As Purism was able to get Anbox on their phone, the same should be doable with SFOS phones, no? It would bring a bigger community behind, as UBtouch is also going this way. So all this players working together on one goal, being able to run Android Apps as an addition to non existing UBtouch, Purism or SFOS apps would really bring momentum in the idea and push it forward. Why not creating a foundation? Maybe even Huawei would be interested in it, as they also want to run Android apps on Harmony OS, and Huawei has a lot of money and enough of developers to push such a project. What do you think?
That’s a nice thing, but I’d prefer native SFOS apps. Installing Sailfish to run Android apps is strange. It’s not fair to the SFOS developers who give their free time for us.
Yes, I know, not enough native apps. I have to use some myself and it annoys me. There’s a lot of energy going into this damn android. It’s easier to buy another phone for $ 100 and be happy. There is a solution for someone who desperately needs Android apps. The Linux community has tens of thousands of usable programs with source code. It would be better to port some important ones to SFOS, like Purism, UT, PostmarketOS, Mobian, Manjaro and others do.
I’m angry, sorry for my negative opinion. It is often forgotten why there is SFOS.
@4carlos: I like your opinion, But we won’t be able to convince the companies for all the banking apps, charging and rental companies to program native apps. So to use sailfish phone for daily buissness, an android layer is mandatory in my opinion. Carrying arround two phones is not practical for me. Also it would bring all downsides of both systems and syncing issues as well.
Of course I can life with acttual implementation, even it is only the 4.4 on my X
Problem is, banking apps most of the time rely on stupid “safety” net and can’t be used anyway.
That can probably happen.
Yes, every sailor knows that.
I buy a bike and realize that I still need 4 wheels and a motor. Do I now ask the manufacturer to deliver this to me? Another example. I buy a game from Sony and have to use the Playstation for it. Now I’m getting a game for Nintendo. Does it have to work on the Sony device, or do I need Nintendo for that?
Okay, totally off topic.
Anbox will not be the solution because special apps such as banking apps have special requirements. Without a real Google Android, not all apps will work.
I feel like this is the same discussion regarding wine. Would it be better to have native apps? Of course. Could be an android layer a viable alternative until were there? Yeah, why not?
If UBtouch, now Purism can do that, the SFOS community should also be able to do it. Its not mainly about banking apps. More and more apps are updating to Android 5 >, so less and less Android apps will work on our phone. With Anbox we would have a from Jolla independant source that can provide us with the latest Android envirronment, as a solution as long as the most important apps don’t exist for SFOS. As soon as this is reached, we can get rid off the evil Google stuff
We already have AD, Flatpak, containers, adding Andbox too it feels SFOS is reduced to a hypervisor-like layer.
Sounds like “never”
I think this we can all agree on!
Care to explain this point? I think the developers (like me) who do give their free time would be happy if the OS could reach more people by being usable as a daily driver. (And Jolla as a business should welcome that too.)
I really don’t get this argument, even though it feels like it is brought up every time someone talks about Android support in SFOS. First, I choose to buy a Linux-driven phone because I’m concerned about my privacy, etc. (insert all the positive things here). Second, I have to use some apps that are closed-source, probably evil, and only available for Android - banking, transportation, social media, comms, whatever. Then, there are two possible solutions: adapting available Android layers for SFOS, or buying a second brick to put in my pocket that, furthermore, is especially built to spy on me. I really don’t understand how the second one could be better than the first one.
Exactly. Why buy a second computer to run Windows stuff if I can use a (free and open-source) Windows layer and run things “pseudo-natively”?
Or, as @SaimenSays brings it to the point:
Might be, yes. Still it seems much better to me to be able to select which parts I want of it I want to run on my phone. I need Whatsapp? It doesn’t need any Google stuff. I need banking apps? I have to make sure it doesn’t believe the phone is rooted (e.g. make sure ‘sudo’ is not available; @davidrasch ); still no Google. I need some annoying public transport app? I install fake Google services. I need something even worse? I still have the last say in what runs on my phone and what doesn’t. I can even kill processes.
With SFOS, I have control over my device; much more so than even a rooted Android phone. (Plus, a rooted Android phone often isn’t of much use when I have to use e.g. banking apps.)
