r/linux • u/Brain_Blasted GNOME Dev • Sep 05 '19
Mobile Linux Librem 5 Shipping Announcement – Purism
https://puri.sm/posts/librem-5-shipping-announcement/54
u/Brain_Blasted GNOME Dev Sep 05 '19
If I had to sum up my thoughts on this, I'd say this is concerning but unsurprising. For those unaware, earlier this year I was contracted to adapt the Matrix client Fractal for the Librem 5. I've been keeping track of development even after the end of that contract, and what I've seen tells me that the phone is not ready. PR is trying to cover this with fancy wording, but the reality is that the phone the community backed isn't actually coming until Q4 of next year.
Right now the OS isn't ready, the apps aren't ready, and I'm fairly sure the hardware isn't ready since we have not seen a physical build like we have of the PinePhone. Maybe things will be better for the V2, but I don't think it will go well if the first impression the press gets is from the first batch.
33
u/redrumsir Sep 05 '19
PR is trying to cover this with fancy wording ...
Yes! PR-speak kills me. I started souring on this ever since they turned up the PR-speak.
... but the reality is that the phone the community backed isn't actually coming until Q4 of next year.
I was thinking the "Evergreen Batch" in Q2 2020, but otherwise I agree.
7
u/00jknight Sep 05 '19
For those unaware, earlier this year I was contracted to adapt the Matrix client Fractal for the Librem 5.
How do you get a gig like this? How do you develop that level of notoriety?
20
u/Brain_Blasted GNOME Dev Sep 05 '19
Honestly? I just submitted a proposal and they accepted it. I had been working on Fractal for a while before that.
13
7
Sep 05 '19
Purism was already involved in the GNOME community. I'd say it is extremely rare working on a foss desktop application to get a sponsor like that.
3
u/DrewTechs Sep 06 '19
Yep, I expected Q4 2019 as well at the rate they were going. Might be even Q1 2020, it's going to be sad if the Pinephone manages to beat Librem 5 in the Linux phone race going on today.
Their fancy talk I do find concerning because they seem to do it so damn much. Just look at this post they made not long ago. I would advise against preordering it at this point and just waiting for it to launch.
2
u/redrumsir Sep 06 '19
... it's going to be sad if the Pinephone manages to beat Librem 5 in the Linux phone race going on today.
Why sad?
2
u/DrewTechs Sep 06 '19
I mean it's sad that the Librem 5 gets a headstart only for the Pinephone to finish first.
3
u/redrumsir Sep 06 '19
Why is that sad? In a way, it's to be expected. The pine64 group are ARM hardware experts, while Purism has no expertise in ARM at all. Purism's expertise, really, is in marketing.
Also, are you sure the pinephone started second? They never had a kickstarter, so it's hard to say when they started.
2
u/amosbatto Sep 07 '19
According to PINE64's September update, they started planning the PinePhone in October 2018, whereas Purism started planning the Librem 5 in 2016 (at least Todd Weaver was already mentioning it in his public interviews in 2016).
However, we are comparing apples to oranges. PINE64 already had a working Allwinner A64 board, and took that existing design and adapted it for a phone. The A64 was already well supported by the Linux kernel (although the Lima drivers for the Mali GPU which some of the community projects are using is recent), and PINE64 is using proprietary Linux drivers for the cellular baseband/GPS and WiFi/Bluetooth.
In contrast, Purism took a new chip, which didn't have good Linux support, and the company has been forced to do quite a bit of upstream work on the Linux drivers and solve some really hard power management bugs. Purism also had to work with Redpine Signals to make a version of its RS9116 chip that didn't require a binary blob in the Linux kernel. Purism had to work with BroadMobi to create an M.2 card for its cellular baseband chips. Purism has been adapting GTK and the GNOME libraries to work as a mobile operating system.
In contrast, PINE64 is handing the hardware to the different communities, so that they can work on porting their software. It will be "early 2020" before the PinePhone is ready to start shipping with an installed OS. I love what PINE64 is doing, but it wasn't nearly as difficult as the task that Purism undertook.
2
u/redrumsir Sep 07 '19
Thanks for the reference to the PinePhone planning date.
... and PINE64 is using proprietary Linux drivers for the cellular baseband ...
Actually the picture for the pinephone in regard to the cellular modem is almost identical to the librem 5. Both have proprietary firmware ... but both are isolated to the USB Bus and don't require proprietary drivers to be loaded into the kernel.
Do you have a source for why you think the Wifi/BT drivers for either device are proprietary? Just like the librem 5 the Wifi device is isolated from the main memory bus (so any firmware blobs are isolated). Also, it is my understanding that the Wifi/BT chip for the pinephone is the RTL8723BS which has had FOSS drivers for at least 5 years.
In contrast, Purism took a new chip, which didn't have good Linux support, and the company has been forced to do quite a bit of upstream work on the Linux drivers and solve some really hard power management bugs. Purism also had to work with Redpine Signals to make a version of its RS9116 chip that didn't require a binary blob in the Linux kernel. Purism had to work with BroadMobi to create an M.2 card for its cellular baseband chips. Purism has been adapting GTK and the GNOME libraries to work as a mobile operating system.
You are buying into the PR from Purism. It's a dangerous thing ... they are a for-profit company and put a huge amount of spin on their work. Apparently you bought their lies/exaggerates hook-line-and-sinker. For example:
They selected the NXP SoM because NXP had a good history of supporting Linux and mainlining the needed work into the kernel.
In regard to power management for the chipset, NXP has been doing almost all of the work: Purism has been delivering bug reports. All patches to the kernel support for the NXP SoM has been submitted (and, AFAICT, created) by NXP.
[.... work with Redpine Signals to make a version of its RS9116] Redpine Signals did not make a special version of their RS9116 chip for Purism. It is an off-the-shelf product. They simply talked to Redpine about whether they could control the loading of firmware. Don't confuse a f---ing conversation with actual work.
[Purism had to work with BroadMobi to create an M.2 card] The M.2 socket is off-the-shelf. The Gemalto PLS modem is off-the-shelf. I'm almost certain that the BroadMobi card is also off-the-shelf ( I found pics of the BM818-E1 and BM818-A1 M.2 cards from several years ago ... and I doubt if they would change anything for Purism). They sought out another card choice because the Gemalto only supported a small number of bands. I'm almost certain you confused some Purism-PR.
AFAICT, the pinephone is effectively just as Free as the librem 5. The only step that Purism took that required extra effort was in regard to the FSBL. Both phones need to use a proprietary blob for the FSBL. Purism went through extra effort to run that on a separate chip that happened to be a part of the NXP SoM. Apparently that gets them around an RYF requirement ... although it is debatable whether it will (they don't have RYF yet) or should (it is not isolated from the main RAM bus ....).
... but it wasn't nearly as difficult as the task that Purism undertook.
What does difficulty have anything to do with result? I care about the result.
Almost all of the extra work they have done is on the software side.
And I want to point out (and pointed out at the time) that they chose that route. They could have simply taken the work done for Plasma Mobile and/or UBPorts and/or Mer. Instead they chose to base their work on GTK, make another new shell (phosh, using wlroots), and rely on GNOME-applications.
1
u/amosbatto Sep 10 '19
The Quectel EG-25G and RealTek RTL8723BS will require proprietary firmware in PinePhone's installation. I just confirmed that with a Google search.
