Develop Bugs

android on samsung s5600 preston?

i'm new into this, so i was wondering if anyone knows if there is any way i can port android on a samsung preston. it's native ui is awful and there's little to no customization.

if no-one is planning on doing an android port for this phone, can anyone point me in the direction of a good guide to doing it myself?
My daughter has this phone it it could really do with a decent OS

Yeah...I would really like to have android on my samsung GT-S5600...I HATE the samsung OS...I like the phone's design,but I'm thinking of buying a new one,just because of the crappy OS...If someone could make android for it,I would be grateful...

dexter9374 said:
Yeah...I would really like to have android on my samsung GT-S5600...I HATE the samsung OS...I like the phone's design,but I'm thinking of buying a new one,just because of the crappy OS...If someone could make android for it,I would be grateful...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the same "problem" if anyone find the solution will be very apriciated.
Thanks
Bissius

Well, I think our only way out would be getting a dev interested... Or we could always buy another phone

I don't see this as being very likely. There are a number of problems that will need to be overcome. First and foremost is the processor type. We have no idea what the speed is. Let alone the architecture. Android requires an ARM based architecture to run with a minimum of 200MHz or so which pretty much guarantees global system lag. You'll probably have smoother performance on the proprietary OS. Not that I've used the device or anything but that's what would be expected. After all, the prop. OS's have been slimmed down to the extent that only the incorporated functions run and nothing else. Next is ram. We again are told nothing on how much memory this thing has. Barebones 'droid requires 128mb minimum to run. Storage… Here's a list of 'droid's requirements.
http://www.netmite.com/android/mydroid/development/pdk/docs/system_requirements.html
Recommended is 256MB of minimum internal storage. It says it will run on less but its not recommended. Let's push the boundaries a little. Lets say that the preston has 96mb of internal memory, which realistically should be about right. Maybe 128mb TOPS. Thats 37.5-50% of the original requirement. Even if you did get it running, where are your personal files going to be stored if you can't get the sd card slot working? In addition to that, more lag will be faced as it is a proven fact that all machines slow down if more than half the internal storage has been used.
Assuming that we got passed all of this (it'll be a miracle if we did), there are other matters that are sure to lay down a roadblock. First of all, drivers. The internal hardware of the device will need drivers written for it. That means everything like radio, bluetooth, camera, keypad, touchscreen, audio, display etc. etc. All current devices that run Android can run it because the hardware in the device already exists in an equivalent Android device. If none of the hardware in the 5600 exists in any other droid phone, drivers will need to be reverse engineered. The kernel is essential for the system to boot. It is the underlying structure on which the OS is built. If the CPU in the device is not ARM based, there is a fat chance that a working kernel will ever be built for it. And the final and probably most important reason why this will probably never work is the boot loader. Even Windows Mobile devices which currently run Android won't work without a third party loader. Hence the reason it must boot into WinMo first to load droid. The reason being is that all phone manufacturers lock the phone's boot loader to prevent it from running anything but the shipped OS. Lets say we got past this by creating a loader similar to haret that ran inside the prop. OS. You would be able to TECHNICALLY bypass the problems we would have with the stock boot loader and internal storage (that is, considering that we have established a way to enter the linux kernel). But you would still be faced with CPU compatibility issues, driver support and sufficient ram to barely run an OS as packed as Android. I will gladly give a medal and bow down to the gentleman/woman who manages the task but as I previously said, it does not seem possible.