So at the end of the day, if we’re required to run Android apps, we can choose between two evils: SFOS with Android layer, or full Android. I don’t see why I should not choose the lesser of the two.
(Please note: I don’t want to sound offensive. I apologize if I do, as English isn’t my native language.)
I am aware that the “safety” checks can be circumvented currently by taking some effort. But I heard/read rumours that Google plans to base the safety net checks on some hardware checkin the near future, which would hamper these possibilities.
Probably there will be other workarounds, but actually this is not really central for me, since I don’t use banking on mobile anyway.
It is a matter of principle. If a service requires an android app, I will do without it.
Which is probably the only safe way, anyways. (But that’s offtopic…)
Then you’re lucky if you can do that; sadly, others still have to rely on Android stuff, no matter the principles.
In Germany nearly every bank is pushing the people towards app TAN, so no real way arround it. It is a matter of practicability, and weighing up the evil. You could also live in a tent and comunicate with smoke signals. But to be fair to the big companies, they do a good job providing services, which makes life easier. Unlikely they are doing it not for goodwill, but for getting more control over us.
“In Germany nearly every bank is pushing the people towards app TAN, so no real way arround it.”
I am surprised this is happening in Germany, I always thought the Germans were more privacy concerned than the Dutch.
In the Netherlands we have a bank ING that uses TAN codes. It is still possible to not use the app, you can request a small camera device with a pincode and you can scan the QR code that is shown on screen.
I am not sure if it is completely legal for banks and such businesses running essential services to force their clientele to use a service tied to one or two major phone OS vendors. I do hope this will be tested in EU courts some day.
I know for sure that there are ways around the mobile-TAN, for example Deutsche Bank has an alternative; you can order a physical token device that generates the TAN numbers.
I had a different experience as a developer (not for SFOS). It is much easier to use Google and find a suitable one from the 3 million apps than to wait for an app for SFOS. It was no longer worth programming because popular apps were instead taken from the Playstore. Why should I, as a developer, invest any more time?
Sorry, I was a bit sarcastic about that. I come from BBOS6 / 7 and OS10. I have been hearing questions about better Android support for years. When new users read that a system can also run Android apps, a momentum occurs. I am just annoyed that many do not accept that only the AOSP is implemented. Many hope for more and ask for it all the time. My reaction is simple: If you absolutely need all Android apps, SFOS with AD is the wrong system. So someone just gets happier with a cheap Androidphone.
It mostly follows these rules
- Ohhh, SFOS, great and it can do Android too!
- Hmm, my downloaded apps are not working
- What, do I need the google services?
- Then Jolla has to deliver it! I absolutely need the app!
- Jolla doesn’t want to do that? Why?
I have seen many users come and go on the various forums. Most of them chose LineageOS again and installed GS.
You’re right. Just a telephone isn’t powerful enough to do all things like a desktop computer. The resources are limited.
Apart from the android blobs, I totally agree with you. That is my motivation to stay with SFOS, at least until a real Linux driven phone can be used as a phone every day.
Personally, I don’t think it’s a good thing that Jolla is neglecting its own system by improving Android. I am the last of 4 people who stayed with SFOS. Everyone else switched back to LineageOS after a long experience with SFOS. None of them think LOS is good, but the basics just work better. Jolla invests too little time in its own system. There are dozens of unfinished or buggy functions in SFOS and have been for a long time. Only 1 example: Browser.
I have strict principles and that’s my opinion.
I don’t use android apps on SFOS and while I can see the benefit of being able to run android apps on SFOS it lowers demand for native apps (and therefore also development of native apps) which isn’t good in the long run. That being said I still think it is good if community could get anbox working because then Jolla could spend less resources on fixing alien dalvik bugs and more resources on improving SFOS.
I do understand where you are coming from. I can also understand the people who “need” AD are among the loudest.
But I can also imagine that you don’t create apps for the Android crowd, but for the Sailfish users.
Me personally avoid most Android apps. I only have Firefox, Whatsapp and Signal. I refuse to install anything else. If there is no Sailfish app or no website, I don’t use it. I would be very happy if Whisperfish would get into more usable state and everybody would switch to Signal. Then with an updated browser (yes, yes ) I would not even need AD anymore.
Again, I do understand that it can be motivational tiring to hear people repeat the wrong motivations, but at the same time, you could choose where and whom you focus on.