Thnks Giovano but not to worry! I took no offence to Nathan whatsover. I know him to be very helpfull and knowlegable generally in the Ubuntu fora. And I have learnt not to be too thin skinned in discussions in open source :D Actually, I would say that Ubuntu is on the whole still one of the most civilized and on-topic foss community projects that I frequent. All good!
cheers Mathijs On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Giovano Iannotti <ianno...@giovano.org> wrote: > Hi, guys, > > Sorry to interrupt. > I don't know if you know each other. > If not, I found Nathan very rude. I am a Ubuntu user who bought both bq > 4.5 and m10, because I like Linux and have been using Ubuntu since ever. > That's my way to help Ubuntu and Linux communities and fight against the > big corporations. > I think Mathijs had an innocent question and a very understandable > concern. He already bought 3 mobiles to use Ubuntu touch. I didn't see him > as someone trying to undermine anything, or trying to induce Cannonical's > employees to give him privileged information, betray the company. I would > like to know it myself. Eventually, my wife will switch to Ubuntu touch > also. > What kind of answer is this: "t's usually *illegal* to leak this > information because of SEC and other stock regulations."? Well, I may be > very stupid, but I never thought that trying to know if some company will > launch a product, as a final consumer, could be a crime. Besides, I don't > know and don't wanna know what is SEC and what are the stock regulations. I > don't care. I care about an OS that is free and is offering alternatives to > real people's lives in a very destructive capitalist system. I care about > collectivism, friendship, being respectful. Otherwise, I would use an > Apple, Microsoft of Google product. > I felt outraged with the tone of the answer. I am not sure why to try to > make Mathijs look as a selfish, irresponsible person. The same answer could > be given in a more polite way. > > On the other hand, if you know each other, I apologize. > > > Wish you all the best and thanks for developing Ubuntu. It is an excellent > OS and I have faith that Ubuntu touch will become an excellent system too. > Don't give up! > > > Giovano > > > > 2016-08-26 21:14 GMT+10:00 Mathijs Veen <mathijsv...@gmail.com>: > >> hi Nathan >> >> Who said I was upset :) ? I didn't. In fact I think I am very relaxed >> about it. Just trying to get the maximum info that I can before deciding on >> a new device for myself. >> >> I need a new phone after having run down 2 n4's, and a bq e45. I would >> really love it to be another Ubuntu phone but i'd hate to have shelled out >> a 100 euros for a sec hand N4 or Oneplus one or whatever and discovering >> that a month later a new supported phone hits the market. Dont blame me too >> much for asking ;) >> >> Thanks for your response non the less >> >> cheers >> >> Mathijs >> >> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Nathan Haines <nhai...@ubuntu.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On 08/26/2016 03:21 AM, Mathijs Veen wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Nathan, >>>> >>>> Canonical has *very* little to do with this. Everything is up to OEMs >>>>> and carriers. So you'll need to rely on Bq or Meizu for any kind of >>>>> definitive information. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I know that that is the official response when pppl ask about a possible >>>> new device on the cards. And I appreciate that such an announcement >>>> would certainly be up to oems. >>>> But if a device is actualy *not* being worked on (anymore) by Canonical, >>>> Why shouldnt that be ok for Canonical to say so? Just like I would >>>> expect Canonical to be in a position to confirm it is NOT currently >>>> developing an Ubuntu edition of say a Lumia 640. >>>> >>> >>> Because there's no way for them to know. The ultimate fate--launch, >>> suspension, reevaluation, cancellation, etc.--literally depends on the >>> OEM. In the cellular industry (as with all others), the contracts come >>> with non-disclosure agreements. The OEM's business department decides >>> whether or not device development will begin, at what specs, at what launch >>> target, and then when that is contractually locked down, they will >>> determine the continuing status. The OEM's marketing department will be in >>> charge of any announcements, on what channels, and in what shape >>> communications will form. >>> >>> i am of course refering to the vanishing Midori images. Also, at least >>>> some of the buzz of months past about the MX6 must have originated from >>>> Canonical sources ;) >>>> >>> >>> No, there's no reason to think that. Chinese vendors often leak >>> information as a way of measuring interest. If so, this was something that >>> Meizu did. >>> >>> But we have seen no more news or hints for months >>>> now. So if the MX6 is -for some reason- no more, it would be cool -and >>>> really practical info for me and a lot of others- if that could be >>>> confirmed. >>>> >>> >>> The MX6 never *was*. In fact, this is exactly my point--you have made a >>> decision based on a rumor without an announcement. Now, that's up to you, >>> but I would never recommend it. It's a very foolish thing to do. >>> >>> Now imagine that an OEM (or worse, Canonical, who has no say in whether >>> a device launches or not) makes an announcement before things have been >>> determined and budgeted. How much more upset will you be if you make a >>> decision based on that? >>> >>> You're asking Canonical to undermine their partners in a most >>> professional way. You're upset that OEMs don't undermine themselves in a >>> very professional way. You're asking about an imaginary device that was >>> never announced. Maybe they ran some tests and decided that the phone's >>> hardware wasn't compatible, or wasn't powerful enough, or wasn't profitable >>> enough, or any number of reasons a company might not continue development >>> on a model. Maybe the MX25 is coming out next week and they shifted focus >>> to that. In any case, if work was done on midori, it wasn't announced and >>> we can see that in general this is for good reason. In fact, it's usually >>> *illegal* to leak this information because of SEC and other stock >>> regulations. >>> >>> Business just doesn't work that way. And OEMs don't necessarily tell >>> Canonical anything at all, much less in a timely manner. In the meantime, >>> you're on this list asking developers who don't work for Canonical for >>> inside information. >>> >>> This is a pretty good rant, and it's not all directed at you. I'm >>> explaining this in detail because "Why doesn't Canonical derelict their >>> contractual obligations by committing securities fraud, trading insider >>> information, and betraying and undermining their commercial partners plans >>> and market advantage so that I, personally, can be excited about a phone >>> before it's certain that it will be released?" is a question that comes up >>> a lot. So I'm elaborating to give others something to think about. >>> >>> The answer is because there's *zero* reason to do so, and a lot of very >>> expensive legal reasons not to do so, even if anybody *would* work with >>> Canonical again if they did. >>> >>> I understand the excitement, and I've wanted to ask colleagues at >>> Canonical as well when I have the privilege of seeing them in person. I >>> don't ask, because they don't know and it's an extremely unreasonable >>> question. >>> >>> -- >>> Nathan Haines >>> Ubuntu - http://www.ubuntu.com/ >>> >>> -- >>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone >>> Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net >>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone >>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>> >> >> >> -- >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone >> Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> >
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone Post to : ubuntu-phone@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
