1. 10
  1.  

  2. 10

    pine64 needs to do some soul searching. throwing hardware out into the world and “hoping” folks show up to write software (for free) to support it is not sustainable. the difference* between pine64 and the other companies listed in the article is that the other companies hired developers to make the devices functional. on the other hand, the most functional pine64 device I own is a desktop power supply that required writing 0 software/firmware.

    i’m still glad pine64 is around, but my desk drawer can only hold so many more of their products that seemingly have no chance of being useful because of the massive effort required to make them work, and pine64’s lack of interest to do so. they seem perfectly happy just making hardware. good hardware on its own does not a good product make.

    • ok there are many many many differences, but the one that supports my point…
    1. 8

      It’s often not even good hardware. There are often hardware issues that go unresolved in later revisions. My rockpro64s are gathering dust because the PCIe slot is buggy.

      I got a pinephone knowing it would only ever be a toy under development. But, even for it the accessories are just bad and I don’t understand why they make some of them. And, the keyboard finally was available after months of talk and it is pretty horrible.

      I have mixed feelings. I know things like the earbuds will have buyers with a real interest, but I also think they generate a lot of e-waste.

      1. 2

        yep. after managing to accrue three different generations of (each unusable in their own, weird ways) PinePhones, and after playing with the PineTime dev kits (which was such a “meh” experience I never bought the production models), and after watching some friends’ issues with the Pinebook{,Pro}, I’ve largely sworn off Pine’s hardware as “you get what you pay for”.

      2. 1

        I haven’t bought a single pine64 product because I know I’m not part of their target. Perhaps you’re not part of their target either? It seems they’re doing fine “throwing hardware out into the world and “hoping” folks show up to write software (for free) to support it”.

        1. 7

          I’m one of the core developers of postmarketOS. If I’m not the target, then who is?

          That said, I still use my pinephone and other pine64 devices. My point was that a company who just makes hardware and hopes someone else will make it functional is almost certainly going to generate a lot of e-waste (as someone else pointed out), and that’s not great.

          1. 2

            I’m one of the core developers of postmarketOS. If I’m not the target, then who is?

            People who are fine with a company selling hardware without any software? :)

            I am not a free-market absolutist but the e-waste problem, in my opinion, comes from people buying the products and then doing nothing with them rather than the company making the product available. Pine64 has been pretty clear from the start about their device not being for people who don’t want to get their hands dirty with software. It’s fairly easy to discover the state of linux on the phone without buying a pinephone (buy a used one, grab postmarketOS or sailfishOS, flash the phone), buying one and then shelving it because “it doesn’t work” is entirely the fault of consumers and not the fault of the company, IMO.

      3. 6

        I didn’t find the article super informative, but it does link to the April Update which has more information.

        https://www.pine64.org/2022/04/15/april-update-no-more-unicorns/

        1. 1

          I thought that was pine’s April fools joke? The article linked then definitely sounded like a good April fools.