Ubuntu smartphones; Will these work like real PCs?

[Veraster]

I seem to be the only one with the idea, but I've always wanted a smartphone that ran a full OS (not like that half-assed Android or IOS stuff) like on my desktop PC. Cross software compatibility is what I'm talking about.

I could write a rather large theses about why I hate currently available smartphones but this is not a thread about how much smartphones suck.

What I'm wondering is, when they get these Ubuntu smartphones on the market, will this be the same as the good ol' Desktop Ubuntu that we all know and love? Or are they going to crap it down like Microsoft did to Windows 8 RT for tablets? Windows without the ability to run exe files is like selling a computer without a PSU and calling it eco-friendly; that makes it completely and utterly worthless and defeats the purpose of having it. I was hoping for desktop PC software compatibility. The creation of Windows RT and Windows Phone 8 was, in my opinion worse than Windows ME or Vista. Windows without exe files is just.. a huge fail of unfathomable proportions.

Of course there will have to be an ARM version and an x86 version of Ubuntu if there's not already. Only x86 compiled software will work on an x86 cpu and only ARM compiled software will work on an ARM cpu without emulation. Because of this, an ARM phone (100% of the available phones on the market) wouldn't be all that great. Hopefully Intel will get more of their chips in phones soon.
But IF the folks at Ubuntu are going to see the light (messing up like MS did to Windows RT would actually take more work), could this possibly be compatible with the same Ubuntu stuff on my desktop if I have an x86 phone (if Intel ever breaks into the mobile phone industry)? Really all they need to do to Ubuntu is make a new GUI that is easier on smaller screens and make drivers.

On top of that, if phone companies won't allow smartphones with Ubuntu already installed to be sold, would it be possible to crack the bios and force it to load something other than Android? That is a threat to phone companies if the user could upgrade their phone's aging and purposefully hardware inefficient software and not be forced to buy a new phone every two years. Phone companies will for sure be more strict on locking down the bootloaders and nands on all phones once they hear about the full potential of Ubuntu for smartphones.

However, someone will hopefully hack that. The procedure to accomplish such a hack would be harder than rooting or jailbreaking a new OS would and probably be more on par as far as difficulty goes as hacking an Xbox 360. It could be done and would be worth it but would be no cake walk.

These are a lot of what ifs and crap shots that will hinder the event of finally having a "PC phone" or a "super smartphone". But IF the folks making Ubuntu don't pull a Microsoft and IF Intel can get some x86 mobile devices on the market, would this idea become feasible?

I'm sure I will get flamed to hell like last time I posted something like this from fanboys and all kinds of Angry Birds lovers. Before someone points out that I talked about "software compatibility" with a PC and made no mention of whether I'm talking about Windows or Linux, it really doesn't matter because on a PC you are able to install Windows, Linux or both. A true PC smartphone should theoretically be the same way. Drivers may not be available but that is a minor problem compared to having to put up with iOS, Android, Windows phone 8 and all those other stupid OSes.

 

[carnageX]

On top of that, if phone companies won't allow smartphones with Ubuntu already installed to be sold, would it be possible to crack the bios and force it to load something other than Android? That is a threat to phone companies if the user could upgrade their phone's aging and purposefully hardware inefficient software and not be forced to buy a new phone every two years. Phone companies will for sure be more strict on locking down the bootloaders and nands on all phones once they hear about the full potential of Ubuntu for smartphones.

However, someone will hopefully hack that. The procedure to accomplish such a hack would be harder than rooting or jailbreaking a new OS would and probably be more on par as far as difficulty goes as hacking an Xbox 360. It could be done and would be worth it but would be no cake walk.

People already have Ubuntu running on Android. Case in point, my Nexus 7:
[Q] DUAL BOOT UBUNTU And JELLY BEAN AND GUIDE - xda-developers
Official Ubuntu for Nexus 7 - xda-developers
Multibooting JB and Ubuntu: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2011403

There's no BIOS to "crack" on Android. There's a bootloader that needs to be unlocked (fastboot oem unlock), and special build of the OS is done.

