El día Tuesday, March 07, 2017 a las 03:11:37PM +0100, Marcin escribió:
> If that's the case, I think we might still get better support even with
> no further new-functionality OTAs with Ubuntu ;)
+1 (even if it would run Android v6)
The best option, apart of the current OTA-15, before having a
t;
*Sent:* Saturday, March 4, 2017 2:53 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Ubuntu-phone] Ubuntu at MWC in Barcelona
I think that it may be more a case of you've been extremely lucky, or
I have been extremely unlucky. Although many others have had the same
issues:
Silent Incoming Calls:
https://bugs.l
I am with Lukasz. I have been critical at times on certain topics but I
consider the current Ubuntu phone state very usable.
The battery issue hasn't occured for over a year. The silent call issue
maybe happened once or twice over the last year.
I -like all of us I assume- do have my own set of bu
2367 is not a hardware problem.
From: Paul Tait
To: "ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net"
Sent: Saturday, March 4, 2017 2:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu-phone] Ubuntu at MWC in Barcelona
I think that it may be more a case of you've been extremely lucky, or I have
been ext
Here are my 0.02€.
I never had the issue of silent calls (or any other notification), at
least as far as I can tell.
I did have the battery drain issue a few times, but it was always solved
with a restart of the phone and a full charge.
After reading the posts on this mailing list (I'm sorr
* Matthias Apitz, g...@unixarea.de [04/03/17 16:08]:
> El día Saturday, March 04, 2017 a las 01:53:57PM +, Paul Tait escribió:
>
> > I think that it may be more a case of you've been extremely lucky, or I
> > have been extremely unlucky. Although many others have had the same issues:
> >
> >
El día Saturday, March 04, 2017 a las 01:53:57PM +, Paul Tait escribió:
> I think that it may be more a case of you've been extremely lucky, or I have
> been extremely unlucky. Although many others have had the same issues:
>
> Silent Incoming Calls:
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s
Hello,
I confirm both issues and consider both of them critical.
Marek
2017-03-04 14:53 GMT+01:00 Paul Tait :
> I think that it may be more a case of you've been extremely lucky, or I
> have been extremely unlucky. Although many others have had the same issues:
>
> Silent Incoming Calls:
>
>
I think that it may be more a case of you've been extremely lucky, or I have
been extremely unlucky. Although many others have had the same issues:
Silent Incoming Calls:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/media-hub/+bug/1612367
Battery Inexplicably Drains:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ca
Lucas
You wrote "I used the Meizu MX4 with touch as my main phone for a long time"
"Used" is past-tense - what do you use now, and are you expecting to use
Ubuntu Personal (snap) in the future, and if so, on what phone?
btw, I bought a new Meizu Pro 5 (Flyme) and flashed Ubuntu turbo on it.
Hey,
Just a quick personal post from my side. I used the Meizu MX4 with
touch as my main phone for a long time and I really didn't think it
was bad; I actually consider it a really decent phone. I was always a
bit puzzled when I saw people mentioning how unreliable Ubuntu Touch
was in some cases i
Surely we must have either a *32-bit Snap image, or a 64-bit **official
phone.
m
* A 32-bit snap would benefit users on older desktops/laptops too.
** A Fairphone 2b?
We.must have.either completely different use cases, or different phones.
matthias, writing from an E4.5
--
Mailing list: h
On Friday, 3 March 2017 16:54:40 CET, Paul Tait
wrote:
Don't get me wrong, overall this is the best phone that I have
ever owned I just wish it was reliable. However it didn't gain
the traction that it was intended to and that Canonical wanted.
That is at least partly to do with the countless
Don't get me wrong, overall this is the best phone that I have ever owned I
just wish it was reliable. However it didn't gain the traction that it was
intended to and that Canonical wanted. That is at least partly to do with the
countless bugs and bad reviews. The phone (the E4.5 at least) is be
On Tuesday, 28 February 2017 17:37:03 CET, Paul Tait
wrote:
But there is a world of difference between having a system that is capable
of running on multiple devices and platforms such IoT, phones, servers,
desktops and tablets and partnering with a manufacturer and ensuring that
it runs and p
But there is a world of difference between having a system that is capable
of running on multiple devices and platforms such IoT, phones, servers,
desktops and tablets and partnering with a manufacturer and ensuring that
it runs and performs well on that specific device. That didn't work out so
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:28:37AM +0100, Mathijs Veen wrote:
> For histories sake, i would be very interested to know whether or not
> it was already decided in 2013 at the launch of the first ubuntu touch
> image that .click was going to be a temporary thing.
Not as far as I know.
--
Colin Wat
On 02/28/2017 01:28 AM, Mathijs Veen wrote:
The additional move from click to snap has slowed us down and that is
unfortunate. Canonical sort of shot themselves in the foot by
introducing .clicks first. Click has been nucleus of what snap is now
but the move from one to the other has obviously s
There will be
no further phones or any other official or specific devices. Any future
phones will be community ports to existing devices. Am I the only one
getting that impression?
I don't think Rodney Dawes was saying that at all, and it doesnt really add
up with what Canonical is doing at the mo
How so have you been backed into a corner? The idea of convergence is that
you could develop Qt+QML for the desktop too...
