Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

I think some people are making way too much out of the pre-order and initial shipment issues. If people go back to the ordering process at the end of November, they were told "Order before December 2nd and you'll get your phone in December". That was the promise and for the vast majority that is what happened.

Yes there was a big gap in the middle when people didn't seem to get any and yes DNA had them in store before some pre-orders shipped. But ultimately, they shipped.

Obviously something went wrong in that process but really, cut them some slack - 1st product, new processes, new Magento based store (not the most reliable IME), pre-Xmas with overworked staff and international postal services. They seemed to have worked like mad to get back on track.

Jolla's communication was maybe too transparent. They perhaps should have just kept to their " in December" promise when asked and next time no sequential order numbers ;-)

Or maybe I'm just way more patient?

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

I haven't said anywhere that your whole argument is wrong because of fallacies. I've only pointed that some people make logical fallacies. So you made a strawman now:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

;-)

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Just to be clear, when I refer to the SIM card holder issue, I am referring to both the repair-requiring phones and the public relations handling of that case, which has been discussed on this thread. So, just to be clear on that.

What puzzles me are the constant mischaracterizations of my views in this thread. Is it genuine misunderstanding or a way to exaggerate my point of view, so that it is somehow easier to counter? Hopefully the former.

I do not need "minute details" of anything. I am explaining my opinion why I think added openness and transparency would be beneficial for Jolla's public image. In the case of the SIM card holder TJC thread, I think it was a mistake to close it a few times and I think it was a mistake to withhold any explanation especially once the root cause was found.

I am not demanding "minute details". I am suggesting some level of added openness, of "brutal honesty" as jalyst put it so eloquently, that I think would be beneficial both to the community and Jolla's public image, as I sense a certain reluctance on Jolla's part on discussing difficult topics.

Why would it be a problem that Jolla admits a flaw? If there is, as you say, a batch of phones with faulty SIM holders - just say so. This sentence alone in that TJC thread would have been a lot better than was gotten:

That is, by the way, the first time at least I have ever seen anyone from Jolla comment on what was the SIM card holder issue. So, I guess better late than never.

Of course CTO's have to respect NDA's, but the likelihood of them dictating what is public (and thus not covered under any NDA) in a company is much higher than for lower-level people. But given the past of Jolla, and the tendency to not discuss difficult topics in public, I must admit I'm a little skeptical an NDA was the reason here. Without any better information, my guess is that it was deemed better for Jolla to not disclose an explanation at that time.

Anyway, the person answering in that TJC thread was Jolla's CTO. I'm sure he was aware of what the problem and the explanation were. It was simply withheld from public for whatever reason. I'm advocating Jolla adding more openness and transparency, because I think it would do them good.

Recall can be for a small subset. But it was just an example of company providing detailed explanations, as one poster here said he had never seen any company post any details of such issue.

I don't think you need to. You certainly don't have to. I think you would be better and better off if you did, though. It is respectful towards the customer, the community and it is transparency. But most importantly, information helps people to deal with issues they are experiencing. Information is caring. Silence brings out the boogeyman in more was than one. And vague platitudes and non-answers are even worse than silence.

It seems to contradict your earlier sentence that there was a batch of faulty SIM holders? I mean, if there was such a thing, so what, why not just say it and that it will be swapped under warranty. What is this circling around things.

Sure. And if you did yell back then, good for you. Apparently someone higher up decided Jolla wouldn't be open about things then even though such voices were inside Jolla. That's unfortunate. I just don't personally see that anything has changed. If it will, good for you and the company, I think changing this will serve you better. You may find that people are much more forgiving when given actual, relevant information. Silence or vague platitudes on the other hand tend to make issues even bigger than they are.

fk_lx (even though I disagree with his rampage style) has a fairly good list of continued silences in this post, maybe it is something your organization can consider:

http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...&postcount=186

That is why I posted here to congratulate jalyst on his post. Maybe his post will help you understand - don't mind my bollocks, if jalyst's post can help you think about this, great:

http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...1&postcount=29

Sure, I get that. Hence the feedback. I don't want you guys to fail.

No need to, although I must say it getting bigger has, in my view, some things to do with this same reluctance to deal with issues with brutal honesty. Had that been done earlier on to deal with it, fk_lx probably would never have blown the gasket like he did. (And far be it from me to agree with a lot of his style, although his posts in this thread are quite solid.)

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Again, absolutely nothing wrong with the issues Jolla faced. Easy to understand them all.

