Active Topics
-
Camera phone competition March 2023 "Endless" (35)
to General by Maemish - 1 day, 10 hrs ago -
TLS 1.2 for N9 is ready (28)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smartblu9 - 1 day, 11 hrs ago -
Maemo repository (3)
to Community by torsen - 2 days, 2 hrs ago -
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (11)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Maemish - 3 days ago -
Introducing ubiboot N9 (multiboot OS loader) (1,393)
to Alternatives by smatkovi - 4 days, 7 hrs ago - more...
|
2015-09-16
, 00:55
|
|
Posts: 338 |
Thanked: 496 times |
Joined on Oct 2010
|
#382
|
Originally Posted by Copernicus
= i have absolutely zero counter argument (or even point to elucidate in the first place) so I'm just going to cry and troll.
Ok, fine. Sounds like Jolla is doomed. So... if I may ask, why are you here? There are plenty of alternatives to Sailfish out there. What makes you interested enough in this doomed, worthless, crappy product to waste your time talking about it on this forum board?
but to answer your question, most people with any interest came from the N900 era, and a few were 'newbies' who only boarded after the N9. people have been continually willing to let Jolla and Sailfish get away with murder because of rose tinted spectacles, myself included. were it not for the glory days (well - halcyon days), very few would have even given jolla the time of day, let alone stuck around until now. the reason there was such a huge exodus of developers and community members in the weeks and months after the jolla phone's launch was because a lot of people realised just how bad the situation was and how unlikely jolla were to improve things remotely soon. to some extent i realised that too, but I honestly thought it could be made serviceable, or that the remaining community members could help fix it. the latter's been impossible for the reasons discussed this evening, and the former seems as far off now as it did ~22 months ago in terms of having a competitive or commercially viable product.
unless there's immediate and significant improvement it's just barmy to stick around. if you can't find something that suits you somewhere within the now vast and varied Android ecosystem, you probably aren't looking very hard. UP is developing very quickly and seems like they'll be the only ones to challenge MS on the desktop integration front for the forseeable future. things don't have to be as much of a struggle as they are with Sailfish for users or developers in alternate ecosystems.
rationally, like many here, i should have left long ago ... but there's the self defeating time invested / inertia and the naive hope for a better tomorrow. I've been hoping that Sailfish would improve to a point where I could make a choice to stay or go, but unless something fundamental has changed since 1.1.9 and tablet have been signed off, it won't be a choice, it'll be a forced exit.
Last edited by bluefoot; 2015-09-16 at 01:03.
 |
|
2015-09-16
, 04:44
|
|
Posts: 1,389 |
Thanked: 1,857 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
@ Israel
|
#383
|
Originally Posted by Copernicus
Mer is just a core. It's like you would say any device using *nix or linux as kernel are enough opensourced (iOS and PS3/4 are based on opensource freebsd and a lot of opensource tools, but it doesn't help you, does it?)
Ok, I've been following today's discussion, and for some reason finding myself more and more confused. I think it finally gelled in my head with javispedro's statement:
So. As I understand it, we've got a fine, fully open-source OS base for mobile devices, Mer. And, there's even a fully open-source UI on top of this OS, Nemo.
To my knowledge, Jolla's Sailfish is not an integral part of Mer. It is, instead, an attempt to build a _commercial_ operating system on top of Mer, in very much the same vein as Android. (And, given Android's success, this seems like a decent strategy.)
Which leads me to the obvious (at least to my mind) question: why in the world would you want to open-source Sailfish? For those folks who want to see (and participate in!) a fully open-source OS, Nemo seems to be the way to go. For those folks who want to see Sailfish succeed as an alternative to Android, there seems little point in them opening the closed bits; they'll need to keep some items closed just to do business in the current environment.
Really, I see this as a perfect use of Mer, myself: one side pursues a commercial, closed-source UI on top of Mer; the other provides a fully open-source system top-to-bottom. Both approaches have their advantages. I just don't see the need to force Jolla to go full open-source as well...
There is a huge difference between functional OS that you can set on your phone and use (btw do you have and hw that is 100% supported by mer/nemo except jolla as they do not provide the way to flash) and set of tools to build your own (see it as LFS).
In addition they actually said they would open source before phone launch and few times later, they said it again before tablet campaign and their PR uses "opensource" word too much and not it a proper way. Marc in his video told that Sailfish 2.0 is open on campaign(and where Marc now :P)
|
|
2015-09-16
, 05:01
|
|
Posts: 1,389 |
Thanked: 1,857 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
@ Israel
|
#384
|
Originally Posted by marxian
Actually you are right on your point of view, but you are wrong in general.
