Lets create the PineCom

[bcnaz]

The responses here do not seem very realistic,
so many people are asking for all the Pine phone functions and adding 50 more new functions

Then they want it for half the price of a Pine phone. ?

[ghostpatch]

@bcnaz You'll always end up with a thread full of unreasonable ideas, if you ask the community what features they want. Don't take it too serious. It's more like brain storming. Why not throw in some strange ideas? In the end the worst that could happen is being ignored, not that bad (speaking from experience lol) xD

I could already think of some ideas I would want the pineCom for:

- audio player
- for reading e-books
- I could install an LED matrix on the back and use it to display smilies. Totally random and useless but for some strange reason I would like to do that hahah! xD
- LoRa is pretty amazing. I could send messages over some distance without needing infrastructure for it. Someone could even build a decentralised mesh network for basic and slow but private communication.. : )

[diodelass]

I have to admit that I still don't quite see the utility of LoRa and LoRaWAN for a handheld device like this.
In particular:
- LoRa is a proprietary specification (unlike 802.11, Bluetooth, etc.) and is thus relatively uncommon, since only a small number of vendors (one?) can produce compatible chips.
- LoRa's datarates are extremely small, potentially slower than even those of dial-up telephone modems. In order to achieve its maximum link budget (about 170 dB), it has to reduce its data throughput to about 300 bits per second. Even using something as minimalistic as IRC at those speeds will be frustrating by modern standards, and loading multimegabyte webpages will be virtually out of the question.
- LoRa's theoretical link budget - how much the signal can attenuate between devices and still be heard - is high, but it's not magic. I don't have any reason to expect that two devices in different parts of the same city, for example, will stand much of a chance of hearing each other. This is still UHF, nearly microwave, and it isn't going to propagate through large structures very well. The chirp spread-spectrum modulation scheme that LoRa uses does have some resistance to multipath fading, so it's possible that highly dispersed reflections off of buildings are more useful than I'm expecting them to be, but I'm still very skeptical of this.
- Mesh networks are a possibility, but they're definitely not going to solve more problems than they create, at least at first. Mesh routing is complicated, especially with very low data rates and mobile nodes. I believe the current applications for LoRaWAN mesh networking are mainly environmental sensors that are polled at extremely low rates (handfuls of bytes per day, not per second) and don't necessarily move very often. In any case, mesh networking between multiple human users will take a very long time to realize, since LoRa is proprietary and chips supporting it are still very uncommon. The PineCom would be the first handset-type device I have ever heard of which contains a LoRa chip.

I'm not trying to say that this device won't be useful; I'm mainly just trying to find out where I might be wrong. A lot of people seem excited about including LoRaWAN functionality in a handheld device, and with my limited knowledge of LPWAN technologies, I'm struggling to share that excitement myself.

---

What we don't need: "protesters" with better covert communication/organisational ability. I'm all for liberty, but only in the name of peace.

This surely is not an appropriate venue for such politically-polarized statements, don't you think?

In any case, it certainly isn't the place for arguing over whether a proposed class of communication device makes it too easy for the wrong people to resist authority. It's hard to see any good faith in that argument.

[KC9UDX]

Then your issue isn't with me, it's with the same post that I find issue with.

[NGOcustomer]

<SNIP>

1. Do we need both a front and back camera on the PineCom? In fact, do we need any cameras at all?
   We need at least a back camera, for many uses. Pinephone back camera is ok.
   
   
2. Should we bring over all sensors present on the PinePhone? If so, which do you think we can do without?
   Low price is aimed, so just basic ones like accelerator + compass for GPS experience
   
3. Should we use the same single band/11n/BT4 WiFi module in the PinePhone (for compatibility sake) or change it out for a dual band/11ac/BT5?
   We need compatibility, so WIFIn/BT4 is fine
   
   
4. Should the device feature a GPS (and compass) or are those features redundant in this type of device? 
   We need it for many reason, in city side and country side
   
   
5. Should we include SPI flash?
   No needed. uSD card is easy to install, spead and easy to destroy.
   
   
6. We are currently considering following the PinePhone’s general design and aesthetic for the PineCom, but if there is some sort of physical (within reason - also financially) that you think would fit this type of device well then make sure to let us know. 
   Cheaper design is good, but keep swich. No need a camera swich, people use black tape.Hardened case or silicone case can be a plus
   
7. We’re currently thinking of using a 5” LCD panel for the PineCom; what do you think about this - is there a reason to go bigger or smaller?
   If it's cheaper, is a good option.
   