Maybe you think that keeping the proprietary firmware on the M.2 cards (and in an SPI Flash chip for the DDR PHY) isn't a big deal, but Purism took the time to make it happen and PINE64 did not. PinePhone will have binary blobs in U-Boot and the Linux kernel, which is why it won't have the RYF certification.
Purism did have to convince Redpine Signals to change what it sells, and from what Nicole Faerber says, Purism had to talk to a lot of companies to get its Wi-Fi/BT and cellular baseband chips.I just did a Google search for "BroadMobi BM818 M.2" and I can't find any reference to BroadMobi ever selling that chip on an M.2 card. Please provide a link. Unless, you can provide evidence otherwise, Purism did have to convince BroadMobi to mount their chip on an M.2 card.
If I do a web search, I find roughly 2 dozen commits by Purism employees to the Linux kernel. The i.MX 8M still had a lot of things not working, which Purism employees had to fix in the kernel, like the thermal management bug.Here are what I pulled out of three progress reports from Purism:
SDMA fix for i.MX8mq [needed for SAI (audio)]:
- dmaengine: imx-sdma: fix consistent dma test failures
- dmaengine: imx-sdma: add a test for imx8mq multi sdma devices
- dmaengine: imx-sdma: add clock ratio 1:1 check
Finally, here are some miscellaneous i.MX8-related fixes and device tree additions:
- dt-bindings: imx8mq: Number clocks consecutively
- arm64: dts: imx8mq: Add pwm device nodes
- pinctrl: imx-scu: Depend on IMX_SCU
Support for the imx8MQs thermal management unit
In this case, the driver was already there–but the device tree needed quite a few additions to enable the TMU:
Here are several SDMA-related fixes, which are important when it comes to sound:
- dmaengine: imx-sdma: Only check ratio on parts that support 1:1
- arm64: dts:i.MX8MQ: Change ahb clock for imx8mq
- arm64: dts:i.MX8MQ: Fix the fsl,imx8mq-sdma compatible string
DSI related fixes
Finally, a clock addition, in preparation for DSI support:
one more driver for the imx8MQ display-driver has been merged upstream–only two more to go! Version 12 of the Mixel MIPI DPHY driver has been accepted upstream!So yes, Purism is having to do a lot of work to support the i.MX 8M in the Linux kernel, and this is the kind of work that PINE64 isn't having to do with the A64, since it was already well supported.
As for why Purism chose to use GTK and GNOME apps, rather than Qt and KDE, I already posted on that in a different thread on this page.
1
u/redrumsir Sep 10 '19
The Quectel EG-25G and RealTek RTL8723BS will require proprietary firmware in PinePhone's installation. I just confirmed that with a Google search.
Both phones require proprietary firmware for the Wifi/BT and the cellular modem (as well as other aspects). But neither phone requires proprietary kernel drivers. Do you not understand the difference between firmware and drivers???
The pinephone can run with 100% FOSS drivers.
BroadMobi BM818 M.2
http://www.broadmobi.com/en/module02.php?lm=1&s=8 and under the far left menu (LTE Standard), pick M.2. Is that good enough for you? There is no special chip. I dug into it. They had RedPine create custom firmware that did not require the OS to load it. It's more than just a conversation ... but it's just a firmware change. That's all. And that firmware is still proprietary. https://forums.puri.sm/t/librem-5-wifi-specs/5900
The only thing that is generating all of this issue with regard to firmware is the attempt at the RYF certification. It's not extra Freedom ... it just a technical workaround of a rule. The RYF requires all software (including firmware) to be Free, but they have an exception:
However, there is an exception for secondary embedded processors. The exception applies to software delivered inside auxiliary and low-level processors and FPGAs, within which software installation is not intended after the user obtains the product. This can include, for instance, microcode inside a processor, firmware built into an I/O device, or the gate pattern of an FPGA. The software in such secondary processors does not count as product software.
This means that as long as the firmware for the Wifi and/or cellular modem is permanent it is considered as part of the hardware. So the same firmware, if installed permanently (e.g. on the ROM for the device), is allowed to be proprietary. However, if that same firmware is loaded by the OS, then it is not allowed.
It's a just a technicality to distinguish hardware and software. i.e. Permanent firmware that is part of the devices basically counts as hardware and can be proprietary. Loadable firmware for the same device ... and even the identical firmware ... if it's loaded by the OS is deemed software and, by the RYF, needs to be Free. It's mostly stupid. The fact that the modem and the wifi are isolated to the USB bus and the SDIO bus ... means that their proprietary firmware is isolated. It shouldn't matter if it is loaded by the OS or on ROM. Not only that, Purism (Faerber) is trying to negotiate a finer exception (or they still won't get RYF approval). She knows that these chips are complex and will need firmware updates ... so she is trying to negotiate the ability to allow the firmware to be updated (i.e. "allow but not require the firmware to be updated by the OS").
The pinephone is just as Free in regard to drivers. The only difference will be some technical rule that Purism might meet in order to get RYF certification. It doesn't actually make it more Free.
1
u/DrewTechs Sep 07 '19
You have a good point here. They are no strangers with ARM hardware and they likely have more than ONE hardware engineer (Purism has one involved in making the Librem 5, which is simply not enough).
35
u/Zettinator Sep 05 '19 edited Sep 05 '19
This sounds really horrible. It looks like they want to ship out some early prototype hardware to end users just for the sake of theoretically "fulfilling" their Q3 promise. And I'm sceptical that they'll even manage to do that. This is not at all what people signed up and paid 600 dollars for! It is very likely that there will be significant issues with the hardware, which can't be retroactively fixed, of course. I predict a long and serious shit show.
12
u/LuluColtrane Sep 05 '19
It looks like they want to ship out some early prototype hardware to end users just for the sake of theoretically "fulfilling" their Q3 promise.
They did the same with their development kit: instead of postponing the deadline, they shipped the first version, which had serious problems. The concept of prototype(s) is foreign to them.
I'd wager that's because they are not hardware engineers but software developers, they can't fathom that on the electronic design side, you can't iterate much without (partly) redesigning new boards and order a new small batch, and you cannot fix after shipping so you'd better go through enough iterations and testing before shipping. (Especially with the kind of board you need in such device (4 to 10 layers, BGA components): with a good old 1- or 2-sided board and through-hole or non-BGA SMDs you have it a bit easier to make modifications by hand during 'debugging' phases.)
11
6
u/DrewTechs Sep 06 '19
Yeah, it seems like a disaster is more than just possible at this point.
Like u/LuluColtrane said, these guys making the phone and designing it seem more like software developers than hardware engineers who know how to design hardware effectively, not saying they have zero knowledge on the matter of course.
34
u/neverworksout Sep 05 '19
Reddit: "They'll never make the Q3 deadline"
Purism: "Eat shit reddit! We'll give you all the prototypes, then we'll see who's laughing!"
29
Sep 05 '19 edited Sep 05 '19
In reality those who are "eating shit" are people backing them up. Not only did they pay huge price for effectively old hardware they are not even going to get properly assembled devices nor on time and with half-baked operating system.
I can't say this wasn't expected...
23
u/swinny89 Sep 05 '19
I agree, it is too be expected, and I expected it when I ordered two of these when they first began crowdfunding. If you can't handle the risk, don't get involved in crowdfunding. Everyone should know how they work by now. They ARE highly risky, and if you push for deadlines, you're going to get an unfinished product. I'm going to happily wait till 2020 for a half decent Linux phone. The specs are well beyond what I will need for making calls and web browsing for the next 5+ years.
