
Librem 5 dev kits are shipping - arctux
https://puri.sm/posts/2018-devkits-are-shipping/
======
subsubsub
Every time Purism is mentioned on HN there are always people chiming in with
negativity around how it's not open or secure or free enough, based on some
unachievable metric of those things and with an side dose of utopian
fantasizing.

Buy one of these phones because you

\- Want a 'free' phone to exist in the future

\- Want an open source phone to exist in the future

\- Want a secure phone to exist in the future

It may not be up to your standards now, but without your support (money) it
will never exist.

If you have the money to spend, then spend it. Consider it a donation to the
cause.

~~~
simias
I'm impressed and very much respectful of what the Purism folks are trying to
achieve but I just don't think their business plan is viable as it is. As such
I really don't really believe that getting a few geeks on HN to support the
project will really make much of a difference. They need a much broader market
share if they want to have a chance to survive in the long term and I don't
see how they can get it. As it stands the only people who will consider buying
this are principled FLOSS folks with a lot of disposable income. I doubt
that's enough. It's not just about building the phone (which is already very
difficult), it's also about maintaining the software and app ecosystem in the
long term.

Windows Phones and countless other smartphone environments floundered over the
years even though they were backed by behemoths. What chances does Purism
have?

So while I have absolutely no hostility towards the project I just don't think
it's worth donating money to what I consider to be a lost cause. I'd rather
donate money to other Open Source projects who I think will make better use of
it.

I would be very glad to be proven wrong however, the current smartphone
ecosystem is an absolute nightmare if you value privacy and having control on
your hardware. If it turns out that the Librem 5 is not dead on arrival like I
presume it will be (assuming that it even manages to arrive in the first
place) I'll definitely consider buying one.

~~~
mlok
The difference could be : a phone that you're not supposed to throw away after
two years. Something that would be maintained over the long run. Lots of
people would buy a phone that can last 5-7 years. I am one of them. My mother
is one of them. My father too. Not everybody is fond enough of phones or tech
to want to change often. If it runs apps and has a good camera, it's fine. A
phone that lasts 5-7 years would also be good for the planet, and that's a
bigger market share than FLOSS enthusiasts.

~~~
simias
I agree with you on all counts but in order for the phone to be supported for
a long time (both by Purism and by third parties) it needs to be reasonably
successful. Otherwise nobody is going to even remember it existed two years
from now, much less port and maintain apps for it.

That's my main problem really, I have Spotify, WhatsApp and a couple other
closed-source applications on my smartphone that I need in order for said
phone to be useful. If there are no ports or alternatives maintained on the
Librem I'd just be buying a very expensive paperweight. And I don't think I'm
a heavy app user compared to most of my friends who often have a couple social
network apps, games etc...

Sibling comments mention that MS could probably make a profitable phone but
they don't have the same objectives and I say that it's irrelevant. The
problem is third parties and app supports. I need my phone to do more than
calling and texting these days, I need decent driving directions, a multimedia
player (ideally something that interfaces with Spotify, but I know that's
asking for a lot), a chat application that can connect to WhatsApp (I won't
convince all of my contacts to switch to Signal, Jabber or IRC) etc...

I need that stuff to be maintained and updated for at least a few years. And
ideally after that I'd like to know that I can count on a Librem n+1 being
available so that I won't have to change ecosystem once again.

I've bought a few open source/homebrew systems over the years, mainly handheld
consoles to run emulators. It works but the software is often rather
lackluster and very amateur looking. It's also generally maintained for a
little while then the contributors move on to something else. It's fine for a
toy emulator console, not so much for a smartphone.

The hardware is not the issue, the ecosystem is.

~~~
skykooler
That's sort of the issue the OpenMoko faced. It was designed to be a device
with long-lasting support - but support died quickly because so few people had
one.

~~~
seba_dos1
TBH community distros were pretty long lived (and let's be honest, those were
the only ones that mattered). At least SHR was actively maintained to around
2012, with last generated image being from April 2013, and I seem to remember
QtMoko being maintained even tad longer. IMO that wasn't bad for a device
released in 2008, especially for today's standards.

------
dannyw
Has anyone who pre-ordered the cancelled Librem 11 from Purism got their
refund?

I put money down more than a year ago. They didn't meet their MoQ, and so
offered refunds or applying it to another product. I chose a refund almost two
months ago, and I still have not received it despite many follow ups and
shifting deadlines.

I'm concerned that Purism may be having cash flow issues?

