Jolla Tablet Refunds (latest developments) - Page 139 - maemo.org

Active Topics

Is there a section to talk about Java ME? Apps, etc. (0)
to General by Kalatti - 3 days ago
Extra softwares in Sailfish using CLI, repositories, etc (117)
to SailfishOS by nieldk - 4 days, 20 hrs ago
Firefox with Leste (6)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 5 days, 17 hrs ago
more...

Page 139 of 615

139

Thread Tools

skanky	2015-10-13 , 10:05
Posts: 188 \| Thanked: 308 times \| Joined on Jan 2013 @ UK	#1381

Originally Posted by pichlo

That's like telling to Android users that they can install things from other sources than Google Play. Sure they can, but
a) Why should they have to bother? And...
b) If Jolla wanted them to use OpenRepos, then they should tell them about it. As far as I know, OpenRepos are not supported by Jolla and should not be part of an official review in the same way that alternative Android sources should not be a part of a review of an Android device.

Now you are really straying into the land of fiction. Include that in a review and you have lost all but about 4 potential customers.

Good. So you are not entirely detached from reality

I tried that. OpenRepos did not come up anywhere in the first 4 or 5 pages. (Interestingly, what did come up were links to ports to Sony and OnePlus devices. I did not know that, TMO only discusses the Nexus port.)

I then tried a search for "Sailfish apps". Again, nothing about OpenRepos. There were two links somewhere on the second page of results mentioning "unofficial third party open source apps". One was a wishlist and the other a GitHub link. None of that really helpful. And that assuming the word "unofficial" did not scare you off and you actually bothered to look.

Exactly. If a company supplying a product for a review cannot be bothered to provide the reviewer with a full set of details, including additional sources of apps, then the company gets what it deserves from that review.

Edit:
BTW, neither Jolla nor Sailfis OS Wikipedia articles mention OpenRepos either.

Search results are a gateway into the ecosystem. That's what the reviews need to look at - it's a new OS.

Anyway, I know, I admit it, I was wrong to expect a review to mention Openrepos, or much useful, really. I don't normally bother with professional reviews (or specialist magazines or websites). The vast majority of them are worthless (partly for the reasons you give). I only clicked through on these as I curious about what device they had been given. I'll go back to ignoring them, again. Life's too short to read them or get into pointless discussions about them.

	Copernicus	2015-10-13 , 10:12
	Posts: 1,986 \| Thanked: 7,698 times \| Joined on Dec 2010 @ Dayton, Ohio	#1382

Originally Posted by pichlo

Bingo! It is just another example of how poor the Jolla's PR is. They actually believe their product is so fantastic it will sell itself.

And, once again, I just have to ask: why would Jolla actually want to sell phones/tablets? They aren't making any money off them. Their core product is Sailfish, and that is now starting to be licensed by customers that can provide Jolla with a sustainable income...

	pichlo	2015-10-13 , 10:39
	Posts: 6,445 \| Thanked: 20,981 times \| Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK	#1383

Originally Posted by Copernicus

And, once again, I just have to ask: why would Jolla actually want to sell phones/tablets? They aren't making any money off them. Their core product is Sailfish, and that is now starting to be licensed by customers that can provide Jolla with a sustainable income...

I did not say the product is the hardware. I did not read all the reviews but those that I did read also did not put the main focus on the hardware, suggesting that the reviewers get it too (either that or they grokked very quickly that the hardware is nothing special and they focused on the one aspect that was different from anyone else).

But look at it this way. You are a new rock/pop/jazz band. The product you want to sell is the music, not the medium. Does that mean the medium on which you send the demo to the critics/publishers does not matter?

About the licensing - you do not know what is going on behind the scene. Let us see how that pans out.

	ZogG	2015-10-13 , 11:00
	Posts: 1,389 \| Thanked: 1,857 times \| Joined on Feb 2010 @ Israel	#1384

Originally Posted by szopin

I like your style

edit:

But not reading skills, literally two posts above yours:

http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...postcount=1353

Or maybe dirk is not a developer

Exactly, he is developer. Not developers, but single dev. Maybe there 2-3 that we might not even know about. but there are about 5-10 well known maemo and now Jolla devs and most them asking the same question — who are devs who got devices. And now compare it to "dev" units Jolla sent to reviewers.
So again it's about what is more important: to support devs to port/create apps (even not talking about proper payments on official store app) or about sending units for reviews? :P

But yes, I do not know to read and jumping to assumptions too quick :P

__________________
IRC nick on freenode — ZogG
imgrup

	Copernicus	2015-10-13 , 11:07
	Posts: 1,986 \| Thanked: 7,698 times \| Joined on Dec 2010 @ Dayton, Ohio	#1385

Originally Posted by pichlo

But look at it this way. You are a new rock/pop/jazz band. The product you want to sell is the music, not the medium. Does that mean the medium on which you send the demo to the critics/publishers does not matter?