[*]If I understand it right you are just saying make an even cheaper pinephone (modem is a must).

[*]If you have an open platform like the pinephone, the privacy part is "just" the software. But pine64 is not a software company, as far as I understond. So if you realy need privacy oriented software, start working with some existing project or start one.

While in my opinion, the Pinecom is NOT a phone, but a technological exploration in what else can be made without the modem.
And from a communucation point of view there are alot of markets that might be served. Like disaster area, operators down scenarions, where a COM can connect people (over whatever radio technology). Or off-grid mesh networks etc. outside the covarage of operators.

Regards Paul

[*]
Hi @pljanson

• Pinephone are more oriented like a "main FOSS phone" in our view, and is totally ok.
  Make a low price range secure FOSS smartphone can be very useful for us for make this tool affordable for each one. A downgraded secure oriented phone with a light OS without bloat for a symbolic price looks a good concept. But maybe we don't fully understand the concept of PineCom, and expect too much about it.
  
  
• We are aware about Pine64 is not a software company. Just asking a basic compatibility with at least one Secure oriented OS, if it's a secure oriented phone. And if some hardware dev read us and can try running Tails /Whonix/qubes, looks an amazing opportunity for software security side.
  We are not able to make our own privacy OS, and we prefer to use worldwide trusted and reviewed OS
  
  
• LoRaWan don't resolve for now all security issue about encryption, auth and MITM attack, mainly bc use old security encryption protocol and the low speed of this network don't allow heavy encryption auth and protocol.
  https://sci-hub.do/10.1016/j.iot.2020.100303
  https://www.cyber-threat-intelligence.co...oraWAN.pdf
  A solid handshake and E2E encryption with modem data looks better
  

[*]About the goal like disaster area and operators Down, if we are fully understand the specification of LoRaWan, for now, is mainly based on Operator Network GSM and mobile data tower cell. So this tower can be unpowered or destroyed
A basic homemade LoRa local network cell cost around 150$ minimum, plus your own network infra (gateway + local server) and need power supply. Looks not for common people during a disaster event, even interested by tech. Last thing, LoRaWan isn't build basically to support massive flood messaging. In a case of a disaster with more thousand people want to communicate at the same moment, the LoRaWan network infra will be limited by the maximum bandwidth.


But maybe we don't fully understand LoRaWan Spec and technology. Anyway, if your target is disaster COM, it's a good goal.


About our politics goals, we are transparent and honest about that because we think tech is politic, and a high secure tech is not a good thing in wrong hands. We need to explain a bit where we from for give sense to our needs. We don't want open a politic debate about our political goals.

If people here think we are the wrong hands because we fight against climate change and for our civil liberty, press liberty, human right, we can delete our posts and stop to contribute to this brainstorm.

Regards

[KC9UDX]

You could discuss these things without bringing up your political goals. And let's face it: I'm not saying this to insult you, take it at face value; what you are describing are, by definition, insurgents. Not legal anywhere, as far as I know. Yes, apparently welcome in some places, but truly contrary to the law.

I'm not trying to be political. But it's not right to support those who break the law and cause disorder. What if you said you were smugglers? Or drug dealers? Or Mafiosos? Would that not be the same?

[X2Q1]

Hi

For my 2 cents worth.

4 to 5 inch screen
Rear facing camera only
No GPS
Switches to turn off all components not required.
Easily removable battery.


I like the idea.

New ideas are what keep us evolving.

Keep up the great work Team Pine.

