Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

There are some things I think Jolla does very well.

Working with upstream projects in collaboration with other stakeholders is generally a pretty good example of that. We've seen a pretty good track record with ofono (+ Ubuntu Touch), Qt (+ Qt Project), and a bunch of other projects.

I also think Jolla do a reasonable (if not great) job at communicating upcoming software progress, considering how frequent releases are: changes are always visible in the repositories, a view into the next update's changes is generally available before it comes (still a relatively new development and not a perfect one), larger technical announcements are sometimes made if there's any hint of problem or interest. And there's changelogs with a fair amount of detail at release time.

But there's also things that I think could be done better.

In particular, I think things like a public platform SDK (similar to what is generally used internally for development at the OS level) could be helpful.

I'd also like to see some work done on making a more cohesive OS development environment (software is available from a spatter of repositories all over the place, often with incredibly blurry lines about what goes where - sometimes to the point of being completely arbitrary) and so on and so forth...

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

I don't think I know of *any* company that would happily say "sure, here's a prototype of software we might ship in two months. It crashes all the time, don't mind that. I promise the real software doesn't do that."

That's a way to end up going out of business really fast, as well as being really open at the same time. ;)

Why does it matter who this person is? If they're about to write a review, which thanks to the "modern, agile, social tech" internet, can appear all over the world if it goes viral, then they need to go through just the same precautions as anyone else: they must be running stable software, and they must go through the tutorial. I don't see why that's such a major drama for you.

I think if that's your opinion, then instead of trying to make any more points, I'll just say that it's time to say that we'll have to agree to disagree. And I think the fact that you're getting actual replies from past and present employees on this thread should speak volumes about that.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

It's called discussion. Sometimes it takes a lot of give and take to get anywhere - and that goes both ways of course, for me to be understood, but also for me to understand others and to learn from them as well.

I think the exchange with Jolla's (?) Philippe was useful and a single or two messages wouldn't have sufficed. Maybe they got something out of it, maybe they didn't. I think I've gained some ideas from this thread, beginning with jalyst's great formulations in his post that made me, a lurker think about this as well (http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...1&postcount=29).

Personally I'm not a big fan of fk_lx's rampage for example, but I'd hardly call participation in a forum thread for a few days excessive either. I think in this thread fk_lx has made some good points too.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Woot is going on here? :D

Get it..!?!

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Why is Jolla always compared to the mythical "any company". I thought they were the unlike company.

Anyway, let's not make too much of this. It is just one more of those examples where Jolla ends up looking a little weird and I think they could loosen it up a little.

But this is not a big deal, just a detail that came up. Details speak of culture.

Reach matters, but also hygiene matters. Treating a device loan to a blogger as a rigid press exercise may not be the best PR either. It makes you look stuffy.

Oh, I think Philippe's exchange was quite useful, hopefully for both of us. Maybe he can yell some more inside Jolla and make a change from within to those nontransparent ways of theirs. Believe it or not, I'd actually be happy if that were to happen.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Aside from some surprising moves in not opening up software (and certain questionable email blocking activities), I agree Jolla's FOSS participation is good. Mostly my concerns about their closed nature as communicators is related to Jolla's consumer device business and corporate strategy/culture.

Their software engineers are probably communicating just fine. Except when they are not. ;)

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Apparently they do read:

Steskeeps @ Twitter:

https://twitter.com/stskeeps

Not that we get any contribution beyond a fluffy tweet? ;)

I beg to differ (with that quote from this thread), by the way. Transparency and brutal honesty from Marc might have healed many a grievance that silence or vaguessness let grow.

But then, Stskeeps likes to talk about Jesus:

http://www.merproject.org/logs/%23jo...05-28T21:16:37

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

If my SIM-card slot is not working, I surely know why I'm sending it to be repaired, don't I? :)

Problem is that you define that balance in one way, others define it the other way. End result is that it's impossible to strike a balance that suits everybody. Now the line has been drawn somewhere and it doesn't suit you, even if it's about information which wouldn't help the community in any way (because everything relating to fixing it are out of community's hands, being hardware and not software issue). I simply don't see any sense on concentrating so much effort extracting information that you cannot use in any sensible way. I would understand this criticism if it was about some software bits or architectural things which prevent people of making new apps or getting things to work.