Like what was previously stated in your other thread... x86 (right now at least) based processors are too power hungry. Your phone wouldn't last very long at all (heck, when I have 4G LTE on and am browsing, my battery sucks down like crazy.. imagine running an x86 CPU, 4G LTE, and a game... bye bye battery in about 30 minutes).

 

[Veraster]

Wow I didn't know this was already possible. Too bad it only works on the Nexus 7. Maybe there will be a universal Ubuntu image that works on different, non device specific phones in the future. I have a Droid X2 and developers don't ever bother to do anything like this for that phone.

And if you try to run a Core i3 on a smartphone, I can see how there would be major battery problems. Intel makes Atom processors that take as much power as normal ARM processors now though. So I was saying: why not just use those? A few less hours of battery life (if you use the higher powered chips) is worth it for the almost non-existent good performance you see on smartphones. Even without the high powered chips, performance would be similar to an Intel P4 with beats the living **** out of those arm chips.

 

[carnageX]

Wow I didn't know this was already possible. Too bad it only works on the Nexus 7. Maybe there will be a universal Ubuntu image that works on different, non device specific phones in the future. I have a Droid X2 and developers don't ever bother to do anything like this for that phone.

That's because you have a Motorola. Motorola's suck for development. Get a Samsung or HTC for decent development. Get a Nexus device for even better development.

And I'm sure that they're getting Ubuntu to work on more than the Nexus 7. I only posted N7 links because I have one and remember seeing threads when I was browsing the N7 boards.

And if you try to run a Core i3 on a smartphone, I can see how there would be major battery problems. Intel makes Atom processors that take as much power as normal ARM processors now though. So I was saying: why not just use those? A few less hours of battery life (if you use the higher powered chips) is worth it for the almost non-existent good performance you see on smartphones. Even without the high powered chips, performance would be similar to an Intel P4 with beats the living **** out of those arm chips.

AnandTech - Samsung Chromebook (XE303) Review: Testing ARM's Cortex A15

Pretty sure smartphone CPU's outperform most P4's even now... P4's were single core, and good smartphone CPU's are dual-core at least.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6529/busting-the-x86-power-myth-indepth-clover-trail-power-analysis

Looks like Intel is trying harder to get down to low-power / high speed though.

 

[Veraster]

That's because you have a Motorola. Motorola's suck for development. Get a Samsung or HTC for decent development. Get a Nexus device for even better development.

AnandTech - Samsung Chromebook (XE303) Review: Testing ARM's Cortex A15

I paid $550 for that phone. There is no excuse for this poor performance and I will not be buying any device running Android made by Motorola again. Even if it's 2-3 more years I'm going to wait for an x86 Ubuntu phone. They aren't getting my money for making ****ty products.

AnandTech - Samsung Chromebook (XE303) Review: Testing ARM's Cortex A15

That's a top of the line ARM Cortex being compared to a slightly dated Intel Atom at a lower clock speed. The ARM Cortex even has more and smaller transistors. The ARM processor is over a year and a half newer than the Atom chip being compared.
However, if the point was to prove that it is possible for an ARM cpu to exist that's better than at least something x86 related, I guess you sorta proved that. That Atom cpu compared is a very crummy one and there are better ones out there. Let's see them compare that ARM chip to an Intel Atom that was actually made at the same time and the Atom will murder the Exynos in everything except power savings which will be slightly worse but worth the performance boost.
Intel Atom N570 from http://ark.intel.com/products/55637/Intel-Atom-Processor-N570-%281M-Cache-1_66-GHz%29

Status
LaunchedLaunch Date
Q1'11Processor Number
N570# of Cores
2# of Threads
4Clock Speed
1.66 GHzL2 Cache
1 MBDMI
2.5 GT/sInstruction Set
64-bitInstruction Set Extensions
SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3Embedded Options Available

NoLithography
45 nmMax TDP
8.5 W

Exynos 5 dual core from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exynos_(system_on_chip)

ARMv7 instruction set
CPU:1.7 GHz Dual-core ARM Cortex-A15
GPU: ARM Mali-T604 (Quad-core)
Memory techology: 32-bit Dual-channel 800 MHz LPDDR3/DDR3 (12.8 GB/sec) or 533 MHz LPDDR2 (8.5 GB/sec)

Note that the wattage for the ARM chip is lower. I couldn't find it anywhere official but they have it on that anandtech website review. However, you only proved that a top of the line ARM cpu is better than the crummiest Intel Atom on the market. Congratulations, I guess.

