Reply
Thread Tools
smoku's Avatar
Posts: 1,716 | Thanked: 3,007 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Warsaw, Poland
#411
Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
Ok, so, let me ask you: why are you shooting down Nemo then?
I am not. Why are you saying I am?
It is a cool project built by damn smart people.

Originally Posted by Copernicus View Post
All I'm saying is, there's no point in having a fully open-source Sailfish, as Nemo already exists. [...] Community effort seems better spent on the community-based project instead...
Please understand that there are people not interested in joining communities. They just want to fix that one annoying bug (or two), not embarking yet another journey...
__________________
smoku @xiaoka.com (SMTP/XMPP) ...:.:....:... pebbled . Poky Fish : sixaxis . psx4m . uae4all
Jolla Phone post-mortem . . . . . . . . . . -> 1+1 VGN-UX390N
 

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to smoku For This Useful Post:
Posts: 3,464 | Thanked: 5,107 times | Joined on Feb 2010 @ Gothenburg in Sweden
#412
I thought this thread was about sfos 2.0 not a thread for Stallman fanatic opinons.

You people still, after all this years, seems to not understand that no device can be fully open source. There are plenty of reason for that.

Not even a damn laptop is fully open source this days.
 

The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to mikecomputing For This Useful Post:
Posts: 338 | Thanked: 496 times | Joined on Oct 2010
#413
Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
] Otherwise the future is bleak. More and more peole will move on, leaving behind only those still refusing to accept the reality. As their concentration increases, so will their cognitive dissonance which they will vent by an increasing aggresivity towards the few remaining people with some common sense. Eventually, the only Jolla's users left would be the 1000 or so die-hard yes-men, Jolla will stop receiving any useful feedabck and the system will collapse. A business cannot exist with such a small user base for very long.
I think the dynamic of the community changed to lord of the flies days or weeks after the Jolla Phone went out into the wilds. There was a very clear divide between people who felt the software was shockingly far behind, and very messy, and the crowd who felt that it was their divine mission to shield Jolla from any criticism and for the most part deny that things were any less than perfect. The former massively outnumbered the latter, as history has shown, but the loudness and aggressiveness of the latter meant criticism and useful feedback was extremely limited. More people are putting their heads above the parapet these days, but most of the Maemo / Meego community and developers and Jolla early adopters are lost forever now, and even if Jolla has turned a corner, it's going to be extremely difficult to turn the ship around and attract newbies.
 

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to bluefoot For This Useful Post:
Posts: 951 | Thanked: 2,344 times | Joined on Jan 2012 @ UK
#414
Installed sailfish 2.0 and played with for few minutes but my screen caved in and no longer accepts touch input 2.0 seemed quite nice actually but didn't get to use it much.

Back to using my N9 and i am falling in love with it again <3
 

The Following User Says Thank You to mariusmssj For This Useful Post:
javispedro's Avatar
Posts: 2,355 | Thanked: 5,249 times | Joined on Jan 2009 @ Barcelona
#415
Originally Posted by pycage View Post
I'm always reading "open-source this, open-source that"... but would it really bring a benefit?
It surprises me that I would see doubts about this on this forum of all places..

Originally Posted by pycage View Post
Most people are consumers, not contributing to the open-source stuff they use at all. The people who develop and contribute to open-source projects are very rare.
And yet both the many users and the minority of developers benefit. Developers make patches and receive donations/reputation and users enjoy significantly increased level of customization of the platform.

Originally Posted by pycage View Post
I think this thread resembles this as well. There are only a few developers among many consumers.
I think this thread is a good example indeed. A number of people is complaining about some perceived mis-features of Sailfish 2.0. A developer appears with a number of patches (possible because Qml is "open source" in the webOS ausmt sense). Everyone wins. Zero cost to Jolla.

Originally Posted by pycage View Post
So we also don't see much progress with Nemo or the open-source parts of Sailfish, except for the work Jolla is doing.

The successful open-source projects are successful, because people employed by companies do paid work on them in the interest of their company. The Linux kernel is a prominent example of how a range of companies are working together on a common
operating system.
And if you look at Mer or Nemo, you'd notice that most contributions are coming from people paid by Jolla.
Did you expect random people would do Jolla's work for free?