There are always disgruntled people. It's a fact of life, you simply cannot please them all and if you try to do it, you end up pleasing nobody. Can they do better? Probably. However, putting effort on deeply explaining some SIM-card problem just because "it's nice to know" is not about improving things but adding noise.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Oh Jesus!
Now is this true?
Really?

That sounds very strange indeed. That they want to make sure test devices have the latest stable production firmware and not some internal, half-baked one that'll never make it beyond testing. How strange. Sure, who knows what sailors hacked on their own devices? Maybe they even installed Google services that must not be part of any Jolla distribution? But hey, how incredible bureaucratic of Jolla to make sure testers and reviewers get the same experience as paying customers. Hard to believ indeed.

:confused:

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

OMG! I'm famous! :eek:

Just to set things straight:
When I said Marc wasn't Jesus I didn't mean to express any doubt about His divinity. Don't punish me! :)

I'd prefer those people to work, not to cater to your ego and entertain you as we do.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

That wasn't really what I was surprised of, though. Had the response just been along the lines of "make sure you don't run an internal development version OS" or "can you make sure the phone has the latest consumer firmware on it?", I would have completely understood, as those are both work in progress and obviously private. That would be completely understandable, but of course that really wasn't the response - and he didn't say they want the press running the consumer release, but some specific release.

I was surprised by the controlling attitude when it came to blogger relations, that is true. Maybe I still expected a more easy, more agile approach from Jolla. As said, maybe I shouldn't have been surprised. They do seem to have a very controlled image, part of which is may of course be related to their unwillingness to host certain discussions in public.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Of course, but it seems common courtesy to tell what is being done to it. Maybe they did in a repair report, but then if so, why not just tell it to those many who asked - isn't TJC for those kinds of interactions. The secrecy seems unnecessary and impolite.

Also, information is important to know whether or not the issue will be fixed for good, or perhaps mended for the time being. Sometimes companies use warranty service to do something to the device, even before a real solution is available (resulting in several visits to the shop). It would be useful for the discerning customer to know more about the likelihood of getting it fixed at that time or perhaps waiting a little longer.

Of course the line has to be drawn somewhere and not all can be pleased. I'm offering the opinion that the line should be drawn a little more towards the transparent. Frankly, quite often it is a common sense thing, really. Reading the TJC thread on the SIM card holder, I do feel the common sense thing would have been to explain something to those who had been waiting for the resolution.

If for example you have been waiting for a delayed flight at the airport, airlines do tell you what was fixed in the plane or why it was delayed, even though you do nothing with that information - certainly much less than you could do with a SIM card holder issue where at least you can stuff some cardboard in there or something. It is common courtesy, it is common sense and it is the right thing to do.

Not explaining anything just leaves a very odd taste in the mouth. But kudos to Philippe for finally offering some information on this.

I agree that they can do better. :) But the SIM card holder example matters exactly because of that. Clearly, for whatever reason, it was an exercise in controlling the information passed out - and that's an area where, in general, I feel Jolla would do themselves a favor by loosening the strings somewhat. It is just example out of several, as has been discussed in the thread. I think some added transparency and "brutal honesty" (as jalyst put it) would resonate better with a larger group of people in this early adopter phase.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Sure, so goes the common line. In reality, more transparent communications would mostly be at the expense of fluffy tweets, not really any other work.

How long would it take to pen an honest the goodness short, informative update on some topic. Not long, that's for sure. In that SIM card holder case, it probably took them longer - as in more time away from that work you talk of - to formulate how to express themselves without providing an actual explanation.

But more importantly, whenever that lack of comms results later in some PR crisis, that will take time away from more important work. The fk_lx case surely has taken some time away from a lot of people and I think that too could have been handled better by addressing it earlier. I think it would be wise to ratchet up the transparency a little, so that less issues would rise to the crisis map and thus take time away from real work.