ayilm1 said:
I don't see this as being very likely. There are a number of problems that will need to be overcome. First and foremost is the processor type. We have no idea what the speed is. Let alone the architecture. Android requires an ARM based architecture to run with a minimum of 200MHz or so which pretty much guarantees global system lag. You'll probably have smoother performance on the proprietary OS. Not that I've used the device or anything but that's what would be expected. After all, the prop. OS's have been slimmed down to the extent that only the incorporated functions run and nothing else. Next is ram. We again are told nothing on how much memory this thing has. Barebones 'droid requires 128mb minimum to run. Storage… Here's a list of 'droid's requirements.
http://www.netmite.com/android/mydroid/development/pdk/docs/system_requirements.html
Recommended is 256MB of minimum internal storage. It says it will run on less but its not recommended. Let's push the boundaries a little. Lets say that the preston has 96mb of internal memory, which realistically should be about right. Maybe 128mb TOPS. Thats 37.5-50% of the original requirement. Even if you did get it running, where are your personal files going to be stored if you can't get the sd card slot working? In addition to that, more lag will be faced as it is a proven fact that all machines slow down if more than half the internal storage has been used.
Assuming that we got passed all of this (it'll be a miracle if we did), there are other matters that are sure to lay down a roadblock. First of all, drivers. The internal hardware of the device will need drivers written for it. That means everything like radio, bluetooth, camera, keypad, touchscreen, audio, display etc. etc. All current devices that run Android can run it because the hardware in the device already exists in an equivalent Android device. If none of the hardware in the 5600 exists in any other droid phone, drivers will need to be reverse engineered. The kernel is essential for the system to boot. It is the underlying structure on which the OS is built. If the CPU in the device is not ARM based, there is a fat chance that a working kernel will ever be built for it. And the final and probably most important reason why this will probably never work is the boot loader. Even Windows Mobile devices which currently run Android won't work without a third party loader. Hence the reason it must boot into WinMo first to load droid. The reason being is that all phone manufacturers lock the phone's boot loader to prevent it from running anything but the shipped OS. Lets say we got past this by creating a loader similar to haret that ran inside the prop. OS. You would be able to TECHNICALLY bypass the problems we would have with the stock boot loader and internal storage (that is, considering that we have established a way to enter the linux kernel). But you would still be faced with CPU compatibility issues, driver support and sufficient ram to barely run an OS as packed as Android. I will gladly give a medal and bow down to the gentleman/woman who manages the task but as I previously said, it does not seem possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks for the info, looks quite feasible what you're telling; it makes me a little sad though

Compiling AOSP

I cant seem to find any work around to compiling ICS or greater on a 32 bit linux system. As I understand, this is not supported anymore(atleast from 2.3.x and greater). I have a 64 bit windows computer though. Would any developer chime in and let me know what they would do?
I was thinking of just running(dual booting) ubuntu on my newer windows machine but did not know if this would work for this purpose. I really just wanted to build my own jb rom from AOSP and gradually expand my knowledge from there. Thanks for any input.

slimb9 said:
I cant seem to find any work around to compiling ICS or greater on a 32 bit linux system. As I understand, this is not supported anymore(atleast from 2.3.x and greater). I have a 64 bit windows computer though. Would any developer chime in and let me know what they would do?
I was thinking of just running(dual booting) ubuntu on my newer windows machine but did not know if this would work for this purpose. I really just wanted to build my own jb rom from AOSP and gradually expand my knowledge from there. Thanks for any input.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not recommended that you try building on a 32bit machine though there are modifications listed out there that *might* allow you to build AOSP from it. You are perfectly capable to dual booting Ubuntu on your Windows machine and that'll work fine. Even a virtual machine would work.

i first tried a virtual machine, that actually was harder to set up, it needed bios correction, network stuff, shared folders, guest extensions, cpu blablabla. in the end a single build took like 8 hours and the pc got so busy that i could barely move the mouse so the whole point of a virtual machine was kinda moot. installing ubuntu was easier than i thought. i wouldnt go for the newest version though. i did that and installing oracle java on 12.04 was not simple, actually that was the most confusing thing i ever had to deal with and i know computers since i was a boy.

molesarecoming said:
i first tried a virtual machine, that actually was harder to set up, it needed bios correction, network stuff, shared folders, guest extensions, cpu blablabla. in the end a single build took like 8 hours. installing ubuntu was easier than i thought. i wouldnt go for the newest version though, i did that an installing oracle java on 12.04 was not simple, actually that was the most confusing thing i ever had to deal with and i know computers since i was a boy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.techlw.com/2012/07/install-sun-java-6-or-7-in-ubuntu-1204.html

Pirateghost said:
http://www.techlw.com/2012/07/install-sun-java-6-or-7-in-ubuntu-1204.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
funny, the tutorial i got was two pages long lol. anyway, i got it working then, ics compiled flawless. along came jb, breaking in the end because of weird proguard EOF errors. that was the point i switched to 11.something, now it works again. :cyclops:

molesarecoming said:
funny, the tutorial i got was two pages long lol. anyway, i got it working then, ics compiled flawless. along comes jb and breaks in the end because of proguard EOF errros. that was the point i switched to 11.something, now it works again. :cyclops:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i havent had any issues with JB compiling on a few of my machines... so far. actually just sitting down now to set up my new build VM on my esxi farm... i think 16 cores + 16gb ram should do the trick....

