What's wrong with the Android one - is it not permissively licensed?

It is not, AOSP based distributions have to kang it from vendor builds. Qualcomm's is mostly standardized but Samsung wrote their own stack and voLTE/voNR won't work on any custom roms.

> That's why the PinePhone or Librem 5 still can't even match the usability (at basic things like phone or camera or battery life) of a 2010-era Android phone, despite having similar hardware.

They most certainly do NOT have similar hardware. You're wrong on thinking it's a software problem when the hardware being interfaced with is notoriously proprietary. The PinePhone and Librem phones are using self-contained quectel modems connected via different interfaces. They are nothing like the integrated soc's of nearly every other device on the market. This dramatically impacts battery life and stability and I don't think it will ever be a solved problem when building devices this way.

Re: Furilabs Linux Phone

#139

Post by jorvi »

GranPC wrote: post #109
jorvi wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since you guys are running Gnome, you might be interested in helping with (or funding) this native GTK WhatsApp client: https://github.com/tobagin/whakarere/ Since these days something like >90% of people is on WhatsApp, it’s beyond quintessential to have a good WhatsApp client.

My biggest hold-up with that sort of work is that Facebook has previously threatened to ban users who use third-party clients, and then they have gone through with the threat. Is this no longer the case?

I can't speak for everyone, but I've been using WhatsApp since ~2010, mostly the official client but with bouts of unofficial client usage, and I've never been banned.

Probably not very detectable for Meta since it uses a wrapped webview, but I've been using ZapZap on Linux for a good while now and I haven't seen a ban yet.

Re: Furilabs Linux Phone

#140

Post by GranPC »

Neikius wrote: post #81
GranPC wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's NFC, although the Linux stack support for NFC is a little limiting. However the NFC hardware is passed through to the Android container, so if, for example, your bank doesn't demand that you pass SafetyNet, you can pay with the phone. (I have done this)

How would you check what the banking app you are using requires?

That's a good question, sorry I missed your comment.

I honestly don't know of an "easy" way to do that. If you have enough time on your hands you could decompile it and take a look. You could also try running it on a spare phone with a ROM that doesn't contain Google Play Services (or where it's been disabled). However, SafetyNet isn't the only line of defense. These apps often have their own root checks, which doesn't pose a problem for us because the Android image isn't rooted. (But it runs inside LXC, and you can attach a root shell into it.)

Another thing they don't like sometimes is the system build fingerprint not being recognized. We have an overlay(fs) system that allows users to customize everything inside the Android container without the hassle of rebuilding the system images or having to stay on the ball when we update things. It's not hard then to pick up the build fingerprint line from a "trusted" device and just drop it in build.prop.

All of this is a bit of a hassle, to put it mildly. But if we try to talk to any bank or contactless payment provider right now, they'll tell us to kick rocks. I guess it's a matter of time until we grow or a very smart person figures out a very clever hack. :)

Post reply on HN