Just be thankful that they're scratching their itches and gracefully embrace their free contributions. Like every other open source project.

Originally Posted by pycage View Post
And with open-sourcing the few remaining closed parts of Sailfish, this would not change.
Maybe. So what? Why is that an argument against open sourcing 100% of Sailfish?

I call this the "Netscape mentality".

You should never _expect_ people to work for you for free. If it happens, then you embrace it with your arms open. But since when the deal's been "i'll only open source this if you implement feature X for me?".

Originally Posted by pycage View Post
The community consists of consumers with a few active developers among them. Most open-source projects are one-man-shows that disappear once the developer loses interest. Almost all bigger projects are actually paid work.
No argument. But again, so what?

Originally Posted by pycage View Post
The community of developers is a utopia.
Couldn't disagree more.

I have developed a number of small utilities or hacks for desktop Linux that most people have never heard about. Bus factor=1. Yet I still receive daily emails about them; with ideas, patches, bug reports, questions and comments. Random people I have never heard about have even packaged them for some Linux distributions. Some of them large ones, some of them probably one-man shows.

Do you know what do I call this?

I call this a fscking miracle.

The number of man-hours contributed by these persons greatly exceeds the amount of time I've spent on these projects. I use them almost daily and yet hardly ever find a big enough free time slot to work on them myself. Thus, I almost always encourage any person who emails me to set up a fork. They never do it either, because they lack the time too.

And yet with the few man-minutes that everyone can offer, the projects improve, and _I_ benefit from the results.

To sum it up: I get a _daily_ reminder about this wonderful utopia of developers. And my small utilities are mostly niche garbage.

I'm sorry your impressions are different.

Originally Posted by pycage View Post
Why don't we see open devices running Mer? I think the best person to answer this question would be Aaron Seigo of the Vivaldi project.
I would ask Jolla. Why did they need to make SailfishOS? And why did they need to make it closed?

Just to repeat past Nokia mistakes in an era in which we are enjoying peak levels of open-sourceness in the competition?

I would never expect Jolla to be the developer of the most closed source mobile operating system. Yet now this scenario no longer seems as unlikely as it would have seemed on day 1. Again, ironically, many other open operating systems will be reusing the components Jolla developed!

Originally Posted by pycage View Post
It simply is not possible to find
acceptable mobile hardware running on open drivers. The Jollavdevices are as open as
it can get. And they are running Mer on top of a closed-source Android hardware adaptation layer dictated by the manufacturer.
Trade-offs. You have the 1000eur phone quite close, on this very forum, which shows you can actually do acceptable open mobile hardware. Stallman was even close to approving it; the FSF did not approve it based on what many people believe is a small technicality. That's a device that is "as open as it can get".

But despite the Android-only hardware, I find I easily like Jolla's hardware, possibly even more than the software. TOH. Schematics!. Actual access to people who know the hardware. I can ask for an unlocked bootloader and I get it. Without having to needlessly explain "why would anyone want an unlocked bootloader" for the nth time. All these things are mostly unheard on most other manufacturers. Even the manufacturers chosen by Ubuntu are crap in this regard.

One of the primary reasons I use a Jolla daily.

Originally Posted by pycage View Post
On the other end is the Silica UI that was promised to be opened (stay tuned as stskeeps said...), but actually is almost entirely BSD-licensed and open already.
Why didn't anyone reimplement the small closed-source part of Silica to make the
BSD-licensed open components run on top of Nemo, so that you have the full
Silica experience on Nemo? After more than two years of having the BSD-licensed Silica code out in the open, I really wonder. Maybe because the community of developers is a utopia...
Again, why would I work for free? I am paying Jolla to do this for me!

Now, release the source of the mail client UI, and I will quickly make a hackish patch to enable multiple identity support, since that's one of my itches*. Since I only have a few man-minutes of free time maybe I will just hardcode the list of identities to avoid having to understand how account setup works. The result would be useless as a Nemo contributon, but still useful for some, developer-y people. And maybe someone else will eventually develop the UI to configure it.

