> How do I tell people about it?
"hey, the website is https://e.foundation, here is the link"
That was not so hard, was it?
I can relate to the OP, /e/ is nit a very handy name for Google searches. It’s like it doesn’t exist. What’s the point of a name you can’t Google, or pronounce?
In case someone might have the same question: the Samsung Galaxy S20 FE is not supported. In fact all recent Samsung devices are not supported. Support for new Samsung smartphones seems to have halted, most recent model in the S-family is the S10, released more than 3 years ago.
Does anyone know why recent Samsung devices are unsupported? After all, Samsung is one of the biggest smartphone makers. It seems odd to ignore such large user base.
/e/'s lead developer is based in France, so /e/ does support some non-U.S. Samsung phone models.
[1] https://www.thecustomdroid.com/sampwnd-unlock-bootloader-sam...
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/galaxys10/comments/c91f8a/is_knox_n...
If you think that the product is lacking in some part, how about you CONTRIBUTE to make it better instead of just diminishing the work of others?
What a fucking lame attitude.
You'd wonder they shot themselves in the foot like that. It would've been easy to give it a good name but instead they severely limited the potential of their hard work for seemingly no reason.
It's not entitlement, it is confusion.
Also why are you so confrontational?
I am confrontational because your "confusion" is just stupid concern trolling. Do you think that it is important to get more people to be less dependent on Big Tech? Then here is an operating system that works pretty well. This is what you need to be telling people, not how you think that the name is bad. Stop worrying about the "marketing", and just use and promote better alternatives. By being and acting self-conscious about something that does not matter, you are not collaborating at all.
Your preferences are not consequential. We are concerned with how the public behaves. And names matter a lot for discoverability.
If you really cared about more people using /e/, you should be concerned that the name is needlessly reducing its reach. I plan on trying /e/, but you are not doing the project any favors with your attitude.
Speak for yourself. I am not "concerned" about anything so abstract as "public behavior". All I am "concerned" about is my personal ability to keep my freedom and my choices, and by extension I am concerned about others having the same freedoms. Being concerned about "behavior" is the last of my worries.
> And names matter a lot for discoverability.
It didn't stop you from finding out about it, did it?
> you are not doing the project any favors with your attitude.
Why? Are you worried that if people see you using a phone with /e/OS you will be associated with grumpy rude graybeards?
It matters if you equate success with total domination, or think that something is only worth doing if it can create a huge gathering of people blindly supporting it.
What if we simply don't care about that? Here we have a system that works well, that can do all the things that I need and that respects my freedoms. I've mentioned it to other people already, all of them simply said "ok, cool" and went on with their lives.
Do you think that the name was the reason that it stopped them from changing it, or do you think that the main thing was "wait, but I want to continue using Google/Apple"? Do you think that their indifference made the product any less useful to me and the other thousands of people who use it? Do you think that my identity is tied to the OS of my phone?
Honestly, can you make a solid effort of explaining what matters so much about marketing, and why?
> Our mission: make technology that respects user privacy accessible to everyone.
I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that /e/ should rebrand itself, if the new name makes /e/ more accessible to potential users who are searching for it. Good marketing doesn't necessarily mean "total domination", but it can help /e/ fulfill its mission by extending its reach.
> I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that /e/ should rebrand itself
Unreasonable, it is not. It is just vapid bike shedding. It is the kind of discussion topic that I would expect from corporate MBA types and useless hacks who never built anything in their lives, not something worthy of so many comments here.
I didn't say that. Something that is accessible is "easy to find or reach": https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/learner-engli...
/e/ wants to make its technology easy for others to find and use, and a rebrand can help them do that.