Considering the amount of love that has been expressed here for quite some time, it does seem like reasonable choice at times.

Personally I'm just waiting for two things:

- are they able to close the financing round in December
- if they are, how will they alter the strategy and what are those "talks" mr. Saarnio mentions in his open letter today

I tend to look at it with broader scale than just labeling it either "success" or "fail". There are things that could have and probably should have done differently, but at least some of them are things that could not be foreseen and there are many things that could have resulted in different kind of problems. However, major problem still is the funding - how to attract investors. Of course we can argue that just by open sourcing everything there would be gazillion devs rowing the boat for golden future but being realistic about it, I don't think it would have made considerable difference. However, allowing fragmentation to some degree (ie. letting other companies to stretch Sailfish OS to different kind of devices/applications) might have lead to wider adoption. But it would have been a trade off too as fragmentation usually is not desirable.

Another thing is licensing, they are now proposing licensing scheme quite similar to Qt and it should allow broader participation in development if there is incentive for people to do it. Also, if they enter "maintenance" phase, it should save them some money. Maybe developing things further if asked/paid for by clients?

If money runs out before it brakes through, it will end up dead. However, it has matured to the point where it might be serious alternative, so if they can get the funding closed in December, there is a chance for turn around. It's not likely they will generate profits in 2016, but at least losses should start to shrink. If that happens, future financing should be easier. But it all depend on December now.