@step There are many reasons to criticize Pine64, but the ones you chose mostly are just wrong. It looks like you are confusing some things.
PinePhone has a slow CPU. You assume that the reason for this is that Pine64 doesn't care about its customers. The real reason is that there aren't many CPUs that work with unmodified Linux kernel.
You are confusing Android and (GNU)Linux.
What we (this community) want is to run a free operating system (Free Software) on our phones. This is because we want freedom and privacy on our devices. One such free system is GNU/Linux. People incorrectly call it "Linux", but Linux itself is just a kernel - a part of an operating system. OSes like Mobian, Manjaro or PostmarketOS are distributions of GNU/Linux. Android is a completely different, proprietary operating system, but it also uses Linux. Most phone CPUs don't work with an unmodified version of Linux kernel and manufacturers create their own versions that they later have to maintain by themselves. After some time they stop maintaining their version and your Android device stops getting software updates. This is what we want to avoid and it's maybe why community's previous attempt has failed in 2017. You should watch this talk: https://gemmei.ftp.acc.umu.se/pub/debian...rious.webm. So as you can see Pine64 and even their competition Purism didn't have much of a choice.
Are you sure the CPU comparison you linked is correct? PinePhone Pro uses a Rockchip RK3399S 6 core CPU.
I think Raspberry PI has better specs than original PinePhone, but it's also bigger.
I don't know how FEL mode works exactly. It sounds useful, but most of us can live without it. Again you are making an assumption that it wasn't implemented for profit, but then why would they add it in PBP? Perhaps you should instead criticize that the phone's microSD slot is easy to damage and PinePhone Pro seems to use the same port.
I agree. I wish there was better documentation written in one place. But I don't understand why you keep mentioning shipping times. Did your PinePhone take 6 months to arrive? I think it doesn't take more than a few weeks.
I think Pine64's strategy worked out better for them since they are now making a second phone. But that's only because they expect the community (and Purism probably) to develop all the software. I wish they contributed more in that area.
PinePhone has a slow CPU. You assume that the reason for this is that Pine64 doesn't care about its customers. The real reason is that there aren't many CPUs that work with unmodified Linux kernel.
(11-21-2021, 12:59 AM)step Wrote: it cannot fulfil the extremely basic set of functions that we would expect of an Android (also Linux) phone
You are confusing Android and (GNU)Linux.
What we (this community) want is to run a free operating system (Free Software) on our phones. This is because we want freedom and privacy on our devices. One such free system is GNU/Linux. People incorrectly call it "Linux", but Linux itself is just a kernel - a part of an operating system. OSes like Mobian, Manjaro or PostmarketOS are distributions of GNU/Linux. Android is a completely different, proprietary operating system, but it also uses Linux. Most phone CPUs don't work with an unmodified version of Linux kernel and manufacturers create their own versions that they later have to maintain by themselves. After some time they stop maintaining their version and your Android device stops getting software updates. This is what we want to avoid and it's maybe why community's previous attempt has failed in 2017. You should watch this talk: https://gemmei.ftp.acc.umu.se/pub/debian...rious.webm. So as you can see Pine64 and even their competition Purism didn't have much of a choice.
(11-21-2021, 12:59 AM)step Wrote: PinePhone (Pro) vs a £50 Alcatel 1's Mediatek https://gadgetversus.com/processor/allwi...ek-mt6739/
Are you sure the CPU comparison you linked is correct? PinePhone Pro uses a Rockchip RK3399S 6 core CPU.
(11-21-2021, 12:59 AM)step Wrote: I think a calculated decision was made to forgo the risk and to simply produce what is, in effect, a very cheap RasperryPI
I think Raspberry PI has better specs than original PinePhone, but it's also bigger.
(11-21-2021, 12:59 AM)step Wrote: So if you break your install on the eMMC to fix it you are going to need: an unmodified fully-functional working PinePhone with a working SD reader, an SD card with a copy of Jumpdrive on it or (and it's not talked about, probably because people would start to ask for it like I am) the img to tell BootROM to enter FEL. Doesn't sound so onerous, but this is making assumptions I don't expect of a phone touting itself as one designed for hackers and people likely to want a sensibly designed kit that doesn't add real limitations out of laziness and a desire to make a buck.
I don't know how FEL mode works exactly. It sounds useful, but most of us can live without it. Again you are making an assumption that it wasn't implemented for profit, but then why would they add it in PBP? Perhaps you should instead criticize that the phone's microSD slot is easy to damage and PinePhone Pro seems to use the same port.
(11-21-2021, 12:59 AM)step Wrote: It would not kill you to write proper documentation and ship your products in the way that every other company manages (getting them to people inside of 6 months).
I agree. I wish there was better documentation written in one place. But I don't understand why you keep mentioning shipping times. Did your PinePhone take 6 months to arrive? I think it doesn't take more than a few weeks.
(11-21-2021, 01:30 PM)TRS-80 Wrote: At this point you could debate strategy, compare PinePhone approach (~ "get a lot of inexpensive units out there into hackers hands to get the ecosystem going") vs. Librem for example who chose a more expensive, powerful (and arguable more open) SoC (iMX6/8) but then spent years getting it well supported in Linux (and who are just now starting to ship in numbers). Both projects have (more or less) the same end goal mind you: which is to produce a GNU/Linux phone, they are just taking different approaches.
I think Pine64's strategy worked out better for them since they are now making a second phone. But that's only because they expect the community (and Purism probably) to develop all the software. I wish they contributed more in that area.