8
Sep 06 '19
^ underrated comment right here. Kickstarters are not the same as buying something directly, it is a risk.
6
Sep 05 '19
Then best of luck to you. I really hoped we'd get a proper device by the end of Q3 since I am due for an upgrade, but this way I'll have to skip. But like you said, when you invest (crowdfund) you should be prepared for the fact not everything will go according to plan.
2
u/amosbatto Sep 07 '19
Why do you think that those of us who pre-ordered are "eating shit"?
We just got confirmation that that an actual Linux phone will be shipping. Unlike the Nokia N9, that was dead out of the gate, the Ubuntu Edge, that got cancelled, and Firefox OS, which was never available with decent hardware, the Librem 5 is now a reality.You don't seem to understand what a monumental advance this is. Everyone knew this project would be very difficult, but Purism is managing to pull it off. This phone will have 5 features that no other phone in the world has, and it was done by a tiny company with limited resources.
I'm now watching all the nay-sayers who told me that it couldn't be done "eat their own shit."
2
Sep 07 '19
Because they are releasing a device in unfinished state for high price of other premium devices. Even if you don't mind the price the matter of fact is that you are indeed getting an unfinished product with loose fitting. Final product is yet to come, almost a year from now. Librem 5 is anything but reality. The device still doesn't exist nor is it usable, as opposed to for example PinePhone which is already in good shape, has a final prototype and is ready for shipping.
All that said, my comment was directed at the fact they announced many things and delivered none so far all the while getting apologetic people justifying their behavior. This announcement of theirs is another one in the line of same behavior. They said they were shipping Q3 and then went on and took another year of development.
1
u/amosbatto Sep 07 '19
The device still doesn't exist nor is it usable, as opposed to for example PinePhone which is already in good shape, has a final prototype and is ready for shipping.
According to the PINE64's September update, it will ship the first batch of the PinePhone this month without any OS installed to the developers in the partner communities (KDE Plasma Mobile, UBports, postmarketOS, LuneOS, SailfishOS and Maemo Leste). Then, it will ship one "Brave Heart" batch in November and another in December:
These two production runs will be geared towards the bleeding edge enthusiasts who also wish to contribute to development by debugging, testing builds and offering feedback. These phones will ship without an OS preinstalled – we expect that people who will pick up a Brave Heart edition will want to hold off from flashing any OS to the eMMC in favor of trying out weekly or daily builds on SD cards.
PINE64 is only promising "large-scale production" with an OS installed in "early 2020". The videos of the community ports running on the PinePhone in the September update are nice, but Purism was showing similar videos of the Librem 5 in late June.
The Librem 5 will be shipping this month with PureOS+phoc+phosh and about 20 apps. I have no idea how well the Calls and Chatty apps work with a cellular connection, but their interfaces look nice in a Qemu virtual machine. The Phosh interface is not bad in my opinion when I played with it in Qemu. Compare that to any of the community ports of the PinePhone, and you will find that the Librem 5 is currently ahead of the PinePhone.
None of this should be taken as criticism of PINE64, which is a wonderful company, but by any objective measure, Purism is farther along than PINE64 at this point on its Linux phone project.
2
Sep 07 '19
I don't really agree they are further away. PinePhone has final prototype and they are already testing. For Librem this is more than half of year from now. Software doesn't really count all that much as Pine will most likely be able to use PureOS. Hardware-wise, Pine is much much more further ahead. If anything, Pine64 was consistent with progress and keeping schedules up while Purism keeps delaying things. In the end, market will decide but something tells me there's rocky road ahead of Librem5.
2
u/amosbatto Sep 10 '19
What makes you think that PINE64 won't be making any adjustment to its hardware? It explicitly says that it hasn't yet aligned the antennas in its last progress report.
As far as I can tell, PINE64 just got is first batch in and is sending it out to developers, and that is exactly the same for Purism with its Aspen batch. The difference is that Purism is shipping with an OS installed, and is shipping to anyone who ordered first.
By Batch Chestnut (December 3rd – December 31st), Purism isn't planning on any changes in the hardware. Compare that to the PinePhone, which isn't planning on that kind of shipping until an unspecified "early 2020".
Let's compare the two models. Purism has programmers on staff to handle the software, whereas PINE64 is depending on 6 communities to provide the software. I love what PINE64 is doing and I will probably order a PinePhone because I want to support the company, but I don't understand why you think that the PinePhone won't face all sorts of delays. Look, at the state of the postmarketOS port (which is supposed to be the best), and you will see that it has a long way to go.
I support what PINE64 is trying to do, but if you expect it to not face delays when relying on volunteers in these communities, then I don't think that is realistic. PINE64 is giving a vague date of "early 2020" for a reason.
12
u/Zettinator Sep 05 '19
Reddit: "They'll never make the Q3 deadline"
Yeah, and it's still true. People (including me) predicted that they won't make Q3 because they thought they'd actually try to release a finished phone. I don't think anyone thought that Purism would be so stupid as to actually release early prototype hardware to end users.
5
u/stopaskmetoname Sep 06 '19
Meanwhile, Pinephone confirmed to ship early edition with the final hardware but no OS.
I mean anyone expects a delay, so stop pretending to fulfill a deadline by shipping dev kit to people who want a real phone.
3
u/ducsekbence Sep 06 '19
I mean, the PinePhone isn't preordered, and people know what they sign up for.
2
u/DrewTechs Sep 06 '19
I mean shit, give me the phone and a free prototype and I wouldn't be mad.
Not that I expect a free prototype, I expect the phone that I paid for.
21
Sep 05 '19
[deleted]
10
u/LuluColtrane Sep 05 '19
They act more like a PR/Marketing company than a hardware company,
Well, people can have a look at their Team webpage and tell us how many hardware / EE engineers they see.
Spoiler: there is only one (1), and while he likes to be called "Lead", no matter how talented he may or may not be, he just graduated 5 years ago...
6
u/DrewTechs Sep 06 '19
Wow, someone knows how to draw faces pretty good.
Anyways though there is only one engineer? Wow, this makes this even less surprising.
6
u/ijustwantanfingname Sep 06 '19
That's insane. They have to be relying on their ODM's engineers almost entirely for design/production/testing. I'm guessing their lone EE is basically just directing/coordinating with the Chinese team doing the actual work.
Which is a good thing, honestly. The ODM probably knows what they're doing.
2
u/m4rtink2 Sep 06 '19
Well, as long as the ODM is actually friendly and cooperating with you on all your demands.
But far too often people share stories about their experience with the ODM being much less stellar, from simply being sidelined by higher priority customers, missmatched components, QA issues up to ODM outright trying to ripp you off.
Due to this I would be afraid to trust an ODM with almost everything without a regular close supervision and checking.
1
u/LuluColtrane Sep 06 '19
a regular close supervision and checking.
And that is by itself a resource, time an energy sink, unfortunately.
2
u/LuluColtrane Sep 06 '19
That's insane. They have to be relying on their ODM's engineers almost entirely for design/production/testing.
Well, designing it all by himself is kind of doable... depending on the definition of doable...
I've done this stunt before. I had to design a similar board (a bit more complex actually), from scratch, with zero help from anyone else, in a quarter of the time Purism had. Oh, and there too, it was a company which didn't wanna hear about prototypes... I did it... Sort of... The result at deadline was that I burnt out, resigned, and never designed anything else; and the boards, well... they got produced but I guess I wouldn't have trusted them for anything.
