<story><title>Ubuntu Frame; A secure, LTS display server for embedded displays [pdf]</title><url>https://assets.ubuntu.com/v1/713b9224-Ubuntu.Frame.Datasheet.pdf</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>hhh</author><text>One of the things I work on is a signage&amp;#x2F;display solution. I really don’t understand where a snap solution fits into this space.&lt;p&gt;I took a small look around this setup, and it’s… weird. I think there is MASSIVE room for improvement in this space around the display server and maintaining the health of Chromium-based browsers. This solves a massive amount of needs by most people.&lt;p&gt;NEC and a few other manufacturers provide most of what you need to provide a managed self-service system for signage. We do this today with RPi Compute Modules w&amp;#x2F; the NEC carrier boards so you get your display in a box and use a QR code to register it (so you don’t leave keys on the device,) and the device onboards and comes up without any interaction after registration.&lt;p&gt;The issues we’ve had are primarily:&lt;p&gt;1. Chromium Health management when inside a container&lt;p&gt;2. Memory (not an issue in cm4, was with cm3)&lt;p&gt;3. Display server&lt;p&gt;X11 was the hardest issue for us when we did not control the display (raspberry pi non-compute module), as you had to deal with KMS and weird TV stuff. This became MUCH more problematic once it was deployed globally.&lt;p&gt;I don’t see why someone would want to use snaps in this way since you have to publish your snap on the snap store OR install locally as far as I can tell. (Please correct me if this isn’t the case, I cannot find otherwise ANYWHERE.) This means you are making it MUCH harder for large enterprises or corporations to adopt this out of the gate.&lt;p&gt;I think there is MUCH MUCH more support and room for adoption for good OOTB display server containers. That’s really all this is, right? I honestly don’t see why you wouldn’t go for ‘here’s the dockerfile!’ first, and just package your snap, unless you are pushing snaps. Maybe it’s not viable to do LTS on a generic container for Canonical?</text></comment>
<story><title>Ubuntu Frame; A secure, LTS display server for embedded displays [pdf]</title><url>https://assets.ubuntu.com/v1/713b9224-Ubuntu.Frame.Datasheet.pdf</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>neltnerb</author><text>This is the main news release.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;ubuntu.com&amp;#x2F;blog&amp;#x2F;canonical-launches-ubuntu-frame-the-foundation-for-embedded-displays&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;ubuntu.com&amp;#x2F;blog&amp;#x2F;canonical-launches-ubuntu-frame-the-...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;There&amp;#x27;s also a webinar in addition to this PDF linked at the bottom, so I suppose the HTML link provides more information.</text></comment>