Now, I'm not suggesting not paying any attention to how or what is communicated. I'm just following jalyst's suggestion to notch back the fluffy stuff a little and replace it with a little more timely brutal honesty:

http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...1&postcount=29

I am neither entertained or care at all about myself in this thread. I would like to see Jolla succeed and as part of that I've made the attempt to explain what and why I suggest - and why I found jalyst's suggestion (surely he is a neutral voice in this?) a compelling one.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

No it doesn't.

I had problems with my Nexus 5 recently, I sent it into the shop and they sent the device back refusing to fix it as they said it had water damage (it most certainly did not!). No diagnosis was given - the only option I was given was to refurbish the phone, but that would cost £180!

Same thing happened with Nokia. We all know about the infamous USB port failure issue that plagued the N900/E7. Well, when my N900 packed in, I was forced to accept an E7 and given no choice or reason why. My E7 then failed 1 month after the warranty expired, I went to Nokia care and they told me to piss off.

My experience with Jolla on the otherhand has been very good. While I haven't had a hardware issue, I did have the annoying battery drain issue. I complained (as did others) and it was fixed very quickly. The other issue I had was with Android apps crashing/failing to work, I complained again and the issue while not completely fixed, was certainly improved upon.

My only issue now is with the native browser, which simply isn't as good as Chrome for Android. If that can be improved, then I will have pretty much the device I want.

Overall though, I am happy with the support that Jolla are providing. Compared to other device manufacturers I have purchased from, I have to say it's some of the best support I have had.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Please use some of your fame to get the copy and paste snowball Rollin...

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

You do realize that common courtesy doesn't mean everyone lives up to it? What you just described are two instances far from common courtesy and indeed unfortunate. One would wish we'd get better from the likes of Jolla, especially on the CTO level. Maybe some outsourced repair shop guy in an individual case can be excused easier for not living up to a standard, but a CTO on a site called together.jolla.com could probably be expected to be a little more transparent, together...

As for liquid damage, I have often received photographs of liquid damaged components - and always a report of what has been swapped or repaired - when visiting maintenance shops, Nokia or otherwise. Probably a Jolla SIM card holder repair also puts out some repair report, it would have been nice to get that info beforehand in the relevant TJC thread.

That, of course, is nice to hear.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Have you tried the Webcat browser? :)

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Just to kind of give a little FOSS perspective to this issue, check out this IRC log:

http://www.merproject.org/logs/%23ne...06-24T20:58:08

I think there certainly is some food for thought there for Jolla. If the FOSS community is voicing this, if some in the consumer perspective (like myself mostly) is voicing this, and even - shudder, horror - fk_lx is voicing this, maybe it is something to think about instead of just laugh off with a GIF or two.

No?

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

So what should jolla do and how?

"also it does not help, that jolla essentially has raped the term "open" PR wise like any other corporation has done before. there, I said it out loud."

Haha love this line. Not sure that a fully agree or maybe I do, Ticky question. But I do love the line. Good one.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Voicing this opinion does what for the community? Does more for the individual than it wil do for a company or project.

Care to prove otherwise? From the outside looking in, it's one person with a very serious problem causing more harm than help everywhere this individual has gone. If there is so much evil in one company, start your own positive endeavor and lead by example.

Is constant negativity going to accomplish anything positive or just give a person an ongoing stage to say their rant without end? So far, that's the case and I've yet to see anything that benefits anybody but this ONE person.

Care to prove otherwise or just unrelentlessly continue attack after attack? I see absolutely nothing positive from this continued posturing and aggravation from either side. Endeavor to fix things or shut the **** up.

I've read enough. I've seen enough. I don't think anybody else wants to even see anything else but a normal, sane, adult resolution. Nothing else suffices; and I don't mean kowtowing to some obviously broken and egocentric, self-serving unnecessarily ongoing rant like some damn child that's throwing a temper tantrum.

Offer to fix things or stop saying the same things over and over again.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Nope - but I will give it a go!

