Why is it mean?
He fairly explained the project and the importance of the idea, tried to find stuff that worked, failed and then showed some of the stuff that didn’t work. In the end he came to a really good and fair conclusion which most of us already had before the first phone was even build: that this is nowhere near to be a product for mass consumerism and requires a ton of work before anybody except for fanatic enthusiasts can enjoy it. How is that mean? He couldn’t have been more postive on it.
Why is it mean?
@bluez well yes but he sounds like he got paid from Pinephone for PR-campaign. It was not fair at all from him since Pinephone is a FINISHED phone and Librem5 is still in middle of development.
It’s also fair to say that Pinephone took shortcuts and won’t be able to claim the same level of privacy that the librem 5 does. I’m ok with some warts when I get my evergreen, but I know that it will be polished as development continues.
So basically the same kind of review as all of the other ones. Nothing wrong with that just not much new to see here.
New video from Purism published today:
Nice need to be able to get our hands on that 3500mah battery for Chestnut to replace that 2000mah.
this is very good
The comment section of the video shows a TERRIBLE view of the Purism community. I think people should go and Like the video and leave a nice comment. We want the reviewer to come back in a few months/year and say ‘WOW the phone has improved so much!’. But they won’t if we just bag him out.
We could say something like ‘thanks for reviewing, I know the software is bad but Purism and the community is building this brand new concept. The reason it’s bulky is because its modular, etc.’
About the comments there it’s anyway nice to see that they (MakeUseOf) pinned a comment saying that the reviewed phone was from the Chestnut development batch (apparently @amosbatto wrote that, well done!) and they did add a note about that in the article text about that: “Note: our review model is from the Chestnut development batch of the Librem 5. The final Evergreen batch for mass production is expected to start shipping in mid-August, so a number of the hardware issues mentioned should have been ironed out by then.” It’s good that they added that because it was not clear from the beginning.
Now that we have seen the components used in Dodgewood, do we have any notion of how much can be reduced in terms of thickness before the Evergreen mass production?
@Edwin Dogwood is supposed to be very similar to Evergreen as far as I know, they want to avoid changing too much between Dogwood and Evergreen to avoid making some regression in the final mass produced batch. You shouldn’t expect any difference in form factor.
Thank you @johan-bjareholt.
For now the Librem phone to me just isn’t as sustainable as I expected it to be as a daily driver. I do appreciate Purism efforts and want them to succeed in their goals so I will keep a close watch on the Purism path towards a ‘mainstream’ phone, hoping the Fir batch will take it up a notch. In the meantime I’ll have a look at a replacement for my Lumia 950, probably a UBport supported device.
“That’s how the Librem 5 performs with all the GPU acceleration in place ”, from May 23, 2020:
@dos, thank you for making this current development stage, but anyhow important to be shared here and, IMO, great video for the Linux phone community ️!
I agree, I saw this on Mastodon or Twitter I think, and commented there that this was great work, and really encouraging!
Another progress video:
It really is coming together! I’m really liking the ui a lot! Especially when I consider that it is regular Linux running underneath it all!
indeed it seems that vibration (haptic feedback) is a thing now
mobile PureOS also seems to be snappier … the temperature sensors seem to work alright !
In that video a reference is made to a chromium scrip that allows users to get chromium to render well on small screen. Any idea where that script is available ?