I suspect they are not usable for everyday use, because all those people that are claiming that they would be willing to contribute to Sailfish, if only it were FOSS, have not bothered to do so in the case of Nemo. This naturally raises the question of whether they really would contribute, or whether it's simply a load of gumflap. In this context, terms like 'we' or 'the community' usually mean 'someone else'.
As you see there is even decrease of devs interested and contributing to Nemo as Jolla not only failed to make it easier, they made it even harder with "in-door" development (last time i checked).
AFAIK even @w00t (ex sailor) posted about lack of organization and documentation and co-operation on that matter somewhere on forum (@w00t correct me if I'm wrong).
And you can say that jolla (that actually controlling Nemo and Mer) do not have to do anything for me or you on that matter, you should understand that developers don't own anything to Jolla as well and if there is choice between A project and B, where A is hard to jump in and B has proper bugzilla(from start) and proper documentation and community friendly, why would he bother to work on A, if there a lot of B-like projects.
|
|
2015-09-16
, 05:05
|
|
Posts: 1,389 |
Thanked: 1,857 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
@ Israel
|
#385
|
Originally Posted by Copernicus
You see it as black and white mate. And that's the problem.
Ok, fine. Sounds like Jolla is doomed. So... if I may ask, why are you here? There are plenty of alternatives to Sailfish out there. What makes you interested enough in this doomed, worthless, crappy product to waste your time talking about it on this forum board?
Btw it is not Jolla forum, they refused to cooperate with TMO and thus why are you spending time wasting on arguments on this forum instead of productive use of your time on TJC, oh wait... because TJC is FAQ engine and now is a mess as they used wrong platform for communication/bug report/everything else that is not suitable to use on FAQ engine ;P
 |
|
2015-09-16
, 05:29
|
|
Posts: 1,197 |
Thanked: 2,710 times |
Joined on Jan 2010
@ Hanoi
|
#386
|
Originally Posted by Copernicus
As a consumer with limited funds rather than investor I have very few options to Support Jolla with Sailfish.
Ok, ok, stop right there. If you really want to contribute to Sailfish, you can (a) become a developer, or (b) go ahead and invest some money in Jolla. (I don't believe they've gone public yet, but they are running almost entirely on investment capital right now; I suspect they wouldn't turn you away if you've got enough money to make a difference.)
2 stickers with Jolla logo: deployed
All hardware (tablet / phone) purchased: done
Providing feedback on TJC: ongoing
Try to hype friends into Sailfish: done and failed
Donate to developers of native applications: done.
Become developer: no time and interest and I am of the same opinion as sensible people stated above, what's the use if Saiflish keeps the interface part for telepathy or how is it called closed source? Can't implement SIP in a worthy way, something I would start with on a phone.
Again, I would like to purchase the software Sailfish in a form originally intended by the Jolla crew in their idealistic free from Nokia Elop days.
Here I have purchased an alternative ROM for my Kindle Fire. Purchase, install , play. Tired of new OS? Run uninstaller to invert operation and get back to original OS.
http://www.perfectlyandroid.com/
An "old" phone loaded with an officially supported 100 Euro Sailfish license would make very original Xmas presents compared to latest Galaxy S.
Another way I would support Jolla is through their indiegogo campaigns. If they would search for support to implement the top 10 jolla together most voted or requested items.
|
|
2015-09-16
, 07:28
|
|
Posts: 62 |
Thanked: 319 times |
Joined on Jan 2013
@ Grenoble, France
|
#387
|
To add some words to this Open Source discussion. I'm contributing to Sailfish-office and more recently to Nemomobile for the simple reason, that they are components that I use every day. The Jolla phone is my only phone. I cannot contribute to something that would stay as a toy on a board, I don't have enough time for that, so everything that is fully Open Source but lacks the capability of being my main phone in mundane life is a no go for me, sadly 
About the direction chosen by Jolla, I don't simply understand why they are not releasing as Open Source all the small applications of SFOS (calculator, calendar, mail…). That they keep Silica closed source, I can understand because they don't want to see a fork being done by a bigger player and being pushed out later. But for the small apps, they are linked (because of Silica) hard to SFOS and cannot be forked easily to work somewhere else. So they don't risk anything at all ! The argument of displaying bad code seems unvalid to me since the office application code is pretty well written IMHO. The argument of not being on control anymore is neither valid, since they can accept or reject any pull request they would receive. The only reasonable explanation that I imagine is a lack of Open Source advantages understanding from the management…
About the direction chosen by Jolla, I don't simply understand why they are not releasing as Open Source all the small applications of SFOS (calculator, calendar, mail…). That they keep Silica closed source, I can understand because they don't want to see a fork being done by a bigger player and being pushed out later. But for the small apps, they are linked (because of Silica) hard to SFOS and cannot be forked easily to work somewhere else. So they don't risk anything at all ! The argument of displaying bad code seems unvalid to me since the office application code is pretty well written IMHO. The argument of not being on control anymore is neither valid, since they can accept or reject any pull request they would receive. The only reasonable explanation that I imagine is a lack of Open Source advantages understanding from the management…
| The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to dcaliste For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2015-09-16
, 07:31
|
|
Posts: 1,671 |
Thanked: 11,478 times |
Joined on Jun 2008
@ Warsaw, Poland
|
#388
|
Originally Posted by dcaliste
Stay tuned.