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Reading the log, one thing some seem to lament is that since Jolla came on board, a lot of stuff has been hidden behind "it is confidential" smokescreen. Others elsewhere have been making the point that Jolla have moved from the likes of TMO to the likes of TJC to retain better control of what is discussed and how. Some seem to wonder if Nokia was more open than Jolla in the FOSS areas.

Perhaps Jolla should start by being more transparent and engaging the community on the community's terms more. That's a first step in the quest for openness, of course. Sorting out FOSS issues regarding components etc. is another matter. Perhaps it could be transparently discussed first.

Nobody is disputing Jolla's right to a business. Perhaps some components must remain closed. I guess people thinking this way are disagreeing with the way Jolla are approaching all that.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

I guess you are referring to fk_lx. In reality, there are multiple voices sharing the concern about lack of transparency from Jolla - and their view that it is negatively impacting things. Check no further than the IRC log a few messages back, several critical voices on Twitter or the posts from myself and some others in this thread (including jalyst's great post on page 3) where Jolla's PR is called into question.

Any one person is irrelevant as far as the larger goal goes. A more open, transparent Jolla has a better chance at keeping a much needed following going on. So goes the thinking, anyway. I must say I have been worried that Jolla's attitude is not the best community-wise and eventually it might start hurting them. People who voice this concern are not out to hurt Jolla. (fk_lx may by now be out to hurt Jolla due to his own experience, but that's really an exception and a result of their falling out.)

I guess a lot of people would have loved to see thp engage in the discussion to get both views, but he has consistently chosen against it. That makes discussion hard. Some might argue that two adults should be able to talk, but who am I to say.

So where's the discussion with both sides in it?

You?

That's the problem, though, how do you fix things if the other party shuts up, shuts down and refuses to do anything about it.

Still, all this hoopla about fk_lx misses the really important topic: How will Jolla continue to build a fruitful community following around it and attract both FOSS talent and contribution. Not by alienating them, that's for sure.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

The comnunity ecpect more from jolla and jolla expects more from community. :D its a dead end:rolleyes:

Mybee jolla learned that communication and demands from users and community isnt an easy task so for now they back off for a while an regroup. End users like me dont have any responsibility to deliver anything still we have the money that componies need, and want so I sitting here and waiting for jolla to come to me. So being a repsentetive for any componies isnt easy. 1000 community members demands 1000 different things so maybe jolla isnt ready to face that atm. If so. Let them hang out and work and when they are ready the will come around.
Meanwhile, continue the speculation. I also have another theory what goes on within jolla right now. But I save it for another thread, time and universe.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Sorry to interrupt, but what you're honestly describing is how there's really a tricky way for a company that uses open source to make money from open source. Their contributions are going to be scrutinized and yet somehow, they have to still make money.

Face it, open source based companies can/will/have made money, but it's usually at the sacrifice of something. What you call a lack of transparency, the business-minded part of me just sees a company that is running into that difficult task of being open, contribute to open source and still make money.

Sailfish has been ported to other devices. Maemo never was officially done as such. BME was never opened, it was reversed engineered. You're simply looking at "open" as how it affects you; not community per se. Open discussion does not make a company open; it makes it transparent.

Repositories make a company open. Look around, many companies do such. But the proprietary bits will always be behind closed doors. Just like executive decisions.

Things like such are better behind closed doors. Just like design by committee is very bad; so is letting a committee of disjoined folks that can't even agree on which shell is best.

Actually I think it'll be better if you described a more transparent company, what makes them transparent, and what Jolla could do more than they already do. Community is nebulous, very vague. Their FOSS endeavors are noted; libhybris is being used by other companies. Even Ubuntu uses it.

Glad to see you say that. But do you mean it? A business has the capability to run parts of itself behind closed doors. You've yet to discuss a fully open and profitable open company. Name two.

RedHat is rather hushed about a lot of the things they do. Want support? Pay for it. So what would make Jolla an open company to you? Give you everything, open to discussion, help them run their business... and if it fails, would you share in that too?

