zlacker

>>todsac+(OP)
On one hand, I understand your frustration here, for sure.

But on the other hand, Pine devices have severely lacked for being able to tell users what the best place to start is. I've wanted to back to my PinePhone a few times and had to ask, like, what is in the best state to use, and nobody could tell me.

Updating my PineBook Pro took a ton of investigating because the simple explanation of how to get from what mine shipped with to what new ones shipped with was hard to find, discussion of what mine shipped with was nearly gone already, and the process for upgrading it also had since changed!

As someone who doesn't build distros, your post is actually really nice for me, now I know I should just install Manjaro on my Pine devices! About time they picked something.

>>ocdtre+49
Why should they pick something? I thought the whole point of this was to build open hardware and let me pick something?

If you want a manufacturer to decide for you what you should run on your phone, maybe just buy a Samsung or apple device. They've already got it figured out also.

>>betwix+aZ
PINE64 hardware is not open hardware and it has never been marketed as such.

>>Martij+pb1
Open in the sense of letting the user run whatever they want, not open-sourcing the hardware itself.

>>yjftsj+Zb1
Many Android phones are also open like this as shown by pmOS: someone somewhere has to work on mainline Linux support and normally mainline doesn't really work and there are still some downstream patches left, meaning you can't run what you want unless you have a patched kernel (the same it true for the PinePhone and PinePhone Pro).