To add some words to this Open Source discussion. I'm contributing to Sailfish-office and more recently to Nemomobile for the simple reason, that they are components that I use every day. The Jolla phone is my only phone. I cannot contribute to something that would stay as a toy on a board, I don't have enough time for that, so everything that is fully Open Source but lacks the capability of being my main phone in mundane life is a no go for me, sadly
About the direction chosen by Jolla, I don't simply understand why they are not releasing as Open Source all the small applications of SFOS (calculator, calendar, mail…).
| The Following 36 Users Say Thank You to Stskeeps For This Useful Post: | ||
abyzthomas, Bundyo, coley, cy8aer, dcaliste, eekkelund, Feathers McGraw, HtheB, itdoesntmatt, javispedro, JoOppen, Jordi, juiceme, madry72, Manatus, MartinK, mattaustin, minimos, mosen, nodevel, OVK, P@t, pichlo, pycage, Rauha, rcolistete, reinob, salyavin, sbock, skanky, The Wizard of Huz, vistaus, vitaminj, Watchmaker, willi6868, zamorph | ||
|
|
2015-09-16
, 08:06
|
|
Posts: 285 |
Thanked: 1,900 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
|
#389
|
Originally Posted by ZogG
It seems that quite many here take it all black and white from their own perspective. For some
You see it as black and white mate. And that's the problem.
Btw it is not Jolla forum, they refused to cooperate with TMO...
Being like that, I don't find it that surprising if not many developers are willing to spend much time here. After all, it requires certain twist in character to wish being ripped apart publicly with no intention for anyone to actually see anything but heir own agenda.
| The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to JulmaHerra For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2015-09-16
, 09:23
|
|
Posts: 2,355 |
Thanked: 5,249 times |
Joined on Jan 2009
@ Barcelona
|
#390
|
Originally Posted by Copernicus
Please note that IMHO, in the absence of valid reasons for going closed source, the default should be free software. In this day and age, I'm just no longer entertaining the opposite point of view.
Which leads me to the obvious (at least to my mind) question: why in the world would you want to open-source Sailfish?
I could see valid reasons to close down say the Twitter client, or maybe Chinese handwriting recognition which seems to be a humongous effort without workable free software alternatives.
But the n^th iteration of the mail client being closed source? It has reached the point where I think they're shooting themselves on the foot.
There's this dooming sensation that Ubuntu will manage to ship a way more free software phone sooner than Jolla, if they haven't already; and the ironic part of it is that it will probably ship more components made directly or indirectly by Jolla employees than Canonical employees.
My message just points out that after that point it will be harder for me to justify Sailfish. But that is an opinion and I'm sure that others find e.g. cover actions more important
Mer, Replicant, etc. do not currently ship devices with support and that's something I'm willing to pay for. Note this would be closer to the role I wish Jolla had: selling working Mer devices and supporting them.
Because we have been there since at least the N900 times (since 2010 for me at) and we do think this (an almost full powered classical Linux distro running on a mobile device) is the way to go ?
Not the various more or less embedded hacked together toy operating systems...
That's why we are there, pointing to various issues, problems and bugs - so that things can be fixed and improved! Because we do care and want Sailfish OS/Nemo/Mer to be successful!
So is sometimes hard to see the same mistakes that Nokia did to be redone by Jolla and most importantly not willing to let people help them - it's because we care...
modRana: a flexible GPS navigation system
Mieru: a flexible manga and comic book reader
Universal Components - a solution for native looking yet component set independent QML appliactions (QtQuick Controls 2 & Silica supported as backends)