Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 19th Feb 2013 16:23 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu After desktops and phones, Ubuntu is now bringing its Linux distribution to tablets. Coming Thursday, preview images for Google's Nexus tablets will be released, so we can all get a good long look at what Canonical is cooking up. They've published a YouTube video which details all that Ubuntu has to offer for tablets, and to be honest, it's looking quite good.
Order by: Score:
Comment by Laurence
by Laurence on Tue 19th Feb 2013 16:38 UTC
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

Canonical have been talking about wanted to target tablets for a few years now, so this was only a matter of time.

Personally, the only Ubuntu project that I'm interested in is Ubuntu TV - but I've not heard anything since the early alpha announcements ;)

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by Laurence
by HangLoose on Tue 19th Feb 2013 17:47 UTC in reply to "Comment by Laurence"
HangLoose Member since:
2007-09-03

Exactly!

I do not want to hamper the excitement for Ubuntu everywhere but to me it is another vaporware until I see it performing. It is really hard to get a grasp on what it can or can not do.

I have been burned many times by Nokia with nice teasers of new platforms (meego, maemo, symbian) to have any excitement anymore. ;)

Here is hoping they pull it off.

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Comment by Laurence
by Laurence on Tue 19th Feb 2013 18:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Laurence"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Exactly!

I do not want to hamper the excitement for Ubuntu everywhere but to me it is another vaporware until I see it performing. It is really hard to get a grasp on what it can or can not do.

I have been burned many times by Nokia with nice teasers of new platforms (meego, maemo, symbian) to have any excitement anymore. ;)

Here is hoping they pull it off.


Exactly what? And are we still talking about Ubuntu TV?

Unless I'm missing your point, your comment doesn't seem to follow on from mine.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Laurence
by Priest on Wed 20th Feb 2013 10:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Laurence"
Priest Member since:
2006-05-12

You said "the only Ubuntu project that I'm interested in is Ubuntu TV"

He said exactly to your lack of excitement about this announcement and then gave statements about why he isn't excited about the announcement so his response mostly does flow within the conversation.

As for Ubuntu TV, its main appeal just seems to be as an alternative to MythTV as a DVR (which TiVo may have patents on). With over the top stuff there are already a whole bunch of other decent platforms available or planned with Roku, Google/Apple TV, Ouya, Wii U, Boxee, Raspberry Pi running XBMC, Pocket TV, numerous smart TV's, and PS4 and Xbox 720 on the way etc.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Laurence
by UltraZelda64 on Wed 20th Feb 2013 04:28 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Laurence"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Wow, so now a new proof-of-concept/product-in-the-making is automatically considered vaporware until it is actually released and proven on the market? I could have swore that vaporware was defined as a product that was promised but fails to make it to market. Such as... Duke Nukem Forever for its first fifteen years or so of existence in many different forms, before finally being released as a piece of shit long after it was forgotten...

[On a side note, I still consider DNF vaporware, because what was actually released was NOT what I was excited about in the 1990s/early 2000s... it was crap. As a Duke fan, I passed up on buying it.]

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Laurence
by lucas_maximus on Tue 19th Feb 2013 18:19 UTC in reply to "Comment by Laurence"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

The SmartTV platform has more traction right now. Samsung and LG. Though they are all slightly different versions on the same idea.

http://www.smarttvradar.com/9989/smart-tv-alliance-announces-new-de...

There is already gesture, voice and obviously remote control support.

Flash, HTML and JS are supported currently.

I have conference call with Samsung representative tomorrow.

Edited 2013-02-19 18:30 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by Laurence
by Laurence on Tue 19th Feb 2013 18:32 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Laurence"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Thanks for that, I've not heard of that OS before.

Can that be installed on HTPCs like Ubuntu TV or pretty much any OS + XBMC? Or is it just designed to be shipped with TVs like an embedded OS?

Edited 2013-02-19 18:32 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Laurence
by lucas_maximus on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Laurence"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Embedded.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Laurence
by Laurence on Wed 20th Feb 2013 00:36 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Laurence"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Damn.

Thanks all the same though ;)

Reply Score: 2

Leery but hopeful
by brion on Tue 19th Feb 2013 16:48 UTC
brion
Member since:
2010-11-04

I've been a bit down on Canonical's mobile offerings since they seem to be missing visible source code, are being developed secretly somewhere, and have no hardware partners.