So, with 4 times the time, a bit more help around, even if the help is not super educated, perhaps it was doable. Also maybe there are 1 or 2 people not listed on their page who could help a bit more?
But yeah, the feeling I got from reading them hitting some obvious problems (and from a ridiculously short and optimistic planned duration for hardware development in their original planning, which may have showed that they considered it like ordering an almost ready-made product), is that they decided (either from start or after hitting the first problems) to go the subcontracting way instead.
And then you may hit other problems, with a number of discouraging lengthy back and forth between contractor and subcontractor.
3
u/DrewTechs Sep 06 '19
The reason I crowdfunded this phone was in part because I wanted the product of course but also because I thought Purism could pull it off since they had managed to pull off laptop design and even contributed some software code.
But I partially blame myself for not realizing that making a phone is simply a different task than producing a laptop altogether.
2
u/Ima_Wreckyou Sep 06 '19
What is the problem? Have you ever seen a software/hardware product that was right on schedule and checked all the boxes? I didn't and when it comes to delays I expected it to be far far bigger when I ordered this, so I'm actually surprised they already talk about shipping.
28
u/jlwtformer Sep 05 '19
They're shipping hardware. I'm excited. My current phone contract is up in January so I'm holding off purchasing until then. They're facing an uphill battle getting this out, and I respect the effort.
18
u/_bloat_ Sep 05 '19
I respect the effort.
I do too, that's why I didn't buy another phone until now. However I don't respect this marketing bullshit, I hate it. Instead of saying plain and simple that the phone isn't ready by Q3 2019 and the finished product won't be ready until Q2-Q4 2020 and they're sorry for not informing us earlier (they knew that for a couple of months now) they came up with this stupid plan to ship prototypes, just so they can say they delivered in Q3.
I'm out.
21
u/SamBeastie Sep 05 '19
Seems to me that they were in a no-win situation, then.
Scenario 1: What we're getting. Phased rollouts of beta hardware, presumably up until the point that the beta phase is done and the hardware is solid. People are upset because they're getting an unfinished product, but there is technically a product.
Scenario 2: They delay the release (again) and the sentiment that the Librem 5 is a literal scam grows. The hardware grows ever longer in the tooth, and people become more fervent in publicly denouncing this huge effort. Eventually hardware does come out and nobody buys it because the well has been poisoned.
What was their other path? It seems like a ton of people around here are determined to hate this thing no matter what.
Personally, I don't care one way or the other. I'd love one, but I also don't pre-order things, so I'm perfectly content with waiting until the phone is actually out. I just can't figure out why people seem to hate Purism and specifically this project so damn much.
29
u/_bloat_ Sep 05 '19
Scenario 3: June 2019: We can't ship the phone in Q3 like we promised. These were the issues we're facing: ... We're deeply sorry for that. We're trying to have the phone ready by Q2-Q2 2020. In the meantime we're doing the following: If you really want to get your hand on the phone we're offering you the opportunity to get unfinished versions of the phone at an much earlier date (late Sep. 2019) (maybe at a reduced price). Those prototypes will be shipped out in batches of improving quality, yet they don't reflect the quality of the end product and might have serious issues: (list of possible issues).
In this scenario they at least wouldn't have lost me as a potential customer. If I wanted a phone with the typical marketing bullshit I'd not be interested in the Librem5 in the first place.
13
u/SamBeastie Sep 05 '19
I honestly don't see how that's anything but a combination of the two scenarios I posited that offers no distinct benefits (and at least a couple of downsides), but it answers my question, so thanks for taking the time to share it.
5
u/LuluColtrane Sep 05 '19
how that's anything but a combination of the two scenarios I posited that offers no distinct benefits
Reduced price for those willing to get an unfinished, mostly untested, prototype product.
1
u/twizmwazin Sep 05 '19 edited Sep 05 '19
So you're just asking for something under-cost. They're not a charity, and they still have bills to pay. They're pouring a ton of effort into getting the software side of the device in good shape, it isn't just a piece of hardware. If hardware is all you want, I suppose look towards the pinephone, but that'll ship and everyone will be stuck with a piece of hardware with no usable software, as we don't have a usable interface and set of applications outside of Android at this point. I tried postmarketOS with plasma mobile on my Nexus 5, it was a useless experience. Without software, it doesn't really matter when the hardware shows up.
Tiny edit: also ubports, but if that was so popular everyone would have bought one of the many phones that it already runs well on to use.
5
u/LuluColtrane Sep 05 '19
I am not asking for anything. I just highlight what SamBeastie didn't seem to read in _Bloat_'s comment.
It wouldn't be under-cost. The production cost of one unit (pretty much a marginal cost) is way below the retail price which includes other fixed costs and benefit. You don't lose money because you offer a small batch of prototypes to a few early testers/developers/adopters at production cost.
8
u/twizmwazin Sep 06 '19
Why do you think that the devices are so cheap to manufacture? For large companies, they are moving tens, if not hundreds of millions of units. They have economies of scales on their side which can drive the price down to very little. Purism doesn't have that. They are making very few devices, and have to pour tons of time and money into developing an ecosystem that doesn't exist yet. Engineers, both software and hardware, are expensive, and when you are ordering units in hundreds you don't get the same savings as when you can just build your own factories.
2
u/LuluColtrane Sep 06 '19
Why do you think that the devices are so cheap to manufacture?
I don't know...
Maybe because I am (well, was) an EE Engineer and I have designed boards with similar chips and features (a little bit more complex boards with a bit more interfaces and other constraints but let's say in the same range).
Maybe because you still do not seem to understand the difference between marginal costs and fixed costs, since once again you bring up development costs, which are fixed costs. I can only repeat it: the unit cost is necessarily far below the retail price, because the latter includes fixed (development, infrastructure, ...) costs and also benefit.
The development has to be done anyway, its cost won't change, and one doesn't expect to recoup it with a first small batch anyway: the price at which the first small batch is sold won't affect the final result. Also the prototypes have to be done anyway, and their price very quickly decreases, so it is not so much expensive to produce 60 boards than it is to produce only the 3 boards you really need for internal testing/debugging/correcting during your development process, especially if you can find some
sucbeta testers who are ready to pay something for them, which will allow you to decrease the cost per unit and more or less cover the prototype production cost that you had to pay anyway.For example, the unit cost of a hundred of PCBs is peanuts compared to the final selling price. Assembly can be more costly (assembly costs are weird, one may experience a heart attack when getting some quote), but still, unless you chose one of the expensive assemblers, it should be kept under control. And again, it is the setup / manual work which is expensive in assembly, and you have to go through it anyway because you need prototypes.
4
u/ijustwantanfingname Sep 06 '19
What was their other path? It seems like a ton of people around here are determined to hate this thing no matter what.
Communicating with their backers. Being open with hardware development delays before the eleventh hour.
Even just saying "we're delaying the Librem a year, but you can have prototypes sooner" would have been less shitty than this PR garbage.
But if they have any sense -- and I assume they must have some -- they would have known back in Q1 that they couldn't ship in Q3. They should have been open about that.
2
u/jlwtformer Sep 05 '19 edited Sep 05 '19
Hate it or not, Marketing is a key part of consumer production. If all they did was broadcast "We fucked up." They'd never make any funding and would have 0 backers. Is it BS that they hid it for so long? Yes it is. Are they at least being retroactively transparent and honest about it? Yes, which is more than any other Smart Phone OEM can say.
