Yes, I use SailfishOS as my daily driver. I should note that I'm a Linux user, and developer, so I am technical.
SailfishOS satisfies all my technical requirements. Admittedly there are things that I would like (e.g. containerising/jailing functionality), but I understand that Jolla has limited manpower.
It meets all my communication requirements, and developing for it is awesome (I don't use that word lightly).
> Any reason to think it wouldn't end up like Firefox OS?
I don't know about FirefoxOS, but SailfishOS, thanks in a large part to Nokia before it, has a strong community from the Maemo and Meego days. e.g. https://talk.maemo.org/ and https://together.jolla.com ; also checkout the IRC channels on Freenode.
The community is very smart and dedicated. I think with a fully opensource SailfishOS, it could continue to maintain the OS without corporate sponsorship (i.e. Jolla). To give credit to Jolla, they really help accelerate development of GNU/Linux on the mobile.
My understanding is that Jolla phones still have proprietary basebands and are thus no more secure than any other phone, since the GSM spec includes silent remote file pushing and the baseband chip has more or less unfettered access to the system.
That's correct. Currently both Android and iOS provide better security features than SailfishOS. The only security "advantage" that SailfishOS currently has, is obscurity.
I use SailfishOS because:
1) I prefer programming for GNU/Linux over Android or iOS
2) I prefer a decentralised development model (SailfishOS is made up of software by Red Hat, Intel, Mozilla, etc.)
3) I prefer the tight-knit, open, hacker community around SailfishOS/Maemo/Meego
>I don't know about FirefoxOS, but SailfishOS, thanks in a large part to Nokia before it, has a strong community from the Maemo and Meego days. e.g. https://talk.maemo.org/ and https://together.jolla.com ; also checkout the IRC channels on Freenode.
That's not the problem with Firefox OS. The problem was installing it on regular phones, and the subsequent lack of apps.
If anything, Replicant makes much more sense as an OS OS.
> That's not the problem with Firefox OS. The problem was installing it on regular phones, and the subsequent lack of apps.
You're right, I misinterpreted your question.
I cannot see how Jolla can overcome the difficulty of getting SailfishOS onto regular phones.
I personally don't think SailfishOS needs 10% market share. It needs 1% market share, with a dedicated following. Similar to how Linux is on the desktop.
I'm hopeful that SailfishOS becomes mature enough that you can install it onto existing phones relatively easily; similar to how people tried Linux on their desktop PCs in the 2000s.
>I'm hopeful that SailfishOS becomes mature enough that you can install it onto existing phones relatively easily; similar to how people tried Linux on their desktop PCs in the 2000s.
It's not about maturity. It's about the lack of ARM standardization, which cellphones are notorious for.
>I'm hopeful that SailfishOS becomes mature enough that you can install it onto existing phones relatively easily; similar to how people tried Linux on their desktop PCs in the 2000s.
Linux was able to use existing Unix code, and now has a large server following.
How much time would you spend on programming for Android Cupcake (which probably has more users than Jolla)?
Linux is pretty awful on desktop. I only put up with it because it's worth putting hours for a tool I use 50+ hours a week. There is no way to justify that kind of timesink for a mobile device.
Seriously? Everything you do outside the terminal? Maybe stuff that just works on Windows/Mac OSX? Like connecting peripherals, printers, Android phones? Dual video card support? Kernel support for new Intel CPU's? Support for HD monitors / screens?
There is a reason Linux isn't gaining any market-share on desktop..
I'm always amazed by the misconceptions out there about the Linux desktop, Maybe the last time you used it was like 3 years ago ?
> Like connecting peripherals, printers
SANE for printers and scanners support hundreds of peripherals out of the box. No specific driver installation required. Most USB devices are recognized and supported in the kernel.
> Dual video card support
That I can agree with you, but it's not related to the "desktop" per se, it's for a tiny amount of people who have this kind of configuration that it's an issue. There are workarounds like Bumblebee, and with Wayland the situation is supposed to improve.
> Kernel support for new Intel CPU's
Intel is releasing patches all the time. That's not the Linux's project fault if Intel is not working at the same pace on all platforms.