But I'm hopeful it'll turn out nice... at a minimum, having an alternate hobbyist OS is cool. At best, they might actually pick up some hardware and capture some of the market... but an increasingly fractured "native apps" landscape makes me worried as a developer. Sigh, can't win. ;)

Reply Score: 6

RE: Leery but hopeful
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:05 UTC in reply to "Leery but hopeful"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

There is some discussion amongst the qt quick using operating systems to standardize their api's. That would make it a lot easier to target plasma active, ubuntu and Blackberry. Qt 5 is also being developed as a platform for android and ios, so there is hope for a unified development platform. However, other cross platform toolkits end up just sucking on every platform. So be careful what you wish for.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Leery but hopeful
by Nelson on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:24 UTC in reply to "RE: Leery but hopeful"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

They should aim to speak the same language, just different dialects.

QML, Qt, and everything that comes with that can be the bedrock of all emerging platforms (Sailfish, Ubuntu OS, BB10, Plasma Ative, etc) and every OS just differentiate an API on top of that.

You wouldn't get write once run anywhere but you'd get a very compelling cross platform developer story. I'd certainly buy into it.

If the various groups can coordinate this and pull it off I'll be impressed and Linux will be a lot better off for it.

Reply Score: 6

RE[3]: Leery but hopeful
by shmerl on Tue 19th Feb 2013 20:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Leery but hopeful"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

They seem to plan that. Hopefully it will work out.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Leery but hopeful
by lucas_maximus on Wed 20th Feb 2013 20:46 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Leery but hopeful"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Hopefully ....

Reply Score: 2

Dual Boot?
by sukru on Tue 19th Feb 2013 16:54 UTC
sukru
Member since:
2006-11-19

Trying Ubuntu on my phone would be really nice. But I wonder whether they'll be able to prepare a "dual boot" option with Android.

I still miss the HD2 days, where you could "triple boot" Windows, Android, Ubuntu (and even Meego, Win 95, Windows 7, recently Win RT, and several more).

On the other hand, 8GB flash on many devices may not be enough to achieve this.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Dual Boot?
by No it isnt on Tue 19th Feb 2013 18:33 UTC in reply to "Dual Boot?"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

Both Nexus 4 and Nexus 7 are available in 16 GB configurations, which is what I have (and yes, I'm aware of having said I'd never buy a phone made of glass: http://www.osnews.com/permalink?547813 ). Multi-boot seems to be possible, although I haven't tried it yet.

The Nexus devices do seem to be the spiritual successors to the HD2; I didn't even have to root my Nexus 7 to install Plasma Active on it (it's not ready for actual use yet, unfortunately), and even though I fucked up big time during install, it was easy enough to repair, and difficult to brick.

Reply Score: 4

Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 19th Feb 2013 17:23 UTC
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

Plasma Active is way ahead in this and it's openly developed.

Edited 2013-02-19 17:24 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 19th Feb 2013 18:14 UTC in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08
RE: Comment by shmerl
by No it isnt on Tue 19th Feb 2013 18:36 UTC in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

I tested Plasma Active a few days ago, and it can't be far ahead of Ubuntu. It's a nice concept, but not ready for any use yet. I'll check Ubuntu on Friday and report back.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 19th Feb 2013 18:43 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

They are further ahead architecturally. See https://plus.google.com/u/0/107555540696571114069/posts/HSL2C21DJt7

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by Hiev on Tue 19th Feb 2013 18:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

Why? Just because one of the plasma developers say so?

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:30 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

His words are verifiable. Ubuntu for tablets (the one which runs on Nexus 7) is not the same as Ubuntu Phone underneath.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by shmerl
by Hiev on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:40 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by shmerl"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

Ubuntu for tablets (the one which runs on Nexus 7) is not the same as Ubuntu Phone underneath

Where did you verify that?

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:44 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Nexus7/Installation

Tablet Ubuntu is regular Unity. Ubuntu Phone is a totally different beast based on Qt.

Edited 2013-02-19 19:48 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by shmerl
by Hiev on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:46 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by shmerl"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

And what is that link is supposed to probe?

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by shmerl
by Hiev on Tue 19th Feb 2013 20:00 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by shmerl"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

Tablet Ubuntu is regular Unity. Ubuntu Phone is a totally different beast based on Qt.

I don't see how is that relevant, you don't program for unity, you program for the OS it self, and you use the API, that it will be probably shared among versions.

Edited 2013-02-19 20:00 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by shmerl
by Savior on Wed 20th Feb 2013 08:31 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by shmerl"
Savior Member since:
2006-09-02

Tablet Ubuntu is regular Unity. Ubuntu Phone is a totally different beast based on Qt.


Unity 2D is written in Qt. If this whole phone/tablet business pans out, I bet the regular Unity won't be GTK for long, either.

Reply Score: 4

RE[7]: Comment by shmerl
by nej_simon on Wed 20th Feb 2013 10:16 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by shmerl"
nej_simon Member since:
2011-02-11

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Nexus7/Installation

Tablet Ubuntu is regular Unity. Ubuntu Phone is a totally different beast based on Qt.