I, unfortunately, do believe so. Meritocracy works best when money isn't involved; but when community comes together to solve a problem for all.

And without a direction or option given thus far - mind you, I'm not picking on you, but you seem to be the most level-headed and most capable of expression yourself in a lot of forms here in these regards, but this is an open discussion, no pun intended - I think this will become a masturbatory exercise of opinion and no resolution.

I'll ignore the prior emotive based conversations. That part doesn't seem to want to be resolved. But how folks think Jolla should be run, I'm curious.

I've seen only opinion that affects the individual thus far. And that's wasted on a community based company endeavor like Jolla.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Ever thought that your approach only had one outcome; nothing would be resolved in answering the questions/accusations as framed because that thought never crossed their collective minds? For once, look through lenses that do not belong to you; and that's unfortunately what I see now... the approach robbed Jolla of an avenue to respond because there nothing in their intent that matched the parameters of the question.

That's like asking a life-long vegetarian how to cook a steak. Besides the confused look you'll get, they'll have absolutely nothing to add to that inquiry.

Sorry, but he is a true problem and he's raised no awareness. Backdoor his oft-repeated sentiments as much as you like, his approach is maniacal and self-serving. Continue down that path as you see fit. He's alienated himself by trying to frame himself the victim whilst doing that to himself. I'll have nothing of it; last time I address his antics ever, anywhere.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Nah, facts about other companies and direct comparisons don't work for Pango. His answer will be "But Jolla is unlike" and will not address it further (except for cases where comparisons seemingly support his view, like the Toyota example).

Source: 27 pages of this circle discussion. Once you introduce facts to the discussion, "unlike" is the answer.

PS: The answer to this message will probably be "Blame Jolla and their PR, they had introduced the 'unlike' term, in which I'm now deliberately projecting whatever meaning that comes to my mind". ;)

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

I agree gerbick
The whole sitch from end to end is termed "fouling the nest" .
Turns me off Jolla as a consequence ...sadly.
I have no interest in supporting any individual(s) or their views who do such devastation, pollution or poisoning in any forum or community.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

As usual, @gerbick has voiced the clearest and sanest opinion on TMO. I hope the discussion on the topic will end now.

I am still lamenting I could not shanghai gerbick into Council as much as I tried... He'd sure be valuable member. :D

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Lots of messages there, before I answer them individually, I think there is something important to understand from my point of view: I am not a FOSS advocate. I don't have any sort of religious adherence to an open software concept. I use FOSS, I've coded FOSS, sure, but simply as part of normal association with software in general. I'm not against FOSS, nor am I pro FOSS, it is one part of the software world.

So, I don't mind at all if a company decides to build on open software, while also developing on their own some closed components. I'm not a GPL3 kind of guy at all. If my FOSS adherence were to lie somewhere, perhaps BSD then. I would like companies to state their open vs. closed policy clearly, though, as doing otherwise might mislead volunteer efforts of contribution, but I don't mind at all if a company has closed software. I don't mind if a company is all closed either, as long as they are upfront about it.

When reading my messages, please keep that in mind.

My point of view in this thread has been about Jolla's transparency and their relationship to the community, or the movement as they like to say. I've been advocating added transparency helping them positively with that community relationship as well as with their business in general, while still in the early adopter phace (I agree the community will become less meaningful if they make it big time).

Certainly I think a part of that transparency is the give-and-take of a FOSS community, and Jolla's insistence on using words such as "truly open" for Sailfish (which is quite hard to reconcile fully with their FOSS participation) and "transparency" in their values (which I don't think they are living up to IRL), but mostly I'm advocating these things because I think they would actually be a good move for a small company and thus good for Jolla's business.

Whether or not they have some closed components is completely beside the point for me and the point of view I have been trying to get across in my own messages.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

I'm sure Jolla has learned many lessons, and I do agree they probably feel unreasonable demands are made of them - but I think going for the defensive has made them miss genuine and reasonable calls for added transparency. If you read the IRC log, there are similar concerns.