> Support for HD monitors / screens
The situation has vastly improved with GNOME, Mate, Cinnamon and KDE for HDPI support. The issue remaining are mostly applications that have not been rewritten to take advantage of modern GUI frameworks yet. Note that on Windows the situation is far from perfect either.
> There is a reason Linux isn't gaining any market-share on desktop..
It has actually beeing gaining steadily about 0.5% market share in the past 6 months according to different metrics of net usage. And it's gaining that kind of share DESPITE having no company doing marketing for it, and very few hardware sold with Linux in the first place (99.9% PCs come with Windows by default).
When you are not in a situation where the choice is left to the user, OF COURSE you will get this kind of share.
I don't get the anger against Linux on the desktop.
It may work, it may not. Let's even say that Linux works on the level it did in the 90s (when compiling your own kernel was a regular thing).
It's not Linux's fault it has terrible driver support. In reality, the same issues back then cause the same issues now.
Lack of standards plus NDAs mean that sometimes Linus just can't figure out how your screen works. It's like screaming that CM doesn't support Samsung S6. It's Samsung you should be angry at, not CM.
Pointing out drawbacks of a platform is different than blaming the authors of the software.
Using the trackpad on my Mac with Linux installed will probably always be worse than with macOS. Obviously that's not the fault of Linux. Still a drawback.
> I'm always amazed by the misconceptions out there about the Linux desktop, Maybe the last time you used it was like 3 years ago ?
I'm using it right now (and have been for years), rather I was going to ask you the same thing..
> SANE for printers and scanners support hundreds of peripherals out of the box. No specific driver installation required. Most USB devices are recognized and supported in the kernel.
Really, what front-end are you using? 50% of the time or more I've had to wiki [0] / run terminal commands to get a printer to work and if that floats your boat that's fine. As for Android it's a complete crap-shot e.g. the Archlinux wiki lists as many as 5 different MTP packages[1] one of which will hopefully work?
> That I can agree with you, but it's not related to the "desktop" per se, it's for a tiny amount of people who have this kind of configuration that it's an issue. There are workarounds like Bumblebee, and with Wayland the situation is supposed to improve.
It's not a tiny-amount of people -- it's anyone that wants to play games on a laptop.. Have you tried Bumblebee? I only got very marginal ~10 FPS improvement running a game with Bumblebee (Nvidia+Intel) vs. only dedicated Intel (after hours of configuration) -- basically useless: don't play modern games on Linux.
> Intel is releasing patches all the time. That's not the Linux's project fault if Intel is not working at the same pace on all platforms.
I don't see how it matters whose fault it is - it doesn't change the fact that if you buy a new laptop/desktop with a CPU less than one year old -- you are going to be in for a world of hurt if you chose Linux.
> The situation has vastly improved with GNOME, Mate, Cinnamon and KDE for HDPI support. The issue remaining are mostly applications that have not been rewritten to take advantage of modern GUI frameworks yet. Note that on Windows the situation is far from perfect either.
I've tried HiDPI with GNOME Shell -- maybe it works for all the built-ins but breaks lots of other programs you might install, again I'm not saying you can't fix it, I'm saying that passing command-line arguments to grub or editing XML files isn't something most users are into.
> When you are not in a situation where the choice is left to the user, OF COURSE you will get this kind of share.
This kind of delusional thinking amazes me. You want users to spend hours monkeying around on command-line/googling getting their system to work -- and than you still think the reason it doesn't have market-share is because users don't have a choice? Don't believe me? I encourage you to give a Linux laptop to some non-programmer friends and ask them about it.
> You want users to spend hours monkeying around on command-line/googling getting their system to work
Funny, you seem to live in a world where Windows users never have technical issues. Look at support forums for Windows, you are in for a good time.
Oh, and for reference, I have installed Linux distros for several of my family members who are non-programmers and complete noobs with computers, and they never complain and actually tell me it runs much better than before (ie. with Windows). You have to wonder which opinion if the most reliable.