Besides, if we all stick with ARM cpus, there will be no Ubuntu cross software compatibility with our man-sized PCs and we will be forced to use the ****ty "smartphone" type apps that smartphone app developers have been forcing us to use for years and ****ing everyone off. Ripping people off may have been working for them for years, but I don't like being ripped off like the millions of other smartphone users who have somehow just accepted it. These apps are ad-loaded, steal all your info and are overpriced for the little they do. I've honestly never purchased a smartphone app that I didn't get refunded or try to get refunded for. I've been a smartphone user since the iPhone 2g. I'm also really strict with deniing app permissions with LBE Privacy guard which is one of the few good smartphone apps available. It denies app permissions without crashing the app getting around most anti-denied permission security. I **** you not, haven't had my email or facebook account hacked since I installed that app probably a year and a half ago.

 

[carnageX]

I paid $550 for that phone. There is no excuse for this poor performance and I will not be buying any device running Android made by Motorola again. Even if it's 2-3 more years I'm going to wait for an x86 Ubuntu phone. They aren't getting my money for making ****ty products.

Or just don't get Moto phones . Moto (or any manufacturer really) never intended their phones to be moddable by developers. It just happens that some brands are more moddable than others (Samsung, HTC, etc.). Moto has just always been known to not be very developer friendly.

That's a top of the line ARM Cortex being compared to a slightly dated Intel Atom at a lower clock speed. The ARM Cortex even has more and smaller transistors. The ARM processor is over a year and a half newer than the Atom chip being compared.
However, if the point was to prove that it is possible for an ARM cpu to exist that's better than at least something x86 related, I guess you sorta proved that. That Atom cpu compared is a very crummy one and there are better ones out there. Let's see them compare that ARM chip to an Intel Atom that was actually made at the same time and the Atom will murder the Exynos in everything except power savings which will be slightly worse but worth the performance boost.
Intel Atom N570 from http://ark.intel.com/products/55637/Intel-Atom-Processor-N570-%281M-Cache-1_66-GHz%29
Exynos 5 dual core from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exynos_(system_on_chip)
Note that the wattage for the ARM chip is lower. I couldn't find it anywhere official but they have it on that anandtech website review. However, you only proved that a top of the line ARM cpu is better than the crummiest Intel Atom on the market. Congratulations, I guess.

Was at work when I posted it, so wasn't really paying a whole lot of attention to which CPU's were which. I just took the links for some of the more recent "Atom vs ARM" links on Google.

Besides, if we all stick with ARM cpus, there will be no Ubuntu cross software compatibility with our man-sized PCs and we will be forced to use the ****ty "smartphone" type apps that smartphone app developers have been forcing us to use for years and ****ing everyone off. Ripping people off may have been working for them for years, but I don't like being ripped off like the millions of other smartphone users who have somehow just accepted it. These apps are ad-loaded, steal all your info and are overpriced for the little they do. I've honestly never purchased a smartphone app that I didn't get refunded or try to get refunded for. I've been a smartphone user since the iPhone 2g. I'm also really strict with deniing app permissions with LBE Privacy guard which is one of the few good smartphone apps available. It denies app permissions without crashing the app getting around most anti-denied permission security. I **** you not, haven't had my email or facebook account hacked since I installed that app probably a year and a half ago.

So much fail in this paragraph... lol. Developers can write applications to be semi-intercompatible to an extent between ARM and x86 - it mostly depends on what language they're using. If you mean by they develop 1 app, and it can be used on any platform... then no, that's probably not going to happen for quite some time (if at all). It mainly depends on how easily apps are able to be developed.

