Top
Best
New

Posted by heresie-dabord 4 hours ago

Jolla on track to ship new phone with Sailfish OS, user-replaceable battery(liliputing.com)
114 points | 67 commentspage 2
poisonborz 3 hours ago|
Jolla / Sailfish is a 13 year old project and through all this time they couldn't make a foothold, or even sustain some small motivated community around them. During this time:

- company folded and changed hand multiple times, including russian ownership

- the tablet scandal leaving users with lost funds

- closed source parts

- locked bootloader

- charging a $50 device reset fee

- not much change in Sailfish OS since ages

- buggy Android compatibility and near zero native devs, all jumped ship

At this point I think they are just one of the grifters preying on naive "EU first" supporters shoveling whatever they still have in a new casing.

I'd love the idea of a greenfield EU Linux mobile OS, but I don't think it should come from this company.

dijit 2 hours ago||
> Jolla / Sailfish is a 13 year old project

Realistically building a production quality database takes 10 years. Building a production quality game engine takes 10 years.

They're building a mobile operating system and the hardware it runs on; that's harder and a moving target.

How long do you think it takes to build a supply chain of hardware that doesn't suck (if it takes 2 years to get moving: you need to start with hardware specs for 2 years from now) and an operating system that doesn't suck when you're also trying to catch up to a major duopoly cranking out devices at an unfathomable volume, with more money than most nation states?

Your standard is "succeed against Google and Apple within 13 years on a shoestring budget with no volume discounts." How can any project clear that bar?

What would you do?

poisonborz 2 hours ago|||
> Your standard is "succeed against Google and Apple within 13 years..."

Absolutely not. My standard is the many other AOSP-based ROMs communities and companies that were founded around them, having success within a few years - yes, they could lean on the ecosystem compatibility and didn't produce their own hardware, but maybe that's a more viable way to start?

"shoestring budget with no volume discounts" does not explain the points of criticism above.

dijit 2 hours ago||
AOSP is just a totally different destination, it's not a faster route to the same one.

Sailfish is spiritually MeeGo: actual Linux on the phone, not a custom skin on Google's foundations. Obviously it's faster to build a kit-car than a car factory, I don't see how that's a rebuttal, it's an entirely different conversation.

An AOSP fork on Qualcomm hardware isn't independence. Jolla are actually trying to build the factory.

The $50 fee and tablet scandal are fair hits- but fuck-ups don't make you a grifter, and we've forgiven larger players far worse.

You still haven't said what you'd actually do.

microtonal 1 hour ago|||
I don't see the issue of using AOSP. You get to skip the many years that Sailfish OS will still need in user testing. You get to skip all the possible incompatibilities with Android apps through the compatibility layer. AOSP is also Linux on the phone. I guess you mean GNU/Linux on the phone, but AOSP now also has official support for a Linux VM (you want a VM because traditional desktop Linux security is not great). They are even adding support for running Wayland apps. With the recently-added desktop support, you can plug a phone into an external screen and you'll have a desktop with Android apps and Linux desktop apps.

I think the chance of Google completely closing AOSP is pretty small, AOSP being open maintains a power equilibrium between Google and other OEMs. Closing up AOSP carries the huge risk that Samsung and some other big OEMs will fork it and Google has essentially lost the whole market overnight. I am pretty sure this is why Samsung phones also have the Galaxy Store with a bunch of apps like Netflix in it. The Galaxy Store is Samsung's subtle message to Google saying: don't try to rein us in, we can cut you out.

That said, even if Google closes AOSP, forking it and maintaining it as an open project is going to be far less work than brining Sailfish OS to the level of polish, security, etc. of AOSP.

poisonborz 2 hours ago|||
Why is AOSP a wrong path? Why would it be "tainted"? Any large enough entity can fork. Hundreds already did, successfully. Even China couldn't do otherwise - via Huawei they mutated it to HarmonyOS (becoming much different from its roots, and incompatible to it, structurally becoming superior in many ways). Why throw away 20 years of development and a sea of dev experience?

But even if you insist on a non-AOSP way: Supporting any other, more well regarded projects and initiatives? Random top of my head idea: motivate Fairphone (Denmark) to adopt some non-android OS like Ubuntu Touch?

fsflover 1 hour ago||
> Why is AOSP a wrong path?

