I’ve been reflecting on how we can improve the reach of Sailfish OS, and I believe there is a significant hurdle that we should discuss: The Jolla Store is currently invisible to the outside world.
While we have OpenRepos (which provides a web interface), the official Jolla Store remains accessible only from within the OS. If we want Sailfish OS to be a viable alternative for the “average user,” we need to bridge this gap in visibility.
Why visibility outside the OS is crucial:
SEO & Web Discoverability: Currently, apps hosted in the Jolla Store don’t exist for search engines. If a potential user searches for an app to see if it’s available on Sailfish OS, they often find nothing, which creates the false impression of an empty ecosystem.
App Badges & Linking: Developers cannot link to their official store presence from their own websites. Standard “Get it on…” badges are a simple but effective way to signal that an app is maintained and officially available.
Lowering the Entry Barrier: Most people want to browse the “shelves” before they buy the “store.” Being able to see the app catalog in a browser is essential for anyone considering switching to Sailfish OS.
Official Trust vs. Community Repos: OpenRepos is a fantastic resource for power users, but for a mainstream audience, the official Store is the primary point of trust. We shouldn’t expect a new user to navigate community repos just to see if the platform meets their needs.
However, since these discussions are quite old, I would like to re-open this topic for a modern context.
I believe that increasing the visibility of the app ecosystem is vital for the long-term health of the platform. Sailfish OS is a great OS, but we need to make sure people can actually see what’s happening inside the store without needing a device in hand first.
What are your thoughts on this? Are there technical or policy reasons why a web-frontend for the store hasn’t been implemented yet, and could a community-driven “mirror” of the metadata be a middle ground?
Don’t forget about possible legal restrictions. Only Jolla (or whatever they are named now) has all the rights to distribute the information. A community-effort needs at the least a proper arrangement with Jolla to operate this service.
The official store is borderline useless.
Most apps I use are all on Chum or OpenRepos.
I would like to see a web version of the Jolla Store but it won’t change the fact that when I try to show off SFOS to anyone I have to direct them to OpenRepos anyway.
To follow up on my initial post, I want to clarify why I believe focusing on the official Jolla Store (and its web presence) is so critical compared to community solutions.
While I love the freedom we have with Chum and OpenRepos, we have to be honest: those are for people willing to go the “extra mile.” They are perfect for us power users, but they can be a major deterrent for the “average Joe.” If Sailfish OS truly wants to position itself as the European alternative for the mass market, we need to provide a headache-free, central entry point.
This also means that the Jolla Store itself needs a significant upgrade. It shouldn’t just be a web interface; the store needs to become more attractive for developers again. We need better tools, better visibility, and a reason for devs to prioritize the official store over fragmented community repos. If the store provides more value to those who build the apps, the ecosystem will naturally become more professional and populated.
In summary, my main points are:
The “Curated” Experience: Normal users expect a place where they can find apps that “just work” and update automatically. The Jolla Store is that place, but its invisibility makes it look like it doesn’t exist to an outsider.
Perception of the Ecosystem: When a potential user searches for Sailfish OS and can’t find a web-based app catalog, they assume the ecosystem is empty. We are essentially hiding our “official shelves” behind a wall.
Avoiding the “Niche Trap”: If we keep relying on community-driven repositories as the primary way to show off our apps, we will stay in a hobbyist niche forever. To reach the masses, the official path must be the most polished, upgraded, and visible one.
I’m not saying we should limit the alternatives—the diversity of Chum and OpenRepos is one of SFOS’s greatest strengths. But the Jolla Store needs to be the professional storefront that welcomes new users. A web frontend combined with a real upgrade for developers is not just a “nice to have”; it’s a fundamental requirement to make the platform viable for a broader audience.
As someone new to Sailfish this is my biggest hurdle. It makes the system feel closed and opaque. Jolla’s marketing is corporate oriented. It doesn’t feel targeted to consumers or ordinary Linux users.
Without explaining what apps are available, how to download, where they came from, or who the author is, I feel uneasy about purchasing. Most of Jolla’s website looks like placeholder pages.
This is one of my most visited websites: NixOS Search
Jolla needs to get with the times and open up their platform. Requiring email registration to download programs from a store I can only browse from a live operating system for a device I don’t own yet is disconcerting.
I don’t need to poses an Android device to browse F-Droid, which is SFOS’s biggest competitor: F-Droid Search: Notes
As the LLM poster pointed out, this leads to the perception that Jolla doesn’t have an official store and relies on Wild West community driven software. I trust free software but dislike how it is essentially paywalled behind purchasing a phone like a Nintendo Amiibo.
In my mind F-Droid is the ONLY Android app store. They build every app from source and trusted repos can be added at the user’s discretion. Only allowing users to browse apps from a live device is exactly what I would expect from Apple/Google/Microsoft. They don’t deserve my money. The fact that Google beats Jolla in that department is frustrating.
I don’t use Arch BTW but the Wiki is amazing and searching packages is easy. I know exactly want to expect when buying a device with Arch preinstalled.
I have a hard time understanding what is so different between picking a random unofficial Android store and a random unofficial Sailfish store that does exactly the same thing.
I do not disagree that it would be better if Jolla implemented web access, even if their store seems largely irrelevant to many people these days now that Chum and OpenRepos exist.
Yes but does this look appealing to the layperson? I will use it of course but couldn’t name one official preisntalled Jolla app.
They describe the preinstalled apps on this page but what is the web browser exactly? Geko engine? Firefox Quantum? Nobody knows what that means.
I am invested in the system so please bear in mind I’m critiquing from the perspective of a new customer who wants mobile Linux to dominate the market. If it hadn’t been for people I trust on YouTube discussing it I would have assumed Jolla’s website was a scam. Honest newcomer impression.
The layperson expects Play Store or Apple Store. Something flashy and elegant.
If I buy a phone and everyone tells me the default apps and app store a rubbish then what am I paying for? Granted, that is the general perception of Windows and Linux. Samsung sell good phones with bloat. Windows is spyware. Linux is a time sink for nerds. SailfishOS? Corporate software or Linux for nerds. Not laypeople.