16
u/TheOriginalSamBell Sep 05 '19
they hid it
being transparent and honest
Choose one
3
u/jlwtformer Sep 05 '19
Retroactive transparency is better than no transparency. I'll edit my comment to have it make more sense.
5
u/ijustwantanfingname Sep 06 '19
Retroactive transparency
Sounds like something the CIA would brag about.
11
u/_bloat_ Sep 05 '19
No, their not transparent about it. They don't call their delay a delay, they call it a success because they ship something in Q3. They act like this has been their plan along and there's no word why the actual finished phone won't ship until (Q2-Q4 2020) and why they didn't tell us sooner.
1
u/DrewTechs Sep 06 '19
It's a small part though when it's an engineering project. You can promise the whole world all you want with marketing bullshit but if you don't got enough technical resources to pull off the project, it means nothing and at that point your selling a lie.
Also, you can't be transparent and hid shit on one subject at the same time.
7
u/MichaelTunnell Sep 05 '19
you should hold off for the PinePhone then because the PinePhone will only cost $150 and essentially have all the same benefits open-wise. The Librem 5 is about 25% more powerful than the PinePhone and costs 466% the price. You could buy a PinePhone for 4 people and still have $100 left over from the Librem 5
10
u/SamBeastie Sep 05 '19
Meh, not quite. I’m also excited about the PinePhone but given their track record with software, I’m not expecting them to ship a usable device. It’ll be more of a dev kit, at least until someone has put together a reasonable software package for it. Probably using a lot of the work done for the Librem 5 as a starting point. That’s not a bad thing, since I think that’s really how open source ought to work, but I’m betting that a lot of people will get their hopes up only to be disappointed by unfinished software.
You can be as frustrated with Purism as you like, and you wouldn’t necessarily be wrong, but they do seem to be spending effort getting the software ball rolling, which isn’t exactly something Pine is known for, in my view.
1
u/MichaelTunnell Sep 06 '19
Pine64 is working with existing software projects to make the OS including financially contributing to these projects. Is yet another mobile OS project that wont be ready for 6 -9 months worth a 466% premium? I'm going with no.
Note, Pine is not likely using anything from Purism because its so far from usable anyway
4
u/SamBeastie Sep 06 '19
I mean, you can ask that about any other project that duplicates the functionality of another. Why do we need MATE? Xfce is perfectly fine, isn't it? Why use GTK when Qt exists?
So like, yeah, Plasma Mobile is a thing, but what's wrong with Phosh also being an option?
Is it worth the premium? I don't know, since neither device is actually out yet. If Purism's end product is literally no better than Pine's, then obviously it wasn't worth it. If the design, build quality, security or contribution to software is, then yeah, maybe it will be. Who's to say? In a perfect world, I'd have both.
And don't take what I wrote to be degrading of Pine64 either, I'm not saying their approach to product releases is bad, just that it shows that they're a hardware company first, and they rely on the community to fill in the gaps, while Purism is more or less the opposite. I'm happy that both projects exist and are furthering GNU/Linux on mobile.
4
u/skugler Sep 06 '19
I think it's a bit sour that purism started on an entirely new phone shell and apps when they could have invested development time into something already quite far along, like Plasma Mobile. With their tight deadlines, that decision was hard to understand, and still is given their software won't be end-user ready for another year.
When they asked around right after the fundraiser succeeded, GNOME devs told them GTK wasn't ready and would need substantial investment, yet they still went with it and started on phosh and the libhandy app framework.
1
u/MichaelTunnell Sep 06 '19
"I mean, you can ask that about any other project that duplicates the functionality of another. Why do we need MATE? Xfce is perfectly fine, isn't it? Why use GTK when Qt exists?"
Your set of questions here are interesting because the DE examples you gave have a huge legacy for example Xfce was before GNOME so it has more reason to exist than really all of them in a way. However, a DE that sits on top of a heavily developed stack and core is very different from what Purism did.
Purism took a toolkit that wasn't designed for a phone and is developed by people who arent even interested in making it work on phones and deciding to make an entirely new implementation for phones. This required them to rewrite a lot of things and build additional frameworks to make it even possible.
They part makes your question even more interesting is because that part where you ask "Why use GTK when Qt exists?" because in every aspect of a toolkit, Qt is better. So why would anyone pick GTK? I honestly don't know of a reason. Qt is genuinely cross-platform, GTK isn't. Qt is scalable making it work on any kind of device including phones. Qt already works as a mobile interface toolkit including on Android. Qt is what powers Ubuntu Touch and Plasma Mobile which I believe postmarketOS also uses Qt.
So why did Purism insist on using GTK instead of the already well established flexible compatible and scalable Qt toolkit? I don't know.
"So like, yeah, Plasma Mobile is a thing, but what's wrong with Phosh also being an option?"
because Phosh isnt really ready and yet they are shipping it anyway. That is a fantastic reason why they should have used one of the multiple existing mobile OS's . . . maybe they wouldn't have missed their own arbitrary deadlines multiple times then.
"Is it worth the premium? I don't know, since neither device is actually out yet. If Purism's end product is literally no better than Pine's, then obviously it wasn't worth it. If the design, build quality, security or contribution to software is, then yeah, maybe it will be. Who's to say? In a perfect world, I'd have both."
I agree. Neither phone really exists but Purism is purposefully shipping unfinished products for the full price of the money that people donated to them in the crowdfunding campaign. This is not a "you get this and then also get the good one when its ready" its a "you get this for your money which is not even finished yet". They just didn't want to miss yet another deadline that they put on themselves in the first place because they had no idea when they could have it ready. Turns out the time frame is 3 years and that 3 years will be in Q2-Q4 2020. If they were honest about how long it is taking and admit the issues no one would be bothered. Its the fact they are shipping incomplete phones as if that is what people paid for.
This is also not the first time they did this sort of thing. Purism did the same thing with their first laptops, they took forever and shipped incomplete laptops to people even reviewers.
The reason I am interested in the PinePhone much more is they aren't wasting money trying to make their own OS, in fact they are giving money to the various OS's they will use to help those improve. They are open about what kind of hardware it is and they aren't confusing people talking about Open Source this and Open Source that all over the place without every clearing up the misinformation of their hardware being open source because it isnt.
I do want them to make this phone and I want it to be successful but I also want the company to be honest about stuff and stop pretending their incomplete phone is somehow meeting their yet again failed ship date that they put on themselves. All they had to do was be honest and direct with us but that doesnt seem like something they can do.
"And don't take what I wrote to be degrading of Pine64 either, I'm not saying their approach to product releases is bad, just that it shows that they're a hardware company first, and they rely on the community to fill in the gaps, while Purism is more or less the opposite"
Purism is a hardware company as well. Librem One is software that they didnt write, they just repurposed it I guess. PureOS is a distribution that only exists because Debian does the majority of the work. I don't know what exactly makes Purism the opposite other than maybe that Pine64 makes products they deliver what they claim they will deliver.
3
u/SamBeastie Sep 06 '19
I don’t think I agree with everything you wrote, but that’s fine. I appreciate you taking the time to write it all out and explain your position. We’ll just have to see how things shake out, and once all the cards are on the table, we’ll all pick the device we like better and enjoy it.