~~~
alexeldeib
FWIW I cancelled a preorder (not the 11, the 15) and I got a full refund very
quickly.

------
123919239
Is there any document where they describe how their focus on security shapes
pureOS? I'm seeing stuff like bundling some add-ons for the browser, and
kernel patches.

In my mind, securing users in 2018 means to have a decent password manager
with an up-to-date browser, make sure that apps are sandboxed and prohibit the
browser from accessing all my user's files. Do they tackle this?

~~~
nonbel
Edit: Sorry, I realized you were only asking about the OS after making this
post. Feel free to ignore.

I think it looks like an interesting project and will buy one. I especially
like the hardware kill switches.

> _Here are some benefits and key differentiators of the Librem 5, the world’s
> first ever IP-native mobile handset and the only user-respecting mobile
> phone product offering on the market:

\- Privacy protection by default, instead your profile and data being products
sold to the highest bidder.

\- Does not use Android or iOS. The Librem 5 comes with the mobile version of
our FSF-endorsed operating system PureOS by default, and is expected to be
able to run most GNU+Linux distributions.

\- CPU separate from baseband, isolating the blackbox that the modem may
represent and allowing us to seek hardware certification of the main board by
the Free Software Foundation.

\- Hardware Kill Switches for camera, microphone, WiFi/Bluetooth, and
baseband.

\- End-to-end encrypted decentralized communications via Matrix over the
Internet.

-We also intend the Librem 5 to integrate with the Librem Key security token in the future._

Also see here: [https://forums.puri.sm/t/librem-5-final-decision-about-
kill-...](https://forums.puri.sm/t/librem-5-final-decision-about-kill-
switches/3021)

~~~
ajdhsjakafjt
No worries, it's part of the whole story. I don't particularly see the point
of kill switches when you trust the software.

I acknowledge the efforts in hardware integration they do. I'd love to see the
Linux desktop being upgraded to Android's standards.

~~~
azdle
> I don't particularly see the point of kill switches when you trust the
> software.

In my view it's two things: 1. It's defense in depth. No one person will ever
be able to review every single line of code running their device, but anyone
can crack open the case (and/or check the open schematics) and verify that
flicking the switch kills the microphone. And 2. The baseband still has
proprietary code running it that you can't verify so the only reasonable thing
you can do to it is power it down.

------
freedomben
Would be interested in some links to SDKs and/or style guides. As a developer,
how do I get started writing my app to target the Librem 5?

Went through the website and many forums but haven't found any definitive.

~~~
pksadiq
> how do I get started writing my app to target the Librem 5?

For commandline applications all you need is to develop for GNU/Linux. It
should work pretty fine on Librem 5 too. If you want to develop GUI
applications see libhandy[0], a GTK+ widget library developed by Purism for
Librem 5.

If you need to, you can get motivations from
[https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Design/app-
mockups](https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/Design/app-mockups) and HIG guide for
GNOME is available at
[https://developer.gnome.org/hig/stable/](https://developer.gnome.org/hig/stable/)

[0]
[https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/libhandy](https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/libhandy)

~~~
oelmekki
Btw, I wonder : I intend to use KDE on librem 5 (at least eventually, if it's
not ready on phone release). Do you know if mixing GTK and QT apps on the
system will be as easy as on desktop?

------
letstrynvm
I have one of these on the way.

The main surprise for me is they're shipping it without the lcd panel working.

They can control the backlight. But no video.

Now I'm participating in the gamble that can be made to function without
rework, I'd at least like complete details, not "we are talking to the panel
vendor".

~~~
blackcain
That's why the support channels were setup. Also, there still isn't a lot of
details to share in the first place. The problem comes down to sending the
initalization codes to the panel, which for some reason is not working. The
conversations continues. Now you're as up to date as the rest of the librem 5
team.