Well, yeah, except maybe not.

If you're Apple or Google, you're trying to get customers to buy a product that you've built yourself, that you maintain yourself, and over which you essentially have total control. (Google was originally fiddling with some fairly open concepts, but lately they've been making moves to enhance their control over Android.)

In such an environment, you've gotta sell this product as the best thing since sliced bread, because your customers sure as heck ain't gonna have any ability to modify it themselves.

Jolla, on the other hand, is offering a product that gives you a much finer degree of control. Sure, it doesn't come complete with all the bells and whistles of iOS or Android; but then, you yourself can make up the difference with your own software.

Maybe we now live in a world where only one or two companies can write their own software, and everyone else has to just live with the results. But if not, then Jolla is acting rationally -- the point is not to show that they have a full-blown iOS / Android level OS that already serves every need of the end-user, but rather that they've got a customizable system available that has already done all of the hard GUI work for you. You only need to install your own middleware into the system, and poof, your mobile device is ready to ship.

Anyway, that's my theory.

tl;dr: Jolla doesn't need to show that they themselves have produced the next iPhone. It's enough to show that they've got a pleasing and usable GUI, that licensees can enhance to turn into their own custom iPhone.

Last edited by Copernicus; 2015-10-13 at 11:29.

	pichlo	2015-10-13 , 11:33
	Posts: 6,445 \| Thanked: 20,981 times \| Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK	#1386

Another thing that occurred to me regarding this "Sailfish as a product" idea. If you want to showcase how fantastic your new OS is, would it not be better to demonstrate it by proving that you do not need a custom HW to go with it? In other words, take a well-known existing device, load your OS onto it and show how much better it is than the OS the device originally came with. Making your own HW just sends mixed messages.

If that is the plan, then I hope it will come quickly (note that I am deliberately avoiding the 4-letter s-word that Jolla users have learned to treat as profanity). As far as I know, all ports to other HW so far have been the results of a community effort and none of them are officially supported.

att	2015-10-13 , 11:58
Posts: 388 \| Thanked: 1,340 times \| Joined on Nov 2007 @ Finland	#1387

Originally Posted by Copernicus

Google was originally fiddling with some fairly open concepts, but lately they've been making moves to enhance their control over Android.

I see it as a direct result of what is happening in chinese phone and tablet markets. If you buy Android phone or tablet in China it is very likely there won't be any Google apps and services installed or available for the device because they have been removed by the vendor.

JulmaHerra	2015-10-13 , 11:59
Posts: 285 \| Thanked: 1,900 times \| Joined on Feb 2010	#1388

There may be legal restrictions how you can use other manufacturers devices to promote your own. Also, doing it would send a message that you can install Sailfish OS on existing devices (which is partially true) and if it's reviewed like that, general public interprets it like supported way, which it is not. N9 and N950 were used as developer devices for Sailfish, but for legal reasons Jolla could not officially support Sailfish on those devices. So, having those "spearhead devices" seems to be the only sensible option to have at least something supported shipping, until there are manufacturers willing to license and launch devices using Sailfish. Maybe this will clear out once the split between HW and SW companies is finished.

kteak	2015-10-13 , 12:50
Posts: 1 \| Thanked: 27 times \| Joined on Feb 2008 @ North	#1389

Another update available @ Jolla Blog:

https://blog.jolla.com/tablet_faq/

aegis	2015-10-13 , 13:38
Posts: 702 \| Thanked: 2,059 times \| Joined on Feb 2011 @ UK	#1390

Originally Posted by benny1967

I'm puzzled, too. I don't want Jolla to build a so-called "cloud" service; the reason they don't have one of their own (which translates to: they cannot try to shove the damn thing down my throat) is a huge plus compared to Apple or Google. It's a part of the freedom I expect.

Absolutely. I don't want them too either but then...

Originally Posted by benny1967

On the other hand, this freedom includes freedom of choice... And freedom of choice just requires an easy way to plug into all sorts of 3rd party services, no matter if its PIM services (calendar/contacts), chat services and social networks, image sharing services, file backup etc etc etc. ("easy" meaning easy for the developer: the OS should provide generic APIs and UI elements so that nobody needs to re-invent the wheel and everyone can share URLs from the browser or pictures from the gallery via their application.)

Bingo. And that's what I loved about the N9 and N900. You plugged in services not apps and it became a part of the phone. Somewhere along the way that unique experience has been lost.

I appreciate that today some of those companies are even more precious about their APIs than before and Jolla isn't Nokia so their influence or ability to licence is not in the same league but we've enough creative people in the community that could unofficially hack an API if only there was somewhere to plumb it in to. That's the disappointing thing with Sailfish 2.0. We're no closer to what we had in the N9 4 years ago.