Because its existence relies on a good will of Google. See:

Google will allow only apps from verified developers to be installed on Android (9to5google.com)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45017028

and

GrapheneOS accessed Android security patches but not allowed to publish sources (grapheneos.social)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45208925

> Any large enough entity can fork.

Only megacorps will likely be able to support a hard fork for such a large codebase.

> Hundreds already did, successfully.

Which of them are hard forks? China will not be a benevolent dictator of AOSP

> Fairphone

It's Android again.

There are indeed non-Android alternatives, but not in Europe. I use Librem 5 btw.

charcircuit 45 minutes ago||
>Because its existence relies on a good will of Google

AOSP is open source. Anyone can fork it.

>Google will allow only apps from verified developers

This is done by Play Services which is not included in AOSP even.

>Only megacorps will likely be able to support a hard fork for such a large codebase.

The same can be said about any operating system. The scope of an operating system is huge.

fsflover 31 minutes ago||
> The same can be said about any operating system.

GNU/Linux is already supported without a (single) megacorp. So not all OSes have this problem.

mpol 9 minutes ago|||
@charcircuit

Sailfish is more like GNU/Linux, that is the OS in this context. For Jolla that is less code to maintain themselves then what Google maintains in Android/Linux. Hard forking Android/Linux looks to be quite a big bite to chew on.

charcircuit 23 minutes ago|||
Most of Linux is written by corporations and that's just a kernel, not a full operating system like ChromeOS which took Google to be able to build.
fsflover 10 minutes ago||
I updated my comment to indicate GNU/Linux.
embedding-shape 3 hours ago|||
> but I don't think it should come from this company.

Could*, maybe than should, unless you believe that all those things will apply to the phone they plan to release in September. Otherwise I don't see the issue with a company keep trying until they get something right (or give up). Why not?

poisonborz 2 hours ago||
True, but I also wanted to signify that I find any user trust (eg as a result of this new marketing campaign) is misplaced and steals air from a better alternative.
fsflover 2 hours ago||
Which is?
poisonborz 2 hours ago||
See my reply above
toast0 1 hour ago|||
> Jolla / Sailfish is a 13 year old project and through all this time they couldn't make a foothold, or even sustain some small motivated community around them.

Sure, but somehow RCS is viable in 2026. Old projects can come back!

tpoacher 2 hours ago|||
on one hand you're not wrong

on the other, I really, really loved my original jolla phone back in the day. I happily used it as my daily driver and only phone for 2 years. Until it had a hardware fault which I could no longer repair via the company.

badgersnake 1 hour ago||
I got burned with the tablet too. Still have the phone and the first one t-shirt that went with it, as well as a Nokia N9.

And I agree, it’s turned into a bandwagon grift. They’re also selling AI boxes that do who knows what.

shmerl 3 hours ago||
What network connectivity does it have for US?
embedding-shape 3 hours ago|
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but they're aiming to serve the EU and UK (and Norway and Switzerland) markets only. Although, with that said, the page for the September 2026 phone says this (https://commerce.jolla.com/products/jolla-phone-sept-26):

> LTE FDD: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 28AB, 66

> LTE TDD: 34, 38, 39, 40, 41

> 5G NR: n1, n2, n3, n5, n7, n8, n12, n20, n26, n28, n38, n40, n41, n66, n77, n78

But I have no idea if that means it'll work for you in the US/elsewhere.

toast0 3 hours ago||
> But I have no idea if that means it'll work for you in the US/elsewhere.

Yeah, that's a fun part of the crazy bandplan for lte/5g where it's just a little here and there without global coordination.

But a look here [1], says it has all 5G bands for AT&T, 2/4 bands for TMo, and 4/5 for Verizon. Seems maybe a bit iffy for TMo, one of the missing bands is n71 (600 MHz) which is extended range that helps fill in coverage.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_5G_NR_networks

BenjiWiebe 18 minutes ago|||
Some carriers also require your phone to be on their whitelist - for example AT&T.

And Verizon claims they don't do it that way, but we had a phone that worked on Verizon with an old SIM card until Verizon caught on, and then suddenly it wasn't compatible with their network and couldn't be used on Verizon.

kevvok 2 hours ago||||
Also missing Band 13, which is Verizon’s main band for coverage
shmerl 1 hour ago|||
Why aren't modern SoC modems just support all bands? How hard is it?
microtonal 1 hour ago||
Just a guess: maybe it requires fairly expensive certification that is not worth it when a SoC family is barely used in a region (yes, I know, chicken-egg).
mempko 3 hours ago||
I used to use a Sony phone with Sailfish but stopped when US shifted to voice over LTE and phones I used were not supported by the networks. If this phone works on US networks, I can't wait to get rid of my Android phone for sailfish. I vibed with Sailfish so hard.
drnick1 3 hours ago|
They should have collaborated with GrapheneOS like Motorola instead of starting from scratch with Linux and a proprietary user interface. As it stands, this phone will have worse security than a Pixel with Graphene or the upcoming Motorola phone.