As has been pointed out by some in this thread, and I've agreed, Jolla have a very controlling style when it comes to their image and some of us feel they have taken that too far - and that is hurting them through hurting the community relationship. No matter what some in their responses imply to me, I don't actually want any harm to come to Jolla, quite the contrary. I think they are hurting themselves now, though, by sticking to their silence and secrecy in difficult issues.

I think the past year has shown us a quite "untransparent" Jolla and some of us are pretty disillusioned. I think it would do well for Jolla to reconsider and bring back these people.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

There's still the case of the missing better example and/or solution.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

First of all, gerbick, please read my comments on FOSS software two messages upwards. I am not a FOSS guy at all, so I don't mind closed software.

If only this were about FOSS licenses, though. It is not.

Certainly there is a balance to be struck. I'm saying they are not striking the right balance - that is my opinion.

The Nokia comment was a reference to the way there was certain renegade spirit within Nokia when it came to FOSS. The argument was Jolla is much more controlled than that, and thus less open and less transparent in the eyes of some. It was not a commentary on where Maemo was ported. Nokia, of course, had plenty of closed components and I certainly think Jolla is well within their rights to have closed components. So that's not an issue at all.

I wouldn't agree repositories make a company open, I'd say the entirety of their operation makes them open. Is Jolla a contributing open source participant? Sure. Are they as a company as open and transparent as I think they could be within the realm of business? No. And most importantly, I think the latter hurts their business, it doesn't help it, as long as the early adopter + FOSS communities are so pertinent to their business.

Some things are suited and understandably behind closed doors, sure. Again, I'm disagreeing with the balance they have struck, not the concept of keeping some parts hidden.

I have been spending pages and pages describing a more transparent Jolla, offering concrete examples of things they could have said and done differently. For example, the SIM card holder TJC case. Jolla updated and eventually closed it without any explanation. I think those kinds of keeping secrets just hurt them, because it makes them look secretive. There was keeping hidden the pre-order delivery issues until it was too late. On the IRC log people lament that nemo development discussion became hidden once Jolla took big part and so on.

Now, perhaps some of these they must do for some reason (I am not trying to be unreasonable and say there couldn't be a reason for some that I would agree with), but my argument is there is a mounting trend that Jolla prefers to choose the "untransparent", be it out of carefulness, control or whatever, rather than be "brutally honest" as jalyst suggested in his message on page 3 - it is a good read and explains the same point much better than I ever could: http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...1&postcount=29

I don't think all these cases of secrecy are likely necessary, no, I don't believe that at all and I'm pretty sure neither do many of you. Some of them are a deliberate choice by Jolla to remain silent. I think they would be wise to reconsider and notch up the culture of transparency a bit and push back on the culture of silence that seems to have crept up in at Jolla.

Well, we've yet to witness a profitable Jolla either. :) But as FOSS wasn't my point, all that is irrelevant.

There are plenty more transparent companies in the world of small business, though.

Again, here's what I'm advocating: I think Jolla's business would benefit from being more "brutally honest" in their comms, instead of trying to control the message quite as much as they do. So, there was a SIM card holder part issue, use TJC to share. So, you struck a database issue with pre-orders and delays are likely, just share as it happens. Try to find ways to share your plans with FOSS guys better (OK, so the preliminary idea you said to open up a component isn't happening now, just tell people and give some short reasonish why). Don't try to move all things to TJC or some closed server if they could be done in a neutral setting, it just makes you look controlling and weird.

I think these kinds of examples would be appreciated by an early adopter community and thus Jolla would enjoy better support from said community.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Then if you have no solution nor an answer, why attempt a discussion?

I read your prior stance. My takeaway, you'd rather resolve nothing while stoking the fire.

I've personally no more time to waste with vapid responses that solve nothing. It's a masturbatory process that produces nothing of consequence.

But you may continue. I see no resolution ever coming from your rhetoric. Damn shame, you're obviously intelligent and that's despite not falling in with the meritocracy of FOSS (it's not a requirement).

