zlacker

>>todsac+(OP)
Anecdote: i backed pine64's first-ever Kickstarter and got two of their A+ boards (i think they were called). They claimed high performance and full HD video. In the end i couldn't get a single Android game, no matter how primitive, to run at more than a couple of frames per second and Netflix was too jittery to watch. They've been on my poo-list ever since.

About 18 months ago i pulled them back out and ran XFCE on one of them. It crashed with the X11 error (i kid you not): "event arrived before it was sent (your hardware is too slow!)" (going from memory - it might have been phrased differently). i ended up giving them away to someone who wanted to use one for a pihole server, and i was glad to be rid of them. Utter garbage, they were.

>>sgbeal+Ca
So you backed a developer-oriented project all about open source software and your test to see if it was garbage or not is to consume proprietary video content and play video games through virtualization?

>>HidyBu+me
These are things lots of people, even developers, do on their phones - play games and watch videos.

>>cridde+jk
Yes, but they probably should not be buying experimental products for this purpose. Set your expectations according to your purchases. The Pine store makes it abundantly clear that this is not a device which you can expect to plug-and-play for whatever use-case you have.

>>ddevau+dw
> Yes, but they probably should not be buying experimental products for this purpose.

You misunderstand. i didn't back the phone/laptop. i backed the first pine64 boards, which were marketed as being much more capable than they turned out to be:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/pine64/pine-a64-first-1...

>>sgbeal+561
I have one of the original Kickstarter A64+, it has happily run low disk I/O tasks for years (on account of the uSDcard).

Right now it runs some services through Docker and is pretty dang solid.

I've never taken any manufacturer's performance claims too seriously, there's always an angle.