thanks for the input. i was under the impression running ubuntu alongside windows was probably the best. i pretty much setup everything on my laptop, got to building the jb rom from source and it spit out errors at me. I realized that I was an idiot for trying it on a 32 bit system after numerous hours of setup
I am new to doing all this myself and definitely new to trying to compile my own rom. I have experience writing some code but for think or swim which has nothing to do/doesnt help me at all with android. Thanks for the quick responses. Thought it would be awesome to learn everything. gotta start somewhere.:silly:

Running Ubuntu Touch as host OS and Android as Guest os with KVM on the Nexus 10

Hello.
My name is Mario. I'm a computer hobbyist. Recently I've bought the nexus 10. This project wants to virtualize android with kvm on top of ubuntu touch on the nexus 10. Someone has already did the most of the job,as you can see here :
http://www.virtualopensystems.com/media/chromebook/chromebook.pdf
they have used the arm chromebook,but IF I don't get wrong,it uses the same board,the exynos 5 with 2 arm cpu's. The only difference between the arm chromebook and the nexus 10 is the boot procedure. Virtual Open System did a proof of concept. They did not complete the project. In particular these features are missing :
Guest Sound support
A way to assign USB devices to the guest
Hardware acceleration
chroot integration in the default OS to achieve better integration with ubuntu
so the project that I would like to start wants to add these features to what virtual open systems did right now.
I know that usually Android run as Host OS and Ubuntu as guest os,but I think that Android is not a secure / powerful OS as Linux. I don't want to use it as HOST OS,but only as GUEST. Tell me what's your point of view. Thanks.
XDA:DevDB Information
Android and Ubuntu Touch on the Nexus 10 run together, a Kernel for the Google Nexus 10
Contributors
marietto2008
Kernel Special Features:
Version Information
Status: Testing
Created 2013-11-26
Last Updated 2013-12-05

I've been wanting to a Linux tablet for years. I'm actually holding out for the Microsoft Surface Pro to liquidate stock for $300 or so if that ever happens.
The problem I see with Linux running on the Nexus 10 is its 2 GB of memory, especially for any type of VM you want to run.
---------- Post added at 11:45 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:45 AM ----------
I've been wanting to a Linux tablet for years. I'm actually holding out for the Microsoft Surface Pro to liquidate stock for $300 or so if that ever happens.
The problem I see with Linux running on the Nexus 10 is its 2 GB of memory, especially for any type of VM you want to run.
But yes, this project of running Linux out right on the tablet could work very well with a stripped down OS so not to take up too much room.
I really wished Google put a memory card on these things.

Looks like someone from Samsung has done something like this with the Xen port for ARM
http://vimeo.com/78023395

Technically speaking,which kind of way do you like between the multi-rom or the virtualization solution ? And what's the best virtualization tool between KVM and XEN ?

Someone is interested to work on this project ? It could be posted on Indiegogo..

http://whiteboard.ping.se/Android/Debian

d me going there with that headline,
im keen to try ubuntu touch on my N10,
I would think ( im not a android or linux , or any other kind of prog/ eng.) that a dualboot or multirom solution would be better than virtualisation, esp on low resource machine. each rom runs on its own so no sharing of common resources?, just my uneducated guess, but Ill keep an eye on this thread,
like to see what the final, or working solution is.
great efforts , thanks
stuie

stuartb88 said:
d me going there with that headline,
im keen to try ubuntu touch on my N10,
I would think ( im not a android or linux , or any other kind of prog/ eng.) that a dualboot or multirom solution would be better than virtualisation, esp on low resource machine. each rom runs on its own so no sharing of common resources?, just my uneducated guess, but Ill keep an eye on this thread,
like to see what the final, or working solution is.
great efforts , thanks
stuie
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll save you the trouble... You flash the entire ROM over your firmware (don't worry, you can revert back to Android by flashing the firmware back).
When I ran Ubuntu Touch on my Next 10, it was... HORRIBLE. The extreme lag and performance issues made it utterly useless. Completely useless. This was about 6 months ago.
Went back and am running latest Android now, nice and speedy.