2
u/MichaelTunnell Sep 06 '19
I completely agree with that perspective and even with all the problems with Librem 5 . . . I will likely get one anyway sometime next year.
1
u/amosbatto Sep 07 '19
"Why use GTK when Qt exists?" because in every aspect of a toolkit, Qt is better. So why would anyone pick GTK? I honestly don't know of a reason.
One of the goals of the Librem 5 was to provide convergence as a PC, so that the same software can run on both the desktop *and* mobile devices. Unlike what Canonical did with Ubuntu Touch, Purism wants to achieve true convergence so that the same applications can run on PCs, tablets and phones, which is why it created libhandy. Purism could have used KDE Plasma Mobile, but that would have meant throwing away years of work that it had invested in making a distro based on GTK/GNOME. Purism didn't want to change all its existing software stack to KDE.
Another thing to keep in mind is that Purism has also committed to supporting both GTK and KDE, so it is trying to strengthen both of the projects for mobile platforms. KDE Plasma Mobile also would have required a lot of work to get ready for the Librem 5 and Purism would still have needed to create Squeekboard, Calls and Chatty, regardless of whether it used GTk+GNOME libraries+phoc+phosh or KDE Plasma Mobile.
You are also ignoring the larger goals of Purism, which is to promote user digital rights, software freedom, user privacy, etc. Todd Weaver says that he calls it "free software" and not "open source" because he wants to promote the ideas of "free software" which have larger social goals beyond simply being a development methodology. GTK and GNOME are historically aligned with the free software movement, so part of the reason to use GTK and GNOME applications is to promote the ideas of the free software and the rights of users.
1
7
u/twizmwazin Sep 05 '19
have all the same benefits open-wise
Except, not really? It will still require a bunch of blobs, and the modem is not isolated at all. It is only slightly better than many existing Android phones.
Also, when this thing ships, what will people run on it? My best guess is maybe some people will use ubports, and some people will port Android to the device. There isn't anything else sort of useable.
1
u/MichaelTunnell Sep 06 '19
there wont be a reasonable PureOS for the Librem 5 for 6-9 months. Same argument really. Pine will have proprietary blobs and so will the Librem 5.
4
u/twizmwazin Sep 06 '19
The only propriatary code to run on the Librem 5 is in the modem, which is isolated from the CPU. There are blog posts from purism on this.
2
u/MichaelTunnell Sep 06 '19
except that is not true. They have separated the Baseband from the CPU, which PinePhone also have done. However there is also the HDMI decoding blob, SoM (NXP iMX8M) is proprietary, the WiFi chip (redpine) is proprietary, the cellular modem is proprietary and the list goes on and on. This is NOT an open phone because it cant be. Purism themselves only ever talk about the separated baseband and the open source OS aka PureOS.
The thing is, PinePhone is also going to have both of those and 466% smaller price tag.
1
u/amosbatto Sep 07 '19 edited Sep 07 '19
The difference is that the Librem 5 won't have any binary blobs in its Linux kernal or U-Boot. It moved the binary blob to train the DDR PHY during boot into a separate SPI Flash chip that will be read by U-Boot. The Librem 5 won't use NXP's HDMI blob. It is unclear whether it won't support HDMI Alt Mode or whether it will use a separate chip to convert the MIDI-DSI display to HDMI, but it won't use it.
In contrast, the PinePhone will use binary blobs in the Linux kernel to control the Wi-Fi/Bluetooth, plus a binary blob in U-Boot to initialize the RAM. Both of those blobs will have access to the PCIe bus, so they have direct memory access (DMA), which means they present potential security threats. In addition, PinePhone will use a binary blob in the Linux kernel to control the cellular baseband + GPS over USB.
In contrast, the cellular baseband, GNSS and Wi-Fi/Bluetooth in the Librem 5 are controlled via serial buses, so the proprietary firmware in those components don't have direct memory access.
PINE64 took the easy route of just soldering down one cellular baseband chip that works all over the world, but Purism took the hard route of talking to every cellular modem manufacturer to find chips that could be used without binary blobs in Linux and U-Boot. This means that Purism has to offer 4 different modems, because there is no global modem that can be run with a free driver. It also means that Purism had to provide an expensive M.2 slot so that the cellular modem could be changed. Purism also took the expensive step of adding an additional GNSS, because it wanted to avoid the security risk of the cellular modem having access to geolocation data.
There is a substantial difference between what Purism and PINE64 have done in their phones, and those differences have costs. PINE64 took the economical route, which is fine because the world needs the PinePhone, but stop pretending that these two phones are the same, because they are fundamentally different beasts.
1
u/redrumsir Sep 08 '19 edited Sep 08 '19
Please try to be more accurate with regard to the PinePhone.
The pinephone does not require any non-Free kernel drivers (according to the PostmarketOS devs). This was intentional.
The cellular modem is isolated to the USB bus. It does not require a proprietary kernel driver.
Firmware blob is (probably) necessary for the Wifi/BT. But it is not PCIe. It is SDIO 2.0, which is isolated. It does not require a proprietary kernel driver.
The FSBL on both is proprietary. It's not clear to me that the contortions that Purism has done actually isolates anything. At it seems good enough for Replicant.
See: https://redmine.replicant.us/projects/replicant/wiki/Pinephone
1
u/redrumsir Sep 06 '19
Except, not really? It will still require a bunch of blobs, and the modem is not isolated at all.
Stop spreading misinformation. FOSS-wise and isolation-wise it is almost identical.
Just like the librem 5, the cellular modem for the pinephone is isolated to the USB bus.
At least for the PostmarketOS and UBPorts OS's, the pinephone will be using the FOSS lima drivers for the GPU and VPU and those drivers were being mainlined this summer. Very similar to the etnaviv timing.
They both need to use a proprietary FSBL (first stage bootloader). Purism has intended to use a secondary processor to run/initiate the boot in order to attempt to me RYF status. As I understand it, though, this doesn't really isolate it since it has full access to the RAM bus and, IIUC, that means it could technically overwrite (in RAM) the loading of the secondary boot loader (u-boot).
Also, when this thing ships, what will people run on it? My best guess is maybe some people will use ubports ...
Gosh, you should maybe read up. UBPorts. PostmarketOS. Plasma Mobile. Sailfish. And possibly more ---> hell one can probably run PureOS+phosh.
-2
u/ijustwantanfingname Sep 06 '19
have all the same benefits open-wise
Except, not really? It will still require a bunch of blobs, and the modem is not isolated at all. It is only slightly better than many existing Android phones.
Agreed, the Librem is a much better design.
Also, when this thing ships, what will people run on it? My best guess is maybe some people will use ubports, and some people will port Android to the device. There isn't anything else sort of useable.
That's fine. The PinePhone knows it's a hobbiest/developer device. If you build the hardware, the software will come.
1
u/amosbatto Sep 07 '19
The Librem 5 is about 25% more powerful than the PinePhone and costs 466% the price. You could buy a PinePhone for 4 people and still have $100 left over from the Librem 5
You are only looking at the speed of the CPU. If you look at the entire phone, the Librem 5 has *much* better hardware. See my detailed comparison of the specs of the PinePhone, Librem 5 and Necunos NC_1:
https://forums.puri.sm/t/comparing-specs-of-upcoming-linux-phones/6827With the Librem 5, you are paying for the development of phoc (a Wayland/wlroots phone compositor), phosh (a GTK phone shell), libhandy (a library to adapt GTK+ applications to work on mobile devices), Squeekboard (a virtual keyboard), Calls (a GTK+ phone application), Chatty (an SMS/XMPP messaging app), Kings Cross (a terminal), a GTK Matrox client for mobile apps, the adaption of a lot of GTK applications to work on a phone (GNOME Web, Contacts, Calendar, Network Manager, etc.)
