Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sailfish OS 1.0 Announced, Sailfish Soon On Android

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
    I doubt they have/had the capacity for something like what you describe.
    Doing something in the open should require no more resources than doing it behind it closed doors. In the worst case nobody's interested in your code you're not losing anything, and in the best case you get lots of interest in your project and contributions for free.

    Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    After all, the phone is made not only for FOSS enthusiasts, but for the general public as well and Jolla needs to appeal to the general public, which means that nice UI goes first, legal review goes later. That's also why developer mode isn't on by default you don't want average joes accidentally deleting the entire contents of their /usr/lib/systemd/system. But the mode is supported and its use by those who are knowledgeable enough about it is encouraged.
    Had they (Jolla) got the 'openness' part right, the general public would already be directly benefiting from all the UI work/optimizations done by the community (which are currently nonexistent, because the UI source code is kept secret.) As it stands, Jolla's "open source" strategy doesn't make much sense. Why would you release your code only after you've done the development and don't actually need the valuable testing/bug fixing/other help any more? That costs you more money and quality and valuable time than making it open source from day 0, doesn't it?

    As you seem somewhat knowledgeable on this subject of "legal review", could you explain how is it then possible that every other open source project (say firefox, wine, linux, ... ) is developed as they should - in the open?

    Comment


    • #17
      I think some people forget that Mer was almost dead before Jolla, so Jolla rather saved the open source Mer mobile.
      If you want something in Sailfish then implement it in Mer or Nemo and you might see it in Jolla.
      In short it's Mer+Nemo=OSS Mer+Silica=Sailfish, the closed drivers is out of Jollas control but since it's android drivers you got the same problem with andriod.
      I do hope that Jolla will use the open source wlan driver in the future.
      In my opinion Sailfish OS is more open then Android.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by KellyClowers View Post
        However, I will certainly take it any day over Ubuntu (I have no respect for or trust in Canonical) or Firefox (I do not think HTML/JS is a worthwhile phone platform).
        Oh yeah, no surprise there. This is the Phoronix forums after all.

        Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
        Wow, good job taking a slide completely out of context. It was presented as an overview for their open-sourcing roadmap. They are working on putting as many things on the right side to the left side, and this is where they are currently at. Clearly not everything will make it, for various reasons (Jolla-specific, patents, 3rd party code etc.), but they are trying to get as much of this open-sourced as possible.
        I used their slide to point out that right now -- and still for a long, long time at the very least -- Sailfish is a proprietary/open-source chimera, and I'm not even talking about drivers. This is a fact that no context can change.

        Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
        After all, the phone is made not only for FOSS enthusiasts, but for the general public as well and Jolla needs to appeal to the general public, which means that nice UI goes first, legal review goes later
        Nice UI and FOSS are not mutually exclusive.

        Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
        It's pretty much the opposite: it's free software running on top of a closed core (the hardware and its firmware).
        Well, since a huge part of the closed components lie in the topmost layer of the stack (user interface, configs, etc.) in addition to hardware and firmware, that's a very... unique conclusion.

        Originally posted by Nille_kungen View Post
        In my opinion Sailfish OS is more open then Android.
        Yes, that might be the case, but that's not a hard thing to achieve, is it?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by M1kkko View Post
          Had they (Jolla) got the 'openness' part right, the general public would already be directly benefiting from all the UI work/optimizations done by the community (which are currently nonexistent, because the UI source code is kept secret.) As it stands, Jolla's "open source" strategy doesn't make much sense. Why would you release your code only after you've done the development and don't actually need the valuable testing/bug fixing/other help any more? That costs you more money and quality and valuable time than making it open source from day 0, doesn't it?
          Have you read the article you're commenting on? Because Sailfish is still beta, it's not even at version 1.0 yet. So they still need that testing and bug fixing.

