The Long-Awaited Batch Update Post


#1

Here is the post everyone has been wanting to see


#2

Very nicely explained. It is nice to see the amount of work going into all of this. I hope people can see it as I can, so as to be able to appreciate the immense undertaking here.

It sound like Chestnut seems to be the most ideal early first backer phone.

My biggest thing with the phone, is figuring out a sleep system that allows polling and such to be sidelined for battery conservation. Seeing a dayof battery life out of a straight up Debian port (pureOS) on ARM would be amazing!

It would not only benefit the phone but could be back ported to laptops, and could help to improve battery life across the Linux domain. This is something that is beyond huge.


#3

yea, I’ve actually opted for chestnut, but considering aspen didn’t come into the masses my chances of getting it are climbing down.


#4

I appreciated this post a lot and it went a long way toward restoring my faith and goodwill after what I felt was a lack of transparency, if not deception, around Aspen. It does sound like the next few batches will be very small, but I’m glad they are setting expectations in what seems to be an honest way.


#5

This validated some of my assumptions about the big picture. My speculation about batch sizes seems to have been closer to the mark than some people were expecting (i.e. Aspen is a very small batch).

The new details about the batches made me change my batch preference from [Chestnut, Dogwood, Evergreen] to [Dogwood, Evergreen]. The improved thermal design is too much of an upgrade to pass up, in my opinion.


#6

I’m uncertain about this. I might also move from Chestnut to Dogwood, but did I understand that properly?
Is the inside = the other side of the PCB, which makes it easier to connect it with heat pipes to the chassis? (N.B. the article does not say heat pipe)

Somebody recently wrote here about the dangers of dropping a device damaging the soldering. Is it mechanically a good thing to connect the chip with the chassis?


#7

yup it seems i was on point with evergreen - from the article dogwood seems to be right on the edge of getting out of the critical hardware changes that need to happen to address the issues observed in the first three batches.

it’s a much appreciated update but i fear the holiday season will have an impact on development but that’s just the way it is and i think the developers and engineers working on getting Libby into our hands do deserve some merry-spirit.


#8

I still want my chestnut. pretty please with cherries on top?


#9

I view this as much simpler than many seem to. I’m pretty certain the most potential is in applying proper power states to unused hardware components.
Next, applying patches to all standard software that optimizes their polling behavior (although I assume most do well already as they were optimized for laptops already).
Whenever a Linux laptop has worse battery life than with a Win installation, it’s typically the hardware support, not misbehaving software.

Only for some non-default things like Anbox-Apps that cannot easily be fixed, I guess we’d need creative ways to make them energy efficient, e.g. pause them when in background and only wake them up every <preferred time unit>.


#10

My original preferences were Aspen, Chestnut, Evergreen, but now I’m kinda torn. I’m excited and want the phone, but don’t want to get something that I might feel like replacing with a later model. Maybe I should just go with Evergreen and get something that very well might last 10 years.


#11

I changed to all the early batches, but seeing as how I back in Oct of 2018, I’m pretty sure I’m in Evergreen. So I’m not worried either way. I’d be happy with a phone from any batch honestly.


#12

I am also uncertain. I speculate that Chestnut will have a slightly more complex thermal solution involving heat pipes, which might work perfectly well and look really cool, while also being pointlessly elaborate and costly. (Costly for Purism.)

Chestnut will probably be perfectly good. I think I just really like the idea of using the chassis as a heat sink. One of the first things I thought when I realised the metal chassis runs between the screen and the PCB was something like “Why the heck didn’t they put the CPU on the other side to make thermal contact with that massive chunk of metal?!”

I probably maybe backed slightly too late for Chestnut anyway.

I don’t see a problem with it. The PCB will be screwed to the chassis, so the chip shouldn’t move very much, relative to the chassis. Even if it does, thermal pads and thermal compounds are not rigid connections.


#13

Doesn’t Android (and thus Anbox?) already do that sort of thing?


#14

I’m not too knowledgeable about that, especially whether it applies to the background daemons many apps have.

But my point was: only if you cannot easily change the app you need a workaround to make it behave.


#15

right and f.i. to publish app for jolla on harbour you need to pass the power consumption (sleep state) test. If you ignore signals (active/inactive) you won’t pass and hence won’t get published.


#16

I feel exactly the same way. I hope that they keep up updates like this as the batches roll out.


#17

Well. Finally, they admitted that they have some issues, and this looks pretty honest and satisfying. I’m completely OK with this.


#18

(Insert some joke about ‘Chestnut phones roasting on an Open source stack ♫’ during the holidays)

In all seriousness, glad that this was posted; I continue to have high hopes and wish contributors the best. :slight_smile:


#19

Makes sense. It had to be a hardware issue they couldn’t just get around easy. It was obvious, when Todd had that visit at Gardiner’s.
It was more than fair, that Purism decided not to ship this flawed device to original backers.


#20

Evergreen for me please.