That's not Ubuntu Tablet. That's the ARM version of the regular ubuntu distribution, with instructions on how to install it on a tablet. Ubuntu Tablet will be available after MWC so we don't know what it's based on yet.

Edited 2013-02-20 10:25 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by No it isnt on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

That may be true, but Plasma Active isn't usable in its current state. The on-screen keyboard doesn't work properly, for instance.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:45 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

I agree that it's not usable yet in various areas and needs work. I was talking about architecture and foundation which are arguably even more important than the good looking end result.

Edited 2013-02-19 19:50 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by shmerl
by Nelson on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:29 UTC in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Plasma Active has nowhere near the polish that Ubuntu OS seems to have.

And after using KDE, I don't really have faith they'll get there. I don't buy into their premise of Activities. I think they're a stupid idea. Just listen to anyone explaining them.

From what I've seen of Plasma Active it's (in my opinion) slow, ugly, and unpolished. Its weird and amateurish. There's no vision here.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

Ubuntu barely has any touch optimized applications at all. I'm not sure what you call polish in this case.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by Hiev on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

KDE applications aren't touch ready eather, they are getting a touch interface for plasma.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:51 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

More and more of them are (and they are used in PA). KDE are working on making more of them. May be Ubuntu has touch optimized ones prepared too, but they aren't available yet, as their development is closed, unlike KDE's so you never know what they are doing.

Edited 2013-02-19 19:52 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by shmerl
by Hiev on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:54 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by shmerl"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

More and more of them

Yeah, Ubuntu is working in the same also, so?

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 19th Feb 2013 20:09 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

It's good that they are working on it. But they need to straighten up their architecture first.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by shmerl
by Nelson on Tue 19th Feb 2013 20:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by shmerl"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

There have been demonstrations of the OS and the OS itself looks a lot more polished in the videos than what Plasma Active offers. Seriously.

I have infinitely more faith in Ubuntu developers vs KDE developers.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 19th Feb 2013 20:13 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

I always trust less closed development, and KDE proved to be way better architectured and flexible than Unity on the desktop.

KDE development is closer to the values of free software. And produces good results as well.

See http://www.datamation.com/open-source/desktop-linux-revolt-how-kde-...

Edited 2013-02-19 20:15 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by shmerl
by Hiev on Tue 19th Feb 2013 20:18 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by shmerl"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

There ere 3 mobile software with the same toolkit (Qt), Ubuntu, Sailfish and Plasma Active, guess witch one is the slower one, the one that use more battery and the one that has the uglier user interface and the one giving poor results: Plasma Active, the one developed in the open and buzzing "architecture", go figure.

Edited 2013-02-19 20:22 UTC

Reply Score: 0

RE[7]: Comment by shmerl
by Nelson on Tue 19th Feb 2013 20:22 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by shmerl"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Open development means shit if the end product sucks. Its just more chefs in the kitchen.

Products need a strong sense of direction, something develop by committee decidedly lacks.

Reply Score: 4

RE[7]: Comment by shmerl
by lucas_maximus on Tue 19th Feb 2013 20:29 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by shmerl"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I always trust less closed development, and KDE proved to be way better architectured and flexible than Unity on the desktop.


Conjecture.

KDE development is closer to the values of free software. And produces good results as well.


Who cares? Only FSF zealots. Sorry people are going to use what works best now based now and developers will target the devices that real people are using not target something just because it is open source.

Reply Score: 5

Re:
by kurkosdr on Tue 19th Feb 2013 17:33 UTC
kurkosdr
Member since:
2011-04-11

I don't use Linux as my desktop and prefer Android for the mobile, but when it comes to this Ubuntu tablet thing, my response is: "Do want do want do want"

Hope it ships on actual hardware (aka not something you will have to install youself by wiping a Nexus 7/10)

Reply Score: 4

Facebook and Google Maps
by WorknMan on Tue 19th Feb 2013 18:20 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

I saw icons in there for Facebook and Google Maps. Do they really have native apps for these, are they running Android versions, or is that stuff all concept?

At minimum, they would need a Facebook and Google Voice app before I would even consider using this on either a phone or a tablet. Turn-by-turn would also be mandatory on a phone.

As with the desktop, you can show off all the fancy OS shit you want, but at the end of the day, it all comes down to apps.

Reply Score: 2

v RE: Facebook and Google Maps
by twitterfire on Tue 19th Feb 2013 18:30 UTC in reply to "Facebook and Google Maps"
RE: Facebook and Google Maps
by nej_simon on Wed 20th Feb 2013 10:10 UTC in reply to "Facebook and Google Maps"
nej_simon Member since:
2011-02-11

Google and facebook have apis that could be used to develop third party apps so it's not impossible. But the apps could also just open up the respective websites in chrome-less browser windows.