          Originally posted by M1kkko View Post
          As you seem somewhat knowledgeable on this subject of "legal review", could you explain how is it then possible that every other open source project (say firefox, wine, linux, ... ) is developed as they should - in the open?
          They don't use anything from third parties and they are not selling products (thus less risk of being sued over patents). It's also funny that you mention Firefox, because it was open-sourced (from Netscape Communicator) as well, not created entirely from scratch.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by nll_a View Post
            I used their slide to point out that right now -- and still for a long, long time at the very least -- Sailfish is a proprietary/open-source chimera, and I'm not even talking about drivers. This is a fact that no context can change.
            Clearly my desktop is a proprietary/open-source chimera as well, because I need to use Skype for my work. The point is that it's all optional once again, you're free to install whatever UI you want, Sailfish as is is just the default. And Jolla is putting effort into open-sourcing as much as possible under the circumstances.

            Originally posted by nll_a View Post
            Nice UI and FOSS are not mutually exclusive.
            Hence you can use Nemo.

            Originally posted by nll_a View Post
            Well, since a huge part of the closed components lie in the topmost layer of the stack (user interface, configs, etc.) in addition to hardware and firmware, that's a very... unique conclusion.
            User interface and configs is not a huge part at all, compared to all the actual software that makes the thing work (once again, systemd, Wayland, Btrfs, GNU utilities, the kernel etc.).

            Originally posted by nll_a View Post
            Yes, that might be the case, but that's not a hard thing to achieve, is it?
            Care to share any more successful attempts at achieving it? The current state is not ideal, but it's still way, way better than we had just recently, when everything was Android, Windows Phone or other completely locked and controlled platforms. I find your position to be rather ungrateful; Jolla is a big step in the right direction and they seem determined to continue making steps towards it, thus they deserve the credit.

            Comment


            • #21
              Why do they need to do legal review on the UI? Didn't they code it all themselves? Also, if they're violating patents then using a proprietary copyright doesn't protect them; I guess it does if you can only spot the patent violation by looking at code.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by nll_a View Post
                Oh yeah, no surprise there. This is the Phoronix forums after all.
                But if I really wanted to be serious about going that route, I would need to toss in something about Lennart's systemd cabal that is trying to ruin Linux, claim that dbus is terrible, and troll about one of the *BSDs

                No, in reality I have just never been that excited about the web or web technologies as an application platform, whether it was from Mozilla or Palm/HP or anyone.
                Canonical clearly wants to do their own thing, maybe to someday be to Linux what Apple is to BSD. And that is fine, but I just prefer not to be part of it.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
                  Care to share any more successful attempts at achieving it? The current state is not ideal, but it's still way, way better than we had just recently, when everything was Android, Windows Phone or other completely locked and controlled platforms. I find your position to be rather ungrateful; Jolla is a big step in the right direction and they seem determined to continue making steps towards it, thus they deserve the credit.
                  Well, the Firefox phones are being relatively sucessful as far as I can tell, so here we go. My position is just that I'd rather support projects which value openness and freedom and start writing FOSS from the beginning, whether I agree with everything they do or not. Jolla surely deserve credit for lots of things, I don't deny that, but personally I only make exceptions for proprietary games and drivers, so a closed user interface (which may be small in code but for common users is very big stuff) is a really hard thing for me to swallow.

                  Originally posted by KellyClowers View Post
                  But if I really wanted to be serious about going that route, I would need to toss in something about Lennart's systemd cabal that is trying to ruin Linux, claim that dbus is terrible, and troll about one of the *BSDs

                  No, in reality I have just never been that excited about the web or web technologies as an application platform, whether it was from Mozilla or Palm/HP or anyone.
                  Canonical clearly wants to do their own thing, maybe to someday be to Linux what Apple is to BSD. And that is fine, but I just prefer not to be part of it.
                  Ok, I understand. Fair enough. I never cared for web stuff either.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Chaz View Post
                    Why do they need to do legal review on the UI? Didn't they code it all themselves? Also, if they're violating patents then using a proprietary copyright doesn't protect them; I guess it does if you can only spot the patent violation by looking at code.
                    Why do you think jolla screens are vertical instead of horizontal?
                    It's not all about the code manufactures can also use design patents for horizontal screens and so on.
                    Originally posted by nll_a View Post
                    Yes, that might be the case, but that's not a hard thing to achieve, is it?
                    If you want FOSS then use Nemo but you still need to use Qualcomm firmware and some closed drivers, i don't know how much that works with FOSS drivers or how good it works since i haven't tried.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Nille_kungen View Post
                      Why do you think jolla screens are vertical instead of horizontal?
                      It's not all about the code manufactures can also use design patents for horizontal screens and so on.
                      That is my point. Closing up the source code does not protect you from a patent claim on that in any way. (Is there seriously a patent on horizontal screens? Shit like that makes me feel that patents should just be abolished wholesale, they are more trouble then they're worth.)