Tried Ubuntu touch as well. If Touch had been a full x86 Ubuntu experience, maybe I'd use it for a while. But it's Ubuntu with even less software than regular Ubuntu/Lunux.
So back to Android. ��
If you want to try it you can follow this guide:
https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/sta...installing-ubuntu-for-devices/#install-ubuntu

[Q] Linux Deploy Frame Buffer Settings [vk810]

Hello,
Currently I'm running Debian Wheezy [armel] [xfce] on my vk810. I love this app; however I would like to use the framebuffer instead of VNC.
I am also having issues properly configuring the frame buffer so that it functions. currently the device freezes when I stop the android gui and initiate the debian gui. I have yet to get it working successfully, trying multiple DPI, and frame buffer settings.
I'm thinking it would be awesome to run debian from my vk810, having the enviroment displayed through my slimport. Idealy it would be nice to assign debian a seperate framebuffer than the android enviroment so that I can use both enviroments simultaniously without using a 3rd party machine running the VNC client.
So.
Has anyone had any luck with successfully running the linux deploy enviroment through their frame buffer, if so what settings/enviroment/architecture did you use.
Is it possible to run android and linux deploy environments on seperate frame buffers? ie. Android on the device display and debian on the slimport attached display.
I'd also love to hear some feedback from those who have been successfully using Linux Deploy on their LG G Tab 8.3's. What do you find works best, what distro/arch are you running, and how are you dealing with limited arm7 support.
For those of you who do not know what Linux Deploy is, you can check it out here. If you also have a better recommendation for a linux deployment suite please share!
Thanks.

Very interested in this. Was running AntiX with Fluxbox, and now Mint on my laptop and couldn't get vnc to work at all. Must have been doing something wrong.
Anyway, having a separate partition for Linux on android would be awesome! Don't really know what I would do with it other than a decent browser and maybe gimp?
I'm willing to give it a go as well. I'm sure it will be a learning curve though.
How are you doing this with a locked boot loader? Or is it not relevant? Regards,

sleekmason said:
Very interested in this. Was running AntiX with Fluxbox, and now Mint on my laptop and couldn't get vnc to work at all. Must have been doing something wrong.
Anyway, having a separate partition for Linux on android would be awesome! Don't really know what I would do with it other than a decent browser and maybe gimp?
I'm willing to give it a go as well. I'm sure it will be a learning curve though.
How are you doing this with a locked boot loader? Or is it not relevant? Regards,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
basically you use the already running kernal for your android system, using linux deploy or a few other scripts i've seen around the web allow you to boot an armel or armhf architecture using the already running android kernal.
To get a native debian or Arch system running on this device would be awesome, but I would just be happy with figuring out native frame buffer setup and having the ability to switch from the device screen or the slimport hdmi output.
I'm thinking this may be possible seeing how the device screen has an independent frame buffer from the slimport [fb1].
I'm personally just starting to experiment with it, I'm not that experienced but I think it has a lot of potential on the vk810, not just because of the dpi [243] but also becuase of the slimport accessibility.

crashtheface said:
basically you use the already running kernal for your android system, using linux deploy or a few other scripts i've seen around the web allow you to boot an armel or armhf architecture using the already running android kernal.
To get a native debian or Arch system running on this device would be awesome, but I would just be happy with figuring out native frame buffer setup and having the ability to switch from the device screen or the slimport hdmi output.
I'm thinking this may be possible seeing how the device screen has an independent frame buffer from the slimport [fb1].
I'm personally just starting to experiment with it, I'm not that experienced but I think it has a lot of potential on the vk810, not just because of the dpi [243] but also becuase of the slimport accessibility.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm running the 510, so it may or may not be the same, but have you looked into the kernel settings for the framebuffer? When messing around in the 510 file I remember seeing a couple of options there for the config but don't know if they are relevant or not. I will look at it again to see if there might not be something else that needs to be turned on or compiled in.

sleekmason said:
I'm running the 510, so it may or may not be the same, but have you looked into the kernel settings for the framebuffer? When messing around in the 510 file I remember seeing a couple of options there for the config but don't know if they are relevant or not. I will look at it again to see if there might not be something else that needs to be turned on or compiled in.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would look into the kernal issue but I have no idea what I'm doing. You could very well be right. I'm using the stock vk810 kernal I wonder if the 510 builds are compatible, and if they are if anyone has messed with the frame buffering.

