As I mentioned: damend if you do, damned if you don't.
Including Nokia's proprietary bits they didn't have access to in the first place?
He who doesn't have the luxury of having enough time and resources for everything, and the one who doesn't at that specific moment have more than one device to support. Mind you that the whole UI was rewritten in about six months because of loss of NovaThor SoC. It meant:
- changing from X to Wayland
- changing Qt4 to Qt5 unstable, writing and backporting quite a lot to it and then updating to stable release, which was painful
- Writing libhybris to accommodate lack of native drivers available
- Redesing the device for another SoC
So, it's easy to see that during that time scalability was not the top priority. The easiest part is to say "I would have done it otherwise." But the thing is: you weren't there. You didn't do the decisions and you don't even know most of the background behind decisions made.
Ane yes, I know already that everything I just mentioned will be dismissed as "excuses." It doesn't matter any longer what, why and how anything has been done, as the main objective seems to be bashing everything just for the sake of doing it.
If you need to rewrite whole UI because of HW - you doing something terribly wrong and you would spend a lot of time and money for each device adaptation ;P
So what? This isn't the same market any more. Entry requirements are higher. Or it requires that the new entrant do something so well or so disruptively that a more general failure to meet current expectations becomes moot.
So what? So they can't afford to do that like Apple and Google can. Their choice is to either progress at a slower pace, using existing free software where they can, or not bother. I'm glad they tried, and are still trying, and will forgive them a little tardiness in getting EAP and SIP done, because no one else is meeting my current expectations in a mobile OS.
If you need to rewrite whole UI because of HW - you doing something terribly wrong and you would spend a lot of time and money for each device adaptation
Gonna have to disagree here actually.
In my experience, there's a lot of factors that determine how you paint the UI to the screen. And if you have only one target, you tend to scale to only one target. So once you add multiple targets to that - such as what was the case always for Android for instance - then you might require a rewrite.
It's not because you did something terribly wrong. Your immediate goals were just that limited. Sailfish came out only on phone, a couple of years later finally targeted a tablet, they scaled up to tablet. Done and done...
The rest is just the ongoing argument on the tablets and the lack of mass shipments.
3G was at $2.5 mm and wasn't met, split screen was lower and should be delivered, but Jolla already stated that that will be later, after the final 2.0 is available.
I stand corrected. Split screen was 1.75 million, 3G was 2.5 million.
No, it's the resources that decide. All of those things that you listed are expensive and/or labour intensive.
Apart from mapping, I'd disagree. But really it doesn't matter if it was true. People expect them to work in a modern smartphone and Jolla simply aren't able to allocate resources (money or people) or in some cases willing to.
Nokia had a huge horde of developers, and near bottomless pockets. You just can't expect a startup to react that quickly.
Correct. And now we know this. A company the size of Jolla can not create a modern smartphone. They need more staff or outside assistance and Jolla have neither.
Look at iOS and Android at 2 years old, and see how many key features they were lacking.
You can't bring a Raleigh Chopper to the Tour de France. How long are people going to make excuses about Jolla's inability to compete today? It doesn't matter how many features were lacking in iOS or Android at age 2 (hint - they had copy/paste, SIP, mapping, app stores, working calendar/contact sync) - It matters what features they have today.
Apart from mapping, I'd disagree. But really it doesn't matter if it was true. People expect them to work in a modern smartphone and Jolla simply aren't able to allocate resources (money or people) or in some cases willing to.
Aren't willing to? Do you have any evidence of that? Easy enough to slip into the end to cast aspersions, but I seriously doubt they ever decided against a community suggested feature without good reason.
Correct. And now we know this. A company the size of Jolla can not create a modern smartphone. They need more staff or outside assistance and Jolla have neither.
No, this is all just a question of time, and whether you think they've had long enough to 'finish' an OS yet. I think they're doing just fine - not that I want a 'modern smartphone' OS anyway. Windows is turning into one of those and it's horribly creepy.
You can't bring a Raleigh Chopper to the Tour de France. How long are people going to make excuses about Jolla's inability to compete today?
I never thought they could compete. It's just not realistic to hope to tackle the US behemoth tech companies. Even if Jolla could invent features that they don't have, and they did, they could be replicated in a matter of weeks. All Jolla could ever hope to do was find a niche somewhere. Provide an alternative that the big boys don't want to offer.
I'd rather have a Chopper myself, and ride around the estate instead. I never fancied shaving my legs :P
In my experience, there's a lot of factors that determine how you paint the UI to the screen. And if you have only one target, you tend to scale to only one target. So once you add multiple targets to that - such as what was the case always for Android for instance - then you might require a rewrite.
It's not because you did something terribly wrong. Your immediate goals were just that limited. Sailfish came out only on phone, a couple of years later finally targeted a tablet, they scaled up to tablet. Done and done...
The rest is just the ongoing argument on the tablets and the lack of mass shipments.
Proper design is proper design(not talking about UI). It doesn't change a lot UI perspective depending on HW and it's common thing even for 12 years old "web developers". If they were planning to have only one device or same size devices it would be different. But from beginning Jolla was aiming on licensing OS to different devices, so why would they shoot in the leg and do something that will slow it.
If they have limited resources they should use them smartly so ...
