I've been using my Samsung smartwatch with LTE as a smartphone that's hard to abuse. Thursday through Sunday I only carry it and leave my "real" phone at home.
It's pretty nice because I still have Bluetooth calls in my car and navigation in a pinch. I can still stream music and ask Google to look things up for me.
Actual calls on the watch are fine, but I do keep a pair of bluetooth headphones on me so I don't have to take business calls on speakerphone.
If texting is your addiction, technically this doesn't solve it but it doesn't increase the friction so maybe it's less of a temptation. I don't text that much so it's not a big deal to me. Doomscrolling is my downfall and fortunately not really doable on a watch.
The Apple Watch Ultra battery is much better in those circumstances. I used to struggle to last a day now I charge every other day and still have 20% ish left.
Oh man, I have been wondering about this experience myself - though if it would all work with no smartphone at all (I have been rolling with the LightPhone II for a few years now).
It had seemed like stand-alone watches were nearly there, but not quite the last time I dug into it. But it works for you?
It depends on what you mean by stand-alone. It works for me as a stand-alone device for days at a time, but you still need a phone to set up the watch and my phone plan is like an addon to the phone so you need that to set up the account. I don't think you can set up a line for these watches in the US without the "host" phone.
I just use Firefox sync. It integrated with iOS and Android. You just install the app and use the system settings to set Firefox as the default password store for the system. It works in all apps, as far as I can tell. I wish it integrated with Linux& gnome a bit better, but I just work around that by bookmarking the browser link to the password page in Firefox.
I trust Mozilla more than any random app that advertises on random podcasts. I like that it warns me when sites I use have been compromised, and that it is generally easy to use. That said, I am not a security expert, so I am interested to see if anybody has any concerns about this setup.
I mostly use Firefox Sync as well. The main downside is that it is super basic. It can only store basically URL, username, password. There is no option it store TOTP secrets, backup codes, binary data or arbitrary information. If it text you can cheat and make "fake" entries, but it isn't good UX.
I'm probably overlooking an obvious answer, I'm not sure how you define this clearly. Using your noise level example, we know how to measure noise levels. It is straight forward to say your new technology complies with a noise regulation.
How do you do that for a regulation like standardized connectors? Just say you can't use any non-open-standard connectors?
I keep going back to the todoist app. It works OK but there is something about it it doesn’t click with me. Maybe there’s a little too much white space in the design and it looks like a webpage instead of an app that fits into the desktop.
I also really like elementary planner, but its sync feature doesn’t work perfectly with Todoist … which is more or less required for me because I need my todo list on my Phone. It is going through a major revision right now so I’m hopeful that it gets even better.
Both support recurring monthly reminders. If I were you, I would try elementary’s planner first. It was designed for elementary distro desktop, but it works just fine in gnome
its the empty space and how when you click on a task to edit it makes a modal pop out. I would prefer a slide in on the right side how wunderlist does it. I am currently trying out remember the milk, it just lacks some things todoist does well.
I have to say I agree. I feel like a lot of people seem to think it is a suit and tie enterprise type boring distribution. Its really not. It has similarities to the enterprise distros, but it certainly doesn't feel like RHEL.
Its where the new fun stuff goes first... not so new that it will bite you, but still new enough to be fun to play with. That seems perfectly in line with the marketing I see from framework.
I have one and I'm using it right now. It is more than fine. My eyes aren't perfect so maybe others would care more but the image is super crisp and looks really good.
As always it depends on a lot of things, but anyone with a background marketing should be pretty versed in product-market fit. It is a fundamental concept to marketing in the same way double-entry bookkeeping is fundamental to accounting... I'm sure there are a bunch of people calling themselves marketers who are really just sales drones, but there are also a lot of developers who are just spaghetti coders and accountants who are really just glorified filers and data entry specialists.
> anyone with a background marketing should be pretty versed in product-market fit. It is a fundamental concept to marketing in the same way double-entry bookkeeping is fundamental to accounting.
It isn't though, marketers aren't experts in understanding if a product is worth building. Some become experts at that, but it isn't a standard part of their job. Instead find people who are experts in product design or just regular business, they will likely be better at this than marketers and could do the marketing bits as well.
It feels as if developers do the same mistake here as they accuse others of. Even a developer can learn marketing, so why not make a product designer learn marketing? Its just useful to have another person on the team who takes care about product market fit etc, looking for a marketer for that role just limits who you can find.
Maybe, I would just look for qualities of finding PMF over marketing qualities. Getting a startup’s product strategy in the right direction is something entirely different than “just” marketing; it means understanding how to change the product based on lack of demand, and understanding it is, in fact, a product problem rather than a marketing problem.
I’m sure great marketeers qualify for these traits, but if that’s the case, why not just select for these traits in the first place, rather than marketing?
I've read conflicting reports on how much more powerful it is in practice. I've seen only one direct review that said the Librem is clearly much faster, but I've also seen a few comparisons that show little to no difference in daily use tasks.
The problem might be that we don't have a quality comparison yet (or I haven't found it), but I wonder if there is a performance bottle neck in the hardware. Maybe the software is still better optimized for the pine and the Librem will start to pull ahead as more developers get a chance to work on it.
In term of CPU, the hardware is similarly shitty. For the GPU, the Librem 5 has a better GPU. In plasma mobile, the current bottleneck is on the GPU side, so maybe the Librem 5 can offer better performance but I'm not sure the improvements are worth $600 more.
In practice, the biggest difference comes from RAM speed, which Librem 5 has almost three times as fast as PinePhone. Then, the CPU is clocked at 1.3x the speed and it has twice the L2 cache. eMMC is faster too. The difference in every day usage is easily noticeable even just by how fast applications start and, indeed, the GPU performance difference is drastic: https://social.librem.one/@dos/104767475144787918
Recently I've compiled GTK4 on both phones and it took my PinePhone almost twice as long as my Librem 5.
Disclaimer: I work for Purism on the Librem 5, although I'm very excited with the PinePhone as well - I'd say it's good for its price.
It's pretty nice because I still have Bluetooth calls in my car and navigation in a pinch. I can still stream music and ask Google to look things up for me.
Actual calls on the watch are fine, but I do keep a pair of bluetooth headphones on me so I don't have to take business calls on speakerphone.
If texting is your addiction, technically this doesn't solve it but it doesn't increase the friction so maybe it's less of a temptation. I don't text that much so it's not a big deal to me. Doomscrolling is my downfall and fortunately not really doable on a watch.