I never understood this

Does someone know why Ubuntu Desktop seems to be able to install on every piece of junk computer out there, but Ubuntu Touch has to be specifically compiled for each individual phone?

Is it some kind of driver issue? Shit can't be that different from phone to phone, can it?

>>105654453 (OP)
phones are basically the jew's ideal computer

>>105654453 (OP)
x86 vs arm

i have never understood this either.

>>105654453 (OP)
NSA and FCC blackmail the OEMs to make the modems drivers purposefully break on the very first Linux update after their target release.

>>105654453 (OP)
>Shit can't be that different from phone to phone, can it?
It is and it isn't. ARM doesn't have a standard like BIOS or UEFI. So shit gets retarded.

>>105654554
/thread

>>105654453 (OP)
Mobile SoC vendors are not as nice as Intel and AMD. Intel puts in the work to make sure the latest version of Linux always supports their hardware.
Qualcomm, MediaTek, etc. do not give a fuck. You get one board support package with a specific version of Linux and specific drivers that are patched in for that version only.
When you license an SoC there's a separate line item on the multimilliondollar invoice for software, so they actively profit from this situation and refuse to upstream their drivers.
Ubuntu Touch takes whatever BSP the phone vendor licensed from the SoC vendor to run Android, strips it down to just Linux + HW-specific userland bits, and then adds all the Ubuntu trash on top.

All the PCs that where born as clones of the IBM PC had in common a standard bus and the BIOS unifying different hardware, with many more standards added on to allow for plug and play operation like ACPI.

SoC and phones evolved from embbedded microcontrollers where each program is custom, there are no standards to even detect hardware or memory size, the bootloader has to do most of the basic initialization and then hands it to a kernel which is filled with proprietary drivers because radio manufacturers will never release them, and the companies involved are too big now to agree on a standard like early PC manufacturers

>>105654453 (OP)
https://x.com/lauriewired/status/1936147401787818084

>>105655423
Bootup is simpler on arm than on x86, it's the other stuff that kills you.

>>105654453 (OP)
that sidebar is a way better layout than the 4xwhatever grid we got for Apple and Android

>>105654453 (OP)
Computers all conform to the IBM-PC Compatible standard. Phones are all unique pieces of custom hardware that require specifically customised software.

I want a small and lightweight slate device with high end SoC and WITHOUT cam/mic/motion sensors/gps/fingerprint and pure AOSP to be used as a handheld computer without the botnet
>durrr just do this instead
no
fuck you

>>105654453 (OP)
same reason android custom roms have to be specifically built for every phone, and same reason you can't easily install an older version of android on a modern phone that ships with a newer one.
arm is a clusterfuck, everything has to be built from the ground up specifically for each device.

>>105654453 (OP)
that's how it is for all of android, why would it be any different just because it's called Ubuntu now

x86 hardware is much more strictly standardized than ARMslop. If you try to make and sell x86 hardware that's as locked down and nonstandard as the vast majority of smartphones, Intel and AMD will sodomize you in court.

>>105656480
are there no phones built on x86? is that unfeasible?

>>105656495
there were phones built on x86 once. i had one, the ASUS Zenfone 2.
intel ragequit the mobile market at some point around 2015 though.

>>105655423
Laurie my kween.

>>105654453 (OP)
>icons in alphabetical order
why can't we have this on the desktop?

>>105654453 (OP)
>Ubuntu Touch
Wasn't it scrapped?

>>105657962
https://devices.ubuntu-touch.io/
seems to be alive

>>105654473
This.

>>105657962
Canonical called it quits but the community carried on
Out of Sailfish and Postmarket, Ubuntu Touch Seems to have the most going for it

>>105656495
there were x86 phones in the past but they never really caught on

>>105654453 (OP)
ARM
I cannot fucking wait for risc-v to become mainstream. I am hyped as fuck for 20 dollar expandable computers with perfect compatibility.

>>105654535
This, arm is trash

>>105658673
Nobody tell him tehe

>>105658673
Risc-V doesnt solve the lack of standardisation

>>105654453 (OP)
Ubuntu touch runs on top of helium/libhybris.
You could port it to any device that supports android treble project like android 9 and up or something
Postmarkte os, that's use more of mainline Linux kernel. is much harder to port, cause you'll need to include the driver in the kernel

>>105656480
>If you try to make and sell x86 hardware that's as locked down and nonstandard as the vast majority of smartphones, Intel and AMD will sodomize you in court.
lmao ps5 is a fully locked down x86_64 device, it doesn't even have UEFI and uses sony's proprietary bootloader
intel macs with the T2 chip don't have UEFI they emulate UEFI on top of iBoot
also all android based tablets and phones with intel cpus were locked down without an easy way to install a custom firmware

>>105654473
>>105658003
Yeah, all the Jews I know are really happy with their choice of phone, and most of them use custom roms and shit. Come to think about it, Arabs and Indians are super into their phones too, and IIRC most custom android builds are developed by jeets. The whole phone scene is just brownoids and heebs these days.

>>105659142
>Intel and AMD will sodomize you in court.
didn't you read this part? obviously they licensed a custom version of their cpus.

>>105654453 (OP)
There's no standardization in smartphone hardware like it exists in PCs. Every manufacturer just does whatever they want and each implementation needs vastly different treatment. It's for that reason that RISC-V won't save us like >>105658673 suggests. Manufacturers will use the open sors RISC-V and then just implement random shit on top of it which will make shit incompatible with each other unless you modify/compile for each device.

>>105654453 (OP)
ARM has no generic bootloader like a BIOS/UEFI. It's locked down to the specific hardware. Look at uboot. It's the most locked down proprietary shit in existence. Even worse than x64. At least there is a gentlemen's agreement there between manufacturers.