Finding software opportunities and common ground

[levi]

What apps came pre-bundled with the Pandora?

I guess similar apps to that for the Pyra, as I assume the target audience is largely the same.

From memory, the most advanced or at the very least uptodate app shipped with the Pandora was arguably vim, a text editor. It was basic pre-internet stuff with the addition of curl and maybe wget to download stuff. I don't think it had an irc client and it definitely did not have a web browser.

But that was more or less ten years ago. I don't think it's representative to use it as more than a base of applicaition packages to have installed, and we must problably have more, at least to make it possible for new users to get on to facebook or instagram or whatever pile of shit they actually use from the internet.

 

[Grench]

What is the best browser for any individual to use ongoing and what browser is best to include as a default or stock are quite possibly different browsers. Two distinctly different sets of criteria and one glaring restriction.

Lucky us the Pyra can ship with either of two publicly known browsers that are present and maintained in the Debian main repository. This meets the criteria for 'ships with a browser' and the restriction 'maintaining it is someone else's problem'.

Lucky us, even though the Pyra will likely ship with Firefox (debian's default) or maybe Chromium (if someone on the OS team cares about it enough to switch to it), nothing stops us from each installing whatever browser meets our own individual criteria or even uninstalling the 'stock' browser.

 

[Swordfish II]

Next to nothing because there was very limited space available. Right now the Pyra comes with solid, but a bit underwhelming stuff. Its just your 100% general expectations of a Linux desktop. It isn't exiting, there is no community, no connections are made, etc. We are exploring alternatives that make sense.
Pale Moon is different and similar enough compared to FF that exploring it makes sense, and the differences are _precicely_ appreciated for the type of people that we have and want more of up to 2500.

...There was a ton of stuff on the pandora some completely broken like cups.

You want easy to use when the Pandora had all sorts of nuances that were not intuitive. Just like the pyra will be.

 

[comradekingu]

Don't know where that argument is going. Agreed, the Pandora experience is not a good ideal for replication.

 

[docbroke]

Not that I had any interest in using Chromium, but I thought Chromium is to Chrome what AOSP is to Android, i.e. pre-contamination software?

Both chromium and AOSP are open source projects but both are supported/deveoped by google which google uses and adds it's own binary blobs to make what we know as google-chrome and google-android.

If we want functions of chromium without google we may try some other browser based on blink (engine used by chromium) but produced by more trusted developers. https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/List_of_applications/Internet#Web_browsers lists most browsers including those based on blink, as well as privacy focused blink based browsers like, brave, ungoogled-chromium, and iridium.

 

[Swordfish II]

Don't know where that argument is going. Agreed, the Pandora experience is not a good ideal for replication.

It's more of a "if you need to know how to work things you can install your own stuff." After all the Pyra will require users to install the codec pack and their own emulators, two of the primary use cases WITHOUT shipping with the associated software.

 

[comradekingu]

It should suck, because then people who know better will install what they need? Still don't see where that goes… Into the trash or not, shipping under-par software in turn means finding out what runs well for each respective user, and using a lot of time getting everything running sort of well, rather than shipping sensible defaults.

The most sensible part of that, like-for-like, is gaining the attention of likeminded projects, that Pyra people most often are already in. Yeeees.

MP3 is not protected anymore, so gstreamer1.0-plugins-ugly and the like isn't needed(?) The OS takes care of installing the correct ones via attemptedly played media types anyway. You can consume media all you like, but you need software. What software is it going to be?
Emulators fall into legality of what country it is shipped to. More people play regular games, and I would argue putting some in "Full" makes sense.

 

[levi]

MP3 is not protected anymore, so gstreamer1.0-plugins-ugly and the like isn't needed(?) The OS takes care of installing the correct ones via attemptedly played media types anyway.

Is that true? I recall having to install the ugly codecs back in the day to play mp3s, although like you say, mp3 codecs should be more widely distributable these days. But that's just because I've not used Debian since squeeze. But still, if you try to play anything not currently supported by the codecs you have, then does it really spontaneously connect to the internet and download codecs? I'm not sure I'm a big fan of that way of working.

 

[comradekingu]

Well it will ask you, from what I recall. It is essentially a solved problem that needs not evoke memories of how it was done on the Pandora.

 

[bzar]

What is your gauging of that, and for what people? It is a contrary measure to quality.
Chrome, Dropbox, Acrobat Reader, MS Office, iTunes, Skype, and WhatsApp and the like all have better counterparts.
Nobody up to 2500 should be more comfortable with these. Recognition is one measure, but generally speaking utility and community (also contrary) is what we need.

If OTOH finding something that has broad recognition that is good enough, like VLC, it still has too many general users up to 2500 to utilize its reach. (I am a contributor).

I didn't mean picking the most recognizable, I meant favoring generally recognized software over obscure counterparts. Which one of the generally recognized ones is picked can be done with other priorities like between Firefox and Chromium (or whatever else is deemed generally recognized).

I'm placing a high value to recognizability because to the class of users who benefit the most from a "batteries included" image seeing and using things they recognize will make the device feel more familiar and approachable. Introduction of unknown elements should be throttled to give the user time to become comfortable and productive. The first thing people don't want to do when learning to use a new device is also learning to use every kind of piece of software at the same time. It's ok to learn a new piece of software in a familiar system or learn a new system while using it to utilize a familiar program, but having both be unfamiliar can be too much, especially if you're not already comfortable with even the type of system you're trying to learn (linux desktop). It's an affordance to the users most likely to get the device and stop using it after getting fed up with the unfamiliarity and never getting to the point of installing the things they actually want to use.