Nobody is forcing you to use any apps, really. If you're worried about ads, get an ad-blocker. I have one for my Android, been using it for both smartphones I've had and it works just fine. Never ONCE have I had any issues with my "information being stolen" because I watch what apps I download. I've actually never bought ANY apps; all the apps I use are free versions or paid versions from the Amazon AppStore's Free App of the day. Otherwise, I've found a free version of what I wanted just about every time. Never had any of my email accounts for my FB account hacked, cracked, or stolen either. And yes, I have several email accounts linked to my phone as well as my FB. I look at permissions once in a while on apps and if I see something I don't like, then I look into it more and see why it needs that permission or kill it entirely. If you don't like the apps on the appstore, develop your own .

Good privacy app for Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.privacy.pdroid&hl=en

 

[Veraster]

Yes, nobody is forcing me to use these apps. These apps are just the only ones available. The only way to do what I want to do without dealing with these app developer's crap is to use my PC.
I would make my own apps if I had the extra time. But the fact is that I don't. I know I can do a better job than these half ass app developers but I just simply don't have that kind of free time.
And I haven't tried that privacy app but I'll remember that one if I ever need another privacy app.
With the ad-blockers, I have them installed and have got rid of the horrible push-ads but there are still in-app ads.

Android and IOS are a MESS like that at least in my experience. That's why I'm hoping Ubuntu will be better.

 

[carnageX]

Yes, nobody is forcing me to use these apps. These apps are just the only ones available. The only way to do what I want to do without dealing with these app developer's crap is to use my PC.
I would make my own apps if I had the extra time. But the fact is that I don't. I know I can do a better job than these half ass app developers but I just simply don't have that kind of free time.
And I haven't tried that privacy app but I'll remember that one if I ever need another privacy app.
With the ad-blockers, I have them installed and have got rid of the horrible push-ads but there are still in-app ads.

Android and IOS are a MESS like that at least in my experience. That's why I'm hoping Ubuntu will be better.

Adfree gets rid of in-app ads. Either no ad displays, or a blank box displays where the ad was, depending on how the ad was implemented in the app.

 

[KSoD]

Yes, nobody is forcing me to use these apps. These apps are just the only ones available. The only way to do what I want to do without dealing with these app developer's crap is to use my PC.
I would make my own apps if I had the extra time. But the fact is that I don't. I know I can do a better job than these half ass app developers but I just simply don't have that kind of free time.
And I haven't tried that privacy app but I'll remember that one if I ever need another privacy app.
With the ad-blockers, I have them installed and have got rid of the horrible push-ads but there are still in-app ads.

Android and IOS are a MESS like that at least in my experience. That's why I'm hoping Ubuntu will be better.

Just by reading what they are doing, it is the same thing that is already being done by Windows Phone 8, Windows 8 and WindowsRT. So not only are Ubuntu phones going to be late and have a hard time taking off, but they are going to be doing something that is already being done on the market now. If you read it says "Develop apps for all things that run Ubuntu". This is the same concept that is used by Windows App Developers that want their apps to run on WindowsRT. It can also be run on your PC as well as your phone cause the development is the same for all devices using the SDK.

So yeah...not sure what you think is going to be different. But naturally it is going to be a tough battle for Ubuntu to break into the market that is dominated by Android and iOS. Windows Phones have yet to make a dent and they have been around for far longer. Add into that the fact that they are looking to launch a year from now, giving all platforms that much more time, is only going to hurt them even more.

 

[carnageX]

Just by reading what they are doing, it is the same thing that is already being done by Windows Phone 8, Windows 8 and WindowsRT. So not only are Ubuntu phones going to be late and have a hard time taking off, but they are going to be doing something that is already being done on the market now. If you read it says "Develop apps for all things that run Ubuntu". This is the same concept that is used by Windows App Developers that want their apps to run on WindowsRT. It can also be run on your PC as well as your phone cause the development is the same for all devices using the SDK.

So yeah...not sure what you think is going to be different. But naturally it is going to be a tough battle for Ubuntu to break into the market that is dominated by Android and iOS. Windows Phones have yet to make a dent and they have been around for far longer. Add into that the fact that they are looking to launch a year from now, giving all platforms that much more time, is only going to hurt them even more.

It's saving grace could be the fact that is open source, so could be ported over to a multitude of devices where as WinRT is closed source and only available on the devices its released on. So I could see the OS being popular among the kind of people that like to flash ROMs on their phone.