brunoais

I wonder what's wrong with @Erik. He hasn't posted since April, even though he has been online. I also sent them an e-mail on the 6th of August and still didn't get an answer. What's going on with them?!?! Is Zendesk broken? Are they in a mess?!?!

They have good intentions and a great product (hardware-wise), however: They SERIOUSLY need to work on their public relations. It really needs a STRONG improvement. @Erik! That guy is at a mess and He desperately NEEDS YOUR HELP!

Are you asking if Ubuntu Touch supports those characters? It does.

Welcome to fxtec! First, about your entry, please use a summary that specifies what you want to ask or state and not who wrote 🙂. Who wrote is given to the readers regardless 🙂. Second, Ubuntu's browser is as capable as android's browser, if not more capable. If you are accessing your bank account online or any shop online, Ubuntu can do that as well (or even better) than the basic android. If you are asking about native apps, Ubuntu touch is still struggling with those. Most apps work but apps with specific requirements struggle or not work at all.

I can see fastboot is available with apt list | grep fastboot I wanted to know about USB stability. Seems not to be OS-based but hardware-based . As for adb, I already use it extensively and have multiple scripts that depend on it for my daily life (not with the Pro¹ but my current phone; still waiting for my f(x)tec Pro¹X)

Is ubuntu also stable enough for fastboot?

Well... There's this:

Yes. You need root permissions on the OS side to set the permission values and, for example, set the same UID and GID to the same app for the equivalent app of the other OS (So both have the same UID and GID). Wait... File browser? I thought we were talking about web browser (the usual meaning for "browser"). If it's the file browser, then consider what I mentioned moot. A proper file browser does need root privileges on android.

I think you need to root at the android level. However, why root at the browser app? In other words, why the need to run the browser app with root permissions?

Why a root browser? Why not just make a symlink or a bind mount? Ultimately, the only requirement would be that the uids and gids match in both installs.

The PRO1 doesn't have any locks or any artificial limitations applied. However, some providers lock it out or make the process harder to allow the PRO1 to work in their networks.

There are no hardware security (or security capabilities) features missing if using the SD662. What it doesn't have is hardware acceleration for many security algorithms. That just means that those will be processed much much slower than SD835 can. That can be related to slower internet speeds that is reported/announced for the SD662. Edit: The only hardware security that an have meaning is the TrustZone. Is that the one you were missing? If so, for what purpose in the smartphone?

Thank you @claude0001 for putting that down to words. Even if F(x)tec goes with the SD662, I will follow them. All because they have shown to deserve the trust and they are the ones being screwed. I don't want to screw them more than what they already are by canceling my pledge. I do wish they would explain better the situation they are in. Could it be stress?

From my understanding of all I could gather. There was a breach of contract. Perhaps because that exact fail of 3 months of warning in advance and even taking the money without delivering

Indeed. They don't tell who but they did mention plural. Qualcomm is pretty much the monopoly. Exynos is Samsung phones only, last time I asked them (mid/late last year)

Is that the interpretation it is supposed to have? if so, then I'd change my option. @Erik Please confirm. If so, I will change the poll above. The announcement doesn't specify it. The baiter and switcher is the one F(x)tec hired and not F(x)tec itself. I wonder if it is a Chinese company... This kind of maneuver seems designed to kill small companies!

It's not that you lose them. You just no longer get hardware acceleration for them. That causes their processing to become slower.

Indeed...

I see. I'm not much updated on that. I'd still rather have those and go forward than this bate and switch from Qualcomm who took the money and then didn't deliver to f(x)tec. Maybe any of those ones would be easier and faster to work with... I just wonder if Qualcomm blocked F(x)tec from using them.

The announcement itself 🙂

Also, does anyone here need android certification? The certification is just a blessing from google so an Android installation passes the SafetyNet attestation. In my case, I'll just buy a super cheap phone for 50$ or so just for those apps.

Qualcomm F(x)tec supplier has turned their back to F(x)tec and with a complete F*ck you, even after having fully promised to deliver and having been paid. Yeah, you can't make that **** up. So, we are left with 2 major choices with which F(x)tec has already tried to choose from. I wish we were consulted as a community first but I guess, when under stress, people make mistakes. Specially such newcomers into this business. Redesign of PRO¹ (possibly into PRO²) and use a much more recent SoC as powerful or more powerful than SD 835 (9 months delay) Slight redesign of PRO¹ to acco

I rather wait 9 months to get the 720[G] instead of 5 to get the 622 and get a long-lasting good product, given how much I'm paying for it.

I tried to jump out before the campaign ended. They refused. Even though I thought I had that long to decide

First, having a PRO¹ so I can start using it. I'll think about what's next. I won't be using google Play, though.