You paid for your printer with money, so contact your vendor and solve your driver problem with them. When you will finish, compare their support with community support, provided by community for free.
yep, people are afraid to call Linux out on its problems because it's open source and free and it makes a lot of people money and we should just be glad to have an alternative at all.. but there are many serious problems with it, it's easy to forget this if you don't have the courage to keep saying it despite the things I mentioned.
1. linux portability. yes, most likely you cant just write one app and it works on 'linux'. without additional work it will only work on your specific distro. Probably even just your specific distro with a specific version number.
2. linux installers in general. i get it, we all like just typing in a quick command and installing a whole suite of programs. thats nice. but for general installations, in 99% of the cases it would be helpful to offer some easy gui click-through installer just like we get on windows.
3. easy to break it: no, i dont see it as my personal user error if i install some random nvidia driver from some random ppa and it breaks my boot desktop and i only get a black screen. i dont care how i broke it, that simply should not be possible ever.
>1. linux portability. yes, most likely you cant just write one app and it works on 'linux'. without additional work it will only work on your specific distro. Probably even just your specific distro with a specific version number. 2. linux installers in general. i get it, we all like just typing in a quick command and installing a whole suite of programs. thats nice. but for general installations, in 99% of the cases it would be helpful to offer some easy gui click-through installer just like we get on windows. 3. easy to break it: no, i dont see it as my personal user error if i install some random nvidia driver from some random ppa and it breaks my boot desktop and i only get a black screen. i dont care how i broke it, that simply should not be possible ever.
1. & 2. We're not in the 90s. Nowadays, I go to chrome or JetBrains and download one of _four_ files: a 32bit deb, a 32bin rpm, a 64bit deb, and a 64 bit rpm, and use a graphics installer.
3. You download an EXE and it breaks your computer? Naah, can't happen on Windows /s .
I think people should be reminded that downloading things from some PPA is _exactly_ like downloading random_cat_video.exe
And it's always the "evil OEMs" and "the stupid users" fault that its desktop adoption is still not there.
I know there are a lot of closed hardware components and you can't do much most of the time. I get that and that's a fair counter-argument.
That however means the fan community should stop pretending Linux is superior on the desktop and that it "just hasn't been discovered yet". This is simply not true.
This is my question. I mean, not to be disparaging (and correct me if I'm off base here) but isn't the Russian market rather small? Double the GDP per capita of china, sure, but with only 143m people and an economy about the size of New York City it seems like a tall order.
Being government backed, does that make it a security risk, similar to the recent issues with BLU devices calling home to Chinese servers?
This is an OS developed by a finnish company. There is little to none risk that a finnish developer would allow malicious russian code on their plattform. The only more anti-russian people I know of is the Balts.
>Sailfish’s local certification in Russia also follows an announcement earlier this year that a new Russian company, Open Mobile Platform (OMP), had licensed the OS with the intention of developing a custom version of the platform for use in the domestic market. So, in other words, a Russian, strategic ‘Android alternative’ is currently being built on Sailfish.
Am I misunderstanding the scope of this 'custom version'? Is the version of Android running on BLU devices not also a custom version developed by a local company?
I've used a Jolla phone for almost a year but ditched it because the camera wasn't up to par for me. Besides that I really liked it, pretty good native apps for a lot of things and a fallback to Android that usually worked well enough for things that weren't available on Jolla (banking apps mostly).
The UI looks nice and is smooth and it's easy to SSH into the phone and write your own software in f.e. Python.
If you're really interested try to find a cheap second-hand Jolla phone.
Government backing can make it last longer, but, as Russia should have learned during the Soviet times, consumer goods aren't commodities, it isn't how much you can produce, but how much people want it that matters.
I suspect that the Russian government wants an OS it can trust for its official and military mobile devices, but realizes that the project is utterly hopeless unless the devices are also sold to consumers, to help pay for the R&D and ensure competitiveness with the market leaders.
Indeed, but it isn't just about being sold to consumers. Consumers have to buy it too. Both blackberry and windows phone were sold to consumers, as well as the fire phone. All 3 failed miserably.
A big thing will be dependent on Russian companies supporting it. Bear in mind, Yandex is the chief of the online services land there, not Google. If Yandex is providing top notch apps and features on Sailfish, it's going to be appealing.
