never buying hardware that could support alternate OSs, but doesn't
next phone will be the dumbest one i can find
so tired of half baked software and pointless pseudo updates
what's the point of advertising "four versions"?
is the hardware of the samsung s6 so fucking slow compared to a similarly priced current phone from samsung, that it can't run the latest android? Or is it because they need us to buy new hardware as often as possible?
why can a fifteen year old computer, with their *uncountable* hardware configurations run the latest OSes, from microsoft and the OSS community, but a 4-5 year old phone with *very specific* hardware can't?
Frankly, what we need is a pocket-sized version of the "IBM-compatible" platform back in the days. A skeleton bus + meat modules + skin ruggedness design. With an open spec for the spine and meat bits. (Skin is trivial.) And all the usuals available from several manufacturers. SoC, keyboard, screen, storage, battery, external connectors, antennas, sensors, camera.
But what it needs is a unique killer feature that can only be enabled by that, and is attractive to even Google humAnoidroids complete iTards who can
Frankly, what we need is a pocket-sized version of the "IBM-compatible" platform back in the days. A skeleton bus {...}
The problem is that "pocket-sized" requires miniaturisation which in turn require ultra high integration, whereas standardized bus and modular architecture need to be spread out. It's like wanting the Raspberry Pi SBC *itselff* being modular (e.g.: swapping ram modules, onboard USB hub and network) as opposed to be able to talk to external modules.
With phones: A lot have tried, very little have succeeded:
- Fairphone managed to pull it of, and even there, the modules are very custom and not industry standard as
never buying hardware that could support alternate OSs, but doesn't next phone will be the dumbest one i can find
You might have a look at the Pine64's PinePhone, which not only has a low-ish price, but in addition has been designed with opensource (runs on mainline kernel) and community in mind.
why can a fifteen year old computer, with their *uncountable* hardware configurations run the latest OSes, from microsoft and the OSS community, but a 4-5 year old phone with *very specific* hardware can't?
Because of - as Mac hardware users are going to discover in the coming years of Apple silicon (M1 and its future descendant): Lack of standard.
Your fifteen year old computer follows some very standard way to organise everything (UEFI or BIOS firmware, ACPI, standard discoverable PCI/PCIe bus, etc.) take any standard compliant Lin
useless bullshit (Score:3)
aka "marketing".
never buying hardware that could support alternate OSs, but doesn't
next phone will be the dumbest one i can find
so tired of half baked software and pointless pseudo updates
what's the point of advertising "four versions"?
is the hardware of the samsung s6 so fucking slow compared to a similarly priced current phone from samsung, that it can't run the latest android? Or is it because they need us to buy new hardware as often as possible?
why can a fifteen year old computer, with their *uncountable* hardware configurations run the latest OSes, from microsoft and the OSS community, but a 4-5 year old phone with *very specific* hardware can't?
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, I hate when I do that.
Re:useless bullshit (Score:4, Funny)
my incompetence is limited by this mortal shell
Re: useless bullshit (Score:2)
Frankly, what we need is a pocket-sized version of the "IBM-compatible" platform back in the days.
A skeleton bus + meat modules + skin ruggedness design. With an open spec for the spine and meat bits. (Skin is trivial.)
And all the usuals available from several manufacturers.
SoC, keyboard, screen, storage, battery, external connectors, antennas, sensors, camera.
But what it needs is a unique killer feature that can only be enabled by that, and is attractive to even Google humAnoidroids complete iTards who can
Re: (Score:3)
https://www.fairphone.com/ [fairphone.com]
Size constrains. (Score:2)
Frankly, what we need is a pocket-sized version of the "IBM-compatible" platform back in the days.
A skeleton bus {...}
The problem is that "pocket-sized" requires miniaturisation which in turn require ultra high integration,
whereas standardized bus and modular architecture need to be spread out.
It's like wanting the Raspberry Pi SBC *itselff* being modular (e.g.: swapping ram modules, onboard USB hub and network) as opposed to be able to talk to external modules.
With phones:
A lot have tried, very little have succeeded:
- Fairphone managed to pull it of, and even there, the modules are very custom and not industry standard as
opensource-friendly phones (Score:2)
never buying hardware that could support alternate OSs, but doesn't
next phone will be the dumbest one i can find
You might have a look at the Pine64's PinePhone, which not only has a low-ish price, but in addition has been designed with opensource (runs on mainline kernel) and community in mind.
why can a fifteen year old computer, with their *uncountable* hardware configurations run the latest OSes, from microsoft and the OSS community, but a 4-5 year old phone with *very specific* hardware can't?
Because of - as Mac hardware users are going to discover in the coming years of Apple silicon (M1 and its future descendant):
Lack of standard.
Your fifteen year old computer follows some very standard way to organise everything (UEFI or BIOS firmware, ACPI, standard discoverable PCI/PCIe bus, etc.)
take any standard compliant Lin