Reply Score: 4

I don't trust Canonical
by twitterfire on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:03 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

I don't see a single line of code supporting their claims. I think they are on crack and highly delusional.

Their so called "operating system" is just a linux distro like many others. They used linux and thrown upstart and Unity on top. I don't see big software development coming from them. Many did better than them. Linux Mint made a nicer linux distro with a far smaller team and Debian added more improvements to Linux than Canonical. If it weren't for debian, there would be no Ubuntu.

I also can claim that I developed a super cool operating system in the secret and that it will run on phones and tablets and that the phone will transform in a desktop when coupling it with a tv.

Some guys already ported Ubuntu on phones and tablets. Just watch these two videos, some guys are running Ubuntu on sub 100$ chinese tablets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyVarHgHMWg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNenqEAGHd8

If Canonical won't do much better than those guys, will just port regular desktop Ubuntu to mobile devices and won't come up with a proper tablet/phone OS, they will fail miserably.

And there's the lack of proper mobile apps. Regular desktop linux apps and games do suck on their own merit, but using them on a tablet or phone will suck even more.

Reply Score: 0

RE: I don't trust Canonical
by Hiev on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:06 UTC in reply to "I don't trust Canonical"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

I don't trust Canonical

Just for the record, tell us, what company do you trust?

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: I don't trust Canonical
by twitterfire on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:13 UTC in reply to "RE: I don't trust Canonical"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11


Just for the record, tell us, what company do you trust?

When it comes to operating systems and software? I trust companies who back their claims with actual software and don't live in a mythical world.

I trusted SUN, I trust IBM and Google, I half trust Oracle and Microsoft.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: I don't trust Canonical
by Hiev on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I don't trust Canonical"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

I trust companies who back their claims with actual software

Then I guess the Ubuntu installed in my machine and the Ubuntu image for Nexus are just an illusion.

Reply Score: 4

RE: I don't trust Canonical
by allanregistos on Wed 20th Feb 2013 04:58 UTC in reply to "I don't trust Canonical"
allanregistos Member since:
2011-02-10

I don't see a single line of code supporting their claims. I think they are on crack and highly delusional.

Their so called "operating system" is just a linux distro like many others. They used linux and thrown upstart and Unity on top. I don't see big software development coming from them. Many did better than them. Linux Mint made a nicer linux distro with a far smaller team and Debian added more improvements to Linux than Canonical. If it weren't for debian, there would be no Ubuntu.
.

You've got it wrong, by comparing Canonical/Ubuntu and Linux Mint. Linux Mint as I see it is just a Linux desktop for linux users who want Linux desktops, with no vision of having to provide smartphones or tablet experience. While Canonical develops Unity in the hope that with _that_ interface they can provide a cross-device UX in accordance to their company vision(go figure what this vision is and compare that to the content of your post.)
Canonical's goal I think is not to go to top1 as a contributor to the Linux kernel. So your post like any other who bash Canonical is highly unfounded and based on poor discernment of reality.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: I don't trust Canonical
by twitterfire on Wed 20th Feb 2013 13:47 UTC in reply to "RE: I don't trust Canonical"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11


You've got it wrong, by comparing Canonical/Ubuntu and Linux Mint. Linux Mint as I see it is just a Linux desktop for linux users who want Linux desktops, with no vision of having to provide smartphones or tablet experience. While Canonical develops Unity in the hope that with _that_ interface they can provide a cross-device UX in accordance to their company vision(go figure what this vision is and compare that to the content of your post.)
Canonical's goal I think is not to go to top1 as a contributor to the Linux kernel. So your post like any other who bash Canonical is highly unfounded and based on poor discernment of reality.


Srsly? Is Unity the best software that came out from this big computing company? Are you serious? That's the best thing they did in 8+ years?

Why can't I compare Ubuntu with Mint? Mint team did Cinnamon desktop which isn't worse than Unity.

Android is an operating system, WebOS was an operating system, Maemo was an operating system, Ubuntu is yet another Linux distro.

Adding a new shell to Gnome desktop and throwing it on top on Debian Linux doesn't make a new revolutionary OS. And pushing that on tablet and phones doesn't revolutionize the mobile world.

It isn't even Canonical's merit that Ubuntu can be compiled on ARM architecture and ran on tablets, that's due to Linaro.

Feel free to mod my comment down as much as you like. ;)

Reply Score: 1

...
by Hiev on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:57 UTC
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

May be Ubuntu has touch optimized ones prepared too, but they aren't available yet, as their development is closed

But it gets open sourced at the end, I don't see any problem.

Reply Score: 2

v liutg
by common8861 on Wed 20th Feb 2013 01:47 UTC