03-20-2022, 04:36 PM
(03-20-2022, 07:18 AM)Simon Belmont Wrote: I got rid of U-Boot and replaced it with Tow-Boot. I listed every step in the process, including a few comments on what I tried that did not work, in this thread (page two):
https://forum.pine64.org/showthread.php?...#pid108308
Next step is to get Arch onto the eMMC.
I have noticed frequent inconsistencies in the instructions provided by Pine64. And not the type that could be explained by language barriers either. In some cases whole steps, which are crucial, are omitted from instructions.
From what I've seen in people's documentation of their experiences with either the Developer or Explorer model, it seems like the "improvements/fixes" made from one to the next, are where most of the problems stem from. Isn't it supposed to work exactly the opposite, when bringing a product to market? How could anyone have tested the Explorer before launch and said, "that will do." ..? I figured this phone would require a bit of work. I didn't realize that meant it would arrive soft-bricked. I hope steps are being taken to address the disastrous states some of our phones arrived-in, in future phones that are being shipped.
In any case, that's why I listed the steps I've taken, so meticulously. Some of it (or most of it) may be superfluous, but harmless. But at least there is nothing omitted.
The printed instructions are required by law, while the wiki instructions are the up-to-date instructions considering all kind of possible issues, so best to stick to the wiki. Regarding the software state of the Explorer Edition: exactly, Pine does not write the software and also does not test it, the user of this early adopters batch does. It's a common misconception of people who can't overcome their expected projections of how commercial companies work versus the business model of Pine.
