Jolla urgently looking for new ownership

Thanks, didn’t know that.

Yes, awful, have these silly typo’s often, especially when typing on my ipadmini.The keyboard of my XA2+ is better. Waiting for a new Jolla tablet!

1 Like

A yearly or monthly payment seems a good option. It was a subject here some time ago, but it was rejected.

I hope you mean newly purchased licences only. Because those already sold were offered as “Software updates and customer support as long as device is supported” for €50, i.e. 10-fold the amount you quoted.

I want a Jolla tablet, too!


I also have two ‘old’ licences, but I would prefer much more to pay this fee in the future than read anytime ‘device no more supported’.
‘As long device is supported’ means that Jolla can decide to no more support Xperia 10 (or whatever device) exactly whenever they want to.

But I strongly request, this fee please not per device but per Jolla account. So a family with 2 or 3 phones licenced on one Jolla account should please not have to pay 2 or 3 times.

Another Idea: Jolla could create a ‘Reseller licence’. With this licence, a dealer or a company could bring ready setup and full functional Sailfish phones into trade. After selling the phone, the licence could be tied to the new private Jolla account of the buyer. To do so, the seller should have the option to ‘release’ the phone from his general account by automatically creating a new account in the same process on his (the sellers) computer, and buyer tells seller the wanted username. Password can be generated automatically. User/buyer can change it later.

So a customer can leave the shop with a fully setup Sailfish phone, an own new Jolla account and a printout of his credentials. Back at home he can immediately start to have fun with it. No unlock procedure, no flashing, no USB problems, no flashing software on customers computer needed.

We can see that Rostelcom bought into Jolla Oy for ~45% newly created shares. In light of the statement about ‘no income from Russia’, I think we can assume they got a copy of the source code up to a certain date and a license to use it for a very long time.

Jolla can’t force Rostelcom to sell, right? So the decision must be mutual. It could be that Rostelcom thought there would be mroe widescale adoption eg within the Russian Govt and that the shares are on a downward trend.

It would be a shame if Jolla had to stop working with Aurora. Of course, there are various levels of relationship.

Most likely new revenue streams are car dashboards or some European sensitive organisation (hence no announcement).

The EU have been slow on self-driving AI and there’s maybe still an opportunity there. Why would the EU risk phone-home driving? But likewise, they wouldn’t like the link to Rostelcom, and that may be what Sami is referring to. Tesla runs on Ubuntu apparently.

1 Like

Renault and Toyota are working with Google. It’s not about selfdriving cars, but about EV’s in general.

Yes, I downloaded a few Android apps without having a Google account. Aurora Store is an app, available in FDroid.

1 Like

I seriously doubt that a monthly fee (of actually any amount) would be able to prolong support for a device model. At some point an old device simply becomes too troublesome and costly to further support and maintain, and that’s it. For instance, when a certain device model becomes the only remaining one with a kernel version a generation older than all the newer ones, like it was in case of the Jolla1. Such device would require a wholly separate development branch, i.e. time and effort (and therefore cost) way beyond any reasonability.

Well, I don’t think so. Ceasing support for devices “whenever they want”, i.e. without valid reasons (like e.g. the kernel version example) would quickly result in people being afraid to buy their licences if they could be terminated at literally any given time, e.g. three days later. Especially that to use SFOS one also needs to buy a specific phone model for it, only to realize a few days or weeks later that support for that device got suddenly ceased because “they wanted to”. I don’t think such approach would turn out to be successful for the company. On the contrary, I would expect a very clear statement about plans to cease support for a device model some - at least - 6 months prior that date, so that people don’t buy and get trapped with devices soon to be unsupported, but instead choose the newer ones.

I don’t have problems with a licence being tied to just one device, as long as it would be freely transferable between devices, i.e. usable only on one phone at a given time, but possible to switch to another phone anytime. If a device breaks, gets lost, stolen, or simply old, I really cannot understand why I cannot simply move it to a new one, if it means that I still use just one licence on just one device, i.e. exactly what I paid for. Even in case of moving the licence to the same device model it takes contacting Jolla and begging for it (with no guarantee of a positive result), whereas transferring it to a newer device model is not possible at all. Which is nasty, because in case of device failure or it being lost/stolen it forces the licence owner to either buy the same (i.e. oldish) device model that soon may lose Jolla’s support (and to hope that Jolla will be generous enough to transfer the licence), or lose the licence and pay for another one for a newer model, for no valid reason.

1 Like

I wonder what impact on Salifish OS can possibly result from the fact that quite a number of Silica UI QML files of the recent OS versions now have “Copyright by Open Mobile Platform” in their headers. It would be nice to know what percentage of the OS and/or the UI is now somehow owned/copyrighted/controlled/whatever by OMP.


I will drop immediately Sailfish OS, if they will do this. Otherwise, if they need money they should raise it in a free and capitalistic way.,by going public, In this way I will have a say in the development or the future of the company.


Struggle has negative connotations, as does strain, which probably don’t apply here.

As for ownership or interested parties, in another thread I pointed out:

Given the Mercedes focus on Yocto linux and QT c++ and python, and, obviously statements in that direction, Mercedes is involved. I’m just speculating, but it does jive.

1 Like

Personally, I would be happy to buy a couple of Jolla shares if they went public.


I don’t think there’s anything stopping a collective offering to buy some of Rostelcom’s shares, but I’d guess it would have to be €200,000+ to be worth the paperwork. Then you’d have to pay a bank to handle the money and a lawyer to set up voting rights. And you couldn’t get your money out without finding a new buyer.

I apologize for my hard and improper words. The truth is, that Jolla supports it’s devices longer than every other company.
What I wanted to say is, old devices surely will be supported longer, if they produce income for Jolla, because they are still in use. Also I hope for a better chance for the VoLTE problem this way. The Xperia 10 can VoLTE under Android, so why should this be impossible under SFOS?? And the 3 Xperia 10’s in my family are in a state like new, why waste it?

1 Like

Even the XA2 supports VoLTE with some operators (e.g. Orange) and their custom “ROMs”, which means it is a solely software, not hardware, thing in that model.

1 Like

raising money by selling stock is the free and capitalistic way to finance an investment with the promise of an investment return. Taking payment for products/services is the free and capitalistic way to make business with consumers. This can be one-off payments are subscriptions, no difference in capitalisticality or freedom.

1 Like

What is an operator’s custom ROM ? Is this like flashing, as we SFOS users do?

Like when you buy a phone from T-Mobile not Amazon or something. It often comes with a branded firmware installed with added customized bloatware that is specific to T-Mobile.