crashtheface said:
I would look into the kernal issue but I have no idea what I'm doing. You could very well be right. I'm using the stock vk810 kernal I wonder if the 510 builds are compatible, and if they are if anyone has messed with the frame buffering.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, the cool thing is that if you look in my signature below you will see a link on How to roll your own kernel, and it is literally copy and paste all the way through. The only difference for your device would be in the read me that comes with the kernel source. Specifically, the version of the google toolchain to use, and the name of your devices "defconfig" in the kernel source..
In other words, one line to change slightly, and that's about it. You should be able to get the source from lg... Same basic location as I have outlined.
Wheezy should be just fine.
on another note, I did look at my kernel source file and for the most part everything looks real good. Slim bus is the way it should be with no further options and everything enabled. Frame buffer support should all be there except for console support. Which, I don't think we need any way. There was also support for virtual frame buffer, which is used for debugging purposes and I turned off for my most recent compile just to see how it'll work because it may or may not use a little more memory. Also there was a pretty cool option for turning on one of three Linux logos for your Android during boot I may mess with that a little bit.
Seriously, you should check out the kernel building. Its all there. The only thing that isn't is the Loki support, and that should be no sweat using one of the 500 kernel zip scripts. Either of the other two active kernel developers would help you with that. I'm sure.
---------- Post added at 06:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:19 PM ----------
Okay, just checked out linux deploy through your link. Looks pretty cool but I dont understand the vnc bit. Is it installing a linux image on the sdcard and then booting from that? AND where does vnc come in? is it all in the device itself?

Okay, I get it now. Am downloading now. Using Ubuntu with precise and armhf. We'll see

sleekmason said:
Okay, I get it now. Am downloading now. Using Ubuntu with precise and armhf. We'll see
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah the VNC work around is kind of gimmicky, it also is assumed as the default config. I'm sure what is being done with Linux Deploy is easily accomplished with chroot and a few scripts in android terminal, but the gui is pretty straightforward and has worked pretty well for the distro's i've tried it with. Like I said earlier our LG's have a lot of potential with the slimport and the ability to run two environments side by side.
I just started reading into your make your own kernal I'm looking forward to what I learn. Thanks so much for this resource!

Okay, couple of things...
Our devices should support armhf no problem and it will be faster than armel. Also, might want to go testing rather than wheezy even though wheezy will be stable. I'm thinking here of the packages for armhf, and I really don't have any evidence this would be better. just a thought.
Also, From what ive read (which isn't much yet), SSH is what most are using as an interface, but vnc is for the graphical environment? Eh.. okay.
Our framebuffer should support 32 bit. I don;t have a clue about most of this yet.
Tried the unbuntu distro and there were packages missing. giving it a go on Debian testing now. Probably be tomorrow before I try anything more.
Looked up other ways to install linux and only saw this and another as a viable option, with this one being the better of the two.

and, here's the skinny...Debian Wheezy was the only one that would work. I tried testing, unstable, and squeeze. I didn't feel the need to go back any further.
using the frame buffer only wouldn't help you unless all you wanted to use is the terminal environment. All of the controls are through the VNC client. This kind of makes the framebuffer environment obsolete unless you have only a specific task in a script that you want to run.
I was able to use armhf no problem it worked just fine. I also used multi VNC as my VNC client.
I understand what they did now. I think it would be easier to simply break apart their program to see what all was put into the image, make your own image on your home computer with everything that you want to have. for instance, instead of using Debian Wheezy, you can use a lite version of Debian running fluxbox, with only the apps that you think are good, and nothing else and transfer it over to your tablet. This would make the image very small. I didn't have any trouble at all with the processing power of our tablet. So that won't really be a factor, but space will.
the 1 item I discussed being off in the kernel may very well be the one that needs to be checked in order to use the frame buffer. Or it is also possible that there is only one option that he gives that allows for that and you can see that option when you set everything up. if I remember right, it was under the distribution choices? Anyway, not a very usable or useful beastie at this point is it? I downloaded gimp and Iceweasel just to try a few apps and it pretty much sucked trying to navigate around.
if you can think of some really cool reason to use it, maybe some script or useful app that doesn't require a lot of navigation I might try to build an image with it already together.

Ubuntu Touch rom?

Is there any dev out there that would be interested in bringing Ubuntu touch to our ZF2?
Quite an interesting OS and seems like it would fit in great with the x86 CPU we have available to us.
I know there are other threads requesting this no dev responded to it saying if it would be feasible or impossible to do so.