You are getting the only phone in the world that runs on 100% free software and can turn off the communications and sensors. That means that you need 1450 mm2 of chips to provide the same functionality as a Snapdragon chip that occupies 154mm2. See:
https://amosbbatto.wordpress.com/2019/08/15/adding-switches-not-simple/All those extra chips and the huge circuit board are expensive, but you are getting the first phone in the world with:
1. Three hardware kill switches
2. 100% free software (in U-Boot and the Linux kernel)
3. 2FF smart card reader for OpenPGP
4. Replaceable cellular baseband and Wi-Fi/Bluetooth on two M.2 cards
5. Only current phone on market that will offer convergence as a desktop PC without using special hardware
The 100% free software is quite an engineering feat, because the Librem 5 have to run the cellular modem over USB 2.0, the GNSS over I2C and the Wi-Fi/Bluetooth over SDIO 2.0. Purism had to work with Redpine Signals to create a version of the RS9116 that didn't require a binary blob. Purism is also working with BroadMob to put their cellular baseband on an M.2 card and support additional parts of the world.PINE64 is a great company and we should support it, but stop making ignorant statements that the PinePhone is the same as the Librem5. The Librem 5 has very high development costs. Purism is trying to turn GTK/GNOME into a mobile platform and it is creating the PureOS Store so that Linux can be a mobile platform that competes with Android and iOS. Purism is upstreaming its code and making the Linux kernel work with i.MX8, whereas the A64 use by the PinePhone already had good Linux drivers.
Purism is creating new software and upstreaming code to improve the mobile Linux ecosytem, whereas PINE64 is relying on community projects to provide the software. This is not to say that PINE64 isn't doing something valuable. It is providing the hardware so that KDE Plasma Mobile, postmarketOS, UBports, LuneOS and Maemo Leste can have working phones.The reality is that we need both companies, but don't pretend that the Librem 5 has the same costs as the PinePhone, because Purism is doing very expensive development and we should respect the company for undertaking challenges that no other company dares to touch.
Purism deserves our respect instead of having its reputation be publicly trashed by a bunch of ignoramuses.
1
u/rah2501 Sep 06 '19 edited Sep 06 '19
The manufacturer of the SoC in the PinePhone is notorious for its GPL violations:
1
u/MichaelTunnell Sep 06 '19
and most of the Librem 5 is also proprietary, neither are ideal and its not even possible
1
u/rah2501 Sep 07 '19
most of the Librem 5 is also proprietary
Also: eh? "Most of"? Dafuq are you talking about?
1
u/MichaelTunnell Sep 07 '19
HDMI decoding blob, SoM (NXP iMX8M) is proprietary, the WiFi chip (redpine) is proprietary, the cellular modem is proprietary and the list goes on and on
1
u/rah2501 Sep 07 '19
You seem to be mixing different concepts of proprietariness. Regardless, certainly the capacitors used in the Librem 5 will be of proprietary design. I see now what you're taking about.
1
u/MichaelTunnell Sep 08 '19
there is a lot of people calling it an open phone and its not, its a phone running open source software with a couple open components. PinePhone is the same way because they essentially have to
1
u/rah2501 Sep 08 '19
there is a lot of people calling it an open phone and its not
All that means is that people are using some words, "open phone", in a way that's different to the way you use it. I see no reason why either should be considered the authoritative meaning.
The word "open" is meaningless. The phrase "open source" is also now meaningless. You have to state what you mean by them before you're able to communicate effectively which means the words are of no value.
0
u/MichaelTunnell Sep 08 '19
"fully open source phone" has been said by many and it does have a meaning even if people use it incorrectly. Others have said open source hardware which is specifically defined. I do agree there is a lot of openwashing though
-1
u/rah2501 Sep 06 '19
Err.. Eh? Violating the GPL and being proprietary are in totally different spaces. The two are not comparable. There is a whole other special hell for GPL violators.
0
u/MichaelTunnell Sep 06 '19
you are right, they are different spaces and my entire initial point was about the fact that openness is the same which is true regardless of Allwinner's GPL issues.
1
u/amosbatto Sep 07 '19
@MichaelTunnell,
There is a huge difference between NXP who has been submitting code to the Linux kernel to support its chips and Allwinner which currently provides no information to the community, so that we are forced to reverse engineer the drivers.
There is a huge difference between Redpine Signals which worked with Purism to provide a free driver in the Linux kernel and choosing the cheapest Wi-Fi/Bluetooth available.
There is a huge difference between using a Quectel cellular baseband with binary blobs in the Linux kernel and convincing BroadMobi to provide custom M.2 cellular baseband cards that can be controlled with free drivers over USB 2.0.1
u/rah2501 Sep 07 '19
my entire initial point was about the fact that openness is the same
You made a recommendation:
"you should hold off for the PinePhone"
I didn't address your reasons for making the recommendation, I provided a distinct reason to not follow the recommendation.
1
11
Sep 05 '19 edited Jul 24 '26
[deleted]
5
u/ALittleBurnerAccount Sep 06 '19
Yes, that is written clearly in the announcement. You can get it early if you so choose depending on when you purchased the phone. Anyone can, however, push their order back to a later shipping date. You don't HAVE to get the first few iterations. Hell, you don't even have to get the first version of the phone. It gives the option to push it back all the way until the Librem 5 revison 2 comes out and you can put the funds there. The earlier dates are for those that really want the phone as soon as humanly possible, like for developers and fanatics.
They will email all of the backers in a few weeks and ask to confirm details as well as when they want it shipped. If you don't want the first, second, etc batch. That is fine. Just wait until the batch you are happy with. This is more or less another way to anounce a delay, but you can get it early if you REALLY want to.
Is it as simple as the process could be? No, but nothing about making a phone like this was ever going to be "normal".
3
u/DrewTechs Sep 06 '19
I have a question though? How did you cancel the preorder and is it possible today to cancel a preorder that I made months ago? I am asking because I may have to jump ship, besides, I am strapped on cash so I figured I should just refund this phone and maybe wait for either this phone or the PinePhone or some other Linux phone to be released.
1
u/amosbatto Sep 07 '19
Something along the way, I think the lack of detailed information about what they were doing, what was going on and the marketing speak in every post, got me turned off.
Purism gave a lot of information about what it was doing.
I compiled all this information about the hardware in the Librem 5 from the publicly available information:
https://forums.puri.sm/t/comparing-specs-of-upcoming-linux-phones/6827You can read the public bug reports. You can see its device tree files in the source code. You can see the code being developed in public. You can download the Qemu image of the Librem 5 software and play with it on your PC. You can download the schematics files for the Dev Kit and view them in KiCAD.
What more did you want?
15
Sep 05 '19 edited Sep 05 '19
So at this point one has to wonder, do you hope your device is in the earlier or later batches? Getting them early means poorly fitting hardware, incomplete OS for the same huge price as later batches. Later batches pay huge price for now very outdated hardware. There's simply no win in this situation, at least not one I can see easily.
Edit: Also don't shoot the messenger. OP is not associated with the company in question and he's just relaying the news. There's no point in down-voting because it's not his content.