* fictitious example

Originally Posted by pycage View Post
IMHO it is NOT Jolla who is to blame for the lack of contributions to Sailfish.
But they are definitely to blame for the closeness of Sailfish.
 

The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to javispedro For This Useful Post:
Posts: 205 | Thanked: 389 times | Joined on Nov 2009
#416
What do you mean by your screen caved in? Did you punch the phone?
 
Posts: 951 | Thanked: 2,344 times | Joined on Jan 2012 @ UK
#417
Originally Posted by salyavin View Post
What do you mean by your screen caved in? Did you punch the phone?
Just one day stopped working.

There is a small section going across the screen that no longer works (see picture) green means working, red means no touch. And after few minutes the whole screen won't respond. A reboot helps only temporarily. But the part in the middle stopped working all together and nothing seems to help ((((
Attached Images
 
 
Posts: 285 | Thanked: 1,900 times | Joined on Feb 2010
#418
Originally Posted by javispedro View Post
Did you expect random people would do Jolla's work for free?
I guess nobody expects random people to do others job for free. However, that's the argument offered for open sourcing everything as if open sourcing was the holy grail to end all suffering in the fsckin world...

I would ask Jolla. Why did they need to make SailfishOS? And why did they need to make it closed?
Because they needed a product to sell and Nemo has a bit different UI paradigm, which is not easily changed. To deliver commercial product you need control over such things.

Another fact of life is that it's impossible to deliver 100% open source product these days. Some closed parts are likely to be open sourced, but it may take time if it's to be done in a way that benefits all parties.
 
w00t's Avatar
Posts: 1,055 | Thanked: 4,107 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Norway
#419
Originally Posted by pycage View Post
I'm always reading "open-source this, open-source that"... but would it really bring a benefit?
Yes, it would.

If Jolla were to die tomorrow, the UI dies with it. Again. The same as has happened with the N900 and N9, to varying degrees. The same as has happened with various other consumer electronics products over time.

Having the source code available helps stave off untimely obsolescence, and possibly even opens up new and more interesting avenues of putting it on more hardware, or doing things with it that weren't originally envisaged/intended: you already see this to some degree with the fairly healthy patching community that has built up around the UI.

Originally Posted by pycage View Post
So we also don't see much progress with Nemo or the open-source parts of Sailfish, except for the work Jolla is doing.
The difference there is that Nemo is not a shipping product. It's not usable as-is, and as making it usable is far from interesting or entertaining work, not many people want to do it. Creating new UIs (like Glacier) and such has taken priority over doing the boring, but necessary work like keeping things building, fixing bugs and adding required functionality to applications. This is why I gave up doing Nemo in my free time back in 2013: because it felt like I was spinning my wheels in the mud virtually alone with no real benefit.

Sailfish on the other hand is already a shipping quality product. Contributing to something that is already running and useful attracts a completely different demographic than a project that has hundreds of thousands of LOC but can hardly make a phonecall, say.
__________________
i'm a Qt expert and former Jolla sailor (forever sailing, in spirit).
if you like, read more about me.
if you find me entertaining, or useful, thank me. if you don't, then tell me why.
 

The Following 30 Users Say Thank You to w00t For This Useful Post:
w00t's Avatar
Posts: 1,055 | Thanked: 4,107 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Norway
#420
Originally Posted by w00t View Post
Contributing to something that is already running and useful attracts a completely different demographic
For a case study of this, consider Qt, which opened up to external contributions & maintainers in 2012, and now has approaching 30-40% of the contributions coming from outside of the "owner" of the project:



Similarly, if it were possible to create a fully OSS SFOS device as a proof of concept, hypothetically, one might see more interest from other manufacturers, if they had the capability to create skunkworks projects to try it out without having to try enter into complicated closed source license agreements and similar.
__________________
i'm a Qt expert and former Jolla sailor (forever sailing, in spirit).
if you like, read more about me.
if you find me entertaining, or useful, thank me. if you don't, then tell me why.
 

The Following 21 Users Say Thank You to w00t For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 15:11.