i just wish pine64 were upfront about the issues with its devices
like i've decided that actually it's okay to have problems but the real thing that makes me not like them very much is they always lie about realistically how usable a pine64 actually is
so i'm saying put on the front page of the pinephone pro that its screen on time is 1.5 hours
if the point isn't to make money and devices are sold at cost why are they misleading buyers
less blunt sort of deal with the pbp
pinebook pro disclaimers
- the battery discharges even when plugged in when under load
- hardware video decoding is iffy
- the ui (KDE) has greater latency on the hardware than you are used to
- the screen on time at low brightness and low cpu load in powersave cpu/gpu modes is at least N hours (i estimate N is 12 but i haven't done any real experiments)
like in this case the screen on time is legitimately impressive right
so i'm just sayin you need to test your shit and disclose the numbers whether it's good or bad
pinecil disclaimers
- none. does what it says i haven't found issues so far
in general there is a lack of testing going on over there imo
the fact that there are devices out in the wild with major hardware flaws that weren't identified until after the batch was shipped is like. a problem tbh. my frickin pinephone is rev _1.3_ and it still has a thing that i need to fix on the mainboard
like if they don't have the resources or enbypower to spend legitimate time testing everything maybe they should shift the general focus from yeeting out as many devices as possible to choosing specifically a set of devices to produce where sufficient testing can be done on all of them. if that means one device per year that's literally fine
fuchsiaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