It's not an improvement over common closed source Android varieties either, and will certainly have worse app compatibility than Android. Hardware switches are irrelevant if you can't trust the software.

NicuCalcea 3 hours ago||
Their entire raison d'être is to make Sailfish OS (non-Android Linux) phones. I'm happy they're doing it. Graphene OS is great but it's just another Android ROM and still dependent on Google.
NewJazz 1 hour ago||
They could have done both. GrapheneOS is as dependent on google as their android app compatibility layrr, if I had to guess.
heavyset_go 2 hours ago|||
This is part of the (spiritual) lineage of Meego/Maemo, it's much older than GrapheneOS and the latter is older than Android itself

Anyway, it's as secure as any Linux distro as it uses the same standard stack as servers and desktops and does sandboxing[1], which is also really nice from a development perspective. You can harden it like you would a Linux box using standard Linux tools + kernel features.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailfish_OS#Software_architect...

mpol 3 hours ago|||
Did GrapheneOS even exist in 2012? There is history at play here, they are still building forward from the Nokia Linux phones.

Also, what's up with all the sour grapes from people who use or develop GrapheneOS? There seems to be a general force dismissing Sailfish as insecure, without ever explaning how. Can't we just be friends in a de-googled world? Are people from Graphene feeling insecure about Sailfish as competition? It feels to me like infighting in small churches. It turns me off from ever considering GrapheneOS before I even looked into it.

distances 3 hours ago|||
They didn't start from scratch, the first Jolla phone was released in 2013. The Sailfish OS continues the Maemo/MeeGo lineage that Nokia abandoned.
jasonvorhe 3 hours ago|||
Agreed. Also, the second I found out that their entire UI stack is proprietary I lost all interest in that platform.
fsflover 2 hours ago||
Don't the security hardware features of the GrapheneOS phones also rely on proprietary software/firmware?
jasonvorhe 2 hours ago||
To my knowledge you have some proprietary firmware blobs, drivers, HAL and the Trusted Execution Environment shipping with GrapheneOS. But replacing Pixel's stock Android with GrapheneOS doesn't expose you to more proprietary components but instead reduces it (by sandboxing Google Play Services for example) and improves upon Android security overall (memory allocation, etc).

So yeah, GrapheneOS isn't 100% OSS, as far as I'm aware. But it doesn't expose me to more proprietary stuff like Jolla would.

fsflover 2 hours ago||
You're not wrong, but the main selling point of GrapheneOS in comparison to other options is security, and it relies on proprietary software. So to me it looks a bit similar, although I agree that less blobs is definitely important.
miohtama 3 hours ago|||
They cannot, because for some reason GrapheneOS is shitting on them

https://x.com/GrapheneOS/status/2029651838975328512

NicuCalcea 2 hours ago|||
Graphene OS really like to shit on competing projects, it seems. Maybe they're right, but it seems a bit obsessive.

/e/OS: https://x.com/GrapheneOS/status/1946269698498105813

iodéOS: https://x.com/GrapheneOS/status/1892555359656534284

CalyxOS: https://x.com/GrapheneOS/status/1953856218931376421

Unplugged: https://x.com/GrapheneOS/status/1861593971685798351

PinePhone: https://x.com/GrapheneOS/status/1964441930760409499

fsflover 2 hours ago||
More projects:

Kicksecure: https://forums.kicksecure.com/t/grapheneos-attacks-kicksecur...

Purism Librem 5 and Pinephone: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47260196

gruez 2 hours ago||||
Seems fair given that it was in response to a tweet referring to the phone as "ULTRA secure!"
drnick1 2 hours ago|||
Is there anything inaccurate in that post by the Graphene devs however?
embedding-shape 3 hours ago||
> They should have collaborated with GrapheneOS like Motorola

Well, Motorola is already doing that :)

I for one is happy that there is at least someone out there not happy with the status quo and go with something completely different and homegrown instead of just going with customizing Android and calling it a day.