specc | # 11 | 2012-07-18, 19:42 | Report

Why not? Almost all Androids are hackable and flashable. I see no reason why it can be a consumer device and still be hackable and flashable.

I think the Finns have lost it. They have been drinking too much Koskenkorva and staid too long in the sauna. Only one brian cell left and unable to have two thoughts in the head at any given time. I guess this means no multitasking either, too difficult.

gerbick | # 12 | 2012-07-18, 19:54 | Report

Okay, but the phones not being so open isn't anything new.

Maemo 5, not fully open.

Harmattan, not fully open.

Just as long as we don't have to jump through the kind of hurdles that Aegis brought along with it and Jolla allows Mer to be as open to create anything we (the community) wants just like it was on the N900 (Maemo 5), then I see no real problem.

Bring something like Aegis to the table... problem. And if I have to void a warranty to get that freedom, so be it.

Stskeeps | # 13 | 2012-07-18, 20:01 | Report

(edit: apologies to gerbick for using his post, but his interpretation is really the closest to sanity..)

This entire firestorm really seems to rely on the interpretation of something that can mean many different things and many different methods. Entirely blown too much out of proportion.

You'll have to wait for something offical on twitter, but in essence, it doesn't make much sense that Jolla is taking away freedoms they themselves use and have used to prototype their own systems on devices. Flashing own kernel and own OS and getting to keep both pieces if they break as a principle, is entirely fine with me, for example.

Read everything together in context (both text and target audience) instead of just those lines and things look darned much better.

---

Last edited by Stskeeps; 2012-07-18 at 20:08.

kinggo | # 14 | 2012-07-18, 20:05 | Report

this.......... exactly this is the reason why are modern products of any kind so boring, so look-alike, so simple, so restricted.............

mikecomputing | # 15 | 2012-07-18, 20:13 | Report

Wasn't there some upcoming plan that jolla should help with some hosting of mer OBS or similar. And also there was some plan to setup an event with deevamo and jolla?

I think people here should stop draw theyr own conclusions before we knows better! But two things we know:

1. No hw company will EVER be fully open source
2. Jolla has already said they will work with the community in some way.

---

Last edited by mikecomputing; 2012-07-18 at 20:17.

jo21 | # 16 | 2012-07-18, 20:28 | Report

wont be hacked?

i give it one day

Creamy Goodness | # 17 | 2012-07-18, 20:38 | Report

They already said it will be more open than windows phone for developers, and they are using a lot of open source stuff so it would be pretty hard to block us from modifying, recompiling, and adding things even if they wanted to. Just saying it's pretty hard to do the security "right" if that's the intent.
They also said the UI will be customizable, which hopefully means we can build our own swipeUI clone or whatever we want.

wook_sf | # 18 | 2012-07-18, 20:39 | Report

well said

tissot | # 19 | 2012-07-18, 21:28 | Report

Full multitasking and customization is a go.
http://nokiagadgets.com/2012/07/16/n...asking-coming/

I would just chill at this point. There seems to be version where you are able to do this. How it will actually be restricted and so on. Jolla also seems to stay away from giving a picture on interviews that Jolla's phone will be just a nerd toy, stigma that didn't really serve MeeGo, N9, Maemo and N900.

I mean really, we don't know absolutely nothing yet.

---

Last edited by tissot; 2012-07-18 at 21:32.

lma | # 20 | 2012-07-18, 21:54 | Report

Perhaps I'm getting old, but I can't get over how absurd that sounds :-)

It doesn't make any sense, but the thing is, if they did they wouldn't be the first ones, and such a move wouldn't be entirely unexpected from former Nokia or MeeGo people in the first place.

Where do you draw the line? Is it reasonable to void the warranty (again, not sure of the legality of this) if you install an entirely different OS? If you recompile the vendor kernel but with a software feature like IPv6 enabled? If you remove Big Brother anti-features? If you fix a bug in the email client?

And why is it appropriate that the people who can and want to do some of the above, the very people who write/test/debug a lot of the code that comes pre-installed on the device, be treated like undesirable second hand citizens?

Having non-free parts is one thing, but locking down the device to prevent tinkering is a whole different kettle of fish. I for one don't want to be a customer of such a company, even if I can jump through some hoops and obtain their Royal Highnesses' concession to modify the device (which I paid for and theoretically own) to do what I want.

I'm trying, but they still don't. If things are better than they seem, would it be unreasonable to ask them to make a brief statement re: device freedom to the audience that actually cares about the issue?