I like to do it , but you know our device is a x86-64 and ubuntu touch is a project for ARM arch , I'll check it if there is any chance !
but if you want linux in your device you can use kali nethunter , that i am makeing flashable zip for zf2 with say99's help and support .
it is based on debian just like ubuntu ...

miradli said:
I like to do it , but you know our device is a x86-64 and ubuntu touch is a project for ARM arch , I'll check it if there is any chance !
but if you want linux in your device you can use kali nethunter , that i am makeing flashable zip for zf2 with say99's help and support .
it is based on debian just like ubuntu ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you as long as it is attempted, I'll be happy.
Yes I have tried many of those other methods for running Linux but none work for the 16gb Ze551ml as apparently Linux deploy can't use the external SD card.
I'll definitely try out yours when it is ready!

Christopher876 said:
Thank you as long as it is attempted, I'll be happy.
Yes I have tried many of those other methods for running Linux but none work for the 16gb Ze551ml as apparently Linux deploy can't use the external SD card.
I'll definitely try out yours when it is ready!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
now you can try it , the flashable zip file are here :
http://forum.xda-developers.com/zenfone2/development/kali-nethunter-t3329426/post65669770#post65669770

Christopher876 said:
Is there any dev out there that would be interested in bringing Ubuntu touch to our ZF2?
Quite an interesting OS and seems like it would fit in great with the x86 CPU we have available to us.
I know there are other threads requesting this no dev responded to it saying if it would be feasible or impossible to do so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know alot of you guys want ubuntu touch on the zenfone just for something different but its not worth it considering all the work that would have to be put into it just "to try something new". ubuntu touch is miles behind android

All other ubuntu phones are ARM based - if you'd try, this would be the first one on an intel chipset. I imagine there are a lot of things broken in the x64 version of the code since no one's really using it. If you do, please do check out ubports.com which has other open source ports of android device.
Personally, i own a BQ Aquarius 4.5 with ubuntu touch because i was interested enough to want to play around with it. It is a functional OS, but it lags heavily in apps. The OS is also very tightly screwed down - every app must run in user space with only write access to the user home. Interaction is limited through the ubuntu service layer, which means its quite difficult to code an app for say - whatsapp - because the service layer must sit in between you and the whatsapp API.
The major promise of Ubuntu is the convergent future - where the phone or tablet can actually run the full ubuntu API with access to all regular ubuntu apps, either old (sandboxed in lxc/lxd) or new (running natively). The zenfone can definately run both but it lacks the usb c and mhl connectivity to drive a screen directly; perhaps when miracast is implemented properly in ubuntu OS it may become interesting to port. Until then, I'm not sure its worth the effort and all the x64 bughunting.

Niropa said:
I know alot of you guys want ubuntu touch on the zenfone just for something different but its not worth it considering all the work that would have to be put into it just "to try something new". ubuntu touch is miles behind android
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rogier Oudshoorn said:
All other ubuntu phones are ARM based - if you'd try, this would be the first one on an intel chipset. I imagine there are a lot of things broken in the x64 version of the code since no one's really using it. If you do, please do check out ubports.com which has other open source ports of android device.
Personally, i own a BQ Aquarius 4.5 with ubuntu touch because i was interested enough to want to play around with it. It is a functional OS, but it lags heavily in apps. The OS is also very tightly screwed down - every app must run in user space with only write access to the user home. Interaction is limited through the ubuntu service layer, which means its quite difficult to code an app for say - whatsapp - because the service layer must sit in between you and the whatsapp API.
The major promise of Ubuntu is the convergent future - where the phone or tablet can actually run the full ubuntu API with access to all regular ubuntu apps, either old (sandboxed in lxc/lxd) or new (running natively). The zenfone can definately run both but it lacks the usb c and mhl connectivity to drive a screen directly; perhaps when miracast is implemented properly in ubuntu OS it may become interesting to port. Until then, I'm not sure its worth the effort and all the x64 bughunting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see. From these two answers it just isn't worth the work so I think just waiting is the best option and seeing if Ubuntu Touch develops more and if they support x86.
Never understood that this was the reason and I had always thought that it would be logical for Ubuntu Touch to support x86 rather than ARM. Thanks for these answers and clearing things up!

You're right that it might have made sense for Canonical to build on top of x64 primarily, but i believe they started the project in 2013 before there were any intel based phones on the market. Perhaps if ASUS and intel were quicker, it would have been