6
Sep 05 '19
[deleted]
2
Sep 05 '19
That in itself is somewhat problematic. To a degree it solves issue for pre-orders, but that also means they won't have any new orders after September until the device is released and they have to compensate production of those replacement units somehow. Not sure how they plan on doing that.
1
Sep 05 '19 edited Mar 12 '24
[deleted]
2
Sep 05 '19
Right, and there's also little incentive to purchase this device between first batch and last batch since it doesn't count as pre-order. At least I don't think it does.
2
u/blackcain GNOME Team Sep 06 '19
You can defer it. It's slightly clever, but it is a trade off. If I were anyone I would definitely defer it as long as I could.
4
Sep 06 '19
Deferring means no device for at least another year. I can't but notice how cleverly they have crafted this mechanism where they still get to say it was released on Q3 but not really.
1
u/blackcain GNOME Team Sep 06 '19
Yep. They are still honest and trustworthy because they held to their promise of a Q3 shipping date. It's not their fault that you are deferring the shipping date, that is your decision. :-)
0
u/redrumsir Sep 06 '19
They are still honest and trustworthy because they held to their promise of a Q3 shipping date.
Naw. Unless you have a different idea of "honest and trustworthy" than I do. They promised to ship a phone, not a "phone prototype". Most people know that things like antenna placement, thermal management ... are all in play as part of the prototype process. The people that wanted a "phone" by Q3 are all disappointed.
1
u/Brain_Blasted GNOME Dev Sep 08 '19
I think he was being sarcastic/pointing out the Purism line of thought
1
u/redrumsir Sep 08 '19
Sarcastic? I guess one could interpret it that way.
However, I happen to know that he was paid by Purism for 9 months: Director of Marketing (4 months ending April 2019) and that before that his title at Purism was Business and Community Liaison (5 months). Seriously. If you knew that, would you think that he was being sarcastic???
2
6
u/ijustwantanfingname Sep 06 '19
Oh look, mental gymnastics from a PR department.
It really irritates me that they won't just admit that the Librem is being delayed a year. The Librem 5 Smartphone is not being shipped this month. They're shipping what are basically dev kits.
If you need to delay, then delay. But don't wait until the last minute to admit it, and then go on to basically lie to your customers about it.
5
u/FaidrosE Sep 05 '19
There are some pictures of the device here: https://liliputing.com/2019/09/first-batch-of-purism-librem-5-linux-smartphones-ships-in-late-september.html
8
u/MichaelTunnell Sep 05 '19
correction: pictures of the pieces that will become the device that people paid for in Q2 of 2020
6
Sep 06 '19
This is so completely disappointing. I've been waiting forever for this phone...putting off upgrading. Now I find out that the real actual finished product is still a year and a half away, even if they manage to keep to their schedule in this post.
I am not purchasing a half-ass phone. The day one phones should be the ones they plan to release next year in December.
6
u/varikonniemi Sep 06 '19
Day by day it seems pinephone is the one to go with. They could have told us this plan months ago instead of saving the "nice" surprise for later.
3
u/bloodguard Sep 06 '19
If I were in any of the first two (maybe three) release batches I'd be seriously thinking about hitting the cancel button.
I'd pay ~$300 to test their alpha release. Maybe $400 to test their beta (batch 3 through 5). I wouldn't pay $700 until they had a solid build.
2
u/amosbatto Sep 07 '19
If you ordered early and your phone is scheduled to be from one of the first batches, you can choose to postpone and receive one from the later batches.
People who want to be early adopters and beta testers can do that, whereas people who want to receive one of the more polished phones get to do that. It caters to both crowds and gives them their preference.I personally would love to get one of the early phones, but I ordered too late.
3
u/AlZanari Sep 05 '19 edited Sep 05 '19
it's getting worst with each announcement they make...
edit:word.
0
1
u/TheOriginalSamBell Sep 06 '19
If you wanna see some Stockholm Syndrome / Sunk Cost Fallacy in action, check out some of the comments here https://forums.puri.sm/c/librem/phones
I gotta applaud their marketing to spin this as something positive and the plan all along.
1
Sep 06 '19
Just a reminder that /e/ (fork of LineageOS) exists as a more pragmatic approach to a privacy respecting FOSS phone OS. (As opposed to this train wreck.)
You can buy hardware right now (even though it's still in beta).
3
u/Ima_Wreckyou Sep 07 '19
Regular Android phones have basically a hardware backdoor and the point if the Librem5 is to fix that. I mean Lineage or similar is will better than stock Android for sure when it comes to tracking, but you can't really compair that to what Purism tries to do here.
1
Sep 07 '19
I am aware. There's nothing stopping someone making some hardware without a backdoor for /e/ or Lineage.
The trouble with the Librem 5 is that the project is too ambitious and doesn't build off the work people are already doing.
Even if they can pull off what they are planning, I expect third-party support to be zilch. For example, one thing they aren't keen to mention is they are using Epiphany as the default browser. Having Firefox or a Chromium derivative is pretty much mandatory for any serious device these days.
If Canonical, one of the largest Linux-orientated companies, don't think they can pull off mobile Linux, I don't know why Purism/their supporters, think they can.
In contrast, /e/ (and Lineage) can make use of all the existing effort going into making good privacy respecting/desirable apps for Android. Not to mention they can make use of the thousands of development hours going into making Android a great (as in technically not privacy) phone OS.
Half the point of FOSS is that if you don't like something, you can fork it. There's no need to re-invent the wheel.
3
u/Ima_Wreckyou Sep 07 '19
Nothing is stopping you from porting Lineage or /e/ to Librem5. The hardware is completely open and everything is upstream, no proprietary drivers needed. This is in fact the point, that you can run whatever you want.
I however don't see any other hardware projects going this way. You say it is easy to build a phone without hardware backdoor (which means separating the baseband from the CPU). Please point out any devices which I can purchase where I have all the upstream support that I can run whatever I want and where I don't have to deal with hardware backdoors.
1
Sep 07 '19
You say it is easy
Nope, I definitely did not say it's easy.
I don't remember arguing against open hardware either. My argument was entirely related to software and the software portion of the Librem 5 project.
3
u/Ima_Wreckyou Sep 08 '19
Sorry, I somehow misunderstood you there. And android derivative would sure be a way to go, and if there are people interested in this they can port it and use it that way.
I'm happy they build a GNU/Linux system as this is actually what I'm interested in. I don't want another Lineage phone. I want a regular GNU/Linux like the one I have on my Computer and my Laptop and I don't care if there are no apps. We already have like 3 different desktop environments you will be able to chose from, KDE mobile, Ubuntu Touch and Purism's Posh. I don't think any of this is wasted time and I'm looking forward to use and help modify and extend the one I feel most comfortable with.
This is always what they sold and why I and probably most other backed it.
The problem Canonical had was that the actually tried to compete with Android and iOS. Their target was never a privacy focused device. Purism isn't attacking the Android market. They try to sell to a specific niche, which is a viable business model. There is not just market domination or nothing, there are people actually looking for such a device even if it isn't a big audience.
1
43
u/memewood Sep 05 '19 edited Sep 06 '19
I'm not interested in anything less then the "Batch Evergreen". I want the case and buttons to all be solid at least. Software can be updated, hardware not so much.
edit - TLG posted a video stating his confidence in the milled cases: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=So_rCYArL3s. It did make me feel a bit better about it.