Edit: One thing I will say, I'm not a fan of how Jolla does marketing, how they've handled community relations nor how they've handled key communication. But it's because I have an agency background alongside being a dev as well.

So clear, concise and direct communication works with the early adopters and fans. Leave the flowery rhetoric for the unconvinced and outliers.

But... I fear that my way would not be a solution for them. It'd have to reverse the suddenly closed stuff that reminds me of the Fremantle WONTFIX type of BS that Nokia did without ever communicating why that decision was made while still trying to sell is stuff. It sucked.

Thus my continued inquiry. What's the solution?

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

I was referring to the guy fk_lx had an argument with shutting up. The resolve the issue would have required them talking to each other. It is hard when one chooses not to. No?

As for fk_lx, I am the first to agree his rampage hasn't been a wise one. Certainly it has hurt his own image and made telling his legitimate points harder. On the IRC log I linked to, there is a guy lamenting that fk_lx's concerns he agrees with have been nullified by all that happened since. I think it would be wise for Jolla and the community to consider those real issues, though, still. They are not any less real just because fk_lx blew a casket.

Now, I'm also inclined to think that a more transparent and brutally honest Jolla could probably have dealt with all that before it blew up. It seems to me they tried to avoid addressing the issue for quite long. Unfortunately it has not been completely excluded as a scenario that Jolla chose to be secretive on the issue so as to not loose a valuable employee either. There is a nagging feeling in the back of my head that perhaps fk_lx wasn't quite fairly treated either.

What if a more transparent, more talkative Jolla could have stopped that rampage before it even started. Would have been good.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Again, just empty air blowing and no examples to be seen, with clear explanation how they'd be more open and what's the profitability like.



[damn me I already vowed to stay out of this silly arguing with brick walls but I just cannot help it...]

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Agree. But that's the case of any company that's embraced a community. They have a very fine line to tread between engagement and company mantra reinforcement.

But some situations cannot be saved. Again, I'm done with that.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

The problem with examples is that some of them a very specific, when taken to the size of Jolla companies. Large stories like Toyota are very simple to communicate, it is much harder to translate life experience working with SMBs in various fields to a comment on TMO. It's the same in reverse: I've seen Jolla compared to the likes of Red Hat, when in reality size-wise we should compare Jolla to much smaller companies.

For example, I've dealt with one company, more closer to the size of Jolla than Red Hat, whose CEO spent considerable time on online forums for two or three years in a row, when their business was starting. When they had delivery issues with their first product, he personally emailed everyone who had ordered one and explained in gruesome detail what went down during the process.

Frankly, these examples are so numerous in the tech world that anyone who has dealt with small companies knows some of these stories. I know several people who design hardware products who are frequenting forums etc. and discussing their products very frankly with their respective communities. These guys get a following, because people love this level of participation and transparency.

If you really don't believe such companies exist, perhaps I can dig some proof for you, but really - look in the mirror for a moment - you know they exist.

Jolla has chosen a more "big company" style, yet they are not yet a big company, nor one that doesn't need its early adopter community anymore. Jolla could still benefit from the early adopters and the FOSS people, so improving relations there can still help their business. I think it would do them good to be more personal, more "brutally honest" as jalyst put it:

http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...1&postcount=29

That's my point.

Re: Discussing JollaOy strategy
 

Well, that's for you get for 'name two'. I forgot there's an option of avoiding the comparison even without using the word 'unlike' :)

What I am basically reading is "I will not compare to profitable companies" - because profit is not by which success is measured, right... If you wanted Jolla to be successful by greater transparency, like you're claiming (and I doubt it), then you wouldn't be avoiding comparisons to successful companies.

IMO you're basically throwing buzz words (transparency, openness) without any concrete ideas for improvement (not that they are buzz words per se, but now they are, without any concrete ideas), you refuse to provide any logical basis and evidence about why it should be better for Jolla, if it had more [buzz word] and you avoid any direct comparisons.

I'm not saying you are wrong, but you are either really bad at arguing your point of view, or you just too stubborn to listen to facts provided and to react to them.