Yes, that could be a sensible approach, and would mirror the community
effort and partnership which brought Sailfish OS to Fairphone 2.
That just started with some porters and then grew into something
bigger, with active collaboration with Fairphone engineers. There was
even discussion of that becoming an official option for FP2, so that
customers could buy a device with SFOS per-installed. Maybe do a deal
with Myriad so that AlienDalvik could be shipped, etc.
https://forum.fairphone.com/t/will-sailfish-os-be-officially-supported-on-the-fp2/16839/9
Looks like there is already a FP2 port in progress:
https://devices.ubports.com/#/FP2
On Wednesday, September 7, 2016, mark <j.m.holmes@xxxxxx
<mailto:j.m.holmes@xxxxxx>> wrote:
> If Meizu and bq have lost interest in the platform, and are really
not planning to build new phones then, perhaps enthusiasts - of which
there seem to be no shortage - should go down the Fairphone route, and
crowd-source a small run of devices, designed for Ubuntu and produced
by an OEM. I don't know what the run of the Meizu or bq phones
amounted to, but surely say ~20,000 high-spec Ubuntu phones could be sold?
>
> m
>
> On 07/09/16 17:53, Mitchell Reese wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, 8 September 2016 4:47:42 AM AEST, Bob Summerwill
<bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> Are OEMs not queuing up to ship devices running Touch?
>
> I suspect that the answer to that is "no".
>
> If, as seems likely, both BQ and Meizu have no immediate plans to ship
> further Ubuntu Touch devices then that likely means that it is not
> economically beneficial to them to do so. That certainly isn't an
> appealing market for other OEMs to join. Canonical would likely be
> pouring their money down the drain with such a device.
>
> Mozilla went through a very similar journey with Firefox OS, though with
> way more devices and way more traction. They ended up giving up on the
> device side, and focusing on just community ports, and on application of
> the OS to new (non-mobile) markets.
>
> Mobile is a tough, tough market to compete with. Commodity Android
> devices are very, very compelling to the mass market. Mobile Linux is a
> really niche. See the troubles Jolla have experienced too. Even
> Samsung are struggling to make any kind of impact with Tizen -
though that
> likely has more to do with their own internal politics than any lack of
> resourcing or ability to sell large volumes.
>
> My personal feeling is that mobile is now "mature", and
uninteresting, like
> the PC market. Who really cares if you have an ASUS or an Acer or
a HP or
> whatever. They have razor-thin markets and little
differentiation. I
> think that is where mobile is getting to be, with Android as the
Windows,
> and iOS as the Mac. So iOS is premium and profitable, "because
Apple",
> but Android is the de-facto standard, commodity and
unprofitable. That
> is a really unappealing place to try to build a third platform.
>
> Android has utterly skewed manufacturing too, to my understanding,
so that
> if you want to get a SoC now, you are going to get Android
bootloaders and
> drivers on it. As blobs. And you're just going to have to suck
that up.
> Want X11 drivers? No way.
>
> Tizen is the only mobile Linux which hasn't just made the pragmatic
choice
> of avoiding the issue by using Hybris. For everybody else, Android has
> become the de-facto HAL :-)
>
> So yeah... I have an MX5 Pro as my daily driver and love it. MX4
before
> that. But I don't have much hope of any future Ubuntu Touch mobile
> devices. I think we're likely walking dead, but just haven't stopped
> walking yet.
>
> So maybe Jolla and Tizen are the "last men standing" in this
space? For
> mobile profile, at least. Tablets are a different story. Ditto
IoT and
> Ubuntu Snappy Core.
>
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 10:49 AM, mark <j.m.holmes@xxxxxx
<mailto:j.m.holmes@xxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> The same thought had crossed my mind. Touch seems to be reaching the
point
> of maturity where something of the Edge's specs might come to
fruition. It
> would be a winner, imho.
>
> Are OEMs not queuing up to ship devices running Touch?
>
> m
>
> On 07/09/16 14:32, Art wrote:
>
> Question.......
>
> I read all the comments, and I am now curious.....
>
> What is to stop Canonical from releasing their own branded phones right
> now?? Just because the current 'offering' isn't Canonical branded,
Is there
> anything that prevents them from selling a Canonical branded phone later
> on??
>
> After all, now we know that a linux based phone actually works, what
is to
> stop Canonical (or even myself) from seeking out an independent
phone OEM,
> buying them in bulk and rebranding them, complete with the linux
software
> already installed?
>
> Great list all, I hope to see the linux phone succeed! It's about
time we
> take back control of our own phones and block all the 'features'
that rob
> us of our privacy!!
>
> Art
>
>
>
>
> On 09/05/2016 10:49 AM, Krzysztof Tataradziński wrote:
>
>
> Hi
>
> Did anyone from Canonical considered to 'simply' develop phone
themselves
> alone, order it in factory and sell with Canonical brand?
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone
<https://launchpad.net/%7Eubuntu-phone>
> Post to : ubuntu-phone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ubuntu-phone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone
<https://launchpad.net/%7Eubuntu-phone>
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
>
>
> Hmmm. Disagree - thanfully. Otherwise, whats the point? Similar
arguments when Microsoft was still a thing - why compete?
>
> The thing about Ubuntu is it's also a desktop system - and has the
potential to be much more. Will be interesting to see where this goes,
but I'm backing Canonical.
> M
>
>
>
>
--
bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