Greetings,
Terence
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 7:27 PM Unix One wrote:
> On 02/26/2017 11:05 AM, Rodney Dawes wrote:
> > On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 18:09 +, Unix One wrote:
> >>
On 02/26/2017 11:05 AM, Rodney Dawes wrote:
> On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 18:09 +, Unix One wrote:
>> As for Ubuntu Touch phones, since 100% of existing phone devices are
>> 32-bit, there are no 64-bit phones even being planned (at least
>> publicly), wiping 32-bit future official support outright al
The impression that I got was that the reason that the phones had been
abandoned was because of the version of Android that was supported on the
devices and therefore the kernel version it can run and the drivers that
are available? As no-one is going to add support for newer Android versions
a
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 21:12 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día Sunday, February 26, 2017 a las 02:05:01PM -0500, Rodney Dawes
> escribió:
>
> >
> > Both the BQ M10 tablet and Meizu Pro 5 phone are 64-bit hardware.
> > The
> > userland is currently only 32-bit there, because arm64 was not
> > s
El día Sunday, February 26, 2017 a las 02:05:01PM -0500, Rodney Dawes escribió:
> Both the BQ M10 tablet and Meizu Pro 5 phone are 64-bit hardware. The
> userland is currently only 32-bit there, because arm64 was not
> supported on 15.04, which the current phone/tablet images are based on.
> That
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 18:09 +, Unix One wrote:
> As for Ubuntu Touch phones, since 100% of existing phone devices are
> 32-bit, there are no 64-bit phones even being planned (at least
> publicly), wiping 32-bit future official support outright alienates
> the
> core power users and developer
I guess we're now waiting either for someone in the community to build a
32-bit kernel that can handle Snap based images, or a 64-bit Fairphone 2+.
I have to agree that it does seem most un-Linux-like behaviour.
m
On 26/02/17 15:09, Unix One wrote:
On 02/24/2017 12:10 PM, Rodney Dawes wrote
On 02/24/2017 12:10 PM, Rodney Dawes wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-02-24 at 18:28 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
>> It is, because the click pkg are EOL and the snap require 64-bit
>
> No. Anyone should be able to create snap based images for 32-bit
> devices if they wish. However, I think as only new device
On 24.02.2017 22:49, Mitchell Reese wrote:
On 25/02/17 08:14, Rodney Dawes wrote:
On Fri, 2017-02-24 at 21:37 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
Rodney, three questions about that:
The Fairphone 2 is, AFAIK, a 32-bit device. What will be shown at
MWC,
announced by Canonical, will this be snap or
On 25/02/17 08:14, Rodney Dawes wrote:
On Fri, 2017-02-24 at 21:37 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
Rodney, three questions about that:
The Fairphone 2 is, AFAIK, a 32-bit device. What will be shown at
MWC,
announced by Canonical, will this be snap or click based?
The FP2 port is like any other
On Fri, 2017-02-24 at 21:37 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> Rodney, three questions about that:
>
> The Fairphone 2 is, AFAIK, a 32-bit device. What will be shown at
> MWC,
> announced by Canonical, will this be snap or click based?
The FP2 port is like any other current device on UBports. It is t
El día Friday, February 24, 2017 a las 03:12:12PM -0500, Rodney Dawes escribió:
> > I was not talking about snap in general, but snap for a next phone.
> > There was a clear statement that this will require a 64-bit kernel.
> > Check the archives of this list.
>
> As in my other reply, I'm pretty
On Fri, 2017-02-24 at 18:28 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> It is, because the click pkg are EOL and the snap require 64-bit
No. Anyone should be able to create snap based images for 32-bit
devices if they wish. However, I think as only new devices coming to
market at this point are really going to
On Fri, 2017-02-24 at 19:25 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día Friday, February 24, 2017 a las 05:42:29PM +, John Lenton
> escribió:
>
> >
> > On 24 February 2017 at 17:28, Matthias Apitz
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > snap require 64-bit
> > umm... no? Snaps are supported on at least amd64, arm
El día Friday, February 24, 2017 a las 05:42:29PM +, John Lenton escribió:
> On 24 February 2017 at 17:28, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> > snap require 64-bit
>
> umm... no? Snaps are supported on at least amd64, arm64, armhf, i386,
> ppc64el, and s390x. Some of those are not 64 bits.
I was not t
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 12:18:40PM -0500, Rodney Dawes wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-02-24 at 17:19 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> > Re/ phones, they will show the Ubuntu Phone "Fairphone 2" there,
> > which
> > is only a 32-bit device as we know :-(
>
> Why is this a relevant concern (32-bit)? The FP2 is
On 24 February 2017 at 17:28, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> snap require 64-bit
umm... no? Snaps are supported on at least amd64, arm64, armhf, i386,
ppc64el, and s390x. Some of those are not 64 bits.
--
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone
Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net
The fairphone cannot even run 64bit, it's not supported by the processor
(armv7).
On Feb 24, 2017 18:18, "Rodney Dawes" wrote:
On Fri, 2017-02-24 at 17:19 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> Re/ phones, they will show the Ubuntu Phone "Fairphone 2" there,
> which
> is only a 32-bit device as we know
> Am 24.02.2017 um 18:18 schrieb Rodney Dawes :
>
>> On Fri, 2017-02-24 at 17:19 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
>> Re/ phones, they will show the Ubuntu Phone "Fairphone 2" there,
>> which
>> is only a 32-bit device as we know :-(
>
> Why is this a relevant concern (32-bit)? The FP2 is not an "
On Fri, 2017-02-24 at 17:19 +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> Re/ phones, they will show the Ubuntu Phone "Fairphone 2" there,
> which
> is only a 32-bit device as we know :-(
Why is this a relevant concern (32-bit)? The FP2 is not an "officially
supported" device, as it's a port from UBports and thu
39 matches
Mail list logo