                      By the by, people have said here before that Jolla's approach to patents is to just not sell their phones in the US, because the US allows software patents and the European countries don't. I can't vouch for that though.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I am not really into Jollas work, but technicaly I find ubuntu os and firefox os fail... I did even install a preview on my phone of ubuntu, its design is just retarded if you connect a monitor you get a real linux, if not you cant use normal linux (x11) tools.

                        That maybe makes some sense for a mobile phone but they handle tablets the same way, and a tablet of course needs to be able to function more or less like a normal pc, and I dont want to wait till they reprogramm every single programm that exist for gnu/linux as open good option.

                        So unfree drivers is one thing, look at replicant.us The question is, are other parts the gui easy to fix (remove unuseful anti-feature blobs).

                        You said there is wayland so could I just replace their propriatary gui with lets say gnome-shell or fluxbox or enlightenment by yum remove blob install gnome-shell... ?

                        I mean even for the replicant there is no gnu-tools included you have this garbage replacements where you fucking bite on your tung when it just is full of bugs and has bad/none wrong parameters, or just are not there.

                        you try to do simple things that would take you 5 mins on a gnu/linux system but because everything is fucked up you try 3hours then quit trying it (tried adn failed to install a chroot linux fedora I belive on a nexus 7 2013)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Chaz View Post
                          By the by, people have said here before that Jolla's approach to patents is to just not sell their phones in the US, because the US allows software patents and the European countries don't. I can't vouch for that though.
                          But that's a great approach. Every software company should do that. Maybe then the US would realize how stupid patents are.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                            I did even install a preview on my phone of ubuntu, its design is just retarded if you connect a monitor you get a real linux, if not you cant use normal linux (x11) tools.
                            Are you talking about this (which is a bug and will be fixed) or about not being able to run Gimp, Inkscape on the phone?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by nll_a View Post
                              Are you talking about this (which is a bug and will be fixed) or about not being able to run Gimp, Inkscape on the phone?
                              ubuntus touch design is like I said, you have a different desktop and special apps for your phone, they made some few apps till know and if they did not change something you will not be able to start gimp from the ubuntu-touch-os.

                              Maybe I am wrong and they will change that its additionaly possible to do that too. But then this would be for now a wet dream or a paper-release or something like that.

                              https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Touch/CoreApps

                              At least it has no priority to canonical to make that work, because they belive in apps and that nobody not much of their customers want to run gimp on a small phone screen (what makes sense for a phone but not for a tablet).

                              The Idea is, that you have a phone with small apps that you can use on a Monitor as a normal ubuntu pc. THATS the idea, if they make it possible by accident that normal apps will run too someday we will see. but then they would need to change the sizes of buttons and menus and stuff from the normal programms.

                              I think they see the phone as their primary target for that this aproach makes sense, you can then install a normal Ubuntu or other linux on a tablet... So ubuntu touch supports some tablets but normaly it makes no sense.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                                You said there is wayland so could I just replace their propriatary gui with lets say gnome-shell or fluxbox or enlightenment by yum remove blob install gnome-shell... ?
                                This was already answered:
                                Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
                                You can run any GNU/Linux program on it (as long as it's compiled for ARM and its dependencies met, naturally; you can also make use of Mer Build Service to create the RPMs). Those proprietary things are also completely optional, nothing is stopping you from installing the Nemo UI on the device. And you don't need to root it, and you can unlock the bootloader with provided tools (so you can probably even install vanilla Gentoo or such on it if you want). And, unlike most phone manufacturers, warranty is not void if you do that (unless obviously you do something that is definitely your fault, like overclocking it until it dies).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X