So you are from finland, after all?
As we say here; "Kenen leipää syöt, sen lauluja laulat"


We had a similar government-saves-da-banks thingy here and it did cause exactly the same bloody shenigans as in UK.
The only way it works it that the banks are at least partly socialised, taken into direct leash of government and only allowed to privatize again when healthy.
Otherwice, it is money thrown to the gutter.

I heard Mark Zuckerberg is wanting to throw money away haha

I am only pointing out that the big part people like in sailfish is the closed one, and that's a big thing to develop.

I have seen a lot of people porting the closed sailfish UX to other devices, but none (except the proof of concept glacier maybe) replacing the UX part with open source in either the original Jolla or in the ports (taking only mer).

It could be that if Jolla were to close, some people would start to write a new UI/UX (or finish glacier), but I have seen nothing in that direction yet, even with lot of complains again the current UI, that is mostly solved by patches.

I have a slightly different take. In my view, the top management of Jolla had a plan, and they followed that plan to perfection -- they were planning on building an Android Killer mobile OS, and replacing Android at least on low-end phones. And to a significant extent, they've accomplished their initial goal -- the Sailfish OS is, in my opinion, the most viable alternative to Android and iOS currently in existence.

The problem is that their plan itself is flawed. Mobile phone aficionados may be deeply interested in the OS running their phone, but average users are not. And, therefore, mobile manufacturers are not either. Apple spends enormous sums on their software, but their top mantra is always "user experience" above all else. All other hardware manufacturers just go with Android, because it's "good enough" and still affordable.

Sailfish may be able to compete on user experience with Android, but there's just no way Jolla was ever going to get enough devices in the hands of enough users to make manufacturers think about switching from Android. They really needed an alternative way to set up a viable user base first; the Phone was a good start, but never went anywhere. The Tablet was, I think, an even better idea, as it didn't compete directly with phones and was able to be marketed to more of the world; but really, a device like that should have been targeted for early 2014, not late 2015.

And I still think they are aiming at the wrong targets with Sailfish. Jolla should not be trying to go after the average user (to maximize their market share); they should instead be targeting smaller groups of users with particular interests (to maximize their profits). This is exactly what Apple does; in both the mobile and desktop markets, they unapologetically aim for folks who can afford higher-end electronics, and target their offerings to fit those people's needs. Apple has little or no interest in maximizing market share! Jolla already has the eye of folks who are interested in Linux, in open source software, and in privacy; they should be marketing hardware directly to these groups first, before trying to license the OS generally to manufacturers.

Anyway, just my thoughts on the issue here...

Indeed. And, that is exactly why the folks at Jolla saw an opportunity here for a private company to make some money. There are lots of folks who want to see an alternative mobile OS, and the Mer core makes a fine base upon which to create that OS.

So Jolla has spent millions and created Sailfish. Their UI is both beautiful and usable, and I can understand why many people want to use it. But let me reiterate the important part: they spent millions to create Sailfish. I just see it as entirely selfish for people to ask Jolla to give away all that work for free.

I think it would be less selfish for folks here to agitate for Google to release the closed-source portions of Android, as Google can much more easily afford to do so than Jolla ever will...

Not sure why we are arguing. I said previously:
The argument that half the OS is open source and that community just have to write a UI is flawed here, because writing such UI is a huge work, as you pointed out...
In the same time, having spend so much money to develop it means they deserve a way to get back their money. That is the main problem with which Jolla struggle since the beginning, mainly to find manufacturers who would buy their OS and/or expertise, which didn't happened yet (still have to see what Intex will do), selling phones/tablet being not sufficient to fund it.

Nothing new here, this has been said countless times on TMO...

agree with you both. who of all you guys is able to code and join nemo?

WHY???? Please, please, please tell me why a community that can create Linux, that can create Gnome, that can create KDE, finds it so dang hard to create a mobile UI...

Actually, I've gotten kinda interested in the effort. But I still need to figure out what hardware to target. My N900s are, sadly, starting to show their age... I was hoping to transition to Jolla's hardware, but that's turning out to be a non-starter. So, I'm currently trying to figure out whether to go the Raspberry Pi / CHIP route (easier to hack on), or pick up some Android device to mess with (the Nexus 5?). (I actually do have an Android device now, but as I am using it as my phone, it's kind of hard for me to mess with it.)

Any suggestions as to the best platform for Nemo would be appreciated.

I asked to locusf. well, fairphone 2 will be for sure supported. should be nexus5 and, if allowed, puzzle phone (dev piece maker by puzzle phone let your phone comes with unlocked bootloader and root for 29 dollars, and in addition it will come even with sfos port by comm).

I consider puzzle phone, fairphone2 best devices to target in order to their possible to be hwupgraded and for being so open. and of course nexus5 for being a well known and hacked phone. n9 is old as HW so I dont know if it worth support it