Re: Ubuntu mobile architecture
 

Yes, Sailfish & Tizen, both coming from MeeGo, are the most comparable to Maemo 5/MeeGo Harmattan. Comparing the new mobile OS, IMHO :

- Saifish OS : Linux kernel, glibc, X11, Qt 4.8/QML, Python/PySide, Alien Dalvik JVM to run many thousands of Android softwares, etc. I.e., a true successor for Maemo 5 & MeeGo Harmattan. Few thousands of Qt4/QML/Python/PySide softwares can be ported from Maemo 5 & MeeGo Harmattan;

- Ubuntu Phone/Tablet OS : Linux kernel, Android drivers used with libhybris, SurfaceFlinger graphical server, Qt5/QML, HTML5, Python (but there is no PySide for Qt5 until now), etc. Many thousands of Ubuntu packages are already available (by using apt-get), but only softwares with GUI in Qt5/QML will run, so the success of Ubuntu Touch will depend a lot on the community to port many softwares from GTK/QtWidgets/etc to Qt5/QML;

- BlackBerry 10 : QNX, Qt 4.8/QML, Python (from the community), Android VM to run many thousands of Android softwares;

- Tizen 2.0 OS : Linux kernel, glibc, X11, EFL, HTML5, Python, etc;

- Firefox OS : Linux kernel, HTML5 only.

Re: Ubuntu mobile architecture
 

The Canonical approach to Ubuntu Touch (Phone/Tablet) is a surprise but it can work. Pro's :
- more than one hundred devices which run Android/CyanogenMod can be adapted to run Ubuntu Phone/Tablet OS, there is already about additional 20 devices being worked to run Ubuntu Touch;
- so many smartphones/tablets manufacturers can (technically) decide to release devices with Ubuntu Phone/Tablet OS;
- from > 50 thousand Ubuntu packages, almost all of them which don't depend on X11 and desktop GUI (Gtk, Qt4, etc) will run;
- many Qt4/QML softwares can be ported to Qt5/QML, from Maemo 5, MeeGo Harmattan, BlackBerry, Nemo Mobile, Plasma Active, etc;
- for example, 2 thousand Pyhon packages on Ubuntu Touch instead of few hundreds or dozens on Maemo 5 / MeeGo Harmattan / Nemo / Tizen. There is Python 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3;

Con's :
- no X11, so "ssh -X" and X11 softwares won't work;
- Python for the moment has no binding to Qt5, i.e., there is no PySide for Qt5. But maybe it will be released in 2013;
- lack of current GUI softwares written in Qt5/QML. I think it will take an year, i.e., until 2014, to have some thousand Qt5/QML softwares on Ubuntu Touch.

I don't understand how Ubuntu Touch will be turned on a Ubuntu desktop if the smartphone/tablet is pluged on TV/monitor, keyboard and mouse. As desktop GUI softwares depend on X11...

Re: Ubuntu mobile architecture
 

Chrooted Ubuntu on current Android is a different experience due to lack of common graphics server and need to use VNC server/client. Ubuntu Touch running on top of some Android layers has the same graphical server, so maybe the chroot use will not have performance penalties (for example, Easy Debian Harmattan run very well and fast on Nokia N9/N950). In the following days there will be good benchmarks to see whether the performance of Ubuntu Touch is good or not :
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTMxMDU

The compatibility is not zero :
- many thousands of Ubuntu armhf packages are already available, those that don't depend on X11 and desktop GUI (Gtk, QtWidgets, WxWidgets, etc);
- few thousands of Qt4/QML softwares from Maemo 5 / MeeGo Harmattan / BlackBerry / Nemo Mobile / Plasma Active / etc can be ported to Qt5/QML.

I think both Sailfish OS and Ubuntu Phone/Tablet OS are interesting plataforms :
- Sailfish OS directly replacing Maemo 5 / MeeGo Harmattan;
- Ubuntu Phone/Tablet OS replacing Android, with almost all of the Linux features.

Re: Ubuntu mobile architecture
 

Think wider. The main con - it won't share the effort with desktop Linux, won't participate in X.org -> Wayland switch and will go totally separate (basically Android) route. I'd call it deserting.

Re: Ubuntu mobile architecture
 

That's not entirely correct. Neither X11 nor Wayland are GNU projects. I don't own a device that I can install Ubuntu Touch on but I have had a poke around the image and repo and I can tell you that much of the GNU operating system is either already installed or can be installed. Like Harmattan, it uses Embedded GLIBC, hence why libhybris is needed for the Android drivers.

As far as I am aware, Canonical have not confirmed that SurfaceFlinger will be used/required on all Ubuntu Touch devices. So long as certified apps are based on Qt/QML I don't think it matters what display server is running underneath. If rumours are to be believed, Canonical are developing their own display server. X.Org and Wayland already appear to be available so hopefully too much effort won't be needed to get them up and running.

Unlike Mer, Ubuntu Touch is using recent GPLv3 packages (the installed version of coreutils is 8.13) and aren't going down the route of Tivoization which is a big plus IMHO.

Re: Ubuntu mobile architecture
 

It's not about "GNU projects", it's about what is used on regular Linux now (not Android). It's glibc and X.org (and in the future Wayland). Pushing this kind of stack to mobile is a hard task, and if Canonical doesn't help - they desert the effort.

Re: Ubuntu mobile architecture
 

Linux doesn't need a display server to function. There are many headless Linux installations which are considered to be "regular" Linux. What makes a Linux distro "GNU/Linux" is the GNU projects. I don't want to turn this thread into Linux naming debate. The point I was trying to make that we still know very little about Canonical's mobile OS. They say they are targeting it to be ready in time the next LTS release which isn't until April 2014. Right now they are targeting Android devices for their developer preview, presumably due their wide availabilty. We don't yet know that all devices will use SurfaceFlinger and even if they do, we don't know if we will be prevented from installing an alternative display server. What we do know is that they are talking about Qt5/QML, not Dalvik so in theory apps could be compatible with an alternative display server. As long as I can install and boot directly into X11, it will meet my display server needs.

Re: Ubuntu mobile architecture
 

Either way, I don't like such rush if they aren't ready. It increases confusion, creates unnecessary fragmentation and etc. For the sake of jumping up earlier? It looks more like a PR move to me.

Re: Ubuntu mobile architecture
 

any feedback from nitdroid hackers ?

Re: Ubuntu mobile architecture
 

People seem to forget what chroot is
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com...-not-to-chroot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chroot
IT has nothing to do with the lack of native code or not. They are simply sand boxing the components. The components that make up Ubuntu are simply being put in a chroot jail. I am not the most knowledgeable person about this but my guess is that they are doing this to keep the average person from messing it up. It is technically an Ubuntu system if you SSH into you will find the components are similar to a regular Ubuntu system. I don't get what the problems are it simply shares display flinger and the Android Kernel for the sake of compatibility. It is not a skin on Android it is Ubuntu with certain Android components.