Good luck with that. They also had SDxc card support as a goal but rapidly backed out of that even during the campaign with "because Jolla heart FOSS" as an excuse given to the believers.
It was because of the huge uproar from the vocal part of community demanding that "no crowdsourced money for M$!11!1!!". To avoid yet another accusation of "not listening" to community, they decided to comply with those demands. It was kind of damned if you do damned if you don't situation. Implementing exFAT would have been trivial (AFAIK it can already be used with small hack), hard part was the ant-MS attitude in community.
Kind of comical that even that is used against them...
It was because of the huge uproar from the vocal part of community demanding that "no crowdsourced money for M$!11!1!!". To avoid yet another accusation of "not listening" to community, they decided to comply with those demands. It was kind of damned if you do damned if you don't situation. Implementing exFAT would have been trivial (AFAIK it can already be used with small hack), hard part was the ant-MS attitude in community.
Kind of comical that even that is used against them...
Not sure about the fees, but there is GPL opensource implementation of exFAT.
From the "hearing community" i think it was all the way around, they did not want to implement it and told it was coz community asked not to (otherwise why exactly this is what they actually listened to?) - but we'll never know
Not sure about the fees, but there is GPL opensource implementation of exFAT.
It doesn't matter if there is an GPL implementation of it. To distribute exFAT implementation commercially you will need to pay the licensing. Alternatively one can fight in in court, but it would be rather futile.
From the "hearing community" i think it was all the way around, they did not want to implement it and told it was coz community asked not to (otherwise why exactly this is what they actually listened to?) - but we'll never know
I am not surprised that you will choose such interpretation about events. Still, I remember the fighting about the licensing both here and at TJC (I was in favor of properly licensing it for the sake of compatibility), also all the polls showed that majority of voters were against the idea of properly licensing exFAT, so in that regard it takes a bit more than you just saying that "oh they just wanted to annoy everybody and not implement it." In other words, you don't really have anything to back up your claim this time.
Maybe they should have done it with two steps. One hw campaign and then one sw with upgrades. What do you think about that?
The HW campaign still would have required a lot of money spending on SW. Sailfish 1.x was only compatible with a small resolution mobile phone - it simply would not have run nicely on a tablet. They decided to dress up all that work as... Sailfish 2.0.
This is why it's unfair to accuse them of scamming by spending crowdfunding money on the OS. The weren't scamming - they just failed.
The HW campaign still would have required a lot of money spending on SW. Sailfish 1.x was only compatible with a small resolution mobile phone - it simply would not have run nicely on a tablet. They decided to dress up all that work as... Sailfish 2.0.
Fair enough, but I just find it hard when a company says we need to do all this work on the OS to bring up to 2.0 so it will work on the tablet. Who then say sorry we cant supply the tablet to you, BUT we are now going to sell/rent/reward the updated OS version 2.0!
I do not understand how Jolla can keep running as a company and just wash their hands of the Tablet?
I personally feel I have been taken for a ride and Jolla will do the OBSOLETE minimum they feel they have to do in regards to the Tablet without jeopardizing the selling/hire/reward of the OS
It was because of the huge uproar from the vocal part of community demanding that "no crowdsourced money for M$!11!1!!". To avoid yet another accusation of "not listening" to community, they decided to comply with those demands. It was kind of damned if you do damned if you don't situation. Implementing exFAT would have been trivial (AFAIK it can already be used with small hack), hard part was the ant-MS attitude in community.
That's the way it was spun externally, yes.
Like many things on together.jolla.com - it's apparently the community that decides. But if that were so, we'd have decent maps, a properly working CalDAV, EAP wifi, SIP and all the other things that are at the top of the voting list and have been for 2 years+.
It's not difficult - they just had to look at the N9 and better it or at least MATCH it and they are still not even close.
Instead we got changelogs full of upstream bug fixes and UI re-arranging. The big thing in 2.0 was UI device scalability which was spun as being necessary for the tablet. It was of course necessary for any phone other than the original Jolla too. It begs the question "Who thought missing that in 0.x beta was a good idea?"
I know there was a race to get the phone out but seriously, who doesn't design in scalability from the start these days?
Like many things on together.jolla.com - it's apparently the community that decides. But if that were so, we'd have decent maps, a properly working CalDAV, EAP wifi, SIP and all the other things that are at the top of the voting list and have been for 2 years+.
It's not difficult - they just had to look at the N9 and better it or at least MATCH it and they are still not even close.
No, it's the resources that decide. All of those things that you listed are expensive and/or labour intensive. Nokia had a huge horde of developers, and near bottomless pockets. You just can't expect a startup to react that quickly. Look at iOS and Android at 2 years old, and see how many key features they were lacking.
Like many things on together.jolla.com - it's apparently the community that decides.
As I mentioned: damend if you do, damned if you don't.
Originally Posted by
It's not difficult - they just had to look at the N9 and better it or at least MATCH it and they are still not even close.
Including Nokia's proprietary bits they didn't have access to in the first place?
Originally Posted by
I know there was a race to get the phone out but seriously, who doesn't design in scalability from the start these days?
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.
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? 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.
Meh, why compare with iOS or Android at age 2 years old, let's compare with Nokia 3310 at day one