[James Good]

Hello everyone,

We’ll soon be starting work on the PineCom - a privacy-oriented handheld communicator that shares the PinePhone’s pedigree but offers a distinct and different feature set. We hope to achieve a high degree of software compatibility between the two devices - indeed, we expect the PineCom to run all existing PinePhone OS images out-of-the-box. Unlike the PinePhone however, the PineCom will not feature a modem but rather rely on WiFi, IoT LoRa and LoRaWan for communications. The device will also be smaller at (5” LCD panel or less), and will not feature a USB-C alt mode for video output. 

Everything else is still up in the air at this point, and we therefore invite you to brainstorm ideas with us regarding the remaining design features of the PineCom. More specifically, we’d like to know your opinion on the following:

1. Do we need both a front and back camera on the PineCom? In fact, do we need any cameras at all? 
   
2. Should we bring over all sensors present on the PinePhone? If so, which do you think we can do without?
   
3. Should we use the same single band/11n/BT4 WiFi module in the PinePhone (for compatibility sake) or change it out for a dual band/11ac/BT5?
   
4. Should the device feature a GPS (and compass) or are those features redundant in this type of device? 
   
5. Should we include SPI flash?
   
6. We are currently considering following the PinePhone’s general design and aesthetic for the PineCom, but if there is some sort of physical (within reason - also financially) that you think would fit this type of device well then make sure to let us know.  
   
7. We’re currently thinking of using a 5” LCD panel for the PineCom; what do you think about this - is there a reason to go bigger or smaller? 
   

We are completely open to any and all suggestions at this point. That said, we’d appreciate it if you’d keep in mind that the targeted price range for this device is $99-149 when offering your insight. 

As always, thank you for your feedback! 

Just a few very quick suggestions on the PineCom.:
The first item, 'Do we need both a front and back camera...'  If the PineCom will be using or will be adaptable to any MESH type WiFi network, recruit some amateur radio operators that are interested in amateur, or Ham, MESH for emergency service support.  For the cameras, the dual cameras could be useful in that the front camera could show the operator at that location and the back camera could show the current conditions in that event or emergency (fire, flood, earthquake, blizzard, etc.) and let the emergency management leadership in charge actually SEE what others might be trying to say about that event.

[bcnaz]

A GPS that is not wifi or modem dependent would be of interest to me, 

However it seems the current Pine phone software relies on internet 'connected'  maps.

So different software using downloaded maps,  like the 'receive only'  GPS units use already.

[aussetg]

[*]Do we need both a front and back camera on the PineCom? In fact, do we need any cameras at all? 

[*]No, I personally find it kinda useless. Especially with a very data limited PineCom.

[*]
[*]Should we bring over all sensors present on the PinePhone? If so, which do you think we can do without?

[*]
[*]Absolutely !

[*][*]
[*]Should we use the same single band/11n/BT4 WiFi module in the PinePhone (for compatibility sake) or change it out for a dual band/11ac/BT5?

[*][*]
[*]Depends on the price, ac would be much nicer as legacy devices slow down existing networks.

[*][*][*]
[*]Should the device feature a GPS (and compass) or are those features redundant in this type of device? 

[*][*][*][*]Absolutely. I can't really think of a place where you don't have access to LTE yet don't need a GPS.

[*][*][*][*]
[*]Should we include SPI flash?

[*][*][*][*][*]I don't know enough to answer but if it enables UEFI hell yeah.

[*][*][*][*][*]
[*]We are currently considering following the PinePhone’s general design and aesthetic for the PineCom, but if there is some sort of physical (within reason - also financially) that you think would fit this type of device well then make sure to let us know. 

[*][*][*][*][*][*]It needs to be at least somehow rugged. And a big battery.

[*][*][*][*][*][*]
[*]We’re currently thinking of using a 5” LCD panel for the PineCom; what do you think about this - is there a reason to go bigger or smaller?

[*][*][*][*][*][*][*]Smaller would be annoying. It needs to display maps / infos / be useful