Except the part where they chose to stay pretty much silent throughout, not offering any real information. If they were "too transparent" earlier, they certainly weren't transparent through out the process.

Jolla was perfectly within their rights not to inform the customers. But that means the lost an opportunity to respect the customer through transparency and choosing a less route of lesser values.

It is hard for me to see what downsides there would have been to being more transparent about the process. Maybe it was an ego thing, someone would have felt embarrassed to share the woes?

That would have been very unfortunate, because problems for a startup are very understandable and it is easier to deal with them from a customer-side if you have solid info on where things are progressing.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

What kind of information would you expect other than "We start shipping and hope people will still get their phones 3-4 weeks after purchase"?

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

I don't expect anything, especially not from Jolla anymore.

But what I would think would have benefited Jolla and the community both, would have been status update on the delays within and the progress of the pre-order delivery process. A few brutally honest status updates, written by someone like Marc, a few times throughout the month or two the orders were being fulfilled. This could be done on varying levels of detail, or through answering some of the questions people posted etc., so certainly many different ways they could have done it. Give people info to help their wait out and show them that you care - since a lot of people were filling Excels and whatnot to stay posted on the status...

A small start-up with an early adopter crowd certainly could do such a thing easily and would also benefit from it, in my opinion.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

question pango - do you own a Jolla?

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

I don't see why it matters, but: http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...&postcount=168

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Somehow seems I am still misunderstanding you as I can't figure out what you want. As asked before, please give a concrete example (the contents can be entirely fictional of course).

Ok I am stumped. So you get the info we are looking into it and will avise once we found the cause. What else can we say? And once the cause found you get the info needed to get it solved. So you do ask for the minute details... You just contradicted yourself.

It is not a contradiction. If there was a sim card holder problem it would be systematic. What happened was that somewhere in the chain there had been some bad QA and as in any production some devices/components are faulty due to manufacturing mistakes. That is why there is warranty and why they are warranty cases. If there was a problem, like bad design or so that would have been a problem. Of course for a single person recieving a device with a faulty component that causes malfunctions is a problem. And I worded it badly, it was not a batch of phones, but rather a batch of phones with an abnormally high amount of specific faulty component.

And this discussion about semantics and understanding points out why it might have been a good idea not to say anything.

There have been changes luckily. But at the time everything was so chaotic that it took a while before people got their mind made up about what to say and how. And it took too long indeed.

But I would say Jolla is pretty transparent, and apart from not having time to answer all questions. Or having to balance things with commercial interests (it's a company after all). I do not understand what more you would like. If we can help we usually do. Like here: https://together.jolla.com/question/...-mode-chooser/
Where else do you get that kind of service?

But we are not all knowing beings and we cannot just decide on our own what is best for Jolla. It's a team and a team effort.

Regarding your list:

* I think the pre-orders has been spitted out enough and Jolla/sailors have admitted communication could have been better. But that is the past and cannot be changed

* Sim holder. As just explained, an extra visible excess of warranty cases, over-dramatized and exagerrated by certain individuals

* Neglecting co-operation with open source community... Can you give any examples where we have not done that? We cannot give into all frivolities either. It is not because some people want a bugzilla we should give it. Other people wanted a forum and so on... We submit lots of our patches upstream, they do stay not in our trees and people don't have to go pick them out of the sources. I mean we even fix bug reports out in the open if that applies. There are occasional hiccups and some people don't always get what they want (and can be very vocal about that) but we also have limited resources and things that give us legal headaches (like the QC binaries). But I don't think we are neglecting it.

* Silica open sourcing. Well yes that has been mentioned, but due to lots of overworked people and a host of other things it has not happened yet. And unlike people think it is not as simple as slapping a license on it and put it in a public place. It's unfortunate it has not been realized yet, but slapping a date on it and making another promise without knowing if we can make that date is not going to help anybody. But then again some people will not accept "as soon as we can" as a valid answer.

Also I would ask you to do your research and actually make up your own mind. Especially not basing it on the coloured viewpoints of a person with a vendetta.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Even if you don't see any problems with a company being more transparent on such issues doesn't mean that there are no problems.

Official statements can easily backfire with the media happily spreading the news enriched with some made-up extra-information to generate more clicks.

Also even a CTO or CEO is bound by NDA if it involves another company. And in case of hardware it certainly involves another company as Jolla isn't building the phone themselves in a garage in Finland. Should Jolla really risk losing their hardware manufacturer or worse, just for this?