I really don’t care that a russian company has shares of Jolla, because I’m no racist. Rostelkom did not attack a country. Other statists did that.
8 Likes
It’s only that it might not be a reliable setup. If a Russian company sells their software abroad they might be forced by their government to e.g. implement backdoors. For this reason European authorities recommend to not use e.g. Kaspersky antivirus any longer.
To my knowledge, most of Jolla development is currently been done outside of Russia. I have no idea which measures Rostelecom has to enforce backdoor implementation if the finish side denies their wish, but, in the current situation, I guess not many…
3 Likes
Oh those elusive Russian backdoors. Nobody has seen them, but everybody is scared of them.
Meanwhile everybody has seen Snowden’s leaks, knows about TAO and how NSA hacked Google, how maintainers of open-source products currently backdoor their projects targeting all users from specific countries’ IPs and yet ‘it’s fine!’.
1 Like
Thank you for emphasizing this technical side. I did not mean to say anything about technical details for that is beyond my capacity. I meant Jolla/Sailfish as a business. You can’t expect everyone to flash an OS on a phone, to make patches, wait long for bugs to be repaired, etc.
There is no proper way to use paid for apps, games, etc. These are things you can do on other phones, not with Sailfish. Most people will prefer iOS and Android because of that, because of reliability and because they can buy a phone in the shop or order it with an OS ready to use. With Sailfish common users are dependent on the goodness of volunteering developers, This way we got nice apps, but it is too accidental. There should be more guidance, a strategy, a plan for future development and improvement.
We know that there are American backdoors in their products. We know that there are Chinese backdoors in their products. So how naive (and kind of deprecating for the Russians) it is to think that of the three world superpowers only Russians are so… (don’t know: silly? naive? kind? good-hearted? unskilled?) not to have such backdoors in their products. Come on, let’s be serious.
No, it definitely isn’t fine. For that very reason I am not willing to use Android (especially on Chinese hardware as it’s kind of “2 in 1”) or iOS. Which doesn’t mean that I’d like someone else to surveil me in exchange.
5 Likes
This is true. One way forward is the Ubuntu Touch project’s installer. UBports Installer • Ubuntu Touch • Linux Phone I use it to install both Volla (android) and SFOS on Volla hardware. That’s a very user friendly, guided visual installer. Of course, I generally don’t use it for SFOS once a usable android is installed. But, there is a lot of potential for using that installer. I’ve been meaning to put some effort into that.
This will change. Well, I’m an optimist. But to ramp up harbour to collect revenue will only work if and when Jolla has enough liquidity. So I’m guessing it’ll take another 2 years. But, given the cash cows that the app stores are, I can’t believe that Jolla doesn’t have it in the road plan?
6 Likes
I remember that already in 2012-2013 I couldn’t believe that they don’t have it in their road plan. And yet they still don’t have it after whopping 10 years.
2 Likes
the full access stuff is in the baseband and the SIM update software.
Yeah, I hear yeah. It does sometimes feel like playing a part in a sci-fi b-grade film around here. But, then, I like b-grade sci-fi!
On we go. I somehow killed droidmedia. Partially. It’s going to be a long day.
I’m not entirely sure how the QT license situation may be playing into this. Are you actually allowed to create commercial SFOS applications without owning an insanely expensive commercial QT license?
I’m not sure lashing out $362 a month just to be able to sell on the Jolla store would have been a viable proposition to many potential app developers in the first place.
That’s a very good question. It’s been puzzling me for a long time but somehow I’ve never managed to find any reliable answer to this. I’m not really good at all that licencing stuff, I don’t even distinguish them. On Symbian, MeeGo (Nokia Store) and BB10 (BBWorld) it was simple and didn’t require knowing any such things - either you were releasing a free app or a paid app, period…
Anyway, I remember that at some point there were some plans to offer at least some kind of donation-like or Patronite-like support in the Jolla store, but even just that never materialized. Which is a pity, because commercial developers don’t have any incentive to support this platform.
I’m not 100% certain, but I believe you can have a GPLv3 app with a paid version and not have to pay QT. The source is:
* ##### Can I use the Community open source version to develop my commercial product?
It depends on how you license and distribute your product. The open source version of Qt is mainly distributed under the LGPL, version 3 and GPLv2/v3. You will need to fulfill the license obligations for these licenses when using Qt in your product.
2 Likes
Unless you’re bundling Qt components with your app, and only depend on them being present on the device, I would have thought that it is the OS provider who needs a license? And even if an app includes parts or all of Qt, I think you can still use the LGPL license for Qt in an otherwise closed source / commercial app, as long as those components are dynamically linked or at least relinkable. @wetab73
From gnu.org:
(1) If you statically link against an LGPLed library, you must also provide your application in an object (not necessarily source) format, so that a user has the opportunity to modify the library and relink the application.
(2) If you dynamically link against an LGPLed library already present on the user’s computer , you need not convey the library’s source. On the other hand, if you yourself convey the executable LGPLed library along with your application, whether linked with statically or dynamically, you must also convey the library’s sources, in one of the ways for which the LGPL provides.
1 Like
You have to attend to what parts are LGPL / GPL but it’s not so difficult and it’s not so many ‘bits’. And it’s kind of unimportant. If using Silica components is a problem, I’m not sure about yet. I’ll look into that.
If you are willing to publish your source (GPLv3) you can sell you app without paying QT. Of course, anyone can try to use your source to build a product. But that’s also not quite as easy as theft 
1 Like
I don’t think EU will help a Google/Apple competitor.
Even the more if it has an open (source?) structure.
1 Like
You can see which parts of Qt are LGPL, GPL and commercial on this webpage:
Select the licensing model in the drop-down on the left, and those components which are not usable under that license will be greyed out. This still leaves the question about whether it’s permitted to link SFOS provided Qt libraries, which I assume Jolla Oy already pay to license.
1 Like
The EU has a Digital Service Act and yesterday they collectively voted in favour of a Digital Market Act. The aim is: enforcing competition and inhibiting the power of Big Tech. It is an exciting Act, that also aims to give users more choice and tries to bring down personalisation.
7 Likes
@cwo @poetaster Thank you for all the information! It’s an interesting read. I guess we might also ask Jolla what is the status of using Qt bits provided by SFOS. It would be great to fully clarify it. Not that there is any place to sell paid SFOS apps, anyway, and I guess not many individual developers feel like handling it themselves, but still it would be just great to know. Also for a reverse scenario, i.e. releasing an app for free (let’s say with an optional link for donations) but without making the source code available.
1 Like
Are there no alternatives to use QT environment in the whole wide world of Linux? Sorry for this amateurish question, but I read here about this issue since 2 years… If too old QT vesions that we are permitted to use or too expensive QT licence fees are the obstructing any progress, why not change to a really open source solution?
Thank you. This is certainly not a quick fix, I think most of us will understand that. Good luck Jolla team!