I didn't want to drop into overly technical detail as not everyone wants that.
You are of course welcome to participate in the community forum that was setup
to chat about the state of the dev kit.

~~~
letstrynvm
One of the unusual and desirable things about this is your customers for the
dev board will largely be very experienced... you acknowledge it in the letter
you sent out.

What surprised me is until it's fixed, there's no certainty what the problem
is. Eg, dsi lanes mixed up, polarity of dsi lane wired wrong, some
semidocumented reset signal on the panel got forced to 0V or forced inactive
but panel requires it strobed, psu to panel must come up in specific order,
psu level or quality or wiring mismatch... there are many possible ways just
from having no video it can be a hw rework issue to solve it. Of course dsi is
also complex, it can easy be a sw-only config issue, or some combination.

It's not up to me as your paying customer to go ask on a 'support channel'
why, it's up to you to explain the reasoning why you believe that's a
software-only issue.

------
louib
They're still aiming for a first release of the phones in Spring 2019 (this is
from the newsletter, not the blog post)

~~~
voltagex_
For anyone not in $DEFAULT hemisphere, I'm assuming this means Q2/March-ish
2019.

~~~
chupasaurus
April as a target month was declared 2 or 3 months ago.

------
czbond
I'm in love with the mission - but don't want to really have to switch
ecosystems again (from Linux --> Apple --> PureOS). I love OSX - could I not
do the same with OSX by tightening it down?

~~~
kbenson
> I'm in love with the mission - but don't want to really have to switch
> ecosystems again (from Linux --> Apple --> PureOS).

PureOS is Debian based linux operating system.[1]

> I love OSX - could I not do the same with OSX by tightening it down?

It depends entirely on how and who you trust. If you implicitly trust Apple
and that their goal now (and in the future!) and that their team can vet all
the code going in to the degree that no single or small group of developers
there working in tandem could get a backdoor in place in either software or
hardware, then I doubt there's a better choice given Apple's ability to design
their own hardware and their complete control of the software stack.

If you would rather trust in a large distributed group of people having public
access to view and vet the source which is public and believe their vested
interest in keeping the system is the better choice for continues security,
choose an open source system wide wide use.

1: [https://puri.sm/posts/what-is-pureos-and-how-is-it-
built/](https://puri.sm/posts/what-is-pureos-and-how-is-it-built/)

~~~
fosco
Does that mean its running systemd? I thought that was generally frowned upon.
I don't know enough to have end opinion myself but it seems like systemd was
questionable especially for this type of endeavor.

~~~
newnewpdro
The librem5 may as well be subtitled "The GNOME phone", I think it goes
without saying that it will use systemd.

~~~
153791098c
You are free to install any operating system on it that you like. Just like
your desktop. We will probably also see 100% free android versions (like
Replicant) to be released for this phone when it's out. But you could also
install another GNU based Linux system of course, or just another DE.

~~~
newnewpdro
Indeed, that's part of the value proposition for such a device.

However, it's obviously preferable to want/use what's being shipped on the
device to all recipients.

In this libre-oriented space in particular, what users are likely to want as a
priority is the ability to easily reproduce the bits shipped on the device
from source, and be able to restore the device to a state no different than
shipped from the factory using those self-reproduced bits. The freedom to run
some hacked up half-baked alternative stuff they're technically free to
install should they wish, is not the top priority.

A major component of the value conferred by this freedom is that those
shipped, reproducible bits, contain a desirable foundation for the community
to converge on and iterate from.

Telling people "you can install whatever you want" before even delivering is
signaling "potentially unusable, controversial vaporware is shipping,
community fragmentation ahead" to anyone paying attention.

I'm not particularly averse to systemd/GNOME, but I do fear that it's probably
too immature an ecosystem for production mobile use and it's unnecessarily
threatening the project's overall success.

It would have been more prudent to collaborate with the Jolla/Sailfish folks
and ship basically a secure Nokia N9 successor but with an easily reproduced
and flashed image, which the N9 lacked, while the GNOME community grinds away
on getting their stack mobile-ready for a potential future device. I don't
know if the licensing could have been hashed out to get the N9 stack fully
available in reproducible form, but I'm inclined to assume that if there were
components legally obstructed from such distribution, it probably was less
work to reimplement them than build all the components needed for a GNOME
phone.