 

[ClockworkCoder]

From memory, the most advanced or at the very least uptodate app shipped with the Pandora was arguably vim, a text editor. It was basic pre-internet stuff with the addition of curl and maybe wget to download stuff. I don't think it had an irc client and it definitely did not have a web browser.

But that was more or less ten years ago. I don't think it's representative to use it as more than a base of applicaition packages to have installed, and we must problably have more, at least to make it possible for new users to get on to facebook or instagram or whatever pile of shit they actually use from the internet.

Vim, suits me fine

Let's face it, all most people need, as you said, is likely going to be a means to satiate their social media addictions, so a decent browser is all that is going to be essential.

 

[Swordfish II]

Well it will ask you, from what I recall. It is essentially a solved problem that needs not evoke memories of how it was done on the Pandora.

Except it doesn't which is why most people use vlc.

Also emulators are not illegal in any country. Roms can be. That's like saying "abiword is illegal because it can open .docx which is a Microsoft format."

 

[comradekingu]

Even so, that is a library question. The only distinction to be made is perhaps going with libavcodec. The other question is how many ones to install by default.

@bzar: I agree. Blender takes the confidence out of me. Incscape is in this department too, though far less so.
Very challenging software where easier counterparts are available, sure. The expectancy of a web browser is that of being a graphical ordeal, as with word-processing.
So, is Pale Moon too obscure over Firefox for you, seeing as they work otherwise almost the same?

 

[bzar]

@bzar: I agree. Blender takes the confidence out of me. Incscape is in this department too, though far less so.
Very challenging software where easier counterparts are available, sure. The expectancy of a web browser is that of being a graphical ordeal, as with word-processing.
So, is Pale Moon too obscure over Firefox for you, seeing as they work otherwise almost the same?

Inkscape and especially Blender are probably the most recognizable tools we have available for their respective tasks. Which counterparts did you have in mind that are as recognizable and easier to use?

Will people who don't know about Pale Moon recognize it as almost-Firefox? It's not just about working similarly enough. The user needs to have confidence they know what they're doing if possible. "I don't know about the rest of the system, but this is Firefox, which I know" vs. "I don't know about the rest of the system, but this Pale Moon thing kinda looks like Firefox though I'm not entirely sure what the differences are so it's still new to me". I don't claim to know how recognized Pale Moon is as a brand, but I'd guess it's a tiny fraction of Firefox's. It doesn't even show up on any browser share charts I found, though if it doesn't set its own user agent string it may just be counted as Firefox.

Personally I recognize Pale Moon and have no issue it being in the default image, but considering others I feel it might be better to pick Firefox over it. Same with Tor-Browser and friends.

 

[comradekingu]

I don't think they are strictly needed. I use wings3d and incscape. One is more minimal, the other a "full" option(?) None of those I think fit in the default(?)
Once you open Pale Moon it (or should be) smooth sailing. A different web-browser is probably not where we are loosing people on the premise of buying a Pyra atm. if we are honest. Tor-browser doesn't do the same thing as either, so it is an addition in my eyes.

The option is "OK, that is Firefox", and vis-a-vis maybe Pale Moon(+Tor Browser), nobody hears about the Pyra for reasons why I don't think Mozilla would mention it. (I am a contributor).

 

[Djoga'Ro]

So, is Pale Moon too obscure over Firefox for you, seeing as they work otherwise almost the same?

Maybe not for the tech-savvy. To everone else, yes, when given without an explaination. And, Firefox doesn't work the same anymore.

Will people who don't know about Pale Moon recognize it as almost-Firefox? It's not just about working similarly enough. The user needs to have confidence they know what they're doing if possible. "I don't know about the rest of the system, but this is Firefox, which I know" vs. "I don't know about the rest of the system, but this Pale Moon thing kinda looks like Firefox though I'm not entirely sure what the differences are so it's still new to me".

Talking about the general public, most don't know about Pale Moon. To those, who don't know, Pale Moon looks like ancient Firefox. To me it is a maintained and updated old (and thus still true) Firefox - a good thing.

 

[ClockworkCoder]

Not sure what others feel, but does a poll make sense?

I think a sensible default for Joe average (and compromise for those of us who are more familiar with "sleeker"/"more private" browsers) would be Firefox.

 

[theredbaron]

Not sure what others feel, but does a poll make sense?

I think a sensible default for Joe average (and compromise for those of us who are more familiar with "sleeker"/"more private" browsers) would be Firefox.

The problem with a poll is that least some people will vote based on what they need, whereas a thread like this causes people to "show there work".

Take me for instance. I will have Firefox, Kodi, smplayer, xedit, and a bunch of emus/games installed. Abiword, chromium, etc, will all be removed. So yeah, I would vote for them ny default. However, with discussion here, it might come out that, god forbid, Kodi doesn't run well, so maybe a full media frontend isn't feasible. And, o, xedit isn't even in the debian repo. Why use that when there are literally tons of editors to choose from. Etc.

Granted this is mitigatable a bit if said poll is specific about why something should be default, aka not "your' preference, but a mixture of ease of use, recognizable, little or no maintenance for prya use, etc.



Sent from my H3123 using Tapatalk

 

[ClockworkCoder]

I just meant a vote on browsers. This is the single piece of software we all appear to agree is required.

 

[ible]

i find it deeply satisfying that the title of this thread is "finding [...] common ground"